NIRB Pre-Hearing Decision Report Mary River Phase 2

Nunavut Impact Review Board
Pre-Hearing Conference Decision Report

for
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation’s
Phase 2 Development Proposal
Related to the Mary River Project
NIRB File No. 08MN053
October 30, 2020

Report title: The Nunavut Impact Review Board Pre-Hearing Conference Decision Report for
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation’s Phase 2 Development Proposal, Related to the Mary
River Project (NIRB File No. 08MN053).
INSIDE COVER PAGE
The Nunavut Impact Review Board’s Primary Objectives under the Nunavut
Agreement, Article 12, Section 2.2.5:
In carrying out its functions, the primary objectives of NIRB shall
be at all times to protect and promote the existing and future
well-being of the residents and communities of the Nunavut
Settlement Area, and to protect the ecosystemic integrity of the
Nunavut Settlement Area. NIRB shall take into account the
well-being of residents of Canada outside the Nunavut Settlement
Area.
The Nunavut Impact Review Board’s Primary Objectives under the Nunavut
Planning and Project Assessment Act, S. C. 2013, c. 14, s. 23 states:
23(1) The Board must exercise its powers and perform its duties and
functions in accordance with the following primary objectives:
(a) to protect and promote the existing and future well-being of the
residents and communities of the designated area; and
(b) to protect the ecosystemic integrity of the designated area.
23(2) In exercising its powers or performing its duties and functions
in accordance with the objective set out in paragraph (1)(a), the
Board must take into account the well-being of residents of Canada
outside the designated area.
Contact Information:
PO Box 1360, 29 Mitik Street
Cambridge Bay, NU X0B 0C0
Telephone: (867) 983-4600
Facsimile: (867) 983-2594
Cover Photo Credits: NIRB staff

Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report i
The Mary River Project
SIGNATURE PAGE
THIS PRE-HEARING CONFERENCE DECISION REPORT WAS AUTHORIZED FOR
RELEASE BY THE NUNAVUT IMPACT REVIEW BOARD ON THIS 30TH DAY OF
OCTOBER 2020.
Marjorie Kaviq Kaluraq Guy Alikut

Chairperson Board Member
Catherine Emrick Uriash Puqiqnak

Board Member Board Member
Madeleine Qumuatuq
Board Member

Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report ii
Executive Summary
There have been many developments in the eleven months since the Nunavut Impact Review
Board (NIRB or Board) suspended the Public Hearing associated with the Board’s reconsideration
of the Phase 2 Development Proposal, a change to the previously-approved Mary River Project. In
particular, the Board acknowledges the unprecedented effects on everyone resulting from the
public health response to the novel corona virus (COVID-19) global pandemic. Public health
protection measures put in place in March 2020 had an immediate effect on the Board’s ability to
continue this assessment, with the Board having to cancel all in-person proceedings for several
months. In July 2020, with the easing of some restrictions on the numbers of people who could
attend indoor gatherings and clarification of isolation and travel restrictions into Nunavut, the
Board worked with public health authorities in Nunavut to modify the Board’s normal in-person
processes and develop procedures for holding meetings in respect of public health orders in
Nunavut and the rest of Canada. The Board’s recent completion of the third Technical Meeting,
and the modified in-person and video-linked Community Roundtable and Pre-Hearing Conference
for the Phase 2 Development Proposal in September and early October demonstrate that with the
pioneering use of new technology and modifications to existing in-person meeting processes, it is
now logistically possible to hold in-person proceedings in a manner that maintains the health and
safety of all participants and communities involved, while delivering on the Board’s objectives for
in-person proceedings.
Having piloted the Board’s modified in-person proceedings, the Board has now turned to the
consideration of whether the resumption of the Public Hearing is not only technically possible, but
also reasonable, given the resolution of technical issues and advancement of understanding of the
Phase 2 Development Proposal and its potential effects amongst Intervenors and potentially
affected communities.
The Board reminds all parties of the primary reasons cited by the Board when granting the motion
of Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated to pause the Public Hearing in November 2019:
▪ Parties had identified that uncertainty and significant information gaps existed in relation
to the assessment of the Phase 2 Development Proposal;
▪ Intervenors, particularly, community-based Intervenors, had been challenged to have
adequate time and resources to review and translate information; and
▪ Overall, in the potentially affected communities in the North Baffin there appeared to be a
lack of understanding of the Phase 2 Development Proposal and the potential for impacts,
and an associated erosion of trust in the process.1
1
NIRB File No.: 08MN053, Record of Proceedings and Disposition of Motions Report for the November 2019 Public
Hearing in respect of Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation’s Phase 2 Development Proposal of the Mary River Project,
December 16, 2019 (Doc ID. 327790).
Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report iii
At that time, the Board also conveyed the expectation that in advance of the Public Hearing
resuming, Baffinland and the parties should work together to:
▪ Provide the Board with a clearer picture of the views of Baffinland and the Intervenors
regarding resolved and outstanding technical issues;
▪ Ensure that the communities potentially affected by the Phase 2 Development Proposal are
provided with the information, including translated materials, they require to fully
understand the Proposal and the potential for the Proposal to have ecosystemic and socio-
economic effects; and
▪ Engage the Intervenors and communities affected by the Phase 2 Development Proposal
so that their views, concerns and questions can be identified, considered and addressed in
a pro-active and collaborative fashion.
As set out in more detail in the Pre-Hearing Conference Decision Report that follows, the Board
has concluded that, although not all Intervenors and communities agree that all issues have been
addressed to their satisfaction, significant progress has been made to date during meetings between
parties since November 2019 and during the recent Technical Meeting, Community Roundtable
and Pre-Hearing Conference. Specifically, progress has enabled the parties to:
▪ Identify the nature and extent of resolved and unresolved issues;

▪ List the 188 specific commitments developed by the Proponent and parties to address
technical issues; and
▪ Demonstrate efforts to engage directly with potentially affected communities to foster
greater understanding of the Phase 2 Development Proposal and potential impacts.
The Board also considered the following to decide whether it is reasonable to resume the Public
Hearing in the current circumstances:
▪ the additional written submissions provided by parties to the Board since December 2019;
▪ the notification provided by the Minister of Northern Affairs under s. 114 of the Nunavut
Planning and Project Assessment Act, S.C. 2013, c. 14, s. 2 (NuPPAA) that the resumption
of the Board’s proceedings in respect of the file should be a priority;2
▪ the successful conclusion of the third Technical Meeting in September 2020;
▪ the questions, comments and closing statements provided by community members during
the Community Roundtable;
▪ the feedback of the Intervenors provided during the Pre-Hearing Conference; and
▪ the successful implementation of the Board’s COVID-19 Protocols to carry out modified
in-person proceedings during the Community Roundtable and Pre-Hearing Conference.
2
Email dated July 14, 2020 from Hon. D. Vandal, Minister of Northern Affairs to K. Costello, NIRB (Doc ID: 330898).
Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report iv
Although the Board acknowledges that many parties may be comfortable with only resuming the
Public Hearing when the COVID-19 pandemic is over and the Board could return fully to our pre-
pandemic processes, this is not a reasonable approach. The Board heard from the Proponent,
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation (Baffinland or the Proponent) that delays in the completion of
this assessment beyond December 2020, resulting in the NIRB and Minister’s decision-making
extending into the first half of 2021, are having and will continue to have significant adverse
financial consequences, and that these effects, when combined with the detrimental impacts of the
COVID-19 pandemic may significantly affect the continued viability of the approved Mary River
Project.
In addition, with recent experience carrying out modified in-person proceedings, the Board is more
confident that it is possible to keep everyone safe, and also to recreate, as much as possible, the
same experience as an in-person proceeding. The Board understands from the feedback provided
by participants that there are improvements to be made to the Board’s modified processes,
particularly to ensure that greater numbers of community members can participate, and the Board
appreciates participants sharing their ideas for improving the Board’s processes. The Board notes
that improvements to the Board’s COVID-19 Protocols will be on-going to incorporate feedback,
but also to reflect the changes to applicable public health measures (such as the recent increase to
the maximum number of people permitted in a single indoor location in Nunavut).
Based on all of these considerations, the Board has determined that it is now reasonable to schedule
the resumption of the Public Hearing for the Phase 2 Development Project, to take place in-person
in the primary location of Pond Inlet in late January and early February, 2021 starting in the week
of January 25 and to be completed by February 6, 2021. Based on current indoor public gathering
limits, the Board anticipates that it will be necessary to video-link Pond Inlet to a hub in Iqaluit
(however the availability and locations for video-linked hubs outside of Nunavut have yet to be
determined as more stringent public health measures are currently in place in Winnipeg and
Ottawa). Precise details, dates and locations will be confirmed in the days to come in the Notice
of the reconvened Public Hearing, and in project-specific procedural guidance. The Board reserves
the right to alter the schedule, locations and modified processes for holding the reconvened Public
Hearing as may be necessary to comply with applicable public health measures, and appreciates
the patience and flexibility of all parties as we work collaboratively to resume the Public Hearing.
In closing, the Board would like to thank all of the Community Roundtable and Pre-Hearing
Conference participants for their adaptability and cooperation as the Board pioneered a new
approach to conducting in-person proceedings in the face of considerable limitations imposed by
COVID-19 public health measures. This was truly an exceptional and challenging undertaking for
us all and the Board is grateful for the contributions of all participants to the successful completion
of these important proceedings and allowing the Board to test and improve our new COVID-19
Protocols.

Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report v
ᐊᖏᔪᖅᑲᐅᑎᓄᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᐊᑕᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐃᑦ
ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᓘᔭᕐᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕ ᑕᖅᑭᓂᒃ 11-ᓂᒃ ᑕᐃᒪᙵᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ (NIRB ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ),
ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑎᑦᑎᓚᐅᕐᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐊᒃᑐᐊᓂᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐊᕆᑲᓐᓂᕋᓱᒃᖢᓂᐅᒃ ᐅᓇ
ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ 2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᒧᑦ, ᐊᓯᙳᕈᑎᒃᓴᖅ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᓂᑯᒥᑦ ᓄᓘᔮᖕᓂ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᒥᑦ.
ᐱᓗᐊᕐᑐᒥᓪᓕ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔪᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᓇᙱᑦᑐᒥ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᖑᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᕐᓇᙱᑦᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᓯᒪᓕᕐᑐᒥ
ᐆᒥᖓ ᓄᕙᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ-19-ᒥ (COVID-19) ᑖᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᕐᔪᐊᓕᒫᒥᑦ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᕕᒡᔪᐊᖑᑎᓪᓗᒍ. ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᕐᓇᙱᑦᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ
ᓴᐳᔾᔨᓯᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᑯᑦ ᒫᔾᔨ 2020 ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᑲᐅᑎᒋᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒥᖓ
ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᒋᐊᒃᓴᖅ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑎᑦᑎᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐅᐸᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᒃᓴᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᑕᖅᑭᒐᓴᖕᓂᒃ. ᔪᓚᐃ
2020-ᒥ, ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓄᒋᐊᓗᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᑦᑕᐃᓕᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᑐᙱᓐᓂᕐᓴᐅᓕᕐᑎᓪᓗᒋ ᐃᒡᓘ ᐃᓗᐊᓃᑦᑐᕐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕐᓯᓯᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓄᑑᓐᓇᖅᑐᒦᒋᐊᖃᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᑎᒃᓴᓂᒃ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ
ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᓚᐅᕐᑐᑦ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᕐᓇᙱᑦᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒥᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕐᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᕋᓱᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓄᖕᓂ ᐅᐸᖃᑎᖃᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ
ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖃᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓗᒍ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᕐᓇᙱᑦᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᖁᔭᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒥᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ
ᑲᓇᑕᓕᒫᒥᑦ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᖓᑦᑎᐅᓵᖅ ᐆᒥᖓ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᓯᓚᐅᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐱᖓᔪᖓᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒥᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕐᓯᒪᔪᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᐸᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑕᕆᔭᕈᓐᓇᐅᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑦᑕᑕᕐᓯᒪᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᐅᑉ
ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒥ ᐆᒧᖓ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ 2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᓯᑎᐱᕆᒥ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᒃᑑᐱᕆ ᐱᒋᐊᓕᓵᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ
ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᒍᑎᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᑐᖃᑦᑕᓕᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᓄᑖᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑦᑕᕈᓯᐅᔪᑦ, ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᒫᓐᓇ
ᐊᔪᕐᓇᕈᓐᓃᕐᑐᖅ ᑲᑎᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᑲᑕᒋᐊᒃᓴᖅ ᒪᑯᐊ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᖅᑕᐃᓕᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᓗᕆᐊᓇᙱᑦᑐᒦᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐊᑐᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ, ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐱᓇᓱᐊᖅᐸᒃᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ
ᐅᐸᖃᑎᒌᒃᓯᒪᓂᒃᑯᑦ.
ᐅᓇ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᒋᐊᕐᓯᒪᔭᖓᑦ ᑲᑎᖃᑎᒌᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᖅ ᐅᐸᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔩ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᕐᓯᐅᓕᕐᑐᑦ

ᐅᓇ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᔪᕐᓇᙱᑐᐃᓐᓇᙱᓪᓗᓂ ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ ᑐᑭᖃᕐᓂᕐᓴᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ, ᒪᑯᐊ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᒋ
ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᑭᓯᕚᓪᓕᕐᓯᒪᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐆᒥᖓ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ 2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᒍᑎᒋᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᑯᓇᓂ ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᕕᖃᕈᒪᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ
ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂ.
ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᐃᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᒃᑐᑦ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓕᒫᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᔭᐅᓂᑯᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓄᑦ ᐊᖏᕐᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ

ᐱᖁᔨᕗᖔᕈᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᖖᒐᕕᒃ ᐅᓇ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᑲᖁᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ ᓄᕕᐱᕆ 2019-ᒥᑦ:
▪ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕐᓯᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᓇᓗᓈᕿᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᓴᒐᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐃᓚᖏ ᐊᒥᒐᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᒪᑐᒧᖓ

ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᒍᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ 2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᒧᑦ;
▪ ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᕕᖃᕈᒪᓯᒪᔪᑦ, ᐱᓗᐊᕐᑐᒥᓐ ᒪᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂᙶᖅᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᕕᖃᕈᒪᓯᒪᔪᑦ, ᐱᕕᖃᙱᓗᐊᓕᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᒻᒪ
ᐃᑲᔫᑎᖃᙱᓗᐊᖅᐸᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᕋᓱᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑐᑭᓕᐅᕋᓱᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓴᒐᒃᓴᓂᒃ; ᐊᒻᒪ
▪ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓪᓕ, ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᑦ ᕿᑭᖅᑖᓘᑉ ᐅᐊᖕᓇᖓᓃᑦᑐ ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᕐᓯᒪᖅᑰᔨᙱᒻᒪᑕ
ᐆᒥᖓ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ 2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᒍᑎᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᒪᐅᖓ
ᐅᒃᐱᕈᓱᓗᐊᕈᓐᓃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒥᒃ.3
ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᕐᓂᕋᓚᐅᕐᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐅᓇ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ ᐱᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᙱᓐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐅᑯᐊ ᐹᕙᓐᓛᓐᑯᑦ

ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᖕᒥᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᒋᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᒪᓐᓇ:
▪ ᑐᓂᓯᔪᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓄᑦ ᓱᖅᑯᐃᓇᕐᓂᕐᓴᓂᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᑯᓇᙵᑦ ᐹᕙᓐᓛᓐᑯᓐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ

ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᕕᖃᕈᒪᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᑯᓂᖓ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒫᓂᒃᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ;
3
ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦᑕ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᓄᑦ ᓇᐃᓴᐅᑎ: 08MN053, ᑎᑎᕋᕐᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖏ ᐱᖁᔨᕗᖔᕈᑎᓄᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᑦ
ᐆᒧᖓ ᓄᕕᐱᕆ 2019-ᒥᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᑎᓪᓗᒋ ᐹᕙᓐᓛᓐ ᓴᕕᕋᔭᒃᓴᒥ ᐅᔭᕋᒃᓯᐅᕐᕕᒃ ᑯᐊᐳᕇᓴᓐᑯᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ 2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐅᕙᓂ ᓄᓘᔮᖕᓂ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᒥᑦ, ᑎᓯᐱᕆ 16, 2019 (ᑎᑎᖃᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑯᑎᖓ: 327790).
Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report vi
▪ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓖ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᑦ ᐆᒧᖓ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ 2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᒧᑦ
ᑐᓴᒐᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᓯᒪᓗᑎᒃ, ᐃᓚᖃᕐᓗᓂ ᑐᑭᓕᐅᕆᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ, ᐱᓯᒪᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᑭᓯᓯᒪᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ
ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᐅᓕᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᒪᑯᓄᖓ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐊᒃᑐᐃᒍᑎᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ; ᐊᒻᒪ
▪ ᒪᑯᐊ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᕕᖃᕈᒪᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐆᒧᖓ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ 2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖏᑦ, ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖏᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕐᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ, ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ
ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᑐᕈᑎᖃᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᑦᑎᒍᑦ.
ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖓᒍᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᕐᓯᒪᓂᕐᓴᓂᒃ ᐅᕙᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᐅᑉ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᓂᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕆᔾᔪᑎᓂᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓂᒃ

ᑭᖑᓂᐊᒎᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᖃᓕᓚᐅᕐᑐᑦ, ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᒃ ᒪᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᕕᖃᕈᒪᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᓕᒫᖏᓐᓂᒃ
ᐱᐊᓂᒃᓯᔪᓐᓇᙱᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓈᒻᒪᒋᔭᖏᓐᓄᑦ, ᑕᒪᑯᓂᖓ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖓ ᑲᔪᓯᕚᓪᓕᕐᓯᒪᓚᐅᕐᐳᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᑲᑕᒃᖢᑎᒃ
ᐱᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᙵᓂᑦ ᓄᕕᐱᕆ 2019-ᒥ ᐊᒻᒪ ᖃᖓᑦᑎᐊᓵᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᓚᐅᕐᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ
ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᐅᑉ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᒃᓴᓅᖓᔪᓂᒃ, ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ
ᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᕈᓐᓇᖅᑎᑦᑎᓯᒪᓕᕐᑐᑦ:
▪ ᓇᓗᓇᕐᓯᓗᑎᒃ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᖏᑎᒋᓂᖏᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᕌᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᕌᓂᙱᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᑦ;

▪ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐃᓗᑎᒃ 188-ᓂ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᓂᐊᕐᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓂᑯᓂᒃ ᐱᖁᑎᖃᖅᑎᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᔪᓄᑦ
ᒪᑯᓄᖓ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᓂᒃ; ᐊᒻᒪ
▪ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᕋᓱᒃᓯᒪᓗᑎᒃ ᐅᑯᓂᖓ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓗᐊᕋᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᑐᑭᓯᕚᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐆᒥᖓ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ
2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᒍᑎᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ.
ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᕐᓯᐅᕈᑎᖃᕐᒥᔪᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᒫᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᓯᐅᓕᕐᑐᓂ ᑕᐅᑐᒃᖢᑎᒃ:
▪ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᑐᓂᒃ ᑐᓐᓂᖁᑎᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓄᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᙵᓂᒃ ᑎᓯᐱᕆ 2019;

▪ ᖃᐅᔨᑎᑦᑎᒍᑎᐅᔪᖅ ᐅᑯᓇᙶᖅᑐᖅ ᐅᑭᐅᕐᑕᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒥ ᐅᕘᓇ ᐃᓚᖓ 114 ᐅᕙᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐸᕐᓇᐃᓂᕐᒧᑦ
ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ, ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᓂᖓ 2013, ᓵᑉᑕ 14, ᐃᓚᖓ 2 (NuPPAA) ᐅᑯᐊ
ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᖓ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᖑᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕆᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ;4
▪ ᐊᓂᒍᐃᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᑯ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᑕᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᐅᓇ ᐱᖓᔪᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖅ ᓯᑎᐱᕆ, 2020-ᖑᑎᓪᓗᒍ;
▪ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑏᑦ, ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᐊᓂᓕᕐᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ;
▪ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᕕᖃᕈᒪᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑐᓂᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᐅᓂᐊᕐᑑᑉ; ᐊᒻᒪ
▪ ᐊᓂᒍᐃᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᓯᒪᔪᒥ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓯᒪᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᕙᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ-19-ᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᖁᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᑎᒍᑦ
ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕐᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᐸᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓗᑎᒃ
ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᐅᑉ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᒃᓴᒥᑦ.
ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐊᒥᓱᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᓈᒻᒪᒃᓴᕐᓂᕐᓴᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᕙᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ-19 ᐊᓂᒍᖅᐸᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᔪᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ

ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐅᑎᕈᓐᓇᕐᓯᓗᑎᒃ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅᑕᖃᓚᐅᖅᑎᓐᓇᒍ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᒪᐅᕐᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ,
ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᓈᒻᒪᒋᔭᐅᓗᐊᙱᒻᒪᑦ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓴᓚᐅᕐᑐᑦ ᐱᖁᑎᖃᖅᑐᒥᑦ, ᐆᒥᖓ ᐹᕕᓐᓛᓐ ᓴᕕᕋᔭᒃᓴᒥ ᐅᔭᕋᒃᓯᐅᕐᕕᒃ
ᑯᐊᐳᕇᓴᓐᑯᓐᓂ (ᐹᕙᓐᓛᓐ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐱᖁᑎᖃᖅᑎ) ᑭᖑᕙᕆᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓚᐅᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐆᒥᖓ
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᓂ ᑎᓯᐱᕆ 2020 ᐅᖓᑖᓄᑦ, ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓐᓂᖓᓄᓪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᐅᑉ
ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕆᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓ ᐅᖓᕙᕆᐊᕐᑕᐅᓗᓂ 2021 ᕿᑎᐸᓗᐊᓄᑦ, ᐊᒃᑐᐃᒍᑎᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑲᔪᓯᓂᐊᖅᖢᓂ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᕆᓂᒃᑯᑦ
ᓈᒻᒪᙱᓕᐅᕈᑎᓂᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᒍᑎ, ᐃᓚᖃᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᓕᕈᑎᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂ ᐆᒧᖓ ᓄᕙᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ-19
ᐋᓐᓂᐊᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᒧ ᑲᔪᓯᒍᑎᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑦ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᓯᒫᓂᒃᑐᒥᑦ ᓄᓘᔮᖕᓂ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒥ.
ᐊᒻᒪᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗ, ᖃᖓᑦᑎᐊᓵᖅ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᑎᐅᓚᐅᕐᑐᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕐᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐅᐸᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᕐᒥ ᐊᑐᓚᐅᕐᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ,

ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᔪᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᐅᓗᕆᐊᓇᙱᑦᑐᒦᑎᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᐸᒡᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᔪᕐᓇᙱᑦᑕᕌᖓᑦ
ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᕕᓃᑦ ᔪᓚᐃ 14, 2020-ᒥᑦ ᐅᕙᙵᑦ ᓂᕐᓱᕐᓇᖅᑐᖅ ᑎ. ᕚᑐᓪ, ᐅᑭᐅᕐᑕᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒥᑦ ᐅᕗᖓ ᑭ. ᑲᔅᑕᓗᒧᑦ,
4
ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ (ᑎᑎᖃᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑯᑎᖓ: 330898).

Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report vii
ᑲᑎᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᕙᓪᓕᐊᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᐅᓯᕚᓪᓕᕐᓯᒪᓂᕋᐃᓪᓗᑎᒃ
ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕐᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ, ᐱᓗᐊᕐᑐᒥᒃ ᐅᓄᕐᓂᕐᓴᐅᓕᕐᖢᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓚᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ
ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᕙᒃᑐᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᓴᕈᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᐸᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ
ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᐅᓯᕚᓪᓕᕈᑎᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᑯᓄᖓ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᓄᕙᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ-19-ᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒋᐊᓕᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ
ᑐᓴᕈᑎᐅᕙᒡᓗᑎᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᓕᒐᓱᖕᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᕐᓇᙱᑦᑐᓕᕆᔨᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᖁᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ (ᒪᑯᑎᑐᓇᖅ ᐅᓄᕐᓯᕚᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᓕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ
ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᐸᒍᑎᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᒡᓗᒧᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒥᑦ).
ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᓕᒫᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᖢᒋᑦ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᓚᐅᕐᑐᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᓈᒻᒪᓛᖑᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᓂᕐᒥᒃ

ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᑎᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᑭᒃᑲᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥ ᐆᒧᖓ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ 2 ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᒥ, ᑖᓐᓇᓗ
ᐊᑐᕐᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓗᓂ ᐅᐸᒍᑎᓗᑎᒃ ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᖕᒧᑦ ᔭᓄᐊᕆ ᐃᓱᐸᓗᐊᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᕕᕝᕗᐊᕆ ᐱᒋᐊᓕᓵᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ 2021-ᒥᑦ, ᐱᒋᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ
ᔭᓄᐊᕆ 25 ᐱᓇᓱᐊᕈᓯᐊᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓗᓂ ᑎᑭᓪᓗᒍ ᕕᕝᕗᐊᕆ 6, 2021. ᒪᓕᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᒫᓐᓇ ᖃᔅᓯᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᑦ
ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᕐᕆᔭᕈᓐᓇᐅᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑦᑕᑕᕐᓯᒪᓗᑎᒃ ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᖕᒧᑦ ᐅᕙᙵᑦ ᐃᖃᓗᖕᓂᑦ (ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕᑦᑕᐅᖅ
ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓇᔭᕆᐊᒃᓴᖓ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓂᖃᕐᕕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕋᔭᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᕐᕆᔭᒐᒃᓴᖅᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᑦᑕᑕᕈᓐᓇᐅᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᓯᓚᑖᓂᙶᖅᑐᓂᒃ
ᖃᐅᔨᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑦ ᓲᖃᐃᒻᒪ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᖅᑕᐃᓕᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖃᕐᒥᖕᒪᑕ ᐅᐃᓂᐱᒡᒥᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐋᑐᕚᒥ). ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᑦᑎᐊᕐᓯᒪᔪᑦ,
ᐅᓪᓗᐃᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓇᓃᓐᓇᔭᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕐᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᑐᑦ ᐊᒡᒋᖅᑐᓂ ᐅᓪᓗᓂᒃ ᐅᕘᓇ ᖃᐅᔨᑎᑦᑎᒍᑎᓂᒃ ᑲᔪᓯᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ
ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᐅᓇ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᖕᓂᒃ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖃᖅᑐᑦ
ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᓯᙳᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ, ᓇᓃᕝᕕᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᓂᒃ ᑲᔪᓯᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃ
ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᒪᓕᒋᐊᖃᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖁᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᖅᑕᐃᓕᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᖁᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᔭᓕᔪᑦ
ᕿᓄᐃᓵᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᔪᓂ ᒪᓕᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᕋᓱᒃᑎᓪᓗᑕ ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ
ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ.
ᐱᐊᓂᖕᓂᐊᓵᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖁᔭᓕᔪᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ

ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᐅᑉ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒥ ᒪᓕᒍᓐᓇᓚᐅᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓚᐅᑲᑕᒍᓐᓇᓚᐅᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ
ᓄᑖᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐅᐸᖃᑎᒌᒃᓯᒪᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᑕᖃᕈᓘᔭᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᓂ ᓄᕙᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ-19 ᒥᒃᓵᓅᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᙱᑦᑐᓂᒃ.
ᐅᓇᓕ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᐊᔾᔨᐅᙱᓪᓚᕆᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓕᕆᕈᓘᔭᕐᓇᖅᖢᓂ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓄᓕᒫᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖁᔭᓕᔪᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᓚᐅᕐᑐᑦ
ᐃᑲᔪᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᓂᒍᐃᔪᓐᓇᕐᖢᑎᒃ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᓯᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᖕᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᖅᑎᑦᑎᓚᐅᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ
ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᐅᓯᕚᓪᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᓄᕙᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ-19-ᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᖁᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ.

Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report viii
SOMMAIRE
La situation a bien évolué au cours des onze mois suivant la suspension, par la Commission du
Nunavut chargée de l’examen des répercussions (la CNER ou la Commission), de l’audience
publique afférant à son réexamen de la proposition de mise en valeur de la phase 2, modification
proposée au projet Mary River préalablement approuvé. La Commission tient notamment à
souligner les effets sans précédent de la réponse des autorités de santé publique à la pandémie
mondiale (COVID-19). Les mesures de protection instaurées en mars 2020 ont immédiatement
altéré la capacité de la Commission de poursuivre cet examen, l’obligeant à annuler pendant
plusieurs mois toutes ses procédures face à face. En juillet 2020, devant l’allègement de certaines
restrictions quant au nombre de personnes autorisées à participer à des rassemblements intérieurs
et la clarification des restrictions relatives à l’isolement et aux déplacements au Nunavut, la
Commission a consulté les autorités de santé publique du Nunavut, pour modifier les habituels
processus nunavutois en présentiel et établir des modalités de tenue de réunions respectant les
ordonnances de santé publique au Nunavut et dans le reste du Canada. La finalisation de la
troisième réunion technique récemment tenue (septembre et début octobre) en mode hybride
(vidéo et présentiel) sur la proposition de mise en valeur de la phase 2 et les subséquentes table
ronde communautaire/conférence pré-audience aux modalités modifiées prouvent qu’avec
l’utilisation pionnière de la nouvelle technologie et avec les modifications apportées à
l’organisation de réunions face à face, il est désormais possible d’agencer des rencontres en
présentiel, garantissant la santé et la sécurité de tous les participants et des collectivités concernées
tout en poursuivant les objectifs de la Commission pour des procédures en présentiel.
Après avoir piloté les procédures en présentiel et étant donné le règlement des questions
techniques et la meilleure compréhension de la proposition de mise en valeur de la phase 2 ainsi
que ses possibles effets sur les intervenants et, éventuellement, sur les collectivités touchées, la
Commission se penche à présent sur la faisabilité technique de la tenue de l’audience publique et
sur son caractère judicieux.
La Commission rappelle à toutes les parties les raisons fondamentales qu’elle a invoquées en
accueillant, en novembre 2019, la motion de la Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated visant la
suspension de l’audience publique:
▪ Les parties prenantes ont noté que des incertitudes et d’importantes lacunes en information
en ce qui a trait à l’évaluation de la proposition de mise en valeur de la phase 2;
▪ Les intervenants et plus particulièrement les intervenants communautaires ont réclamé
suffisamment de temps et de ressources pour examiner et traduire les informations; et

Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report ix
▪ Un manque de compréhension de la proposition de mise en valeur de la phase 2 et une
érosion de la confiance dans le processus semblaient régner dans les collectivités
potentiellement touchées du Nord de l’île de Baffin5.
À cette époque-là, la Commission avait déclaré s’attendre à ce qu’en prévision de la reprise de

l’audience publique, la Baffinland et les parties prenantes pourraient travailler ensemble pour :
▪ Lui présenter un plus clair tableau des points de vue de la Baffinland et des intervenants
sur les questions techniques résolues et en suspens;
▪ S’assurer que les collectivités potentiellement touchées par la mise en valeur de la phase 2,
reçoivent les informations requises – y compris les documents traduits – pour comprendre
parfaitement la proposition ainsi que ses possibles répercussions écosystémiques et
socioéconomiques; et
▪ Mobiliser les intervenants et les collectivités touchées par la proposition de mise en valeur
de la phase 2 afin que leurs points de vue, préoccupations et questions puissent être
dégagés, examinés et traités de manière proactive et dans un esprit de collaboration.
Tel que détaillé ci-après dans l’extrait tiré du Rapport décisionnel de la conférence pré-audience,
la Commission a conclu que, malgré l’insatisfaction de certains intervenants et collectivités quant
au règlement de plusieurs questions, d’importants progrès avaient été réalisés depuis novembre
2019 au cours des réunions inter-parties ainsi que lors de la récente réunion technique, de la table
ronde communautaire et de la conférence pré-audience. Plus précisément, ces progrès avaient
permis aux parties de:
▪ Préciser la nature et l’ampleur des questions résolues et en suspens;

▪ Répertorier les 188 engagements spécifiques pris par le promoteur et les parties pour régler
les questions techniques; et
▪ Prouver les efforts réalisés pour amener les collectivités potentiellement touchées à mieux
comprendre la proposition de mise en valeur de la phase 2 et ses possibles répercussions.
La Commission a en outre examiné les points suivants afin de déterminer si la reprise de l’audience
possible dans les circonstances actuelles était raisonnable:
▪ les autres mémoires écrits, soumis par les parties à la Commission depuis décembre 2019;
▪ l’avis du ministre des Affaires du Nord spécifiant en vertu de l’article 114 de la Loi sur
l’aménagement du territoire et l’évaluation des projets au Nunavut, L.C. 2013, ch.14, art.2
(LATEPN), que la reprise des procédures de la Commission devrait être une priorité6;
5
No. de dossier de la CNER: 08MN053, Record of Proceedings and Disposition of Motions Report for the November
2019 Public Hearing in respect of Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation’s Phase 2 Development Proposal of the Mary
River Project, 16 décembre 2019 (Doc no. 327790).
6
Courriel du 14 juillet 2020 envoyé par l’honorable D. Vanda, ministre des Affaires du Nord à K. Costello, CNER
(doc. no. 330898).
Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report x
▪ la conclusion positive de la troisième réunion technique en septembre 2020;
▪ les questions, observations et déclarations finales des membres des collectivités lors de la
table ronde communautaire;
▪ la rétroaction des intervenants lors de la conférence pré-audience; et
▪ La mise en vigueur réussie des protocoles COVID-19 de la CNER permettant d’appliquer
pendant la table ronde communautaire et la conférence pré-audience des modalités en
présentiel modifiées.
Certes, la Commission reconnait que plusieurs parties prenantes préfèreraient ne reprendre

l’audience publique qu’après la pandémie COVID-19 avec les processus utilisés avant la
pandémie, mais elle sait que ce n’est pas une approche raisonnable. Le promoteur, la Baffinland
Iron Mines Corporation (la Baffinland ou le promoteur) l’a avisée que toute prolongation au-delà
de décembre 2020 de la finalisation de cette évaluation, qui amènerait le ministre et la CNER à
repousser leur décision jusqu’à la première moitié de l’année 2021, aura et continuera à avoir de
graves et négatives conséquences financières qui, combinées aux incidences préjudiciables de la
pandémie COVID-19, risqueraient sérieusement d’affecter la viabilité soutenue du projet Mary
River approuvé.
De plus, grâce à la récente application des procédures en présentiel modifiées, la Commission est
certaine de pouvoir garantir la sécurité de tous les participants ainsi que de recréer, autant que
possible, la même expérience que celle des procédures préalables. La CNER comprend fort bien
d’après la rétroaction des participants, que ses processus modifiés peuvent être améliorés,
notamment en ce qui a trait à la participation d’un plus grand nombre de membres des collectivités
et elle remercie les participants de leurs observations et de leurs idées positives. Elle s’attend à ce
que ces améliorations soient effectuées de manière continue, non seulement pour intégrer les
commentaires mais encore pour traduire les changements des mesures de santé publique en vigueur
(comme la récente augmentation du nombre maximum de personnes autorisées à participer à un
rassemblement intérieur au Nunavut).
À partir de toutes ces réflexions, la Commission a jugé qu’il était désormais raisonnable de
programmer une reprise de l’audience publique pour le projet de mise en valeur de la phase 2.
Cette reprise aura lieu en personne fin janvier et début février 2021, au site principal de Pond Inlet.
Elle commencera la semaine du 25 janvier et se terminera le 6 février 2021. Étant donné les
restrictions actuelles quant au nombre de participants à des rassemblements publics intérieurs, il
sera probablement nécessaire de relier Pond Inlet par vidéo à une plateforme située à Iqaluit (mais,
à cause des rigoureuses mesures de santé publique actuellement appliquées à Winnipeg et à
Ottawa, la disponibilité et l’emplacement de ces plateformes à l’extérieur du Nunavut sont encore
à déterminer). Des détails plus précis, les dates et les sites seront confirmés prochainement dans
l’avis de reprise de l’audience publique ainsi que dans les directives procédurales inhérentes au
projet. La Commission se réserve le droit de modifier l’horaire, l’emplacement et les procédures
de cette audience publique si les mesures de santé publiques en vigueur l’imposent. Elle félicite
Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report xi
toutes les parties de leur patience et de leur souplesse pour cette reprise placée sous le signe de la
collaboration mutuelle.
En terminant, la Commission tient à remercier tous les participants de la table ronde

communautaire et de la conférence pré-audience de leur flexibilité et de leur coopération alors
qu’elle innovait avec ces procédures présentielles modifiées, dues aux considérables restrictions
imposées par les mesures de santé publique en réponse à la COVID-19. Ce fut une réalisation tout
aussi dynamique qu’exigeante pour nous tous et la Commission tient à remercier tous les
participants d’avoir contribué à la finalisation de ces importantes modalités, lui permettant ainsi
de tester et d’améliorer ses nouveaux protocoles COVID-19.

Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report xii
Contents
INSIDE COVER PAGE .................................................................................................................. i
SIGNATURE PAGE ...................................................................................................................... ii
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... iii
ᐊᖏᔪᖅᑲᐅᑎᓄᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᐊᑕᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐃᑦ ..................................................................................... vi
SOMMAIRE .................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... xiv
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. xiv
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
Procedural History............................................................................................................ 9
Modifications to Board Processes Required During the Pandemic ............................... 18
2. Project Proposal Before the Board ........................................................................................ 20
Project Description Overview ........................................................................................ 20
Updated Project Scope following Adjournment of the Public Hearing ......................... 21
Proposed Changes to Project Components and Activities ............................................. 22
Description of Operational Flexibility ........................................................................... 26
3. Summary of Submissions from Parties ................................................................................. 27
Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated (NTI) ........................................................................ 29
Qikiqtani Inuit Association ............................................................................................ 29
Government of Nunavut ................................................................................................. 30
Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs ....................................................... 31
Environment and Climate Change Canada .................................................................... 31
Fisheries and Oceans Canada ......................................................................................... 31
Health Canada ................................................................................................................ 32
Natural Resources Canada ............................................................................................. 32
Parks Canada .................................................................................................................. 32
Transport Canada ........................................................................................................... 32
Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Association ............................................................ 33
Hamlet of Pond Inlet ...................................................................................................... 34
Other North Baffin Communities................................................................................... 35
Oceans North .................................................................................................................. 36
World Wildlife Fund ...................................................................................................... 36
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation ................................................................................ 37
Comment Summaries from the Community Roundtable ............................................... 39
Fisheries and Oceans Comments on Somerset Narwhal Stock ...................................... 57
4. Nunavut Impact Review Board Analysis and Decision ........................................................ 58
Submissions on Procedural Issues ................................................................................. 58
Jurisdiction of the Board ................................................................................................ 58
4.2.1. Issues ....................................................................................................................... 59

Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report xiii
5. Conclusions of the Board ...................................................................................................... 63
Appendix A: Agenda for the Community Roundtable and Pre-hearing Conference ................... 69
Appendix B: Summary Listings of Attendees at Community Roundtable Session and Pre-
Hearing Conference ...................................................................................................................... 75
Appendix C: List of Commitment ................................................................................................ 80
Appendix D: NIRB COVID-19 PROTOCOL .............................................................................. 99
List of Tables
Table 1: Procedural History of the Board’s Assessment of the Proposal to Date ........................ 10
Table 2: Key submissions from Proponent and Parties through the assessment stage ................. 28
Table 3: Summary of Comments and Issues raised by Community Representatives................... 39
Table 4: Summary of Baffinland’s Response to Comments from Community Representatives . 54
Table 5: Summary of Parties and Baffinland’s submissions following the PHC ......................... 56
List of Figures
Figure 1: NIRB Executive Director and Chairperson at Community Roundtable and PHC .......... 2
Figure 2: NIRB Staff and Chairperson in Pond Inlet and other hub locations ............................... 3
Figure 3: Community Representatives in Pond Inlet and Iqaluit hub ............................................. 4
Figure 4: Community Representatives in the Iqaluit hub ............................................................... 5
Figure 5: Participants in the Ottawa hub......................................................................................... 5
Figure 6: Participants in the Winnipeg hub .................................................................................... 6
Figure 7: Map showing additional Phase 2 infrastructure at the Mine site .................................. 23
Figure 8: Map showing the North Railway Transportation Corridor for Route 3 ........................ 24
Figure 9: Map showing additional Phase 2 infrastructure at Milne Inlet ..................................... 25
Figure 10: Map showing the Marine Shipping Corridor for Phase 2 ........................................... 26
Figure 11: Graphical Representation of Operational Flexibility .................................................. 27
Figure 12: NIRB Chair and Staff during the PHC ........................................................................ 59

Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report xiv
1. Introduction
The Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) determined in its Record of Proceedings and
Disposition of Motions Report issued December 16, 20197, that a third Technical Meeting was
required to allow Intervenors additional time to discuss unresolved issues, followed by a Pre-
hearing Conference (PHC) as part of the Board’s assessment of Baffinland Iron Mines
Corporation’s (Baffinland or Proponent) “Phase 2 Development” Project Proposal, a proposed
amendment to the approved Mary River Iron Ore Mine (NIRB File No. 08MN053). The meeting
was also held in accordance with the mandate and objectives of the Nunavut Impact Review Board
(NIRB or Board) established under Article 12 of the Agreement between the Inuit of the Nunavut
Settlement Area and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada (Nunavut Agreement) to assess the
potential ecosystemic and socio-economic effects of the proposal. All documentation associated
with the NIRB’s assessment of the Phase 2 Development proposal can be accessed from the
Board’s online public registry at www.nirb.ca/project/124701.
Pursuant to Rule 18 of the NIRB Rules of Procedure 8 the Technical Meeting was held by
teleconference the week of September 14-18, 2020, facilitated by NIRB staff, with participation
by the following parties:
▪ Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation (Baffinland);
▪ Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA);
▪ Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated (NTI);
▪ Hamlet of Pond Inlet;
▪ Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Association (MHTO);
▪ Igloolik Working Group;
▪ Hall Beach Hunters and Trappers Association;
▪ Hamlet of Hall Beach (Sanirajak);
▪ Hamlet of Clyde River;
▪ Government of Nunavut (GN);
▪ Government of Canada (GoC);
o Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC);
o Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC);
o Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO);
o Health Canada (HC);
o Natural Resources Canada (NRCan);
o Parks Canada (PC);
o Transport Canada (TC);
o Northern Projects Management Office (NPMO);
o Department of Justice (DoJ);
7
Doc ID#: 327790
8
NIRB’s Rules of Procedure dated September 3, 2009.
Phase 2 Development Proposal Pre-Hearing Conference Report
The Mary River Project 1
▪ Nunavut Independent Television Network (NITV);
▪ Oceans North (ON); and
▪ World Wildlife Fund (WWF).
Each Intervenor was represented by several individuals and over 130 people participated in each
session. Representatives from the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, Policy Advisor from the
Nunavut Marine Council, and media (Nunatsiaq News and CBC North) observed the proceedings.
Through the assessment to date, the Proponent made 188 commitments intended to address
outstanding technical concerns raised by interested parties and affected communities regarding the
Proposal. Due to the length of time which parties required for their questions, Baffinland was
required to submit a list of these commitments on September 23, 2020. On the same day, the NIRB
circulated this list of commitments to parties and requested that parties provide updates on
agreement of wording or confirm issues that remain unresolved by September 30, 2020 for
discussion at the PHC. The NIRB received comments submissions on the revised commitment list
from the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, Government of Nunavut, Government of Canada,
Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Organization and the Hamlet of Pond Inlet.
On September 28-October 1, 2020 the NIRB’s Chairperson and staff facilitated the Community
Roundtable and Pre-hearing Conference which consisted of an in-person meeting in Pond Inlet,
connected by audio/video feeds to hubs in Iqaluit, Winnipeg, and Ottawa.
Figure 1: NIRB Executive Director and Chairperson at Community Roundtable and PHC

Figure 2: NIRB Staff and Chairperson in Pond Inlet and other hub locations
This Report provides a brief overview of the proceedings and issues discussed by parties and
provide the Board’s direction on the remaining steps in the assessment. The PHC is a key step in
the NIRB’s process, and allows parties involved in the ongoing assessment to discuss concerns
associated with the proposed project as well as define and narrow the outstanding technical issues
to be addressed through the rest of the Public Hearing process. The Community Roundtable
occurred on September 28-30, 2020 and involved community representatives from six (6)
potentially affected communities in the Qikiqtani region (i.e. Pond Inlet, Arctic Bay, Igloolik,
Sanirajak, Clyde River, and Resolute); Pond Inlet representatives attended from the primary
location while the rest of the designated representatives participated from the Iqaluit hub. The
NIRB notes there were fewer representatives appointed at the Community Roundtable compared
to the number of representatives present for the November 2019 Public Hearing; as such certain
demographics (e.g. youth/woman) were under-represented. Additionally, approximately 17 seats
were available in Pond Inlet for “walk in” members of the public to attend and participate during
each session. Community representatives and members of the public were provided time to ask
questions about the Proposal, to Intervenors and the Proponent, and provide comments about the
Project Proposal. The proceedings were conducted from Pond Inlet using a dedicated audio/video
feed to link the hubs, and the technology allowed all locations to hear and see the proceedings in
Pond Inlet as well as speak directly to the other participants. For those unable to attend either in
Pond Inlet or at another hub location, an audio feed was provided through two lines; one in English,
the other in Inuktitut. Simultaneous interpretation in Inuktitut was available throughout the
meetings to participants in Pond Inlet and Iqaluit as well as on the audio line to ensure participants
could participate in either language. Most of the community representatives at the Community
Roundtable and PHC were new appointees except for four (4) community members who had
previously participated as community representatives at the November 2019 Public Hearing in
Iqaluit. Iqaluit.
Figure 3: Community Representatives in Pond Inlet and Iqaluit hub
The meetings at each hub were held in accordance with the respective local Public Health Orders
(i.e. maximum gathering size, personal distancing requirements, personal protective equipment
requirements, sanitizing and coordination of individual movement, health checks, and collection
of contact tracing information) as well as the NIRB’s workplace safety planning and procedures
for holding meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic, which were reviewed, revised and endorsed
by the GN’s Chief Public Health Officer. These instructions were communicated to participants in
advance of the meetings through email correspondence, to individuals during sign-in at each in-
person meeting location, and through statements provided by a Public Health representative at the
beginning of the proceedings, and the Chairperson/NIRB staff remarks each day.

Figure 4: Community Representatives in the Iqaluit hub
Figure 5: Participants in the Ottawa hub

Figure 6: Participants in the Winnipeg hub
The following Intervenors attended the Community Roundtable and Pre-hearing Conference:
▪ Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation (Baffinland);
▪ Qikiqtani Inuit Association;
▪ Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated;
▪ Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Organization;
▪ Igloolik Working Group;
▪ Hall Beach Hunters and Trappers Association;
▪ Hamlet of Sanirajak;
▪ Clyde River Hunters and Trappers Organization;
▪ Hamlet of Clyde River;
▪ Hamlet of Arctic Bay;
▪ Government of Nunavut’
▪ Government of Canada represented by the following departments, also coordinated
through Northern Projects Management Office and Department of Justice, including:
o Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada;
o Environment and Climate Change Canada;
o Fisheries and Oceans Canada;
o Health Canada;
o Natural Resources Canada;
o Parks Canada;
o Transport Canada;
▪ Nunavut Independent Television Network;
▪ Oceans North; and
▪ World Wildlife Fund.
The additional community organizations that received participant funding were represented in the
sessions through the appointment of a designated community representative; specifically the
Igloolik Hunters and Trappers Association, Hamlet of Clyde River, Clyde River Hunters and
Trappers Association, Municipality of Hall Beach (Sanirajak), Hamlet of Arctic Bay and Ikajutit
Hunters and Trappers Association.
Update on Government of Denmark/Greenland

The NIRB initially received correspondence from the Government of Denmark/Greenland on
March 31, 2020 indicating concerns about impacts of the proposal and interest in participating in
the assessment under the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary
Context (informally called the “Espoo Convention”). Through ongoing communications between
the NIRB, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, Government of Canada, and the required
Government of Denmark departments, the Government of Denmark confirmed that it would be
observers in the NIRB’s process and would not be actively participating in the various NIRB
meetings directly but expect to be informed of the results of the assessment under mechanism of
the Espoo Convention. The NIRB has verified this by holding one video meeting with the
Government of Denmark/Greenland contacts directly, however reflecting this material on the
NIRB’s public registry has been delayed as most follow up communication has been led by
Government of Canada departments as signatories to the Espoo Convention, and permission has
not been received to post the ongoing correspondence. The primary issue of delay has been parties
seeking clarity on steps and timing related to Canada and Nunavut’s decision-making process, and
signatory responsibilities, as this is the first request under this agreement. In addition, potential
reporting options, and resource limitations in the Government of Denmark/Greenland agencies are
all still being discussed. NIRB staff remain available to participate in discussions and are tracking
communications to ensure it is appropriately reflected on the NIRB’s registry for the Board’s
consideration in resuming proceedings, but at this point, the nature and extent of
Denmark/Greenland’s participation in the next steps of the assessment remain unclear.
Community Roundtable and PHC Proceedings

The objectives of this Community Roundtable were:
• To provide information to the Community Representatives and general public about the
Phase 2 Development proposal and its relation to the approved Mary River Iron Ore Mine
Project;
• To encourage all community members in attendance to ask questions about the Phase 2
Development Project, its potential impacts and the Proponent’s proposed environmental
management, mitigation and monitoring plans; and
• To provide opportunities to community representatives and members of the public in Pond
Inlet to share their comments and give their input to the Board.

Following completion of the Community Roundtable, the Pre-hearing Conference started the
evening of September 30th to discuss the updated commitments list following the technical
meetings, and completed on October 1, 2020 when all parties discussed the following matters:
(a) Identification of any issues preventing the reconvening of a Public Hearing;
(b) Anticipated date, time, form, and location(s) to reconvene the Public Hearing;
(c) Timetable for the exchange of additional documents and information requests prior to the
Public Hearing;
(d) Confirmation of commitments list by Intervenors;
(e) Finalization of issues for the Public Hearing, and identification of interested parties to
attend the Hearing;
(f) Procedures to be followed for reconvening a Public Hearing including public meeting
safety planning for COVID-19 and exposure control plan;
(g) Logistics arrangement, equipment, language, interpretation, translation, and transcript
requirements; and
(h) Decide any other matters that may aid in the simplification of the Hearing.
Please refer to the Agenda for more information about the key topics discussed during the
Community Roundtable and PHC proceedings (see Appendix A). The list of participating agencies
and community organizations with their representatives are also appended to this report (see
Appendix B). A final list of commitments is required to assist the Board with identifying those
areas where additional direction and information may be required prior to reconvening the Public
Hearing (see Appendix C). Should the Proponent fulfill its commitments made during the third
Technical Meetings, Community Roundtable and PHC, the NIRB believes that many of the
technical issues identified by the parties during this assessment will be resolved through
Baffinland’s additional information and/or submissions. However, the Board notes that there were
also a number of issues identified at the Technical Meetings and Community Roundtable that may
not be fully addressed through the Proponent’s commitments alone. For greater accuracy, the types
of issues raised in the PHC were not new. Baffinland and the Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA)
negotiated an Inuit Certainty Agreement (“ICA”) signed June 16, 2020, which provide
commitments to address many of the QIA’s technical concerns. As set out in their letter of July 7,
2020 QIA has confirmed it has more confidence the reconsideration process is ready to resume on
the basis that the signed ICA has addressed QIA’s technical concerns.
Throughout the Community Roundtable, community members expressed serious concerns that the
ICA was signed without any consultation or agreement with the affected communities and that the
communities do not fully understand its content and long-term implication of the agreement
especially as it relates to benefits to communities, monitoring/mitigation of impacts, and socio-
economic effects of the Phase 2 Development Proposal. Community members expressed distrust
and dissatisfaction regarding how the ICA could be signed to support Inuit without the direct
consultation of the affected Inuit communities, particularly Pond Inlet. QIA responded to these

concerns noting that the purpose of the ICA is to allow direct Inuit involvement in Project
monitoring and greater stewardship of the Mary River Project by Inuit in terms of management of
impacts and benefits. QIA further noted its plans to travel to the affected North Baffin communities
to discuss the contents of the ICA in October-December 2020 to facilitate the understanding of the
ICA and how it impacts Inuit. Community representatives indicated that they will not consider
these issues to be resolved until Inuit are informed about the content and the implications of the
ICA, and the affected communities have had an opportunity to consider this additional information
and given enough time to think about the Phase 2 Development Proposal. The NIRB notes that the
Proponent and/or Parties are expected to advise the Board as to whether there are any outstanding
concerns that remain following any additional engagement or consultation meetings and review of
the respective documents in order to address unresolved issues.
The objective of this PHC Decision Report is to provide further direction and guidance regarding
resuming the Public Hearing for the NIRB’s assessment of the Phase 2 Development Proposal, as
well as define and narrow the issues to be addressed through the rest of the Public Hearing
proceedings. The PHC Decision Report provides a proposed timeline to reconvene the Public
Hearing for the Phase 2 Development Proposal to reflect modifications to the Board’s Public
Hearing processes as necessary to comply with public health measures and that respects the
Board’s sixty (60) day public notice requirements, and the Board’s anticipated timeline for
decision-making with respect to the Proposal.9
Procedural History
The Board’s assessment of the original version of the Phase 2 Development Proposal (involving
increased trucking of ore along the existing Tote Road, but not including the construction and
operation of the North Railway line) and associated reconsideration of the Mary River Project
Certificate No. 005 commenced in October 2014. In February 2016 prior to submitting the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Addendum, Baffinland provided notice to the NIRB that
the Phase 2 Development Proposal had been modified to change the preferred ore transportation
option from the increased use of trucking along the existing Tote Road to transport by a Northern
Railway line. The Phase 2 Development Proposal that is the subject matter of this Report involves
ore transport via a proposed Northern Railway line (the Proposal).
Table 1 below highlights key procedural steps associated with the Board’s assessment of the
Proposal and associated reconsideration of the terms and conditions of the Mary River Project
Certificate No. 005, commencing with the referral of the Phase 2 Development Proposal from the
Nunavut Planning Commission, and concluding with the completion of the NIRB’s and concluding
with the completion of the NIRB’s five-day Community Roundtable and Pre-hearing Conference
from September 28-October 1, 2020. As this summary is not exhaustive, parties wishing to develop
9
This notice requirement arises from s. 102 of the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act, S.C. 2013, c. 14
(NuPPAA) and Rule 20.1(c) of the NIRB Rules of Procedure.
a more complete understanding of the activities associated with the NIRB’s’ assessment of the
Proposal are encouraged to consult the complete listing of all documentation available from the
NIRB’s online public registry at: www.nirb.ca/project/124701.
Table 1: Procedural History of the Board’s Assessment of the Proposal to Date

Date Party Process Steps Notes
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation (Baffinland)

submitted Phase 2 Development proposal and additional
Nunavut
Proposal received from referrals received from Fisheries and Oceans Canada
October 29, Planning
Proponent, NIRB and Nunavut Water Board on January 8, 2015.On April
2014 Commission
received copy 8, 2015 the Commission provided notice that the
(Commission)
proposal did not conform to the North Baffin Regional
Land Use Plan.
Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern

Applied to Minister for Development grants exemption to North Baffin
May 21,
Baffinland Exemption from Land Regional Land Use Plan under section 11.5.11 of the
2015
Use Plan Nunavut Agreement on July 13, 2015 and Phase 2
Development referred to the NIRB for assessment.
Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern

Exemption granted and Development grants exemption to North Baffin
Responsible
July 13, 2015 proposal referred to Regional Land Use Plan for the Phase 2 Development
Minister
NIRB for assessment proposal under section 11.5.11 of the Nunavut
Agreement.
Input received from Qikiqtani Inuit Association,

Government of Nunavut, Aboriginal Affairs and
Confirm proposal
Northern Development Canada, Environment Canada,
August 27, required amendment to
NIRB Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Natural Resources
2015 the NIRB Project
Canada, Parks Canada, Transport Canada, World
Certificate
Wildlife Fund, and Helen Gerson. NIRB determines that
amendment to Project Certificate No. 005 required.
Issued Amended
Input received from Qikiqtani Inuit Association,
Guidelines for the
Government of Nunavut, Aboriginal Affairs and
October 6, preparation of a Final
NIRB Northern Development Canada, Environment Canada,
2015 Environmental Impact
Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Natural Resources
Statement (FEIS)
Canada, Parks Canada, and Transport Canada.
Addendum to Proponent
Notice of preferred Prior to submitting the FEIS Addendum, Baffinland

February 16, option change, possible provided notice to NIRB that the preferred option
Baffinland
2016 change of scope for changed from use of the Tote Road to transport by
proposal Northern Railway.
Request to Minister for NIRB requested clarification from Minister of

February 22, clarification if Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development whether
NIRB
2016 exemption continued to previous exemption applies to updated scope and
apply preferred option.

Minister provides clarification that exemption continued

Confirmation that to apply to scope change that were non-significant,
previous exemption however several differing perspectives were provided if
October 4, Responsible
continues to apply only changes to this land-based method of ore transport
2016 Minister
if scope change non- would be significant and left it to the Board to determine
significant if the change was a significant modification to the
proposal.
On October 28, 2016 NIRB requested Baffinland clarify

November Complete updated scope
Baffinland the activities being considered in the Phase 2
31, 2016 provided
Development proposal; Baffinland updated scope.
NIRB determines that the change to scope for the Phase

Issued notice of scope
December 2 Development is a significant modification and refers
NIRB change; proposal
19, 2016 Baffinland to the Commission as required under
referred to Commission
NuPPAA s. 141.
Phase 2 Development proposal received positive

Conformity
Nunavut conformity determination to North Baffin Regional
May 29, determination issued
Planning Land Use Plan. Proposal determined to be a significant
2018 with referral to the
Commission modification to project and required amendment to
NIRB for assessment
Project Certificate No. 005.
NIRB provided direction to parties on the processing of

Notice of Assessment
modification applications including the Phase 2
June 11, and confirmation of
NIRB Development proposal, confirmed previous Guidelines
2018 applicability of
were still adequate in providing direction on
Amended Guidelines
requirements of the FEIS Addendum.
Following the original request for a coordinated

FEIS Addendum
assessment process, on September 10, 2018 Baffinland
August 23, submitted with request
Baffinland clarified that it was seeking coordination in the form of
2018 for NIRB/ NWB
a joint technical meeting and separate but consecutive
coordinated assessment
public hearings.
NIRB provided notice that the submission did not fulfill

the requirements of the Guidelines; specifically,
September FEIS Addendum not
NIRB additional information required on Environmental
14, 2018 accepted
Management Plans, increased accuracy of references in
concordance table, and ambiguity in content.
Additional detail on updates to the Addendum provided

Submission date for
October 3, with submission; NIRB received complete document by
Baffinland revised FEIS
2018 October 5, 2018 and initiated internal conformity check
Addendum provided
discussions with NWB.
Internal conformity
October 10, NIRB provided Baffinland additional direction on
NIRB check of FEIS
2018 conformity check of FEIS Addendum.
Addendum

NIRB accepts FEIS NIRB/NWB joint letter of acceptance of the revised

Addendum and initiates FEIS Addendum and receipt of application for
technical review process amendment to Water Licence.
▪ NIRB initiates technical review by requesting parties
October 12,
NIRB/NWB NWB initiates submit information requests
2018
completeness check of ▪ NWB requested parties comment on completeness of
application application
Process map provided to demonstrate steps to
coordinated process for parties.
Additional time was requested to ensure effective

November 2, Extension on deadline
QIA participation of the Inuit members; NIRB granted
2018 for IRs requested
extension to November 23, 2018 as requested.
IRs submitted by Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA),

Government of Nunavut (GN), Crown-Indigenous
Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC),
Information Requests
November Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC),
Parties (IRs) submitted to
23, 2018 Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), Health Canada
NIRB
(HC), Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), Parks
Canada (PC), Transport Canada (TC), Oceans North
(ON), World Wildlife Fund (WWF).
NIRB distributes participant funding guide and

applications on behalf of CIRNAC, completed
CIRNAC Participant applications due January 11, 2019. CIRNAC provides
December
CIRNAC/NIRB Funding Notice update on funds awarded on March 6, 2019 and May 27,
11, 2018
distributed 2019. Pond Inlet Hamlet, Mittimatalik HTO, Igloolik
Community Working Group, Hall Beach HTA, and
NITV awarded funding.
Following receipt of Baffinland’s responses to IRs,

December Technical Review NIRB initiated the technical review period. NIRB
NIRB
21, 2018 commenced process proceeding while NWB application
completeness check required additional time.
Provided with several justifications to extend the

Extension to deadline
January 25, comment period by 14 days, the NIRB found these
QIA for Technical Review
2019 justifications reasonable and extended the deadline for
comments
technical comments to March 7, 2019.
Afternoon and evening sessions held in Pond Inlet,

Community Information Clyde River, Arctic Bay, Resolute, Grise Fiord, Hall
January 15- Sessions held in Beach and Igloolik. NIRB staff, NWB, Government of
NIRB
30, 2019 potentially impacted Canada, Government of Nunavut, and Isuma TV
communities representatives accompanied tour. Report issued May 7,
2019.

In response to concerns raised by the Northern Projects

Management Office and QIA, with input from
February 4,
NIRB Updated process issued Baffinland, and considering the NWB’s determination
2019
of the application being incomplete, the NIRB provided
an updated process map for the guidance of parties.
Notice provided of Technical Meeting to be held April

February 12, Notice of Technical 8-10, 2019 in Iqaluit, NU. Draft Agenda circulated to
NIRB
2019 Meeting parties on March 1, 2019 and final version circulated on
March 28, 2019.
March 7, Technical review Comments received from the QIA, GN, CIRNAC,
Parties
2019 comments submitted ECCC, DFO, HC, NRCan, PC, TC, ON, and WWF.
March 29, Response to comments Baffinland provided response to parties’ technical

Baffinland
2019 submitted review comments.
NTI, QIA, GN, CIRNAC, ECCC, DFO, HC, NRCan,

April 8-10,
NIRB Technical Meeting held PC, TC, ON, and WWF and Baffinland attended in-
2019
person meeting in Iqaluit.
Due to the number of outstanding issues parties

requested a second technical meeting; NIRB scheduled
April 18, Notice of second
NIRB a second meeting in Iqaluit June 17-19, 2019. Draft
2019 Technical Meeting
Agenda circulated on April 29, 2019 and final version
circulated on June 6, 2019.
Parties notified that due to limited accommodations the

Public Hearing would be held both in Iqaluit and Pond
May 27, Update to Public
NIRB Inlet. NIRB encouraged Intervenors to contact CIRNAC
2019 Hearing Logistics
to update participant funding contracts as may be
required.
NTI, QIA, GN, CIRNAC, ECCC, DFO, HC, NRCan,

June 17-19, Second Technical
NIRB PC, TC, ON, and WWF and Baffinland attended in-
2019 Meeting held
person meeting in Iqaluit.
June 28, Commitment list Updated commitment list from Technical Meetings
Baffinland
2019 provided provided.

Following the NWB’s Notice of Application (May 16,

2019) and request for teleconference with parties to
determine options for scheduling of the NWB technical
meeting, both the NIRB and NWB received a request on
Joint correspondence
July 4, 2019 from Baffinland to delay the NIRB’s
provided to update
hearing to the week of November 4, 2019 and NWB’s
July 25, 2019 NIRB/NWB parties on timing of
technical meetings following the NIRB hearing.
events and expectations
Joint NIRB/NWB correspondence provided to update
for coordination
parties on timing of events and expectations for
coordination; specifically, a NIRB Public Hearing on
November 2-9, 2019 and subsequent NWB technical
meeting the following week.
Public hearing dates of November 2-9, 2019 circulated

with requests for intervenors, and request for final
written submissions. Request for Intervenors note Inuit
August 21, Notice of Public organizations, regulators, and groups that received
NIRB
2019 Hearing participant funding to participate in the hearing would
be granted Intervenor status (Pond Inlet Hamlet and
Mittimatalik HTO, Igloolik Community Working
Group, Hall Beach HTA, and NITV).
Notice of Site Visit for

August 29, Baffinland provided a tour of the Mary River site on
NIRB the NIRB’s Board and
2019 September 21, 2019; report issued October 22, 2019.
Intervenors
Intervenor applications received from Nunavut

Request for Intervenor
September 6, Independent Television Network (NITV), Oceans
Parties status submitted to the
2019 North, World Wildlife Fund; NIRB grants Intervenor
NIRB
Status to these organizations on September 6, 2019.
September Draft Public Hearing Draft agenda provided to parties for comment; final
NIRB
16, 2019 Agenda circulated agenda released October 10, 2019.
Correspondence sent to Pond Inlet, Resolute Bay, Grise

Request for community
September Fiord, Arctic Bay, Igloolik, Clyde River, Hall Beach,
NIRB representatives to attend
24, 2019 and Iqaluit seeking nomination of 5 representatives per
the Public Hearing
community.
Final written FWS received from QIA, Hamlet of Pond Inlet,

September
Intervenors submissions (FWS) Mittimatalik HTO, GN, CIRNAC, ECCC, DFO, HC,
27, 2019
submitted to NIRB NRCan, PC, TC, ON, WWF, and NITV.
October 17, Responses to FWS

Baffinland
2019 submitted

As a result of Oceans North and Mittimatalik HTO

submitting separate motions for the Hearing, as well as
the Hamlet of Pond Inlet and Oceans North requesting
October 29, Procedural Guidance
NIRB additional time for Dr. J. Loxley to present his paper,
2019 issued
the NIRB provided clarification to parties on
expectations for the Hearing. In addition, NTI requested
additional time to present at the hearing.
Parties represented at the hearing included: Baffinland,

NTI, QIA, Hamlet of Pond Inlet, Mittimatalik HTO,
Igloolik Working Group, Hall Beach HTO, GN,
Public Hearing held, CIRNAC, ECCC, DFO, HC, NRCan, PC, TC, ON,
November 2- including Technical WWF, and NITV, residents of Iqaluit, and designated
NIRB
9, 2019 sessions and representatives from Pond Inlet, Resolute Bay, Grise
Community Roundtable Fiord, Arctic Bay, Igloolik, Clyde River, Hall Beach.
Technical and Community Roundtable sessions were
scheduled for Iqaluit, with additional Community
Roundtable in Pond Inlet.
November 6, Motion submitted at NTI brought a motion to suspend the Public Hearing for
NTI/Intervenors
2019 Hearing a period of 9-12 months.
NIRB suspends Public

Hearing proceedings, Submissions from parties were requested regarding the
cancelled the NTI Motion, including addressing the length of the
Community Roundtable suspension of the Public Hearing and additional process
scheduled for steps required, in accordance with the following
November 6,
NIRB November 8-9 in Pond timeline:
2019
Inlet and adjourned
completion of the Public Intervenors to file on or before November 15, 2019
Hearing pending
consideration of the NTI Baffinland to file on or before November 22, 2019
Motion
Requested one-week The basis for Baffinland’s request to file their response
extension to timeline for on November 29, 2019 was to allow Baffinland to meet
November
Baffinland filing written response with potentially affected communities to discuss next
21, 2019
to NTI’s November 6, steps and timelines; NIRB issued response granting the
2019 motion extension.
November Written response Filed written response to NTI’s November 6, 2019

Baffinland
29, 2019 received motion to suspend the Hearing for 9-12 months
Direction issued to
Accompanied by the NIRB’s Record of Proceedings and
December Ministers and parties on
NIRB Disposition of Motions Report for the Phase 2
16, 2019 reconsideration process
Development proposal.
and procedures

Updated information (report or other summary) from the

meeting amongst affected community organizations by
Report on meetings the Igloolik Working Group in November be filed with
January 6, Igloolik
between North Baffin the Board. NIRB did not receive formal submission,
2020 Working Group
communities however correspondence from the North Baffin
communities was received during planning of
subsequent meetings.
Intervenors: required to provide response to questions

deferred during the Public Hearing.
Intervenors
Responses to deferred Baffinland: required to provide updated project scope
January 6, items from Hearing and with clarification on operational flexibility, preferred
2020 applicable additional options (such as railway alignment, wildlife mitigation
materials submitted and/or human crossing structures, etc.). Baffinland also
Baffinland
to provide additional supplemental materials, including
list of commitments and responses to questions deferred
during the Hearing.
CIRNAC to work with the Intervenors to update

participant funding agreements and provide additional
required funding; NIRB received update that parties
received additional funding, and several additional
December/ Participant Funding
CIRNAC parties received funding, specifically Hamlet of Hall
January 2020 Update
Beach (Sanirajak), Hamlet of Clyde River, and Clyde
River Hunters and Trappers Association, Igloolik
Hunters and Trappers, Hamlet of Arctic Bay and Ikajutit
Hunters and Trappers Association.
Provide updated
February 6, Intervenors and interested parties could provide updated
Intervenors technical review
2020 technical review submissions (if they so chose).
submissions
Response to updated
February 13, Baffinland may provide a reply to updated technical
Baffinland technical review
2020 review submissions (if they so chose).
submissions
Baffinland files presentation materials they intend to

February 25, Presentation materials
Baffinland present during the Technical Meeting/Pre-hearing
2020 provided
Conference.
NIRB changed format and timing for Technical Meeting

and Pre-hearing Conference planned for March 16-25,
2020 due to concerns around the spread of COVID-19
March 12 Meeting format change
NIRB The Board determined that the meetings would no
&13 2020 due to pandemic
longer be held in-person, but expected to occur via a
combination of teleconference sessions and written
submissions.

NIRB paused the assessment process due to challenges

March 17, Meetings deferred due associated with public health response to COVID-19. and
NIRB
2020 to pandemic did not issue a revised schedule for formal technical
teleconferences.
Requested that the NIRB schedule and conduct the

April 14, Requested resuming
Baffinland Technical Meetings and Pre-Hearing Conference by
2020 Technical Meetings
way of teleconference by the end of April 2020.
Correspondence provided to interested parties with

April 16,
NIRB Technical Meetings suggested time, format, and draft agenda for the
2020
Technical Meetings.
Impact
Applicability of Espoo NIRB received inquiry as part of the consideration of
April 20, Assessment
Convention to the Phase the Espoo Convention; clarification on current scope of
2020 Agency of
2 Proposal the Phase 2 Development provided April 23, 2020.
Canada
Updated direction Most community organization/parties objected to

April 22, Baffinland &
regarding scheduling of conducting the Meeting by teleconference due to
2020 Intervenors
Technical Meetings challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic.
Impact
Applicability of Espoo
June 16, Assessment Confirms that Espoo Convention applies to the Mary
Convention to the Phase
2020 Agency of River Phase 2 proposal.
2 Proposal
Canada
Baffinland provided updates and clarification on the

June 19, Project Description
Baffinland Phase 2 Project Description and the anchorage point in
2020 update
Greenland.
Minister of Northern Affairs recommended that the

Responsible Resumption of the NIRB resume the reconsideration process due to
July 14, 2020
Minister reconsideration process successful negotiation of the Inuit Certainty Agreement
on June 16, 2020.
Notified parties of the rescheduled Technical Meeting

and resumption of the assessment process and format of
Notice of Technical meetings; dates of the meetings initially scheduled for
July 29, 2020 NIRB
Meetings August 31- September 3, 2020 later deferred by 2 weeks
as a result of challenges experienced by parties to being
prepared for the meetings.
Baffinland seeks an Order that the Public Hearing of the

August 5,
Baffinland Notice of Motion Mary River Project Phase 2 Proposal be rescheduled to
2020
reconvene on October 30, 2020 for a two-week period.

Following receipt of the Motion, NIRB provides parties

one week to provide comments on the Motion. NIRB
August 24, Response to Motion issues its reasons for decision for the motion filed by
NIRB
2020 filed by Baffinland Baffinland; a public hearing will not be scheduled until
the Board successfully concludes the Technical Meeting
or issues its PHC decision.
September Third Technical Meeting was held via teleconference involving

NIRB
14-18, 2020 Meeting intervenors and observers.
Tentative dates for NIRB provided update from the motion and defers
September
NIRB reconvening Public release Hearing dates for until after Pre-hearing
22, 2020
Hearing Conference Decision.
September Community The proceedings were conducted from Pond Inlet using
28-October NIRB Roundtable/Pre-hearing a dedicated audio-video feed to link the hubs in Iqaluit,
1, 2020 Conference Winnipeg, and Ottawa.
Modifications to Board Processes Required During the Pandemic

Since March 12, 2020 when the Board cancelled the in-person Technical Meeting, Community
Roundtable and Pre-Hearing Conference planned for March 16-25, 2020 for public health and
safety reasons to prevent the spread of the novel Coronavirus (COVID-19), the Board’s
continuation of the assessment of the Phase 2 Development Project proposal has been significantly
impacted by the public health measures put in place by public health authorities in Nunavut and
across Canada in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Board understands that the
unprecedented nature of a global pandemic has had significant impacts on the existing Mary River
Project, the North Baffin communities, Nunavummiut and Canadians. In general, adjustment due
to the COVID-19 pandemic has created uncertainty and anxiety and made the NIRB modify its
existing board practices and processes to advance the assessment of the Phase 2 Development
Project proposal to the next steps. While the Board understands the anxiety and concern of
communities and participants that the assessment should be suspended until there can be a return
to the Board’s normal practices for conducting in-person proceedings, an indefinite delay is not in
keeping with the Board’s obligations to deliver thorough but timely assessments.
Consequently, the Board has committed to the development and implementation of modifications
to the Board’s processes designed to meet the central goal of ensuring as high a level of public,
community, intervenor and proponent engagement as possible, while preserving the health and
safety of all communities and participants involved. As parties participating in the Technical
Meeting teleconference and the in-person Community Roundtable and Pre-Hearing Conference in
Pond Inlet, Iqaluit, Ottawa or Winnipeg experienced firsthand, while the implementation of the
Board’s COVID-19 Protocols (attached as Appendix D to this Report) as uniquely adapted to meet

changing directions from local health authorities in each venue was initially unusual, in some cases
uncomfortable and challenging, by the middle part of the week, participants were beginning to
successfully adapt to the demands of new practices and processes. The Board appreciates the
adaptability, flexibility and good humour shown by participants as we all adjust to find ways to
continue the Board’s work during these unprecedented times.
The Board acknowledges that, due to the 50 person maximum capacity limit in place in Iqaluit and
Pond Inlet that some community members who wished to attend the meetings in-person in Pond
Inlet and also in Iqaluit could not be accommodated in the meeting rooms as the maximum number
of people had been reached. Although several alternative options were given to ensure that their
questions could be asked, comments could be provided and that they could listen to the
proceedings, the Board understands that these alternatives were not the same as being able to
participate in-person. The Board heard from several parties that the Board should consider how
larger numbers of community members could be accommodated to attend in-person in both Pond
Inlet and Iqaluit. Recommendations included that the Board consult with the Government of
Nunavut’s Chief Public Health Officer to determine if greater numbers of people could be admitted
to the Nunavut venues if measures such as masking of all participants at all times inside the venue
were to be implemented, or the Board should consider linking in an additional venue in these
communities. In developing additional guidance regarding the modifications to the Board’s normal
practice and procedure for Public Hearings, that will govern the reconvened Public Hearings for
this assessment, the Board has considered this feedback and be will working with the applicable
health authorities to accommodate community members in both venues to the extent that the Board
can do this safely, and in compliance with the directions of local health authorities.
Overall, the Board has highlighted some of the key lessons learned in the implementation of the
Board’s COVID-19 Protocols:
▪ There was a very steep learning curve for all participants as we adjusted to new practices
such as doing health checks before being admitted into the venues, and wearing masks all
the time (at some venues) or when unable to physically distance (at some venues);
Participants sometimes needed gentle reminders in order to comply with the Board’s
protocols (such as putting on masks, following directional signage, etc...);
▪ Given capacity limits in each venue, the ability of the Board to adjust when registered
parties did not attend or wanted to switch their attendance to a different venue on short
notice was very limited;
▪ Parties were pleasantly surprised that the technology chosen and implemented was robust
and effective, and gave the sense that the speakers in the various hubs were actually all in
the same room;
▪ Presentation materials need to be in same hub as the speaker;
▪ There should be greater direction given at the front entrance to venues to ensure that
physical distancing is maintained at the sign-in desk; and

▪ The Board should consider supplying hand sanitizer foot pump stations inside the meeting
venues rather than only at the sign-in desk.
The following further modifications to the Board’s procedures were also suggested:
▪ The NIRB should use more Facebook and radio advertisements in advance;
▪ The NIRB should have rules around social media streaming of proceedings, as some
attendees appeared to be streaming proceedings without the notice of other parties or the
permission of the Board;
▪ There were sometimes long waits for the Community Representatives in Iqaluit to ask
questions or raise issues, and more balance between venues should be considered; and
▪ The teleconference lines should be toll free numbers.
The NIRB is considering all of the feedback received in advance of, and throughout these
meetings, to develop the next iteration of procedural guidance to govern the reconvened Public
Hearing.
2. Project Proposal Before the Board

Project Description Overview
The Phase 2 Development Proposal included the following activities, in addition to the activities
associated with the original Mary River Project and the Early Revenue Phase Proposal:
▪ Changing marine transport of ore from year-round shipping to shipping six months of the
year (July 01 to December 31), with a focus on shipping ore primarily during the open
water season;
▪ Associated changes at the Milne Port site to maximize shipping during the open water
season, which would include increases to the size of the proposed second ore dock and
ship loader to accommodate cape-sized vessels;
▪ Increase the truck haulage of ore on the Tote Road and shipment of iron ore from Milne
Port from the approved 4.2 million tonnes per annum (Mt/a) to 12 Mt/a;
▪ Reducing the amount of proposed fuel storage at the Milne Port site; and
▪ The installation of an enclosed ore crushing facility at the Milne Port site.
While the NIRB’s consideration of the Phase 2 Development Proposal was underway, the scope
of the application was further modified by Baffinland to add a proposed northern rail component
between the existing Mary River Mine site and the existing facilities at the Milne Port site. This
significant modification while the assessment was ongoing resulted in the proposal being referred
back to the Nunavut Planning Commission (Commission) for further consideration of the
additional rail component on December 19, 2016.
On May 29, 2018 the Phase 2 Development Proposal, as resubmitted by Baffinland to reflect the
increased scope to include the northern railway, was formally referred to the NIRB for assessment

by the Commission. The following activities and works were included in the scope of this updated
Phase 2 Development Proposal:
1. Increased iron ore production from 4.2 Mt/a under the Early Revenue Phase to 12 Mt/a,
and transportation to port for shipping via the northern transportation corridor;
2. Construction and operation of a 110 km railway within the Mary River Transportation
Corridor between the mine site and Milne Port, generally following the existing Tote
Road. Once the railway was in place, the Tote Road would remain operational, but its
use would be limited to moving personnel and key goods;
3. Expansion and improvement of the Milne Port facilities: a second ore dock would be
added to accommodate cape-sized vessels; a second ship loader, railway unloading
and maintenance facilities, and additional support infrastructure would be developed,
in addition to an enclosed crushing facility;
4. Modification of the shipping season: the ore shipping season would be from July 1 to
November 15 but would also be adapted annually in consultation with the Mittimatalik
Hunters and Trapper Organization (MHTO) based on ice conditions and thickness. At
that point it was also noted that the winter sealift was no longer included in the Phase
2 Development Proposal, due to concerns expressed by the communities regarding ice
breaking; and
5. Expansion of the existing accommodation camp at the Mine site.
Updated Project Scope following Adjournment of the Public Hearing

Baffinland provided additional updates and clarifications to scope of the Phase 2 Development
Proposal following the adjournment of the November 2019 Public Hearing which includes the
following changes:
▪ The number of Tote Road level crossings of the North Railway has been reduced from 10
to 8;
▪ The North Railway alignment, specifically the deviation area around the km 67 hill will
follow Route 3, and Route 1 has been withdrawn from consideration;
▪ Additional land user access features have been added to the Northern Transportation
Corridor, including:
o Provision of dedicated pick-up trucks and trailers to move land users between
Milne Port and the Mine Site;
o Implementation of a controlled access program for the Tote Road once the North
Railway is in operation, similar to what occurs at the Meadowbank Mine outside
of Baker Lake;
o Provision of refuge cabins at three locations;
o Provision of snow machine trails in five areas; and

o The addition of up to 30 crossings (primarily for land users on snow machine or
ATV, and secondarily for wildlife crossing) along the North Railway.
▪ The North Railway design has been modified to increase wildlife permeability, including:
o Flattening of railway embankment slopes;
o A pilot program to install some embankment slopes at a gentler slope in selected
areas (TBD); and
o Smoother fill material to be used along entire alignment.
▪ The temporary ore transfer area has been removed, with a maximum of 6 Million tonnes
of iron ore per year to be transported by truck during the Phase 2 construction period;
▪ Wind turbines have been removed;
▪ As a contingency, Baffinland has identified that during the shipping shoulder seasons,
empty ore carriers may be required to anchor at an established sheltered anchorage at Store
Hellefiske Bank (an area in Baffin Bay off the west coast of Greenland). This activity may
occur at the discretion of the vessel captain if drifting ice conditions make this a safer
alternative to anchoring and/or drifting at the mouth of Eclipse Sound in Baffin Bay where
vessels can be exposed to drifting ice; and
▪ Vessel deviation north or south of the northern shipping route is proposed so that vessels
avoid traversing heavy ice floe areas until the vessels are escorted by the designated
icebreaker at the entrance of Pond Inlet (the ore carriers will not enter areas that require
icebreaking without an icebreaker escort).
Proposed Changes to Project Components and Activities

The updated scope of the Phase 2 Development Proposal includes the following specific
undertakings, works or activities at different project locations:
Mine Site
Changes at the Mine Site would consist of the following:

▪ Changes to crushing and transport of ore;
▪ Construction of the Mine Site North Railway Terminal;
▪ Expansion of permanent fuel storage; and
▪ Expansion of the mine maintenance facilities and support administration
buildings/facilities (warehouses, shops, etc.);
Increased production rate to 30 million tonnes per year (Mt/a):
▪ 12 Mt/a on the North Railway to Milne Port;
o Increase of 7.8 Mt/a from current permanent approved rate of 4.2Mt/a under the
Early Revenue Phase; and
▪ 18 Mt/a to be shipped on the South Railway to Steensby port under the existing approved
project.
Review Modification:
• Removal of wind turbines from the Phase 2 Proposal.

Figure 7: Map showing additional Phase 2 infrastructure at the Mine site
Northern Transportation Corridor

Changes to the Tote Road:
▪ 8 (reduced from 10 during detailed design) realignments to facilitate railway crossings,
plus new or modified culverts;
▪ Discontinuation of ore transport by road; and
▪ Increased public access.
North Railway:
▪ Construction of 110 km rail line with a raised railway bed and track:
o Development of additional quarries;
o Other laydowns, shelters and small equipment shops;
▪ Construction and operation of 4 temporary camps;
▪ Operation to consists of 2 to 3 trains completing an average of 5 to 8 round trips per day
and maximum of 10 round trips per day; and
▪ Additional water crossings (bridges/culverts).

Figure 8: Map showing the North Railway Transportation Corridor for Route 3
Milne Port:
▪ Expansion of the Milne Port PDA (245 ha to 415 ha);
▪ Construction and operation of a second ore dock capable of berthing capesize ore carriers;
▪ Modifications/expansion of ore stockpiling, new ore crushing/screening facility and ore
handling systems;
▪ Construction and operation of railway maintenance facilities;
▪ Expansion of the Port Site Complex, potable water treatment plant and associated sewage
treatment plant;
▪ Expansion of the existing power plant;
▪ Expansion and re-purposing of laydown areas and ancillary facilities; and
▪ Construction and operation of a landfill site.

Figure 9: Map showing additional Phase 2 infrastructure at Milne Inlet
Marine Shipping Corridor

▪ Expanded shipping season based on ice conditions and Inuit use of the floe edge,
shipping will not occur any earlier than July 1 or later than November 15;
▪ Addition of larger capesize ore carriers into fleet of vessels calling on Milne Port;
▪ Increased shipping frequency during the shipping season (maximum of 176 ore carrier
voyages per year);
▪ No changes to Northern Shipping Route including anchorage locations; and
▪ No shipping through Navy Board Inlet or the Northwest Passage.

Figure 10: Map showing the Marine Shipping Corridor for Phase 2
Baffinland indicated that throughout all the phases of the Project, the Proponent would conduct
operations in a manner designed to return the Project sites to a safe and environmentally stable
condition. The Proponent also indicated it would undertake ongoing reclamation activities
throughout the mine life, and that all temporary facilities required for the construction camps will
be decommissioned and removed at the end of their useful life. Borrow areas, quarries, temporary
roads and other disturbed sites would be stabilized to limit erosion of ground surfaces and
rehabilitated once they are no longer required and that environmental and safety monitoring will
continue as long as necessary.
Description of Operational Flexibility

Baffinland proposed that operational flexibility (Table 13) for Phase 2 would permit Baffinland
the ability to make up ore production and transportation shortfalls experiences over a single (i.e.
years where less than 12 Mt/a of ore is shipped via Milne Port) or consecutive years (e.g., more
than one year in a row where less than 12 Mt/a of ore is shipped via Milne Port) in a single
following year. Baffinland proposed that shortfalls would be made up with increases of up to 20%
in production and/or transportation (i.e. up to 14.4 Mt), or the stated activity limits on ground
transportation and shipping, whatever limit is reached first. For example, this would mean that if
in a given year 11 Mt were transported, the following year could see the transportation of 13 Mt–
if this can be achieved within the stated activity limits of 176 ore carrier voyages (352 transits) per
shipping season and up to 10 ore train trips (20 transits) in a given day. For clarity, Baffinland
further stated that it would not be able to make up for deficits over multiple years. Following a
single or consecutive year of deficits, regardless of the amount, Baffinland would only have the
opportunity to make up for this deficit in a single year. Given that this operational flexibility is
intended to make up for shortfalls in previous years, the proposed 20% operational flexibility on
ore tonnage will not impact the overall predicted mine life. Furthermore, the added activity limits
on ground transportation and shipping ensure the potential impacts of operational flexibility on ore
tonnage have been assessed in the FEIS Addendum for the Phase 2 Development and the technical
materials subsequently filed with NIRB by Baffinland throughout the assessment process.
Figure 11: Graphical Representation of Operational Flexibility
3. Summary of Submissions from Parties

Throughout the technical review stage of the assessment, the NIRB provided interested parties and
intervenors with opportunity to submit technical comments at different stages of the process and
also provided the Proponent with opportunity to respond to those comments. In order to facilitate
the hearing process, as set out in Section 22.2 of the Board’s rule of Procedure (2009), the NIRB
gave full standing to the Proponent and granted intervenor status to regulatory agencies listed in
Section 1 of the PHC Report in order to allow parties present their position on the Project proposal
and participate in discussion or resolution of issues. In coordination with Crown-Indigenous
Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC), the NIRB further acknowledged the groups
that received participant funding would also be included as Intervenors in the NIRB’s assessment
of the Phase 2 Development Proposal. The following parties were awarded participant funding:
▪ Qikiqtani Inuit Association;
▪ Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Organization;
▪ Hamlet of Igloolik;10
▪ Hall Beach Hunters and Trappers Organization; and
▪ Nunavut Independent Television Network.
Following the adjournment of the November 2019 Public Hearing, CIRNAC worked with the
Intervenors to update participant funding agreements and provided funding to five (5) additional
parties below:
▪ Hamlet of Arctic Bay;
▪ Ikajutit Hunters and Trappers Association;
▪ Hamlet of Hall Beach (Sanirajak);
▪ Igloolik Hunters and Trappers Association;
▪ Hamlet of Clyde River; and
▪ Clyde River Hunters and Trappers Association.
The following sections summarize the status of outstanding technical comments from
registered intervenors and parties involved in the ongoing assessment of the Phase 2
Development Proposal. Table 2 below list timelines of key technical submissions to the NIRB
and the Proponent responses throughout the assessment period for the Phase 2 Development
Proposal.
Table 2: Key submissions from Proponent and Parties through the assessment stage
Dates Key documents Doc ID numbers
March 7, 2019 Receipt of Technical Review 323436, 323459, 323464,
Comment Submissions 323469 through 323472 and
323474 through 323480
September 27, 2019 Final Written submissions 326940 through 326967.
from intervenors
October 16, 2019 Baffinland’s response 327139-327149, and 327155.
to parties Final Written
Submissions
January 6, 2020 Updated project scope with 327956 and 327957.
clarification and additional
submissions
February 6, 2020 Updated Technical 328460, 328461, 328464 and
Comments submissions from 328465.
CIRNAC, ECCC, DFO, PC,
NRCan, WWF, ON
10
Later during the Technical Meeting the representatives of this group requested that they be referred to as the Igloolik
Working Group as they didn’t expressly represent the Hamlet or views of counsel.
Dates Key documents Doc ID numbers
February 24, 2020 Baffinland’s response 328634 and 328635.
to parties Updated Technical
Comments submission
March 5 & 10, 2020 Additional Technical 328839.
Submission from Fisheries
and Oceans Canada
July 7, 2020 QIA Update Regarding 331073.
Ongoing Resolution of
Technical Issues in
Preparation for Resumed
Hearings for Baffinland Iron
Mines Corporation’s Phase 2
Proposal
August 25, 2020 North Baffin Community 331263.
Concerns with Inuit Certainty
Agreement and QIA
Community Engagement
Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated (NTI)

Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated (NTI) did not provide any technical submission during the
technical review stage of the assessment but noted within its August 10, 2020 correspondence to
the NIRB that the Phase 2 Proposal as envisioned by Baffinland will result in some level of impact
to terrestrial and marine wildlife that Inuit rely on as a critical source of food and it remains unclear
whether and how these impacts can be mitigated. NTI further stated that the Phase 2 Proposal as
currently presented has the potential to impact Inuit rights under the Nunavut Agreement,
particularly harvesting rights, requiring Inuit consultation rights to be fully recognized and
fulfilled. NTI also recommended that the NIRB verify with community representatives that they
have been able to access digital copies of available materials contained with NIRB’s public registry
and if community representatives have been unable to access relevant materials that NIRB
facilitate access to these materials to facilitate community participation in the review process.
During the Community Roundtable and PHC, NTI identified and commented on several areas of
concerns specifically related to community direct benefits and royalties, wildlife management and
compensation, Inuit participation in environmental decision making and Project monitoring as well
as proper integration of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) into the Project. These concerns were
similarly echoed by the QIA and several speakers at the Community Roundtable and the affected
communities.
Qikiqtani Inuit Association

The Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA) acknowledged that Baffinland has worked diligently to
address unresolved concerns (see Appendix C) and has negotiated an Inuit Certainty Agreement

(“ICA”) signed June 16, 2020, which resolved many of the QIA’s technical concerns, including
the majority of the QIA’s technical concerns outstanding at the adjournment of the Public Hearing
in November 2019. QIA specifically noted that its dialogue with the Proponent since the
adjournment of the November 2019 Public Hearing resulted in resolution of 48 of 53 of QIA’s
technical concerns (with 12 technical issues resolved contingent on successful implementation of
the associated sections of the ICA). During the PHC, the QIA noted that six (6) issues remained
outstanding:
• Implementation of a more precautionary moderate risk threshold for lake sedimentation.

• Recommendations regarding metrics on fish health and physical condition of fish (e.g.
lesions, injuries);
• Implementation of a freshwater working group;
• Submission of a comprehensive lessons learned report (for the Tote Road crossings);
• Recommendation for the Proponent to share details of the DFO led sampling program to
be carried out at Milne Port in 2021 prior to the Public Hearing;
• Provide details of actual vessel noise signatures as recorded during Passive Acoustic
Monitoring; and
• Submission of a Report pertaining to Inuit use of sea ice in its various forms (not just use
of the floe edge) in the start and close of shipping season.
The QIA stated that the ICA provides greater Inuit control and oversight, direct community
benefits and new and expanded programs for Inuit in communities impacted by the Mary River
Project, with a focus upon Pond Inlet. As set out in QIA’s letter of July 7, 2020, QIA confirmed
that it has more confidence that the reconsideration process is ready to resume on the basis that the
signed ICA has addressed QIA’s technical concerns. Throughout the PHC, community
representatives expressed serious concerns that the ICA was signed without any consultation or
agreement with the affected communities and that the communities do not fully understand its
content and long-term implication of the agreement especially as it relates to benefits to
communities, monitoring/mitigation of impacts, and socio-economic effects of the Phase 2
Development Proposal. During the PHC, QIA committed to working further with the Proponent
to resolve outstanding issues and further engage with the affected communities particularly Pond
Inlet to thoroughly discuss the content and implications of the ICA before the Public Hearing.
Government of Nunavut
The Government of Nunavut (GN) noted that it has received the Technical Memo arising from the
commitment made by Baffinland to provide additional details on Operational Flexibility and
further noted that it anticipates receiving a finalized Research and Contribution Agreement from
Baffinland to support the GN’s regional caribou monitoring prior to the Public Hearing. With
respect to the commitment to the GN and QIA for which Baffinland committed to provide full cut
and fill profile of the north rail in relation to the potential caribou movement corridors, the GN

specifically requested to add a provision where colour-coded maps showing cut and fill profiles
are categorized into <1 m, 1-2 m, and >2 m profiles, to be added and be provided prior to railway
construction. During the PHC, the GN commented that it has no unresolved technical issues with
Baffinland in relation to the GN’s Final Written Submissions.
Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) indicated that Baffinland
has made a number of commitments in response to the outstanding issues raised by the CIRNAC
during the Technical review stage (see Appendix C). During the PHC, CIRNAC noted it has no
unresolved technical issues with Baffinland and does not propose any additional changes to the
commitment wording provided by the Proponent for their respective commitments.
Environment and Climate Change Canada

Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) noted that Baffinland has made a number of
commitments in response to the outstanding issues raised by the ECCC during the Technical
review stage (see Appendix C). During the PHC, ECCC indicated that it will be seeking more
detailed commitment language from Baffinland regarding air quality monitoring and mitigation as
related to commitments ECCC-FC1 and ECCC-FC3, and considers these two (2) issues as resolved
pending additional input from Baffinland. ECCC further indicated that it has proposed
modifications to the wording provided for commitments ECCC-FC4/ECCC-1 NEW related to the
atmospheric environment and that is committed to working with the Proponent to finalize wording
of commitments prior to the Final Hearing.
Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) indicated it is still working with the Proponent to address
several outstanding technical concerns on the Phase 2 Proposal as pertaining to impacts to the
marine environment and marine mammals and proposing changes to several commitments made
by Baffinland during the Technical Review Period (see Appendix C). During the PHC, DFO
indicated that seven (7) technical issues remained unresolved:
▪ DFO’s recommendation that the Proponent provide a draft Marine Monitoring Plan
(MMP), which must include specific section relevant to icebreaking and shoulder season
shipping activities in the MMP as part of the Phase 2 review process;
▪ DFO’s recommendation that the Proponent commits to produce a response plan for the
potential event of an ice entrapment, should this be observed during the annual end of
season clearance surveys;
▪ DFO’s recommendation for the Proponent to provide an updated draft revised terms of
references for the marine and terrestrial working groups;
▪ DFO’s recommendation for the Proponent to submit a literature review of ship-based
marine mammal remote monitoring systems, including the implementation of an incidental
marine mammal monitoring program with vessel operators calling on Milne Port; and
▪ DFO’s recommendation for the Proponent conducting ship hull biofouling monitoring
surveys using an ROV on ore carriers, with focused efforts on areas of the hull and niche
areas where biofouling has the greatest potential to occur (e.g. chain lockers, stern tube,
rope guard, bottom, rubber side, etc.).
Additionally, DFO provided follow-up comments in respect of potential concerns associated with
somerset and Eclipse Sound narwhal pods mixing which has been further described in Section
3.1.7 of the PHC Report.
Health Canada
Health Canada (HC) acknowledged that Baffinland has made a number of commitments in respect
of its technical comments (see Appendix C). HC proposed modifications to the wording provided
for commitments HC-FC-01 and HC-FC-02 related to the atmospheric environment and
implementation of Nitrogen oxide (NOX) reduction measures. During the PHC, HC stated that it
has no unresolved issues, contingent upon the Proponent’s acceptance of these suggested edits on
the commitment list.
Natural Resources Canada

Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) stated that Baffinland has made a number of commitments
(see Appendix C) in response to the technical issues raised by NRCan during the Technical review
period and does not propose any further changes to the commitment wording provided by the
Proponent for the commitments. During the PHC, NRCan stated that it does not have any
outstanding or unresolved technical issues on the Phase 2 Development Proposal.
Parks Canada
Parks Canada indicated that it does not have any comments on commitment wording but expressed
that three (3) commitments (i.e. PCA-02, PCA-03 and PC-04a, b and c) are still considered
unresolved (see Appendix C). PC further noted that outstanding technical issues related to PCA-
03 and PCA-04a were not included in the revised commitment list that Baffinland provided and
therefore remain outstanding. During the PHC, PC stated that resolution of these issues is in
progress pending resolution of the commitments DFO 3.4 NEW series, DFO 3.5 NEW, DFO 3.7
NEW, and DFO 3.6.6 NEW, and that all other issues are resolved.
Transport Canada
Transport Canada (TC) noted that Baffinland has made several commitments (see Appendix C) in
response to the technical issues raised by Transport Canada during the Technical review period
and does not propose changes to the commitment wording provided by the Proponent. During the
PHC, TC stated that it does not have any unresolved technical issues on the Phase 2 Development
Proposal.

Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Association
Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Association (MHTO) indicated that many of the commitments
(see Appendix C) made by Baffinland have not fully addressed all the technical issues and
outstanding concerns raised by MHTO in its in the Final Written Submissions. The MHTO
submitted that community concerns raised during the Community Roundtable have raised
additional and unforeseen issues that will be brought forward in subsequent assessment stage. The
MTO’s September 30, 2020 submissions identified 16 key technical issues which have been
summarized below where existing commitments from Baffinland have not fully addressed
outstanding concerns, and the issues remain unresolved:
▪ Shared concerns that Baffinland has not incorporated Inuit knowledge and experiences
with current impacts into the impact assessment and significance findings including
identification of indicators and development of thresholds;
▪ Lack of information regarding timeline for Baffinland to engage the MHTO in the
development and implementation of a policy that ensures the safety of all land users to
travel the Tote Road with recreational vehicles;
▪ Recommendation to increase sampling effort to ensure rapid detection of potential aquatic
invasive species in the environment;
▪ Recommended that the opening and closing of shipping dates be based on approval from
the MHTO, and that the Proponent acknowledge this may not be based solely on floe edge
use, but on Inuit knowledge of animals and times that they require quiet and little
disturbance and when Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit says stop using ice and disturbing the
ecosystem;
▪ Recommended that a commitment be made for continual improvement of the terrestrial
monitoring program design, data analysis, and integration of Inuit perspectives and Inuit
Qaujimajatuqangit;
▪ Concerned that no additional engagement and consultation regarding the railway have been
conducted with Inuit in Pond Inlet to date;
▪ Requested that Baffinland provide a more accurate anticipated date that results of the Route
3 Geotechnical Program would be available and that the MHTO be included in the parties
listed to receive the results;
▪ Concerned that Baffinland has not provided details of how it plans to conduct monitoring
of seal in response to icebreaking activities;
▪ Concerned that Baffinland has not addressed concerns related to sea ice use between
October 15 and October 31;
▪ Concerned that Baffinland has not committed to provide additional information with
respect to local caribou monitoring programs;
▪ Concerned that Baffinland has not undertaken the surveys and monitoring of Arctic Char
health;
▪ Recommended that the Proponent make update to shipping season opening and closing
protocol based on ecological triggers from the MHTO;
▪ Recommended that the Proponent provide public records of all engagement and
consultation meetings with the MHTO and the North Baffin community and that the record
include details of the comments and questions raised, as well as copy of any materials
provided by Baffinland or other parties as applicable;
▪ Recommended that Baffinland investigate the feasibility of installing acoustic monitoring
equipment at the floe edge; and
▪ Opposed to ice breaking and have serious concerns with Baffinland continuing this activity.
During the PHC, the MHTO indicated it does not support the Phase 2 Development Proposal but
remains willing to work with Baffinland to resolve outstanding technical issues.
Hamlet of Pond Inlet

During the PHC, the Hamlet expressed concerns about the ICA noting that the QIA has had very
little communication with Pond Inlet about its contents and implications. The Hamlet also
expressed that community members are still concerned about observed impacts from the currently
approved project especially in relation to dust, impacts to marine mammals and loss of harvesting
opportunities for hunters. The Hamlet also expressed concerns about potential and larger negative
impacts to the marine and terrestrial environment if Baffinland is approved to increase project
shipping and ore tonnage for the Phase 2 Development Proposal. The Hamlet also expressed that
the community has not really benefited much from the current operations in terms of direct benefits
to the community and that there are uncertainties regarding how the ICA would be implemented
to mitigate impacts and ensure direct benefits to the most affected communities. In its closing
statement at the PHC, the Hamlet requested additional time to submit further comments regarding
its outstanding concerns. On October 6, 2020, the Hamlet submitted its closing statements from
the PHC which identified the following outstanding issues within the updated commitment list:
▪ Proponent needs to clarify whether it is committed to an “adaptive management” approach
to dealing with Phase 2 impacts, regardless of the outcome of the ICA;
▪ serious deficiencies in the research and information used to arrive at the significance ratings
Baffinland has applied to elements of the socio-economic analysis;
▪ Concerned that Baffinland has negotiated the Inuit certainty Agreement and the Inuit
Stewardship Plan, in part, as a substitute for deficiencies and “unknowns” associated with
research conducted for its submission to the NIRB (Addendum) for the Phase 2 Proposal;
▪ Concerned about the feasibility of what has been proposed by the way of the Inuit
Stewardship Plan to address ongoing and outstanding concerns;
▪ Concerned that if the QIA is unable to get reasonable support from the five (5) affected
North Baffin communities, and cannot support Phase 2, then some matters that Baffinland
has already indicated a commitment to will no longer be on the table;
▪ Concerned that the ICA does not provide NIRB with any basis for evaluating the merit and
quality of approaches and methods that are yet to be put in place for dealing with social
impacts; and

▪ Share many of the concerns raised by the MHTO with regards to impacts.
During the PHC, the Hamlet of Pond Inlet indicated willingness to work with Baffinland to resolve
outstanding issue prior to the Final Hearing.
Other North Baffin Communities

Prior to the third Technical meeting, the five affected communities in the North Baffin Region,
represented by the mayors and the Hunters and Trappers Organizations of Arctic Bay, Clyde River,
Igloolik, Pond Inlet, and Sanirajak expressed concerns that many of their outstanding technical
issues pertaining to dust generation, integration of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) into the Project,
impacts to caribou and marine mammals including the significance ratings of socio-economic
impacts of the proposed project remain outstanding. The North Baffin communities further
indicated that the Proponent has given a false impression to the NIRB and other parties that most
outstanding technical issues have been resolved. These concerns were similarly echoed by NTI,
QIA and several speakers at the Community Roundtable.
During the PHC, representatives of the North Baffin communities generally expressed concerns
about the Inuit Certainty Agreement (ICA) noting that the QIA has had very little communication
with the affected communities about the contents of the agreement and implications for the
communities. The Hamlets of Arctic Bay, Clyde River, Sanirajak and the Igloolik Working Group
further expressed that their communities are still concerned about observed impacts from the
currently approved project especially in relation to dust, impacts to marine mammals and loss of
harvesting opportunities for hunters and that the remaining issues that are contingent on the
implementation of the ICA remain outstanding for them. The Igloolik Working Group also
expressed that the community has not really benefited much from the approved Mary River Project
in terms of Inuit employment and contracts for small and local businesses, and there are many
concerns regarding how the ICA would be implemented to address the concerns of the affected
communities. The Clyde River Hunters and Trappers Association submitted written comments at
the close of the PHC indicating that it has several outstanding concerns as related to the following
issues:
▪ The proposed Phase 2 Development project will have significant impacts to community
members ability to hunt caribou and marine mammals;
▪ The community is opposed to icebreaking in Baffin Bay and generally support the Pond
Inlet HTO’s recommendation for a shorter shipping season; and
▪ Recommended that Baffinland finalize more details of its monitoring and mitigation plans
before the final hearing.
Further, the Clyde River Hunters and Trappers Association noted that it will work with the Hamlet
of Clyde River to submit a detailed written submission that will discuss outstanding technical
issues before the end of October 2020.

On October 8, 2020, the Ikajutit Hunters and Trappers Organization of Arctic Bay submitted
follow-up comments to the Community Roundtable which built upon the issues raised by the five
(5) North Baffin communities in their letter to the NIRB on September 9, 2020, specifically:
▪ Noted that the HTO needs additional time to review and determine the impacts of the “Inuit
Certainty Agreement” signed between Baffinland and the Qikiqtani Inuit Association;
▪ Noted that the HTO was not provided the opportunity to provide input and review the ICA
until after it was signed between the two parties;
▪ The HTO needs time to discuss and agree upon what baseline data needs to be researched
to start to collect and compare observation by harvesters since Baffinland started its
operations and before expansion to Phase 2 for effective monitoring led by HTOs;
▪ The HTO needs to assess the implementation of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit after it has
received reports from Baffinland; and
▪ The Inuit Impact Benefit Agreement between QIA and Baffinland was ignored, and all the
impacted communities need more information and evidence before making a decision
likely to affect livelihood of Inuit should the Phase 2 Proposal be approved.
The Arctic Bay HTO noted its support for all the impacted communities and more specifically
Pond Inlet and expressed that the communities need assurance that their concerns would be heard,
addressed and respected. During the PHC, Arctic Bay and Clyde River indicated that many of their
questions as pertaining to impacts, monitoring and mitigation for the Phase 2 Proposal were still
unanswered and that many issues still remain unresolved. Overall, community organizations (i.e.
Igloolik Working Group, Sanirajak, Hamlet of Clyde River, and Hamlet of Arctic Bay) indicated
support for Pond Inlet and expressed their willingness to work with Baffinland to resolve
outstanding issues prior to the Final Hearing.
Oceans North
During the PHC, Oceans North (ON) identified several outstanding technical issues related to the
Phase 2 Development Proposal with specific notes on acoustic disturbance to marine mammals,
potential future development of other deposits, cumulative effects assessment, re-assessment of
cumulative impacts on marine mammals and functionality of the Marine Environmental Working
Group. ON indicated it is not calling for Baffinland to stop production despite so many issues that
remain outstanding from the most affected community. ON also expressed concerns about the
Proponent’s bad environmental planning of the project, underestimation of the environmental
impacts to the marine environment and marine mammals, including the lack of wildlife
compensation and the multigenerational implications of the impacts of the Project.
World Wildlife Fund

World Wildlife Fund (WWF) did not identify any outstanding technical issues separate from those
identified in its Final Written Submissions. During the PHC, WWF noted that the commitment on

engaging Kugaaruk in the review process in respect of impacts to narwhals remains absent. WWF
further indicated that following commitments are still unresolved:
• Recommended that thresholds and indicators for marine monitoring should be finalized
before a public hearing is scheduled;
• Recommended that a NIRB mandated Monitoring Framework should be in place before a
public hearing is scheduled;
• Recommended that the Terms of Reference for the Marine Environment Working Group
and Terrestrial Environmental Working Group should be in place before public hearing is
scheduled;
• Requested that Greenland should be invited to the public hearing when it is scheduled.
• Requested that Baffinland commit to banning the use of heavy fuel oil by 2024 for project
shipping prior to Phase 2 Proposal being approved;
• Expressed concerns that there are many unknowns about potential impacts to the heard and
recommended that more research and Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit needs to be gathered before
a public hearing is scheduled; and
• Recommended that a climate change plan should be in place which includes emission
reduction targets before a public hearing is scheduled.
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation

Baffinland’s latest list of commitments (dated September 29, 2020) which was submitted at the
start of the Pre-hearing Conference included 188 commitments to parties to address outstanding
issues, comments, and questions raised by interested parties including the affected communities
regarding the proposed Project. A list of these commitments was compiled and brought forward
for consideration at the PHC to assist the Board with identifying significant unresolved issues and
deferred discussion including those areas where additional direction may be required prior to
reconvening the Public Hearing. During the Community Roundtable, several community
representatives questioned Baffinland on the purpose of the Inuit Certainty Agreement (ICA) and
why it was signed without consultation and agreement of the affected communities. Baffinland
provided the following the clarification to community representatives on the ICA during the
Community Roundtable:
▪ The Inuit Certainty Agreement provides greater Inuit control and oversight, direct
community benefits and new and expanded programs for Inuit in communities
impacted by the Mary River Project, with a focus upon Pond Inlet. The agreement
contains many new programs, and actions to ensure Inuit have a direct voice in project
oversight and management and would ensure that Inuit will benefit directly through a
Community Direct Benefits Fund.
Baffinland further indicated to parties that it is committed to supporting the development and
operation of an Inuit Stewardship Plan to be led by the QIA with input from Inuit Committees
which would help form the framework for Inuit led monitoring of potential impacts and changes
resulting from the proposed Phase 2 Development Project. Baffinland noted that the following
commitments have contributed to issue resolution with the QIA:
▪ The development of an IQ Management Framework that explicitly identifies how the
company defines, collects and applies IQ to its environmental management system and
general operations;
▪ Improvement in monitoring of food security as part of Baffinland’s socio-economic
monitoring and reporting, as well as supporting a Pond Inlet Food Security Baseline
Study; and
▪ Development of a community risk communication strategy to address concerns within
communities related to the potential health effects of the project.
Baffinland also indicated that the Company is increasing its investments in training by committing
$1.5 million a year for the life of the Project to Inuit training programs in addition to developing
an “Inuit Training Plan” to ensure employment opportunities are available to Inuit. Baffinland also
noted that it is committed to amending and improving contracting practices to ensure greater access
to Project contracts for qualified Inuit Firms. Further, Baffinland indicated that it has committed
to fund an Inuit Stewardship Plan which will include an enhanced, Inuit-driven, social monitoring
program related to the Project. Baffinland also indicated that the following benefits would be
provided:
▪ $10 million Pond Inlet Training and Research Facility;
▪ Baffinland Inuit Employee Daycare allowance;
▪ $15 million for construction of daycare facilities ($3 million for each of the 5 North Baffin
communities); and
▪ Enhanced royalty agreement with QIA and direct financial benefits to communities
During the Community Roundtable, Baffinland further clarified that the Culture, Resource and
Land Use Monitoring Program, previously proposed as a Baffinland program will now be led by
the QIA and an independent Inuit Committee. The program will run on inputs from dedicated Mary
River Nauttiqsuqtiit, QIA on-site monitors, and directly from communities, including community-
based monitoring programs. Baffinland further indicated that the development of the Inuit
Stewardship Plan with its Culture, Resource and Land Use and Social Streams of Inuit led
monitoring, combined with direct Inuit authority over the adaptive management components of
key environmental management plans confirms that Baffinland has been listening to communities
and understands there is no path forward without true partnership. At the PHC, Baffinland
provided the following update on resolved and outstanding issues as of September 2020:
▪ 154 technical issues resolved (78% of the technical comments received);
▪ 22 (11%) considered outstanding but in progress;
▪ 5 (3%) determined as partially resolved; and
▪ 17 (9%) of parties’ technical concerns remain outstanding and may require NIRB
involvement in determining resolution.

Comment Summaries from the Community Roundtable
To facilitate the Community Roundtable portion of the PHC, the NIRB invited representatives
from the North Baffin communities of Arctic Bay, Clyde River, Grise Fiord, Sanirajak, Igloolik,
Pond Inlet and Resolute Bay. The NIRB invited three (3) representatives from each of the Nunavut
communities: one (1) representative appointed by each community’s Hamlet, Hunters and
Trappers Organization (HTO) and encouraged them to support representation of the community’s
Elders, Women, or Youth. No organizations from Grise Fiord appointed community
representatives from Grise Fiord. The oral format of the PHC allowed the community
representatives to observe presentations delivered by Baffinland in line with the Agenda (see
Appendix A), and the results of discussions that occurred over the four (4) days of proceedings
held September 28-October 1, 2020 (see Appendix B). During the Community Roundtable,
community representatives from each of the North Baffin communities present were invited to sit
at the table with the NIRB to hear focused presentations by Baffinland and parties explaining the
Project components in detail. Community representatives were then invited to pose questions to
Baffinland and parties, and comments to the NIRB. The Community Roundtable concluded with
each community providing a summary of their views in respect of the Project in the form of a
closing statement. During the question and answer component of the Community Roundtable, a
variety of questions were asked by community representatives and members of the public. The key
comments and issues raised by community representatives at the Community Roundtable and PHC
included the following:
Table 3: Summary of Comments and Issues raised by Community Representatives

Subject Issues/Concerns/Comments
ECOSYSTEMIC EFFECTS
Acoustic Modelling Wonder whether the modelling of acoustic impacts on marine
mammals reflects that the Arctic is currently a very quiet
environment and marine mammals here may have very
different tolerances or be impacted differently by noise than in
other places.
Acoustic Modelling Were comparisons made between acoustic modelling
conducted by Baffinland for this Proposal and actual data from
other jurisdictions?
Acoustic Impacts Are there any concerns with the loudness of the train and the
(Railway) sounds of the horns used by the train at crossings and the
potential for these sounds to have impacts on caribou and other
wildlife?
Acoustic Impacts When equipment like an “echo gram” (not sure of the name of
this, but a device to listen to underwater sounds) was used we
were able to hear sea mammals from 20 kilometres away. It
seems that sound travels better underwater in our area and the
noise of ships is likely very clearly heard by the marine

mammals. Has this been considered in the assessment of
acoustic effects?
Adaptive Management What research has Baffinland done to determine what adaptive
management plans will work?
How does Baffinland know what will or will not work?
In Pond Inlet, community members do not think that

Baffinland’s adaptive management is currently working; how
will Baffinland improve it?
Air Emissions (near At Milne Port the iron ore is being crushed; in the environment
Milne Inlet) in the area of Milne Port there is wide-spread iron ore dust
already. If Phase 2 were to go ahead would that dust be cleaned
up and would there be less dust released? And why has it taken
Baffinland so long to agree to clean up this up?
Air Emissions (near Will it only be after Phase 2 is approved that the crusher at
Milne Inlet) Milne Port be moved indoors? Why does Baffinland not use a
crusher in a building right now?
Air Emissions Why has Baffinland not covered the trailers used to haul ore on
the Tote Road to prevent the release of dust, when Pond Inlet
has asked you to?
Air Emissions While Baffinland is thinking about what is going to happen,
there are impacts occurring from dust right now. What
mitigative measures are Baffinland going to put into place for
us right now?
Air Emissions If the indoor crusher were to be built that would be a good thing,
because right now the dust just goes right out into the
environment, which impacts the snow, and ptarmigan, rabbits
and foxes that look pink from the iron ore dust. We would
strongly encourage Baffinland to consider putting into place the
indoor crushing before the Phase 2 Development Project
proposal proceeds.
Air Emissions Baffinland should consider using the cleanest fuel for shipping,
because waiting and allowing the pollution to go up into the air
means that contaminants can land on the ocean and contaminate
halibut and narwhal.
Air Emissions Would there be more dust generated due to increased blasting
due to the increase in the amount of ore being mined during
Phase 2?
Air Emissions What is the trajectory of the iron ore dust—how far will it be
dispersed, and will this get even worse after the Phase 2
Development?

Ballast Water When the ballast water is being discharged into Milne Inlet we
are seeing different micro-organisms and invasive species
going into Milne Inlet and we need to support the community
of Pond Inlet in getting these concerns addressed.
Ballast Water What kinds of treatment methods are used to treat ballast water
(e.g. salt, ozone, ultraviolet, chlorine), and is it effective to
actually ensure that organisms will be killed and not just
temporarily damaged?
Ballast Water Could the ballast water contain rust and other contaminants that
could be released into Milne Inlet?
Ballast Water Could the ballast water change the salinity in Milne Inlet?
Ballast Water Concerns about the discharge of ballast water in Milne Inlet are
not new and have been a pressing concern for communities
since the beginning of international shipping.
Baseline Studies What additional studies were conducted to support the Phase 2
Development Project proposal, and has Baffinland considered
updating its studies since the submission of Baffinland’s
original documentation 4 years ago?
Baseline Studies The communities don’t have confidence in Baffinland’s studies
and the people conducting the research, as they don’t seem to
be reflective of what Inuit are saying they have experienced
since the mine opened.
Caribou Have noticed the decline of caribou in recent times and Inuit
knowledge says that Inuit should not interfere with caribou
migration and habits (e.g. getting salt from the sea water and
eating the minerals in mud along the beach). People from
Iqaluit don’t want to be deprived of caribou from this area due
to the effects of marine shipping.
Caribou If caribou eat vegetation that has iron ore dust on it, would those
caribou be contaminated such that people should not eat it?
Caribou When Baffinland claims that there will be no significant effects
on caribou what do the scientists from the Governments of
Nunavut and Canada and the Qikiqtani Inuit Association think
of that? Do they agree?
Climate Change Has Baffinland thought about potential impacts and mitigation
issues that arise due to climate change effects (such as warming
permafrost, ice breaking up earlier, etc.)?
Country Food Is country food in the area of the mine and Milne Port safe for
people to eat? Are there any limits on the amount or types of
country food we can eat?
Fish Will the food chain for marine fish, such as cod, be affected by
this expansion of the existing Mary River Project (such as

effects on the food sources for the fish that could also affect the
marine mammals)?
Fish There seems to have been sculpin and cod dying in the area, but
Fisheries and Oceans Canada doesn’t seem to know or be
concerned about this and seem to be kind of haphazard in their
response to this. Has the cause of these fish deaths been
determined?
Fish We are noting that the char and fish in the area seem to be
affected. Are the fish safe to eat, or are there limits on the
number of fish or other country foods we can eat?
Fish If fish health is impacted by the mine or at Milne Port, who
would be doing the testing/monitoring? Who would
communities ask to help out with this monitoring? Who would
compensate the communities if effects on fish health are
identified?
Freshwater Environment The freshwater streams near Milne Port have been affected by
the dust, and so hunters in that area cannot drink the water when
they are out on the land. Even lakes distant from Milne Port
have been affected by the red dust such that these lakes are
undrinkable. The dust also settles on the ice that is forming and
tends to thin the ice and make it less stable.
Freshwater Environment Baffinland’s plans for enhancing the habitat for char (fish
habitat offsetting plans) should consider if Baffinland can build
any of these works closer to the community so that we can take
advantage of any improvements that would improve the
community’s access to char.
Impacts from the The impacts to terrestrial wildlife, vegetation and to people
Existing Project from the existing Mary River Project need to be dealt with and
rectified.
Impacts from the Baffinland’s increase to tonnage doesn’t seem to be very
Existing Project respectful of animals in our area – Pond Inlet residents have
seen impacts to both our terrestrial wildlife and to marine
mammals already from existing operations. These animals are
our livelihoods and impacts to these animals threaten our food
security and well-being in our community.
Impacts from the Can Baffinland provide more details regarding the existing
Existing Project impacts to char, marine mammals, and terrestrial wildlife that
people are seeing?
Impacts from the There are many things that communities didn’t expect from the
Existing Project existing Mary River Project (e.g. we were told that emissions
and dust would take place, but we didn’t realize the enormity
of the problem). When we go hunting we see a landscape full
of red dust now that the mining has started.

Impacts from the Baffinland needs to be honest with communities and listen and
Existing Project acknowledge that existing operations may have affected the
baseline conditions that have since been used in the modelling
for the Phase 2 Development Project proposal.
Impacts from the It seems that about 7000 kilometres of the land and the sea have
Existing Project been affected by the mine and the transportation out of Milne
Inlet.
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Want to express caution with respect to the very serious
limitations/flaws in the way Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit is being
“considered and categorized”.
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Would Baffinland consider consultation and incorporation of
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit from many different Inuit knowledge
holders, including from youth who are very able to share their
own knowledge and experience as well as with elders and all
community members?
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Inuit have had rules for thousands of years and Inuit do not
want these rules to be forgotten when new rules made by others
are being adopted.
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Inuit views cannot be confined to consideration separate and
apart from the way that western science is considered.
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit The Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit principle of respect for animals
should be incorporated into every aspect of Nunavut’s laws and
as part of the Board’s consideration of the Phase 2 Proposal.
Invasive Species There was an invasive species identified last year in the report
that DFO provided to the community; why doesn’t DFO seem
to mention it now as an invasive species?
Invasive Species Pond Inlet is concerned about whether there are invasive
species that can attach themselves to the ships that are anchored
at Ragged Island and get released into the water near Ragged
Island.
Iron Ore Deposits Are there other iron ore deposits Baffinland can mine nearby or
when Baffinland is done with Deposit 1 will Baffinland have to
shut down the mine? How many deposits have Baffinland
found and when would Baffinland be developing them?
Marine Mammals Since project shipping began in Milne Port we have seen a
significant decline in the whale populations close to our
community (Pond Inlet). We used to see whales mating and
calving in this area and we don’t see that anymore.
Marine Mammals Narwhals and whales have already been greatly impacted by
the existing project.
Marine Mammals If Pond Inlet is unable to harvest enough narwhals to use up the
full number of tags/quotas for the community, will Pond Inlet’s
future number of tags and quotas of narwhals be further
reduced?
Marine Mammals Women who prepare sealskins have noticed that there are
starting to be white spots on the skins and the skins are not
waterproof where the white spots are.
Marine Mammals We are seeing marine mammals moving away from Pond Inlet
and going to other areas such as Arctic Bay. Has Baffinland
conducted any surveys or other studies regarding these effects?
Marine Mammals Since the mining began, we are seeing effects. For example, we
harvested a seal that had a small worm in the meat that we had
never seen before. It was provided to government authorities to
identify it, and in the liver of that seal we saw yellow spots that
we had never seen before, and we did not eat it as a result.
Marine Mammals Is Baffinland aware of the importance of this area for narwhal
calving and does Baffinland or DFO monitor the number of
narwhal calves being born in this area?
Marine Mammals This area has seen impacts from sonar and seismic activities on
marine mammals historically—saw many mammals that had
their hearing damaged or were killed from these activities, and
do not want to see these kinds of impacts again.
Marine Mammal Did Baffinland or DFO conduct narwhal surveys at Bruce Head
Monitoring this summer (2020)? And were such surveys conducted from
the land?
Marine Shipping Where will the additional ships be mooring and waiting to go
into Milne Port—will there be a specific mooring spot where
the additional ships will wait?
Marine Shipping If the Steensby Port were to be built, would the number of ships
going through Milne Port be decreased?
Marine Shipping The increase to the number of ships transits (to 176), does this
increase include iron ore carriers and other ships, like supply
vessels, fuel ships and other freight vessels?
Marine Shipping Back in the early days of the Mary River Project in 2006 there
were guarantees given by Baffinland that there would be no
shipping through Eclipse Sound. What has happened to those
guarantees?
Marine Shipping The shipping season is stated by Baffinland to be July 1 to
November 15, but in our experience in Pond Inlet by November
15 there will be solid ice and the community does not want to
see ore shipments being made when the ice is solid.
Marine Shipping The ocean is the equivalent to our farm—there is no way to
compensate us for losses and changes to our harvesting in the
marine environment; there is no amount of money that will
compensate us.
Marine Shipping Would Baffinland consider moving the anchoring and mooring
spot for the ships (Ragged Island), and routing of the ships, to
avoid the areas of importance to marine mammals, especially
whales in particular when they are sensitive to disturbance such
as during the mating, migrating and calving seasons near to
Hall Beach?
Marine Shipping Hunters in Pond Inlet do not want ships anchoring near Ragged
Island because hunters use that area as a safe place for hunters
to shelter, and there used to be lots of seals that we could hunt
in that area. We are concerned that the area won’t continue to
be safe for us and seals with Baffinland continuing to use that
area to moor vessels.
Microorganisms Is Baffinland taking into consideration research and monitoring
of microorganisms (for example algae) because an increase in
iron dust can disrupt the microorganisms and affect the rest of
the food chain. Is Baffinland aware that the increase in iron dust
emissions creates room for growth of opportunistic
microorganisms which are harmful to the animals we harvest.
Mining Plans The rate of mining the deposits at Mary River should be limited
so that the mining doesn’t result in damage to the environment.
Baffinland should consider slowing the rate of mining down to
the point where impacts would be minimized.
Mitigation If there are effects noted by community members that are
greater than predicted, would Baffinland be willing to reduce
the scope of the project to limit the extent of the impacts?
Monitoring There should be more project monitoring of the dust emissions
and also of the sediments in the bottom of the ocean.
Monitoring If monitoring and research indicates that there are impacts, is
that the end of the story, or is Baffinland actually going to do
anything?
Monitoring Specific monitoring of impacts on narwhals in the area of
Button Point is required because that is where there are many
ships waiting to get into Milne Port and the narwhals are being
affected.
Monitoring Who would be responsible for conducting monitoring/testing
fish, ptarmigan and seals or other marine mammals?
Where do the meat samples from these animals get sent to
identify whether they are contaminated?
Monitoring The results of monitoring must be communicated back to the
community—we (communities) don’t hear about the results.
This applies to Baffinland and all other intervenors who
undertake monitoring studies in these areas and monitor the
health of fish, wildlife and marine mammals. Results should be
communicated back to Pond Island and all the communities
affected by the Mine.

Monitoring Young people chosen to conduct community monitoring
should be trained about Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, including
about polar bear safety.
Monitoring Who has the contract to do the monitoring at the Baffinland
site? We have concerns that this monitoring does not fully
incorporate Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit. Baffinland should
consider adding elders and residents of Pond Inlet to ensure that
they have people doing the monitoring that understand the
animals in the area.
Permafrost Are there any studies that have been conducted or that are on-
going regarding whether the effects of vibration from the
railway could affect the permafrost underneath?
Permafrost We are seeing increased melting of the permafrost (due to
climate change) in our area that is creating much rougher
terrain as the tundra becomes less flat and stable. Baffinland
needs to take this into account in their design of project
infrastructure like the railway and haul roads.
Phased Development The community has great concern that Baffinland is in a hurry
to get Phase 2 underway and that Baffinland’s plans for the
Mary River Project seem to be constantly changing.
Potable (Drinking) Where does Baffinland get their potable water at the mine site
Water and at the Milne Port site? Does Baffinland use water treatment
for that water?
Railway alignment What is the alignment of the railway now—what is the routing
Baffinland has chosen?
Railway crossings Baffinland has indicated they will be asking for community
members to help identify crossings for caribou and people; will
Baffinland be asking other parties, such as engineers to help
identify where it is safe for these crossings as well?
Railway Under Baffinland’s railway plan, will the road still be used to
transport iron ore after the railway is built?
Railway When the train is passing by, will it be as loud as the trains are
when they are passing by in the south?
Railway If both railway lines (north and south) are built, I would not be
supportive because there would be rail lines that would cut off
the migratory routes of caribou and would make it impossible
for caribou to migrate around Clyde River. Baffinland should
be required to build the south railway as it has already been
approved.
Railway Will operations stop to allow caribou to cross the railway; how
will Baffinland adjust the use of the railway when the caribou
are migrating. Will Baffinland suspend the use of the railway if
caribou are present?

How does Baffinland know what will work to protect the
caribou from impacts due to the railway? What makes
Baffinland think adaptive management will work to manage
any potential impacts?
Railway Baffinland has placed stakes along the railway routing; is that
the routing that will be followed?
Railway Caribou migration routes must not be touched; if the railway
alignment could cut off the migration route, according to Inuit
knowledge, this should not be allowed. The Tote Road has
already had an effect on caribou in that area.
Railway Caribou are not seen in this area very much, but once the
railway has been constructed, they will definitely not come
back.
Railway Will the rail cars be covered? We don’t want to see open cars,
because it seems that these closed cars will prevent the spread
of iron ore dust to the environment.
Railway What kind of material will be under the train? Will the railway
ties be made of wood or metal?
Railway Routing Which railway routing is preferred by the community of Pond
Inlet?
Railway Routing Has Baffinland considered alternative routing of the railway to
the east of Milne Port and not along the Tote Road so that the
railway isn’t adding to the disruption to caribou migration that
is also added to the effects of the Road?
Railway (crossing) Will Baffinland be required to provide signage and sound the
horn of the train at each crossing?
Sewage What are the plans to enlarge/build new sewage lagoons at the
Mine site and at the Milne Port?
Tonnage Once Phase 2 is approved, will Baffinland continue to ask for
additional increases to the tonnage shipped out of Milne Port
from the 12 million tonnes per year to more than that?
Tote Road Hunters had some concern that snowmobile and ATV trails
around the Tote Road had to be approved by Baffinland and the
Qikiqtani Inuit Association before they could be used; if Phase
2 is constructed are we going to be awaiting these kinds of
approval processes again because it took a long time and there
weren’t many trails approved.
Tote Road Communities want to have access to the road without a
Baffinland escort vehicle.
Vibrations Have there been any baseline studies conducted regarding the
potential for vibrations from the railway to affect the
permafrost?

Wildlife collaring Hunters have noticed that collared wildlife are generally not
healthy, and Inuit do not like to see our wildlife having their
health impacted by collaring; aren’t there other ways to study
the wildlife that will not hurt them?
Wildlife monitoring Everyone in the community shares the responsibility for
monitoring the wildlife; because wildlife cannot tell us if they
are not feeling well or are being made sick by this project and
we have an obligation to continue watching out for sick
wildlife.
SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS
Benefits, Royalties and Pond Inlet feels that we have not seen benefits but have seen
Taxation many of the impacts of the existing Project; how will
Baffinland and the QIA ensure that the benefits of Phase 2
accrue to Pond Inlet, as it seems that we have been left hanging.
Benefits, Royalties and Perhaps there should be a toll system for each ship that goes by
Taxation our community. Maybe ships could also haul groceries so that
the costs of groceries could be reduced or maybe each
household in the community should get a payment (heard it was
$35,000 per household from a mine in another Northern
Community), or a port or a dock could be built within the
community that would be a shared benefit to our community.
There are four impacted communities; we need more in terms
of positive impacts.
Benefits, Royalties and How is the Phase 2 Project going to benefit Pond Inlet,
Taxation including increasing employment amongst residents, training,
and also providing support for hunters to hunt from aircraft or
to receive compensation to purchase caribou elsewhere
(because it is very expensive)?
Benefits, Royalties and Current compensation programs (such as hunters’ gas cards,
Taxation etc.) are not sufficient to replace the losses to hunters/harvesters
of access to fish, wildlife, and marine mammals which have
been significantly reduced in abundance since the Mary River
Project started.
Benefits, Royalties and There are a lot of promises being made with the Phase 2
Taxation Development Project proposal, but hunters have not seen much
in terms of benefits from the existing Mary River Project—
there are many and various committees and monitoring
programs, there were plans being made, with big ideas and
predictions about how the iron ore would be transported, but
Pond Inlet has seen things that we didn’t expect, the NIRB
under Article 12 is responsible for ensuring projects are for the
benefit of all Nunavummiut. Many of the people who promised
these benefits under the original Mary River Project are long
gone.
Benefits, Royalties and There are significant barriers to gaining access to existing
Taxation benefits programs administered by the QIA. I would rather be
able to go hunting than have to fill out an application to get
funding which is every difficult for some of us.
Benefits, Royalties and The IIBA and ICA are good, but both provide generalized
Taxation benefits to communities in the region and are not specific to
Pond Inlet and are not designed to meet the specific needs of
Pond Inlet. Pond Inlet should have their own specific benefits
program.
Benefits, Royalties and Communities have questions regarding who the
Taxation “investors”/financial participants/benefactors are with respect
to the Phase 2 Development Project proposal and under the
Inuit Certainty Agreement.
Benefits, Royalties and Elders should be the first people who receive benefits.
Taxation
Benefits, Royalties and It is our understanding that individuals are not able to get
Taxation benefits, that the IIBA makes it so that benefits cannot be
provided in the form of payment to individuals due to legal
issues. The time is now for the Inuit of the region to benefit
from the existing Project—the Inuit of the North Baffin Region
need help now.
Benefits, Royalties and If benefits had flowed to the Community as originally promised
Taxation by Baffinland for the original project, it would be a lot easier to
agree to the Phase 2 Development Project Proposal going
forward, but the lack of implementation of previous benefits
needs to be addressed before Phase 2 should be allowed to
proceed. Inuit are not in a rush—there should be caution.
Benefits, Royalties and The existing Wildlife Compensation Fund is not working
Taxation because the processing of claims is time consuming and energy
draining when the compensation does not even compensate for
the lost time and energy put into the application process.
Benefits, Royalties and There are some community members accessing benefits from
Taxation the Project, but there is not equal access to everyone and people
in the community that are living in poverty are not getting
access to anything, and things are not getting better for them.
Benefits, Royalties and Benefits must be established under agreements that are
Taxation sustainable, that give communities legal remedies that are
enforceable, and that allow communities to be decision-
makers.
Benefits, Royalties and What is the basis for the 12% royalty level—it is too low.
Taxations
Commitments from Baffinland’s CEO has committed that “if Baffinland can’t do
Baffinland Phase 2 safely and in a way that protects the environment we

won’t do Phase 2”. Is that still true, does Baffinland still
commit to that?
Commitments from The questions and concerns of the residents of Pond Inlet seem
Baffinland to be falling on deaf ears; we have real concerns that the
commitments from Baffinland will not be fully implemented.
Commitments from All Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit workshops and communications
Baffinland with the community should always be recorded so that all
commitments made throughout the regulatory process can be
referred to and can be upheld.
Communication Communications should be two way, not just one-way
communication.
Communication There has been no community knowledge or understanding of
the Inuit Certainty Agreement, nor was their consensus from
communities about this Agreement; how is this in keeping with
Inuit values?
Community We need to see benefits and support for Pond Inlet as an
Infrastructure and Public affected community. We have heard that there have been
Services benefits but I don’t see those benefits being fairly distributed
amongst us all.
Community There needs to be a balance between what is taken away from
Infrastructure and Public the community (e.g. reductions in the availability of marine
Services mammals and not allowing hunters to go to Milne Port) and
what the four communities can get in terms of benefits.
Contracting and Business Local contractors and businesses have not been seeing direct
Opportunities benefits as a result of the existing project, and we do not see
that the Phase 2 Development Project proposal will change this
situation for the most impacted community of Pond Inlet.
COVID-19 What is Baffinland’s on-going response to the COVID-19
pandemic going to be until we have a vaccine—is it going to be
the same as now or are there going to be changes?
COVID-19 When Baffinland’s employees come into the mine directly
from down south, does our Nunavut health system have to take
care of their employees if they get COVID-19. Are they going
to be able to spread COVID-19 from cases at the mine into the
communities?
COVID-19 Has COVID-19 impacted the financing of the Phase 2
Development Project proposal (including whether the project is
sustainable)?
Culture, Resources and Archaeological sites must be protected, and artifacts found
Land Use must be preserved and not collected and taken away from the
sites.
Culture, Resources and The hunters who are going hunting are having to go further to
Land Use find food and there are fewer fish or no fish.

Culture, Resources and There are archaeological sites in this area that show where we
Land Use used to go hunting; and caribou hunters went there this year and
got nothing.
Culture, Resources and We have to live off bought groceries now instead of living off
Land Use the land.
Mine Customers Who is buying the iron ore from the mine from Baffinland, and
what are the products being made?
Economic Development How many more Inuit will be employed at the mine site if the
& Self Reliance Phase 2 Development Project proposal is approved? Right now
it looks like people from down south are going to be the ones
primarily benefitting from this project.
Economic Development The benefits from the project need to be sustainable, such as
& Self Reliance investing in infrastructure like ships for the community or
airplanes, and we need sustainable revenue so that once the
mine closes there will be lasting contributions to local
infrastructure.
Employment Inuit are not currently benefitting from the existing operations.
Opportunities If the Phase 2 Development Project proposal is approved how
many Inuit will get employment opportunities?
Employment Will there be employment opportunities in all five of the
Opportunities potentially affected North Baffin Communities?
Employment How many existing Inuit haul truck drivers would be able to
Opportunities transfer their current employment to jobs under the Phase 2
Development Project proposal?
Employment When the mine was first proposed there were some residents,
Opportunities like me, in Pond Inlet that were in support, for the benefits from
employment at the mine but Baffinland’s desire to develop
more is becoming a concern. It is unclear what they really want
and what their plans are for here. It should be remembered that
the Arctic is different, our wildlife is our livelihood. We are not
supportive of the mine now because the individuals in the
community are not seeing benefits, but we are seeing impacts.
Human Health and Well- It is difficult to believe that people drinking water that is red
Being because of the dust is safe, and we all have questions regarding
whether it continues to be okay for nursing mothers exposed to
the dust to continue to allow their babies to nurse. We also
wonder whether, when you can smell the iron ore dust (it smells
like rust) is it safe for people to eat the vegetation and berries
and the caribou that eat the vegetation and berries that are
affected by the dust.
Human Health and Well- There remains a lack of trust with Baffinland and our
Being representatives and so the community of Pond Inlet feels
neglected, which reinforces the state of oppression that Inuit are

already in, and their experiences with poverty, lack of housing
and the rest of Inuit social determinants of health.
Inuit Harvesting Country food is getting further and further from the areas near
to our communities; we had always been told not to harass our
wildlife in our area so that they would always be there. It has
been this way since time immemorial. Near to the mine the
wildlife is going away from this area and may not return.
Inuit Harvesting In Pond Inlet there are no caribou nearby; we expect to have
support from Baffinland for hunters so that they are able to
travel farther and farther to access caribou.
Inuit Harvesting Every year there are fewer hunters in Pond Inlet and this means
that if those hunters have to go farther and farther away to get
fewer animals this creates strain because there is less and less
country food coming back to the community and it will just not
be sufficient to support the community.
Inuit Harvesting Pond Inlet community members came to Arctic Bay to harvest
narwhal because they didn’t get any in our area and DFO
discouraged Pond Inlet from using their tags to harvest narwhal
in Arctic Bay, because they are not from the same stock. Arctic
Bay wanted to let Pond Inlet use their tags because Arctic Bay
residents have seen tagged whales from Pond Inlet in Arctic
Bay, but DFO was not supportive of that.
Inuit Harvesting Inuit harvesting has been affected already, and this is a very
serious matter to us. Baffinland needs to provide compensation
and implement agreements to address these issues.
Inuit Harvesting Have seen effects in Pond Inlet with significant reductions in
the number of seals and narwhals that we see every year, but it
seems as if we are not believed that these are effects linked to
the existing project.
Inuit Impact Benefits The IIBA can be a strong agreement but if any of the IIBA
Agreement terms and conditions are not being implemented properly, the
concerns of Inuit cannot be met and the rights of Inuit are not
respected.
Inuit Impact Benefits The IIBA should be designed to establish an ownership fund so
Agreement that the Inuit of North Baffin can put money into the fund to
eventually buy the mine for ourselves.
Inuit Place Names The traditional names of areas and landscapes have been
permanently changed to the names chosen by Baffinland.
Inuit Rights In the 1700’s 28,000 whales were killed by Europeans who did
not ask Inuit about what we wanted; they just took our wildlife
because it was abundant; and then the Hudson’s Bay Company
got our land even though it did not belong to them; and then in
the 1970s NTI and the QIA identified our lands and talked

about how we should run our lands; the 5 North Baffin
Communities should be more involved in the negotiations with
respect to the Phase 2 Development Project proposal—Inuit in
these communities must be able to exert our rights over our
wildlife to make sure that our wildlife is not depleted in the
areas near our communities. If we are not going to use our
wildlife for consumption then the wildlife should be left alone
and even protected. Capacity must be built in the communities
to manage our wildlife. Is there going to be a return to the way
our elders taught us to live in our communities again?
Regulatory Uncertainty We have seen that there are components and a lot of equipment
being delivered to the Mary River site that look like this
material can only be used for the construction of Phase 2
Development Project proposal, components like the railway.
Does Baffinland already have approval to start building the
northern railway? Has this already been approved without
consultation with the communities?
Traditional Land Use The lands affected by the Mary River Project have belonged to
the Inuit for thousands of years, but it seems that once the mine
was built that Baffinland could now tell us how Inuit can use
the land, the sea and the ice used by Baffinland (e.g. Baffinland
tells us when and if we can cross the Tote Road and where we
can travel around Milne Port, etc.). This does not seem right.
Wildlife Compensation The Wildlife Compensation Fund only compensates hunters by
Fund giving them back their expenses for an unsuccessful hunting
trip, but it should really be the community that is compensated
when we don’t have wildlife to harvest because the entire
community is affected by the loss of animals to harvest.
Youth Youth in the communities have not been meaningfully engaged
in the assessment of the Mary River Project and their
perspectives have not been referenced in the materials.
Youth Inuit have to recognize what our elders are telling us; but we
are also having to think about whether our young people can be
hunters or workers at the mine.
OTHER ISSUES
Accidents and Recently we had an incident with community members being
Malfunctions side swiped by a truck and ending up in water and although
Baffinland helped, the individuals were not taken to the Mine
site and were dropped off at the MHTO’s cabin instead. Was
this due to COVID-19?
Accidents and In the event an iron ore carrier sank, what would be the effects
Malfunctions and how would clean up be undertaken, by whom, and would
it involve the community members?

Cumulative Effects Are there any other mining projects planned for/going on in
the North Baffin Region?
Operational Flexibility What does “operational flexibility” mean…does that mean
Baffinland will end up shipping 18 million tonnes in a year
where Baffinland is making up their tonnage under operational
flexibility?
In addition to the questions directly discussed at the Community Roundtable, the NIRB received
written submissions from community members in Pond Inlet during the proceedings and on
October 5, 2020 Baffinland was given an opportunity to provide responses following the meetings;
and the response was received by the NIRB on October 9, 2020. The NIRB has also received
additional submissions from parties since the conclusion of the Pre-hearing Conference which are
summarized in the following table.
Table 4: Summary of Baffinland’s Response to Comments from Community Representatives
Areas of concerns Baffinland’s Responses
Deficiencies in community Engagement has focused mainly on the North Baffin
engagement and consultation about communities. Baffinland has conducted 218 specific
impacts of the proposed Project, engagement activities since 2015 through which we have
especially lack of engagement with
built an extensive body of knowledge on project impacts
youth.
to communities.
These engagement activities have led to the sharing of
knowledge and feedback on the Phase 2 Proposal.
Baffinland has used this feedback to make changes to the
Proposal currently before the Board as noted earlier in
this presentation.
The Company has also conducted countless hours of
informal engagement through our Community Liaison
Officers, shipping monitors, interactions with hunters in
the project area, and through informal discussions.
Concerns about vessel anchorage and Expanded shipping season based on ice conditions and
drifting locations including changes Inuit use of the floe edge.
to shipping route. Shipping will not occur any earlier than
July 1 or later than November 15.
No changes to Northern Shipping Route. No shipping
through Navy Board Inlet or the Northwest Passage.
Lack of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) Company has worked to ensure a clear understanding of
perspectives integrated into the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit that has been shared and the best
current and proposed Project. way to integrate into operations and Phase 2 Design.
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit is not static- sharing and

collection of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit to continue
throughout the life of the Project. We also know that IQ,
and Inuit perspectives will always need to be included in
project monitoring, management, and mitigation.
Additional workshops were held in 2019 and 2020 to
enhance proposed protections of marine and terrestrial
mammals.
Implementation of adaptive management including “No
go” zones – Koluktoo Bay, western shore of Milne Inlet
(Saviit area).
Concerns about significance Our teams and technical experts have considered IQ
determination and impact throughout the Phase 2 assessment process including in
findings/ratings in the Impact the development of Significance Determinations.
Statement and associated documents.
Concerns about accidents, fuel spillsAdditional Arctic diesel fuel spill modelling to account
and shipwrecks. for shoulder season shipping.
Update the Spill at Sea Response Plan as necessary.
Concerns about air quality around Baffinland has actively been collaborating with their
the Project site and black carbon shipping contractors to assess the feasibility of mitigation
emissions from ships. measures to reduce black carbon emissions. Baffinland
and their shippers have been, and will continue to be,
committed to complying with all of the applicable IMO
shipping regulations.
Impacts to water, fish, marine Reduced speeds of Project vessels to continue under
mammals, and wildlife as well as Phase 2.
their habitat. 40 KM set-back from floe edge of shipping season.
Confirmation from MHTO that floe edge is closed for
hunting.
Reduced vessel transits in thicker ice conditions.
Avoidance of ringed seal parturition, nursing and
breeding periods.
Potential for increased shipping and Winter shipping was removed.
icebreaking activities to cause Shipping route and establishment of restricted areas
impacts to fish and marine mammals where vessels cannot travel (e.g. Koluktoo Bay).
especially seals and narwhal.
Rail alignment and impacts to Movement of rail alignment to Route 3.
traditional travel route and rivers Modifications to rail embankment slope and use of fill
“kanadjuk”. material in the rail embankment design.
As part of the railroad design, IQ will be used to
determine the location of wildlife crossings and human
crossings based on Inuit travel routes.
Use of the hi-railcar during rail operations.

Commitment to work with MHTO on identification of
additional caribou and snowmobile crossings along rail
line.
Inclusion of rail line underpasses to maintain known
travel routes.
Ballast water and Aquatic Invasive BIMC committed to exceeding standards required by
species. Ballast Water Control and Management Regulations.
Will conduct both a mid-ocean exchange and use an IMO
and Transport Canada approved Ballast Water Treatment
System (BWTS).
Ballast water to be exchanged in mid-North Atlantic
Ocean, part of same ocean regime as Milne Port.
Pilot ‘biological monitoring of ballast water’ program
will commence in 2020 in accordance with Fisheries and
Oceans (DFO) protocol.
In addition to the questions directly discussed at the Community Roundtable, the NIRB received
written submissions from community members in Pond Inlet during the proceedings and on
October 5, 2020 Baffinland was given an opportunity to provide responses following the meetings;
and the response was received by the NIRB on October 9, 2020. The NIRB has also received
additional submissions from parties since the conclusion of the Pre-hearing Conference which are
summarized in the following table.
Table 5: Summary of Parties and Baffinland’s submissions following the PHC

Submission Date Document Summary Document Number
October 26, 2020 Baffinland submission regarding use of 331843
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) and how IQ
was used in the Phase 2 Proposal and how
it has influenced Project design.
October 26, 2020 Baffinland’s response to Post-Community 331842, 331841
Roundtable received from Ikajutit
Hunters and Trappers of Arctic Bay.
October 16, 2020 Baffinland submission of four (4) 331790 through to 331794
deliverables remaining from the technical
meetings related to railway alignment,
summary of January 2020 workshop,
MEWG terms of reference and Fuel Spill
Risk Assessment for Polar Bear.
October 14, 2020 Ikajutit Hunters and Trappers of Arctic 331730, 331731
Bay post-Community Roundtable
comments requesting additional
consultation.

Submission Date Document Summary Document Number
October 14, 2020 Baffinland’s concerns with statements 331754
made by Ocean North during the
Community Roundtable.
October 14, 2020 Baffinland response to Comments 331755
Received by Mittimatalik Hunters and
Trappers Organization concerning lack of
engagement on outstanding technical
issues between November 2019 and
September 2020 in relation to
commitments made September 30, 2020.
October 9, 2020 Baffinland response to written comments 331690
from Pond Inlet residents.
October 8, 2020 Fisheries and Oceans Canada 331750
correspondence to the Kitikmeot Inuit
Association and Kurtairojuark Hunters
and Trappers Organization regarding
possible impacts to narwhal Somerset
stock from Phase 2 Development
Proposal.
October 6, 2020 Hamlet of Pond Inlet comments with 331669
regard to the status and appropriateness of
some of the commitments made by
Baffinland and the Inuit Certainty
Agreement.
October 3, 2020 Letter from the Hamlet Arctic Bay noting 331747
content intended for closing remarks and
Community Roundtable indicating
community support for the Proposal.
October 3, 2020 Statement supplied by Frank May 331748
outlining personal experience and
feedback about the proposal as someone
also attending the NIRB’s Community
Roundtable and Pre-hearing Conference.
October 1, 2020 Nangmautaq Hunters and Trappers 331749
Association outstanding concerns
regarding the Phase 2 Development
Proposal.
Fisheries and Oceans Comments on Somerset Narwhal Stock

Following the Technical Meeting and through additional questions at the Community Roundtable
and Pre-hearing Conference, discussions regarding possible interactions of the Somerset stock and
Eclipse Sound narwhal populations occurred between Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), World

Wildlife Fund, and several community representatives. These discussions identified concerns of
the possibility that narwhal stocks may be intermixing more, and as such, the narwhal hunted in
the community of Kugaaruk could potentially be affected by project impacts on narwhal
populations that take place in Eclipse Sound. World Wildlife Fund suggested these concerns mean
that impacts to Kugaaruk should also be considered by the Board, and World Wildlife Fund
reached out directly during the Technical Meeting to engage the local HTO. The NIRB staff
followed up, and after the conclusion of the Pre-hearing Conference, the Kurtairojuark Hunters
and Trappers Organization (KHTO) responded back that they wanted to know more about the
proposal and potential impacts. In response, the NIRB staff has helped them navigate to the
applicable documentation on the public registry. In addition the Board’s staff have requested (three
times to date) further clarification from DFO regarding the “new data/reinterpretation of existing
monitoring data” that raises the question of the extent to which the narwhal stocks harvested in
Kugaaruk could be impacted by project effects. To date, DFO’s responses have not provided the
clarity sought by the Board. At this point, the nature and extent of the participation of the
community of Kugaaruk and the KHTO in the next steps of the Board’s assessment of the Phase
2 Development are not clear, but the NIRB continue to follow up to clarify what may be required.
4. Nunavut Impact Review Board Analysis and Decision
Submissions on Procedural Issues

Prior to the close of the PHC, and in keeping with the NIRB procedures for the conduct of a PHC
(Rule 21 of the NIRB’s Rules of Procedure11), the following matters were discussed with parties,
including community representatives, in attendance at the PHC with a view to preparing for the
next stage in the NIRB’s review of the project proposal:
1. Identification of any issues preventing the reconvening of a Public Hearing;
2. Date, time and location of the Public Hearing;
3. Timetable for the exchange of documents and information requests prior to the Public
hearing;
4. Finalization of issues for the Public Hearing, and identification of interested parties to
attend the Hearing;
5. Procedures to be followed for reconvening a Public Hearing including public meeting
safety planning for COVID-19 and exposure control plan; and
6. Logistics arrangement, equipment, language, interpretation, translation, and transcript
requirements.
Jurisdiction of the Board

The NIRB conducted the Pre-hearing Conference (PHC) associated with the Board’s
Reconsideration of the terms and conditions of Project Certificate No. 005 for Baffinland’s Phase
11
https://www.nirb.ca/rules-of-procedure
2 Development Project proposal (NIRB File No. 08MN053) under 12.8.2 of the Agreement
Between the Inuit of the Nunavut Settlement Area and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
(Nunavut Agreement). The purpose of the PHC was to, in light of the commitments made and
discussion of technical issues at the Technical Meeting and the input of Community
Representatives provided at the Community Roundtable sessions, inform the NIRB’s
consideration of any additional Board direction to Baffinland in preparing for the final phase of
the assessment of the Phase 2 Development Proposal.
Figure 12: NIRB Chair and Staff during the PHC
4.2.1. Issues
Taking into account parties’ submissions and comments from the public at the Community
Roundtables and the PHC, the Board’s decision on the six (6) issues is as follows:
1. Identification of any issues preventing the reconvening of a Public Hearing

The NIRB acknowledges that community representatives were split on their support of the
proposal and support to reconvene the Public Hearing. As noted above, numerous parties pointed
to the number of outstanding issues in their closing remarks as an issue that provides uncertainty
in being prepared to reconvene a Public Hearing, especially the community organizations, MHTO,
ON, and WWF. Communities also noted their preference for reconvening the Public Hearing when
there could be full participation from interested members of the community, especially Elders. The

federal agencies and the GN did not identify any issues that may prevent the reconvening of a
Public Hearing.
In their closing remarks two communities (i.e. Arctic Bay, Clyde River) as well as an Intervenor
(i.e. the MHTO) indicated that they would not to want reconvene the hearing as they consider so
many questions to yet be unanswered, and many issues remain unresolved, but Arctic Bay and
MHTO and Hamlet of Pond Inlet further indicated that if the Public Hearing reconvened it was
unlikely to be before January or February of 2021. The Hamlet of Hall Beach noted it supported
reconvening the Public Hearing on the same timing but only if NIRB determined that the
application was sufficiently developed. The communities of Resolute and deferred submissions
from Arctic Bay were supportive of the proposal, while Igloolik noted both challenges and
increasing confidence in the material discussed, and Pond Inlet noted that the entire process felt
rushed and Inuit are cautious about making decisions that will impact their land and its resources.
As opposed to directly indicating support to reconvening the Public Hearing, community
organizations (i.e. Igloolik Working Group, Hamlets of Sanirajak, Clyde River, and Arctic Bay)
instead indicated support of Pond Inlet (Hamlet of Pond Inlet deferred closing items, and MHTO
noted early 2021). The Qikiqtani Inuit Association and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. noted support to
the communities being able to participate fully when the Public Hearing could resume.
Further, community organizations noted that with the number of commitments being considered
resolved based on the commitments around the Inuit Certainty Agreement, there remains a high
level of uncertainty if commitments will be completed in such a way to actually resolved the issues
being raised by parties. Concerns were also raised about lack of involvement of the communities
in development of the Inuit Certainty Agreement, lack of agreement on significance ratings for
impacts, adaptive management, socio-economic benefits, monitoring and mitigation plans, and
integration of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit/Inuit perspectives into the project. Baffinland noted that
complete resolution of issues is not necessary for the NIRB to reconvene the Public Hearing as it
is routine for there to be issues requiring the Board’s participation in finding the balance of
resolution through their decision-making and recommendations. Further, as reiterated, it was
observed that there were fewer representatives appointed for the recently held Community
Roundtable and PHC compared to the number of representatives (21) present during the November
Public Hearing as such certain demographics (e.g. youth/woman) were missed, but should hearings
resume, the Board would expect affected communities to prioritize appointment that would be
reflective of a more complete demographic.
2. Discussion and facilitation of the Public Hearing process

a. Anticipated date, time, form, and location(s) to reconvene the Public Hearing.
The Hamlet of Pond Inlet and Arctic Bay indicated that a Public Hearing may be held no earlier
than January/February 2021, and that the location for the Public Hearing should be in Pond Inlet.
Also, as noted in the previous section, Inuit organizations and community groups recommended
that the Public Hearing be delayed until such a time when meetings could be safely held in person

without the gathering and travel restrictions required in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
World Wildlife Fund deferred to the communities’ preferences on timing, but noted it was
important to make sure there are answers available during the completion of the Public Hearing.
CIRNAC (on behalf of the Government of Canada), GN, and ON deferred to the NIRB for timing
to reconvene the Public Hearing and recommended that the hub model was successful and would
be of benefit to involving necessary parties in the proceedings. Baffinland requested that the
hearing proceedings reconvene as soon as possible as the 2021 year must be planned and it was
keeping with the Board’s decision on the NTI motion; therefore the Public Hearing should be
completed by the end of December 2020, during a period of 12-14 days, and night sessions should
not be held to allow for discussion time.
b. Timetable for the exchange of additional documents and information requests

prior to the Public Hearing.
Baffinland committed to exchanging documents and providing updates on the status of
commitments and documents on or before October 16, 2020, which the Proponent. The NIRB
confirm that the Proponent has submitted the documents committed to during the Technical
Meeting and PHC which has been circulated to parties and posted on the NIRB Public Registry.
During the PHC, Baffinland also suggested that the Board should direct that any parties wishing
to file formal Motions should be required to submit the Motions in writing several weeks in
advance of the Public Hearing.
c. Confirmation of commitments list by Intervenors

Most parties indicated requested updates to wording or issues in the commitment list provided by
Baffinland and the Hamlet of Pond Inlet requested a deferred response to the commitment list
which was submitted on October 6, 2020 and detailed several uncertainties in the commitment list
itself as well as the lack of confidence in the number of issues considered resolved through
commitments related to the Inuit Certainty Agreement. Following the meetings, Baffinland
provided its additional clarification to concerns around the MHTO’s lack of response to inquiries
as well as justifications for not including several of Oceans North’s requests as commitments. The
Board notes Baffinland’s reference that 17(9%) of parties’ technical concerns remain outstanding
and may require NIRB involvement in determining resolution. The Board also remind intervenors
to be prepared to justify their position on the resolution of outstanding issues to community
members during the public hearing proceedings.
d. Finalization of issues for the Public Hearing, and identification of interested

parties to attend the Hearing
The NIRB noted that the recommendations contained within the PHC Report including the
outstanding technical issues and the final commitment lists would comprise the issues to be
brought forward to the Public Hearing. The Board notes that all the communities that attended the
Community Roundtable and Pre-hearing Conference indicated interest in attending the rest of the
Public Hearing. Iqaluit did not end up responding to inquiries or appointing community reps but
instead elected to attend at the Iqaluit hub, and discussions with community contacts in Grise Fiord
indicated that they were not interested in appointing representatives to this event. The Hall Beach
Hunters and Trappers Association considered value in participants from Kinngait, Kimmirut, and
Naujaat may find value in attending as they travel by boat in these areas and harvest Narwhal.
Arctic Bay suggested that Pangnirtung also be asked if they would like to attend. The Igloolik
Working Group noted its support of Kugaaruk attending due to the discussion at both the Technical
Meeting and Community Roundtable of mixing of the Narwhal stocks with those that are hunted
by residents of Kugaaruk. The Nangmautaq HTO of Clyde River indicated that it would work with
the Hamlet of Clyde River to submit a detailed written submission that will discuss outstanding
issues before the end of October. Attendees raised the issue that the Government of
Denmark/Greenland may still also want to participate; the Board is still unclear of this parties’
interest to be involved in the rest of the Public Hearing.
e. Procedures to be followed for reconvening a Public Hearing including public

meeting safety planning for COVID-19 and exposure control plan
Parties expressed that the NIRB process must be based upon procedural fairness for all parties,
including the affected communities and proponent, but must also take into consideration the
current challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Parties anticipate that the NIRB would
consider the following items before reconvening a Public Hearing:
▪ Consideration for the health, safety and wellbeing of participants;
▪ Consideration for enabling full and meaningful participation by Inuit from the affected
communities; and
▪ Consideration of the technical limitations and possible solutions to ensure full participation
of community representatives and Intervenors, including members of the public.
NTI/QIA emphasized that community participation in the NIRB reconsideration process is critical.
Community organizations indicated they are fully supportive of in-person opportunities for
community participation wherever possible and practicable during the current COVID-19
situation. The Hamlets of Pond Inlet and Sanirajak recommended that the NIRB request for an
exemption to allow for indoor gatherings of more than the 50 people to allow for full public
participation and representation from Pond Inlet and other affected communities.12
f. Logistics arrangement, equipment, language, interpretation, translation, and

transcript requirements
The Hamlet of Pond Inlet requested that the NIRB consider adding another venue in the
community (e.g. school gymnasium) to allow more members of the public attend and participate
in the Public Hearing. Parties noted their satisfaction with the technology and format used for the
Community Roundtable and Pre-hearing Conference, but noted that there were people who
12
Since the close of the Pre-Hearing Conference, the GN’s Chief Public Health Officer has increased the indoor in-person gathering limits to allow
for a maximum of 75% of maximum occupancy of the facility or 100 people, whichever is lower. Meanwhile, the indoor gathering limits in
Winnipeg and Ottawa have been reduced further to only 10 people for at least two consecutive 14 day cycles.
couldn’t make it to either of the southern hubs and felt limited in participating by the audio line as
they could not speak into the sessions. Parties also requested that NIRB consider ways to allow
participants to fully participate from wherever they live. Related to the content of submissions,
parties asked that the use of idioms be avoided as they do not translate and lead to confusion.
Further, Elders should be allowed to speak at a time that is convenient to them. Finally, some of
the location names at the meetings were noted to be incorrect, therefore it was suggested that
Baffinland share names as some of the location names discussed during the meetings were not
accurate. Participants noted appreciation to be able to participate in their own language and
expressed further appreciation for the efforts to translate documents and the proceedings.
g. Other matters that may aid in the simplification of the Public Hearing
Participants noted interest in having large scale maps provided especially with traditional place
names, pointers that participants can use to indicate a specific location pertaining to their
comments, 3D models or simulations, and comparative models for project components especially
the railway component that allow understanding in relation to other structures or items in the
Hamlet and affected communities. Community organizations requested wording for draft terms
and conditions agreed upon by parties as well. Any documents such as commitment lists be
provided in larger font for readability, and include full information not just cross-references that
provide no actual information. The QIA and NTI requested the use of visuals and models at the
hearing locations especially around railroad components, and the size of ore carriers, as well as an
English and Inuktitut glossary of terms to ensure complete understanding of items being discussed
and help participants get a clearer picture. The Government of Canada noted it would be useful
where information is being referenced from the Impact Statement Addendum that direct
information be provided to help community members be clear on the information being given. The
NIRB recommends that Baffinland and intervenors be prepared to provide comparable examples
for shipping and railway traffic impacts that communities can use to comprehend the potential
scope, scale and impacts of key components of the Phase 2 Development Proposal.
5. Conclusions of the Board

Since the Public Hearing was suspended in November, considerable progress has been made by
Baffinland and parties to come to resolution on technical issues and to increase the overall
understanding of the Phase 2 Development Proposal. In particular, the Board recognizes that the
Qikiqtani Inuit Association continues to work with communities to bring more clarity around the
mitigation of impacts and potential for benefits associated with the Proposal under the ICA, and
provided the Board with a specific schedule of engagement with the potentially affected
communities to take place between the PHC and December 2020. However, from comments
spoken at these meetings the Board noted indications that there is a lack of trust between the
communities and the Inuit organizations that represent them in Inuit Impact and Benefit Agreement
negotiations arising from a sense that communities were not adequately consulted about the ICA
terms and conditions in advance.
Recognizing, however, advancement in the resolution of many parties’ technical issues, several
parties indicated support to reconvene the Public Hearing, and suggested that scheduling the
resumption of the Public Hearing in January or February 2021 may be appropriate. This timing
appears reasonable to the Board, as it would allow time for the engagement by the Qikiqtani Inuit
Association and communities to take place, and also recognizes that the normal seasonal travel
amongst communities and outside of Nunavut over the holidays in December may take longer and
be complicated by quarantine and self-isolation periods that could limit the in-person participation
of parties at venues in Nunavut. As the Board indicated previously, in this interim period before
the reconvened Public Hearing, the NIRB encourages parties to keep discussing possible resolution
to outstanding issues.
Recognizing the progress that has been made to date, the NIRB has directed that the Public Hearing
for the Phase 2 Development Proposal be reconvened the week of January 25, 2021 to be carried
out over 12 days (Monday through Saturday each week) and to be completed by February 6,
2021. The Board has directed that the main location for the in-person Public Hearing will be Pond
Inlet, but to ensure that venue has capacity to allow for as many community members to attend the
proceedings as possible, the Board also expects Pond Inlet to be video linked to a hub in Iqaluit
and a hub or hubs outside of Nunavut (location(s) to be determined based on public health
restrictions in place in January 2021). Parties should be aware that this timing, venues and modified
Public Hearing procedures remain subject to compliance with the local Public Health Orders in
place at the time, and plans may have to change with little notice.
The model used for the Community Roundtable and Pre-hearing Conference was largely
successful, but will be adjusted to incorporate parties’ feedback regarding improvements such as
having a toll-free telephone number, greater ability for telephone participants to participate and to
increase the number of community members able to attend the in-person sessions in Pond Inlet.
The Board notes that the current indoor gathering limits in Nunavut have been increased as of
October 5, while gathering limits have been significantly reduced in the rest of Canada. Parties
should be assured that the Board will continue to monitor and adjust the Board’s modified
processes to support the participation of the potentially affected communities, Baffinland and
Intervenors in a healthy, safe and efficient manner. The Board appreciates the flexibility and
commitment of all participants to a safe and productive resumption of the Public Hearing.
The Board accepts the Commitment Lists as set out in Appendix C and notes that Baffinland’s
timely fulfilment of these commitments will be a key part of addressing the unresolved issues
identified at the Technical Meeting and at the PHC prior to reconvening the Public Hearing. The
Board notes that Baffinland’s fulfillment of commitments to various interested parties as specified
in Appendix C may also address some of the key questions and concerns raised by Community
Representatives from the North Baffin communities in attendance at the Community Roundtable
and PHC. Based on the submissions of the parties and the NIRB’s consultation with potentially

affected communities, in addition to the commitments, the Board requires Baffinland to address
the following additional items prior to the Public Hearing:
1) The Board also requires the Proponent to work with the Kurtairojuark Hunters and
Trappers Organization to address concerns arising from the possibility for Baffinland’s
project activities along the shipping route to cause impacts to individual narwhal from the
Somerset stock potentially impacting the community of Kugaaruk. The NIRB recommends
that CIRNAC determine if the KHTO requires participant finding contingent on their
expressing interest in participating in the assessment process;
2) Discussion of how Baffinland reconsidered the significance of potential Project impacts
where parties raised concerns with the significance determinations presented within the
FEIS Addendum; and
3) Discussion of the Proponent’s planned coordination of socio-economic monitoring with
existing programs. This discussion should consider the changes to harvesting and
traditional pursuits that communities such as Pond Inlet and other affected communities
may have experienced because of a rapid transition to a wage economy caused by nearby
development.
The Board recommends that the Hearing involve the communities which have been designated in
this assessment as potentially impacted by the Phase 2 Development Proposal (i.e. Grise Fiord,
Resolute, Pond Inlet, Arctic Bay, Hall Beach, Clyde River, and Igloolik), and any additional
communities be required to indicate their interest to attend. The Board notes community
representatives’ suggestions to further include Naujaat, Kimmirut, Pangnirtung, and Kinngait,
however due to the scope of the Phase 2 Development Proposal being shipping of iron ore to the
North through Milne Inlet and does not significantly adjust impacts previously determined to be
associated with approved activities for shipping via Steensby Inlet, the additional communities
would not be necessary to understand the impacts of the current proposal in front of the Board.
However, the Board further notes that pending the results of DFO’s clarification on narwhal stocks,
it reserves the decision to include Kugaaruk in the proceedings should the updated submission of
DFO indicate likely impacts to the Somerset stock and therefore Kugaaruk hunters. The Board’s
requirements for reconvening the Public Hearing and all communities determined as potentially
impacted are being communicated to the Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs
Canada’s participant funding coordinators.
Discussions are still ongoing to determine the nature and extent of impacts to the Somerset narwhal
stock and if the studies identify intermixing with the Eclipse Sound stock. The NIRB request that
Baffinland make efforts to schedule “one on one” teleconference conference or video calls with
the Kurtairojuark Hunters and Trappers Organization to address concerns about possible impacts
to narwhal stocks as soon as practicable if they identify that such discussions are appropriate or
necessary, and Baffinland must provide the NIRB a summary of such discussions and resolution
of issues once completed. The NIRB also expects Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) to clarify
its position on the interpretation of narwhal mixing studies prior to the Public Hearing and inform
the Kurtairojuark Hunters and Trappers Organization and NIRB by November 25, 2020. The
Board has noted on its Public Registry the correspondences associated with discussion of possible
interactions between the Somerset and Eclipse Sound narwhal populations as raised by Fisheries
and Oceans Canada, World Wildlife Fund, and Kurtairojuark Hunters and Trappers Organization
to enable parties track progress of key issues. More information regarding the distribution of
narwhal stocks and Narwhal hunting can be found on the website of the Nunavut Wildlife
Management Board.
Unless provided to the Board prior to announcing the reconvening of the Public Hearing,
Baffinland is encouraged to provide information to the Government of Denmark/Greenland to
assist its understanding of the proposal as they continue discussions with the Impact Assessment
Agency of Canada on expectations around implementation of the Espoo Convention.
The NIRB recommends that Baffinland prepare large scale maps, models, and comparisons to
project components for the Hearing hubs, including traditional place names, and consider
developing with the GN, NTI, and QIA a glossary of terms used in relation to the Proposal or
monitoring of the existing project. As previously indicated, based on indoor public gathering
limits, the NIRB anticipates that it will be necessary to video-link Pond Inlet to a hub in Iqaluit
(however the availability and locations for video-linked hubs outside of Nunavut have yet to be
determined as more stringent public health measures are currently in place in Winnipeg and
Ottawa). Precise details, dates and locations will be confirmed in the days to come in the Notice
of the reconvened Public Hearing, and in project-specific procedural guidance. The Board reserves
the right to alter the schedule, locations and modified processes for holding the reconvened Public
Hearing as may be necessary to comply with applicable public health measures, and appreciates
the patience and flexibility of all parties as we work collaboratively to resume the Public Hearing.
The Board also notes there were intervenors that requested seats to attend a specific location to
participate in the Community Roundtable and PHC and did not show up for the meetings; as the
NIRB assigned the seats based on demand and fairness to parties, those requesting seats then
deciding to attend from another location or not attend at all with late or no notice to the NIRB,
limited the efforts of the NIRB during the proceedings to ensure as many participants from each
agency could attend an in-person location. The NIRB reminds all intervenors and parties to be
mindful for public meetings being held during the pandemic, of the limited seating due to public
health orders limiting gathering sizes, especially as the cost of adding additional locations is very
high. Also, the Board would like to clarify that the meeting locations outside of Pond Inlet are for
registered guests only with no public admissions.
The Public Hearing will proceed in accordance with the NIRB Rules of Procedure (2009), with
modifications as necessary to reflect both the changes to logistics necessary to comply with the
applicable directions and orders of local public health authorities during the COVID-19 Pandemic
and also to reflect that this is a resumption of a Public Hearing that commenced 11 months ago.
During the Public Hearing, formal technical presentations from Baffinland and Intervenors who
filed technical review comments will be the first component of the Public Hearing. As
recommended by several parties, including Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and Baffinland,
recognizing that some parties may be participating remotely outside of the Territory, parties are
encouraged to give some thought to pre-recording their technical submissions in both English and
Inuktitut so that if there is an interruption to the audio or video links during the technical sessions,
parties may be able to review the presentations offline. In addition, the NIRB notes that in the
interests of time, the Board may limit the time allotted to individual Intervenors for questioning
and may focus the first round of questioning on each topic during the technical session on those
Intervenors who filed technical review comments in relation to the topic being discussed. More
specific guidance on these points will be provided in advance of the Public Hearing when the
Agenda, logistics and venues can be confirmed.
A Community Roundtable will follow the technical sessions. All parties are required to ensure
sufficient technical expertise is available for the Community Roundtable portions of the Public
Hearing, especially pertaining to the marine environment, railway, caribou, freshwater, fish, and
dust/air quality/human health. The Board also encourages Baffinland and the QIA to meet with
the Hamlet councils and HTOs in potentially affected communities to discuss the content and
implementation of the Inuit Certainty Agreement (ICA) and be prepared to provide clarity on how
this agreement addresses community concerns as well as provides certainty in project mitigation
and monitoring.
To maximize the time available for discussion of technical issues and community concerns during
the Public Hearing, the Board is also modifying the way that the Board will handle formal Motions.
The Board requires any party who wishes to bring a Motion for the Board to consider in relation
to the Public Hearing or the Public Hearing Record, to:
▪ file the Motion, and any material supporting the Motion in writing with the Board on or
before December 17, 2020;
▪ the Board will post the Motion on the Registry and will invite anyone wishing to comment
on the Motion to file their comments, in writing with the Board on or before January 7,
2020; and
▪ the Board will consider the Motions and responses of other parties and will issue the
Board’s decisions regarding the Motions and any associated procedural guidance prior to
the Public Hearing.
Parties are expected to follow this direction on Motions and are advised that the Board may be
unwilling to entertain oral motions made during the Public Hearing if the Board determines that
such motions should have been made in advance as directed above. The Board will issue Public
Notice of the reconvened Public Hearing at least 60 days prior to the first day of the Public Hearing
and further procedural directions to all participants regarding the Public Hearing as required.

The Board thanks all participants during the recent Technical Meeting, Community Roundtable
and Pre-Hearing Conference for their participation and contribution to conducting productive
meetings under very challenging circumstances. However, the Board also reminds all participants
of the Board’s expectations that parties’ submissions will be respectful of the other parties, the
Board and the limitations on the Board’s processes imposed by circumstances outside of the
Board’s control. Comments intended to denigrate the views or comments of other participants, or
simply intended to disrupt the proceedings are not appropriate and may result in the Board
sanctioning such commenters and, if the Board considers necessary, striking such comments from
the Public Hearing Record. The Board recognizes that participants may have very strong feelings,
including strong disagreement with other participants, but as the Board has generally come to
expect, strong emotions and disagreement can still be conveyed in a manner that is respectful and
productive. The Board looks forward to participants continuing to provide positive and respectful
contributions when the Public Hearing resumes.

Appendix A: Agenda for the Community Roundtable and Pre-
hearing Conference

APPENDIX A:
FINAL COMMUNITY ROUNDTABLE AND PRE-HEARING CONFERENCE AGENDA
NIRB File No.: 08MN053 – Phase 2 Development Project Proposal

Proponent: Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation
Formats: In-person and video conference (details to be confirmed to participants)
Locations: Atakaalik Community Hall, Pond Inlet, NU (in-person)
Koojesee Room, Iqaluit, NU (Northern hub)
Ottawa Conference and Event Centre, Ottawa, ON (Southern hub)
Victoria Inn Hotel and Convention Centre, Winnipeg, MB (Southern
hub)
Dates: September 28-October 1, 2020
Times: All times given are approximate and the order of discussion topics are
subject to change at the NIRB’s discretion. Additional evening sessions
may be scheduled if deemed necessary to complete the agenda.
Community Roundtable Sessions: 9:00 am – 5:00 pm; 6:30-9:00 pm ET
Pre-Hearing Conference: 9:00 am – 5:00 pm; 6:30-9:00 pm ET
Sunday, September 27, 2020 – Training Session – 6:30-9:00 p.m. ET
Participants in the Pond Inlet and Iqaluit locations will be required to participate in a training
session to demonstrate how proceedings will be conducted, starting with the whole group then
completing with an update session for community members on their requirements for the meetings.
Monday, September 28, 2020 - Day 1 of Community Roundtable
General Opening
1. NIRB Welcome and Opening Remarks (30 minutes)
a. Opening statements from Public Health Nurse
b. Opening statements from Mayor
c. Objectives of Community Roundtable and Pre-Hearing Conference
d. Overview of the NIRB process and status of the reconsideration
e. Introduction of Participants
f. Overview of Agenda
g. Housekeeping Items
(866) 233-3033 (867) 983-2594 info@nirb.ca www.nirb.ca @NunavutImpactReviewBoard

P.O. Box 1360, Cambridge Bay, NU X0B 0C0
Page 1 of 4
Community Roundtable Session
2. Summary presentation by the Proponent – Introduction and Overview of Project
highlighting updated scope items and limits of operational flexibility (45 minutes)
i. Update on community engagement since the Public Hearing was suspended
and feedback from communities on the Project Proposal
▪ Questioning of the Proponent and Intervenors by community representatives
▪ Questions or statements from the public to the Proponent or Intervenors
3. Summary presentation by the Proponent – Incorporation of Inuit Qaujimaningit into
project planning and proposed mitigation including Incorporation of Inuit
Qaujimaningit/Use of Inuit knowledge in developing significance determination,
integration of the results of monitoring using western scientific methods with the results of
Inuit Qaujimaningit and how these perspectives would be accommodated and
communication of findings (45 minutes; 20 minutes on terrestrial items, and 25 on marine
items)
▪ Questioning of the Proponent and Parties by community representatives
4. Summary presentation by the Proponent – Railway components and the Terrestrial
Environment including air quality (45 minutes)
Close of Day 1
Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - Day 2 of Community Roundtable
General Opening (continued from Day 1)

1. Opening prayer
2. Opening Remarks by NIRB
Community Roundtable Session continued

3. Railway components and the Terrestrial Environment including air quality cont’d
4. Summary presentation by the Proponent – Milne Port development, marine shipping
activities, shipping season, and the Marine Environment (60 minutes)

Page 2 of 4
5. Summary presentation by the Proponent – Socio-economic effects and maximizing
benefits of the proposal, traditional land use considerations, and coordination with
communities for monitoring of project-related impacts (60 minutes)
Close of Day 2
Wednesday, September 30, 2020 - Day 3 of Community Roundtable

and start of Pre-hearing Conference
General Opening (continued from Day 2)

1. Opening prayer
2. Opening Remarks by NIRB
Community Roundtable Session continued
3. Socio-economic effects and maximizing benefits of the proposal, traditional land use
considerations, and coordination with communities for monitoring of project-related
impacts cont’d
4. Summary presentation by the Proponent – Accidents and Malfunctions, Effects of the
Environment on the Project (45 minutes)
5. Closing statements from each community
Pre-Hearing Conference starting evening session
1. Identification of any issues preventing the reconvening of a Public Hearing (both NIRB
and/or Intervenors)
2. Discussion of commitment list
Close of Day 3
Thursday, October 1, 2020 - Pre-Hearing Conference completion
General Opening
3. Opening prayer
4. Remarks from NIRB, review of Agenda and housekeeping items
Pre-Hearing Conference

Page 3 of 4
5. Identification of any issues preventing the reconvening of a Public Hearing (both NIRB
and/or Intervenors)
6. Discussion and facilitation of the Public Hearing processes – parties and intervenors at the
table will be given an opportunity to comment on the following:
i. Anticipated date, time, form, and location(s) to reconvene the Public Hearing;
ii. Timetable for the exchange of additional documents and information requests prior
to the Public Hearing;
iii. Confirmation of commitments list by Intervenors;
iv. Finalization of issues for the Public Hearing, and identification of interested parties
to attend the Hearing;
v. Procedures to be followed for reconvening a Public Hearing including public
meeting safety planning for COVID-19 and exposure control plan;
vi. Logistics arrangement, equipment, language, interpretation, translation, and
transcript requirements; and
vii. Other matters that may aid in the simplification of the Public Hearing.
7. Closing remarks from Parties
8. NIRB Closing Remarks and Next Steps
9. Closing Prayer
Close of Day 4

Page 4 of 4
Appendix B: Summary Listings of Attendees at Community
Roundtable Session and Pre-Hearing Conference

Project Proponent: Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation
2275 Upper Middle Road East, Suite 300
Oakville, Ontario, Canada
L6H 0C3
Date Updated Project Description of October 3, 2018

the Proposal Received:
Positive Conformity Determination May 29, 2018

Received from the Nunavut Planning
Commission:
Dates of Community Roundtable: September 28-September 30, 2020

Pond Inlet (in person & Teleconference)
Northern hub (Iqaluit)
Southern hub (Ottawa and Winnipeg)
Dates of Pre-Hearing Conference September 30-October 1, 2020

Pond Inlet (in person & Teleconference)
Northern hub (Iqaluit)
Southern hub (Ottawa and Winnipeg)
Board Members Present: Kaviq Kaluraq, Chairperson
NIRB Staff: Karen Costello, Executive Director

Tara Arko, Director, Technical Services
Solomon Amuno, Technical Advisor I
Cory Barker, Technical Advisor I
Erin Reimer, Technical Advisor I
Colleen Parker, Nunavut Marine Council Policy Advisor
Mark Ings, Director, Finance and Administration
Priscilla Evalik, Senior Finance Officer
Stephanie Taptuna, Manager, Communications
B. Beattie, Environmental Technologist
NIRB Legal Counsel: T. Meadows, Meadows Law
Interpreters: J. Tucktoo, Interpreter (NIRB)

Veronica Dewar, Interpreter
Titus Arnakallak
Rhoda Katsak
Sound Technicians: Harold Price Douson Multimedia, Pond Inlet)

Olivier Sirois (Douson Multimedia Pond Inlet)
Francois Baril (Douson Multimedia, Iqaluit)
Phil Abercrombie (Douson Multimedia, Iqaluit)
Jonathon Scharf (Douson Multimedia, Ottawa)
Garry Hale (AventPRO, Winnipeg)
Parties:
Proponent:
Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation Christine Kowbel, Legal Counsel
Brad Armstrong, Legal Counsel
Brian Penney, President
Megan Lord-Hoyle
Lou Kamermans
Mathew Clark
Andrew Moore
Udlu Hanson
Joseph Tigullaraq
Emma Malcolm
Fay Pittman*
Connor Devereaux
Connie Merkosak
Terry Killiktee
Peter Taqialuk
Steve Douville
Richard Cook, Knight Piesold
Intervenors:
Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated Hannah Uniuqsaraq
James Eetoolook
Joe Ohokannoak*
Paul Irngaut*
Jeff Maurice*
Richmond Green*
Carson Gillis*
Jorgan Aitoak*
David Lee*
Bert Dean*
Neida Gonzales*
Arthur Yuan*
Qikiqtani Inuit Association: PJ Akeeagok

Stephen Williamson Bathory
Richard Paton
Levi Barnabas
Jared Ottenhof
Eva Aariak
Bruce Stewart
Jeff Higdon
Alistair Macdonald*
Susan Leech*
Nick Jewitt*
Jason Ash*
Lorrain Land
Nicole Wirawan*
Government of Nunavut Emily Stockley, Legal Counsel

Natalie O’Grady
Amy Robinson
Kamil Sameer*
Daniel Haney*
Chantel Emiktaut*
Dianne Lapierre*
Crown-Indigenous Relations and Spencer Dewar

Northern Affairs Canada Felexce Ngwa
David Abernethy*
Kim Pawley
Jennifer Walsh
James Neary
Fisheries and Oceans Canada: Alexandra Sorckoff

Alasdair Beattie
Kimberly Howland
Marianne Marcoux
Joclyn Paulic*
Gabriel Bernard-Lacaille
Environment and Climate Change Anna Graham

Canada Brian Asher*
Reg Ejeckam*
Anne Wilson*
Carl Lewis Kabanguka*
Health Canada M. Gale
Natural Resources Canada: P. Unger
Northern Project Management Office Arusa Shafi

Saba Qazi
Scott Hitchcox*
Parks Canada Allison Stoddart

Laurant Jonart
Transport Canada Anita Gudmundson

Jackie Barker*
Myrna O’Soup-Bushie*
Department of Justice Simon Gruda-Dolbec*
Igloolik Working Group P. Ivalu
Hamlet of Sanirajak Louis Primeau
Hall Beach Hunters and Trappers Jopie Kaernek

Association
Hamlet of Clyde River Warren Bernauer
Nunavut Independent Television Carol Kunuk

Network
Hamlet of Pond Inlet Frank Tester

Danny Maktar
Mittimatalik Hunters and Trappers Eric Ootoovak

Organization Amanda Hanson-Main
Oceans North Chris Debicki

Amanda Joynt*
Georgia MacDonald*
Joshua Jones*
World Wildlife Fund Andrew Dumbrille*

Paul Okalik
Erin Keenan
Media Members
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Beth Brown
Travis Burke
Nunatsiaq News Megan Deuling
Community Representatives
Arctic Bay Moses Koonoo
Olayuq Naqitarvik
Cecil Francis May
Clyde River Jerry Natanine

David Iqaqrialu
Sanirajak Sam Arnardjuak

Emma Allianaq
Danny Arvaluk
Igloolik Natalino Piugattuk

Joanna Quassa
Resolute Bay Saroomie Manik

Simon Idlout
Iqaluit Meeka Mike

Appendix C: List of Commitments

Summary of Baffinland Commitments for the Phase 2 Expansion Project [current to September 29, 2020; DRAFT]
ID# FWS ID# Topic Review Phase Commitment Commitment Due Date Notes
188 CIRNAC-01 NEW Freshwater 3 - September CIRNAC requests that Baffinland commits to the providing the following information during the Water Licence Amendment process, subject to NA This issue is resolved for environmental assessment
Environment 2020 - Technical Nunavut Water Board requirements. purposes and will be further addressed during water
Meetings i. Baffinland shall provide a heat balance and relationship of the heat generation associated with the exothermic reaction of PAG waste rock license
deposited and soluble sulphates and demonstrate that the current design of the waste rock facility will maintain permafrost conditions in the long
term (closure and beyond).
ii. Baffinland shall perform an oxygen balance of the waste rock facility and correlate it with soluble sulphates. This will provide understanding of
the process of ARD generation and the performance of the waste rock facility.
187 CIRNAC-01a NEW Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland shall develop a detailed site program to monitor the thaw consolidation and soil deformation under the structures/embankments NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical constructed as part of the Phase 2 Project. The monitoring results shall be compared with the Final Environmental Impact Statement Addendum
Meetings predictions and appropriate mitigation measures shall be identified and incorporated into the adaptive management approach.
186 CIRNAC-03 NEW Freshwater 3 - September CIRNAC requests that Baffinland commits to the providing the following information during the Water Licence Amendment process, subject to NA This issue is resolved for environmental assessment
Environment 2020 - Technical Nunavut Water Board requirements. purposes and will be further addressed during water
Meetings i. Baffinland shall develop reliable criteria for identification of PAG rock that clearly accounts for uncertainty in the 0.2% total sulphur threshold license
and the presence of acidic soluble sulphates upon projected life of mine tonnages of PAG and Non-Acid Generating (NAG) rock.
ii. Baffinland shall incorporate these criteria, clearly stated ranges in projected life of mine PAG and NAG rock tonnages and the resultant
necessary contingencies and methods of validation that need to be incorporated into engineering design, environmental monitoring and
management strategies for the Waste Rock Management Plan and Interim Closure and Reclamation Plan. These documents are to be submitted
for review during the Water Licence Amendment process, subject to Nunavut Water Board requirements.
iii. Baffinland shall review the performance of these plans and provide evidence of the effectiveness of these plans by demonstrating compliance
with the management measures and that the desired outcomes of mitigation are achieved on an annual basis.
185 DFO-3.6.4 Marine 3 - September Baffinland and DFO will provide an update on DFO Comment 3.6.4 and 3.6.6 following bilateral discussions On or before October 16, 2020 Update will be provided during the Community
DFO-3.6.6 Environment 2020 - Technical Roundtable
Meetings
184 ECCC-3 NEW Freshwater 3 - September Baffinland will address ECCC's outstanding concerns, as identfiied in their letter to the NIRB on September 4, 2020, through the Nunavut Water NA This issue is resolved for environmental assessment
ECCC-4 NEW Environment 2020 - Technical Board Water License amendment process for Phase 2 purposes and will be further addressed during water
ECCC-6 NEW Meetings license
183 HPI Corporate 3 - September Baffinland will provide a list of participants to each Hamlet and HTO from the North Baffin impacted communities who were present in the North On or before October 16, 2020 Update will be provided during the Community
Environment 2020 - Technical Baffin community meetings reported in the February 2020 community update submission to the NIRB. Roundtable
Meetings
182 MHTO Marine 3 - September Baffinland will look into the feasibility of installing acoustic monitoring equipment at the floe edge. Complete Baffinland can install acoustic monitoring equipment at
Environment 2020 - Technical the floe edge. Baffinland has already committed to
Meetings engage with DFO and Inuit prior to development of
acoustic monitoring programs (DFO 3.3.3 NEW). No
further commitment is required.
181 GN-TRC24 Marine 3 - September Baffinland will support a revised Term and Condition 103 that reflects and incorporates the commitment made in relation to GN-TRC24. This NA BIM and GN to provide joint wording for NIRB
Environment 2020 - Technical commitment will be reflected in an updated commitment list. consideration
Meetings
“Baffinland will provide maps with its Annual Reports that illustrate tracks taken by each Project-related ship within the RSA and Baffin Bay,
relative to recorded ice coverage. (3) Every 3 years Baffinland will conduct an analysis of ship tracks through Baffin Bay in relation to sea-ice to
assess the extent of Project shipping’s interaction with sea-ice in Baffin Bay. Results to be reported in the Annual Report.” (June commitment from
Baffinland) (GN comment TRC 24)
180 QIA-08 Socio-economic 3 - September Baffinland and the QIA will work to provide more details on the CRLU Risk Community strategy (QIA 08), including a review of the commitment On or before October 16, 2020 Update will be provided during the Community
Environment 2020 - Technical wording to ensure that it is clear that Baffinland will be working with Inuit on the development of this strategy. Roundtable
Meetings
179 GN-TRC24 Marine 3 - September Baffinland is committed to preparing a memo which includes a fuel spill risk assessment on polar bears, consistent with the risk assessment On or before October 16, 2020
Environment 2020 - Technical framework applied in Section 10 of the Phase 2 Addendum.
Meetings
178 IGW Corporate 3 - September Baffinland will work with the communities of Igloolik and Sanijarak to establish monitoring programs in relation to the Southern Transportation NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
HB-HTO Environment 2020 - Technical Corridor to Steensby Inlet following a decision to move forward with that component of the Project
Meetings
177 IWG Atmospheric 3 - September Baffinland will integrate IQ into its analysis of satellite photo data, once available, of dust dispersion in relation to the Mary River Project NA Initiative under existing Project
Environment 2020 - Technical
Meetings
176 IWG Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland will share the results of the Route 3 Geotechnical Program, currently planned to begin in October 2020, with the Igloolik Working Group NA Results will be shared as they become available
NrCan Environment 2020 - Technical and Nutural Resources Canada
Meetings
175 MHTO Corporate 3 - September For the duration of the Phase 2 Review Baffinland will prepare and provide public records of all engagement and consultation meetings with NA Ongoing for the remainder of the Phase 2 Review
Environment 2020 - Technical MHTO, which include the number of people in attendance, a record of questions comments and concerns raised, as well as copy of any materials
Meetings provided by Baffinland or other parties as applicable.
174 MHTO Marine 3 - September Baffinland commits to reviewing proposed ecological triggers from the MHTO for the fall season if they can be provided with dates and TBD Contingent on submission of ecological triggers and
Environment 2020 - Technical corroborating data for IQ. rationale by MHTO
Meetings
173 GN Corporate 3 - September Baffinland will provide a technical memo providing additional details on Operational Flexibility. On or before October 16, 2020
DFO Environment 2020 - Technical
Meetings
172 MHTO Freshwater 3 - September Baffinland commits to work with the MHTO to achieve the objective of PC Term and Condition 48(a) NA Initiative under existing Project
Meetings
171 MHTO Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland will meet with the MHTO to discuss their specific objectives with respect to local caribou monitoring programs TBD Based on agreement to meet by MHTO
Meetings
170 MHTO-6 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland is committed to an annual maximum of 6MT throughput during the construction period for Phase 2. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
GN-01 Environment 2020 - Technical
Meetings
169 MHTO-4a Marine 3 - September Baffinland commits to working with MHTO to better understand any issues relating to sea ice use between October 15 and October 31. TBD Based on agreement to meet by MHTO
Meetings
168 PCA-04b Marine 3 - September Baffinland will update the definition of sea ice concentration at which regular shipping activities can proceed as 3/10 ice cover. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Meetings
167 QIA-20 Atmospheric 3 - September Baffinland will consider rail car coverings as part of a suite of potential response actions through the development of adaptive management NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-21 Environment 2020 - Technical objectives, indicators, thresholds, and responses for rail operation and dust. These OITRs will be developed in consultation and with agreement
Meetings from the QIA.
166 HPI Corporate 3 - September Baffinland commits to provide the January EA Workshop to each Hamlet and HTO from the North Baffin communities who participated in, with On or before October 16, 2020
Environment 2020 - Technical the caveat that this summary report will be unverified by participants.
Meetings
165 QIA-01 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland commits to compile all commitments related to caribou in a single document for review by relevant parties Complete This has been achieved through reorganization of this
QIA-02 Environment 2020 - Technical commitment list
Meetings
164 QIA-01 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland will provide an updated draft revised terms of references for the marine and terrestrial working groups, including notes provided by On or before October 16, 2020 Initiative under existing Project
DFO-3.4 NEW Environment 2020 - Technical other parties, by October 16.
PCA-02 Marine Meetings
WWF-FWS-03 Environment
163 QIA-01 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland is committed to using Inuit input to finalize wildlife crossings, land user crossings (subject to Transport Canada regulations and NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-02 Environment 2020 - Technical acceptance), slope designs, and adaptive management (i.e. future rail improvements or mitigation measures).
Meetings
162 QIA-01 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland is committed to coming to agreement on railway monitoring. A multi-dimensional approach to monitoring is proposed which would NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-02 Environment 2020 - Technical involve Inuit staff working under the Inuit Stewardship Plan monitoring according to Inuit interests as informed by the Inuit Committee, and, QIA
Meetings technical staff.
161 QIA-01 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland is committed to evaluating the Railway Operation and Maintenance Plan against the Adaptive Management Plan and Checklist, and NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-02 Environment 2020 - Technical subsequent updates.
Meetings
160 QIA-01 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland is committed to having QIA’s approval of the Interim Closure and Reclamation Plan (ICRP) prior to the NWB Public Hearing for Phase 2 NA This issue is resolved for environmental assessment
QIA-02 Environment 2020 - Technical Water License Amendments. purposes and will be further addressed during water
Meetings license
159 QIA-01 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland will be solely responsible for all railway and rail feature construction costs, and all associated maintenance, should Adaptive NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-02 Environment 2020 - Technical Management Plan measures be triggered and identify that a modification to the rail must be made in accordance with adaptive management
Meetings principles.
158 QIA-02 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland will provide the full cut and fill profile of the north rail in relation to the potential caribou movement corridors to the QIA. On or before October 16, 2020
GN-03 Environment 2020 - Technical
Meetings
157 QIA-08 Socio-economic 3 - September Baffinland commits to modify commitment wording to QIA-08 to make clear the Risk Communication Strategy will be developed with Inuit. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Meetings Proposed wording: Baffinland commits to develop a risk communication strategy focused on the gathering and dissemination of
information to Inuit related to the Baffinland Iron Ore Mines Project, and linkages between the Project and human health and ecological risk
assessment topics. The strategy will focus on , but not be limited to, building capacity within community groups to understand the mining
process, elements of the mining process and how substances produced from the mining process move in the environment. Baffinland will work
with communities to develop this program to ensure it is relevant to Inuit.
156 QIA-09 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland commits to working with QIA and the North Baffin Communities to develop revegetation standards based on IQ for reclamation and NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical revegetation including meeting standards for cultural use and addressing community concerns with respect to re-establishing use of critical areas
Meetings
155 QIA-20 Freshwater 3 - September Baffinland has agreed to a process to work with QIA to consider waterbodies of heightened importance and a tiered approach to compensation in NA This issue is resolved for environmental assessment
QIA-21 Environment 2020 - Technical the Water Compensation Agreement Process. purposes and will be further addressed during water
Meetings license
154 QIA-38 Socio-economic 3 - September Baffinland commits to providing Inuit employees with a childcare subsidy NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Meetings
153 QIA-38 Socio-economic 3 - September Baffinland commits to providing support to communities to ensure adequate childcare facilities become available NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Meetings
152 QIA-38 Socio-economic 3 - September Baffinland commits to working with QIA to develop quantiative measurable objectives that will provide greater insight into the mitigation of NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical negative social impacts and the promotion of positive benefits
Meetings
151 QIA-38 Socio-economic 3 - September Baffinland commits to funding QIA and the communties development of a social monitoring program to greater insight into the mitigation of NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical negative social impacts and the promotion of positive benefits?
Meetings
150 QIA-38 Socio-economic 3 - September Baffinland is committed to working with QIA and to allow QIA with approval of socioeconomic objectives, indicators, thresholds and responses as NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical part of Baffinland’s adaptive management principles.
Meetings
149 QIA-40 Atmospheric 3 - September Baffinland will provide an update on the development of the Climate Change Strategy 15 days prior to a Pulblic Hearing. A full draft is expcted by NA Initiative under existing Project; Status update will be
Environment 2020 - Technical December 31, 2020 and a final copy by June 30, 2021. Baffinland will endeavor to meet the requested timeline, but this should not be viewed as a provided 15 days prior to a Public Hearing
Meetings barrier to moving forward with a Public Hearing as this is an ongoing operational commitment.
148 QIA-41 Freshwater 3 - September Baffinland is prepared to adopt a more precautionary moderate risk threshold for lake sedimentation. The current moderate risk threshold for lake NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical sedimentation is 1 mm, adopted from the FEIS. Baffinland will adopt the lake sedimentation rate predicted in the FEIS of 0.54mm, which is about
Meetings half the current threshold. A low risk threshold of 0.15 mm will also be applied that will trigger corresponding low risk response actions.
147 QIA-42 Freshwater 3 - September The commitment made under QIA 42 will be amended to reflect the following: Metrics on fish health (fish presence, catch per unit effort, fish NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical length and fork length) are collected from 60 crossing sites along the Tote Road and reported annually to DFO, as well as in the Annual Report for
Meetings Operations to the QIA and NWB, as well as the Annual Report for the NIRB. Baffinland already monitors water quality and sediment quality as part
of the Tote Road Monitoring Program, and we commit to add observations regarding physical condition of fish (e.g., lesions, injuries). Baffinland
and QIA will determine an appropriate approach to analysis for the 2021 reporting period.
146 QIA-42 Freshwater 3 - September Baffinland commits to coordinating freshwater focused workshops to address specific freshwater issues. Baffinland does not support the NA This issue is resolved for environmental assessment
Environment 2020 - Technical implementation of a regular occuring freshwater working group. purposes and will be further addressed during water
Meetings license
145 QIA-42 Freshwater 3 - September Baffinland commits to providing QIA, MHTO and HPI a copy of the comprehensive lessons learned report (for the Tote Road crossings) when it is NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
MHTO Environment 2020 - Technical sen to DFO as part of the Phase 2 FAA.
HPI Meetings
144 QIA-45 Marine 3 - September etails of the DFO led sampling program to be carried out at Milne Port in 2021 will be shared through the Marine Environment Working Group
D NA Tentatively before the Final Hearing, not a requirement
Environment 2020 - Technical prior to the 2021 shipping season.
Meetings
Baffinland notes that QIA has requested the details to be shared prior to a Public Hearing. This is contingent on the completion of the initial draft
by DFO, and preliminary review by Baffinland, before it can be released for public review. Baffinland and DFO will endeavor to meet the requested
timeline, but this should not be viewed as a barrier to moving forward with a Public Hearing.
143 QIA-47 Marine 3 - September Baffinland commit to working with community organizations and community members to address any issues arising with respect to sea ice use NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-48 Environment 2020 - Technical and potential inference from shipping activity
Meetings
142 QIA-47 Marine 3 - September Baffinland commits to include a checklist of information with regard to Inuit use of sea ice in its various forms (not just use of the floe edge) in the NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-48 Environment 2020 - Technical start and close of shipping season determinants report committed to DFO in relation to DFO 3.2.1 NEW.
Meetings
141 QIA-51 Marine 3 - September Baffinland commits to provide a supplementary submission that documents actual vessel noise signatures as recorded during PAM, a comparison NA Tentatively before the Final Hearing, not a requirement
Environment 2020 - Technical with the modelled noise outputs used in the assessment, and a discussion on how any differences, if they exist, affect the impact assessment or
Meetings inform opportunities for mitigation and adaptive management.
Baffinland notes that QIA has requested the details to be shared prior to a Public Hearing. Baffinland will endeavor to meet the requested
timeline, but this should not be viewed as a barrier to moving forward with a Public Hearing.
140 WWF Marine 3 - September WWF has proposed Baffinland restrict the dumping from ore carriers of treated and untreated sewage and greywater in the RSA and restricting NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical the use of open loop scrubbers. Baffinland is evaluating the feasibility of this proposal for Phase 2 and will provide an update prior to a Public
Meetings Hearing.
139 WWF-08 Atmospheric 3 - September Baffinland commits to tracking and reporting annually GHG emissions for its operations, and upon evaluation of existing data, subsequently NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical pursue efforts to set multi-year energy use and GHG emissions targets, that aim to ensure continual performance improvements over time, and
Meetings achieve alignment with industry best practice, in the next draft of the Climate Action Plan.
138 MHTO-5d Corporate 3 - September Baffinland commits to integrating independent relevant community based monitoring into phase 2 adaptive management, and mitigation NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
WWF Environment 2020 - Technical measures when available and shared with Baffinland for inclusion. This could be integrated under the Inuit Stewardship Plan or brought forward
Meetings through other venues by community participants in the environmental and socio-economic working groups. Baffinland will incorporate results of
relevant community based monitoring that have been brought forward to it in future environmental assessments should they be developed.
137 General Corporate 3 - September Baffinland commits to including information on activities and modifications made to the Project resulting from input from the Inuit Committee, NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2020 - Technical the Inuit Stewardship Plan, the Inuit Social Oversight Committee, and any Culture Resource and Land Use assessments and monitoring results in
Meetings their Annual Report to NIRB.
136 QIA-08 Socio-economic 3 - September Baffinland is committed to fully resourcing an Inuit-led country food baseline study for Pond Inlet and integrating the results into Project NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Environment 2020 - Technical management, monitoring and compensation systems, including reconsideration of mitigations and compensation programs proposed by environmental assessment purposes
Meetings Baffinland in relation to food security based on the results of the Pond Inlet Country Food Baseline Study. This work will be Inuit-led and
administered by the QIA, and supported by Baffinland.
This information will inform long-term project monitoring consistent with the vision and principles of the Inuit Stewardship Plan and the Adaptive
Management Plan. This project may also provide a basis against which the Wildlife Compensation Fund and Baffinland’s other food security
initiatives can be assessed over time Baffinland will fund this study to completion
135 QIA-01 Corporate 3 - September Baffinland will work with the QIA to jointly develop and approve the Adaptive Management Plan and associated sub-plans for the Mary River NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
QIA-02 Environment 2020 - Technical Project. This process will also include the development of Inuit Objectives, Indicators, Thresholds, and Responses, which will involve the impacted environmental assessment purposes
QIA-04 Meetings communities through the Inuit Committee and Inuit Social Oversight Committee. The Inuit Social Oversight Committee will support decision
QIA-07 making if additional responses are required due to the monitoring results.
QIA-11
QIA-38 Key areas for which QIA, based on Inuit input, will have adaptive management approvals are, but not limited to, the marine, terrestrial and social
QIA-46 environments. This process will ensure that both Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and western science will be applied to project operations and
QIA-49 management decisions. Baffinland will fund Inuit participation in this initiative as well as activities needed to implement Adaptive Management
responses for the life of the Project
134 QIA0-2 Corporate 3 - September Baffinland will support the development of an independent, Inuit-led Inuit Committee. The Inuit Committee will be administered by the QIA and NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
QIA-03 Environment 2020 - Technical shall be comprised of members nominated from the five Project impacted Communities. environmental assessment purposes
QIA0-7 Meetings
QIA-10 The Inuit Committee will direct the monitoring of the Inuit Stewardship Plan’s Culture, Resource, and Land Use stream to capture the Inuit
QIA-11 experience and will support decision making if additional responses are required due to the monitoring results. The Inuit Committee will also have
QIA-38 a role in identifying Inuit objectives, indicators, thresholds and responses to be built into the Project’s Adaptive Management Plan. Baffinland will
fund the ISP and Inuit Committee for the life of the Project. QIA will administer the ISP for the life of the Project.
133 QIA-02 Socio-economic 3 - September Baffinland and QIA agree to complete an additional Inuit-driven CRLU Assessment in consultation with the impacted communities, prior to major NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
QIA-09 Environment 2020 - Technical construction activities related to Phase 2. environmental assessment purposes
QIA-11 Meetings
QIA-38 It is expected that this work will result in modifications and additions to mitigation, monitoring, adaptive management, and compensation
QIA-46 measures, to be reflected in the Adaptive Management Plan and associated Environmental Management Plans. This will include updating
QIA-49 Objectives, Indicators, Thresholds and Responses used in Project monitoring and Management. Baffinland will fund this work to completion.
132 QIA-22 Corporate 3 - September Changes in project scope, which could reasonably require amendment of the Project Certificate would result in the following obligations being NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
QIA-30 Environment 2020 - Technical initiated prior to the filing of a formal proposal to amend the project certificate: environmental assessment purposes
QIA-53 Meetings (a) Baffinland commits to carry out a Culture Resource and Land Use assessment conducted with QIA and Impacted communities, prior to the
submission of an FEIS or FEIS Addendum.
(b) Baffinland commits to carry out a Cumulative Effects Assessment conducted with QIA and Impacted communities, prior to the submission of an
FEIS or FEIS Addendum.
(c) Baffinland commits to review and renegotiation of the IIBA consistent with IIBA Article 22.4.
(d) Parties come to agreement on increases to IIBA Implementation Costs
131 QIA-03 Corporate 3 - September Baffinland will support Inuit to conduct independent, proactive monitoring of the Project for the purpose of mitigating adverse impacts and NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
QIA-04 Environment 2020 - Technical enhancing beneficial outcomes in a manner that captures the direct experiences of Inuit. A project management plan (the Inuit Stewardship Plan) environmental assessment purposes
QIA-05 Meetings will be developed by QIA, with input from an Inuit Committee and an Inuit Social Oversight Committee made up of members from the five Project
QIA-09 impacted Communities.
QIA-10
QIA-38 The Inuit Stewardship Plan will have two separate but linked streams:
QIA-46 • Culture, Resource, and Land Use Stream
QIA-49 • Social Stream
Each stream will include dedicated monitoring led by Inuit monitors:

• The Culture, Resources and Land Use Monitoring Program, with a focus on gathering data from impacted communities and through direct
observations of changes on the land, waters, ice and wildlife
• The Social Stream will see impacted community members trained to gather information about impacts on community well-being
Information from both monitoring streams, and input from the two Committees, will directly inform the Project management system. Baffinland
130 QIA-38 Socio-economic 3 - September ill f d hwillISP
Baffinland f h the
support lif development
f h P j ofQIA ill d i i Inuit-led
an independent, h ISP fInuithSocial
lif Oversight
f h P j Committee (ISOC). The Inuit Social Oversight NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Environment 2020 - Technical Committee will be overseen and administered by QIA and shall be comprised of members nominated from the impacted communities. The Inuit environmental assessment purposes
Meetings Social Oversight Committee will direct the monitoring of the ISP’s social stream to capture the Inuit experience and will support decision making if
additional responses are required due to the monitoring results.
Baffinland will work with QIA and the impacted Inuit communities to develop an enhanced, Inuit-driven, social monitoring program related to the
Project. This monitoring program focused on community wellbeing will address a known monitoring gap and complement other forms of
monitoring related to the project Baffinland will fund the ISP and ISOC for the life of Project
129 QIA-6 Terrestrial 3 - September Baffinland commits to adopt Route 3 for the final rail alignment and is committed to bearing the costs of transitioning to this alternative route. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-20 Environment 2020 - Technical Baffinland agrees that technical issues associated with Route 3 will be addressed at the cost and risk of Baffinland and will not be used as the basis
Meetings for reverting to Route 1.
128 QIA-20 Freshwater 03 - September Baffinland is committed, within the next year, to support an Inuit-led IQ study on water values in the Project-affected area, and to integrate the NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
QIA-21 Environment 2020 - Technical results into a revised water compensation agreement that establishes a tiered approach to compensation for substantial effects on water that environmental assessment purposes
Meetings increases compensation for impacts on waterbodies deemed by Inuit to be of heightened importance. In addition, a finding of a waterbody of
heightened importance will increase the amount of monitoring focus such waterbodies receive, where a project impact pathway can be
established. Monitoring will be carried out either through Baffinland's scientific monitoring or the new Inuit-led Culture, Resources and Land Use
Monitoring Program.
127 DFO 3.1.2 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland can confirm that it will not surpass the number of vessels described and assessed in the Phase 2 FEIS Addendum to ship an additional NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to 20% of ore over 12 Mtpa in the maximum operational
Updated Technical flexibility scenario. For clarity, this is a limit of 176 ore carriers, 12 freight vessels and 12 fuel vessels.
Comments
126 DFO 3.10.1 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will provide a detailed water withdrawal plan that includes an in-depth risk analysis informed by site specific fish and fish NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to habitat features for the waterbodies chosen for water withdrawal as supplemental information to water licensing and any DFO Request
Updated Technical for Review submission.
Comments
125 DFO 3.10.2 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will conduct a thorough localized assessment on the waterbodies selected for water withdrawal in order to adequately assess the NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to potential impacts on the fish habitat resulting from 20% of the 10-year dry unit runoff water withdrawal on fish-bearing watercourses and
Updated Technical connecting waterbodies. This assessment will include an assessment of the effects to littoral/shore/riparian areas from the proposed water
Comments withdrawal, the specific withdrawal locations proposed for each waterbody including fish habitat in the area and updated rationale on how this
level of withdrawal will be an environmentally protective threshold. This content will be included as supplemental
information to water licensing and regulatory permit applications made to DFO.
124 DFO 3.10.3 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will provide additional rationale/ assessment to support the assertion that 40% of the 10-year dry unit runoff water withdrawal from NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to non-fish-bearing streams will not negatively affect downstream fish-bearing waterbodies. This content will be included as supplemental
Updated Technical information to water licensing and regulatory permit applications made to DFO.
Comments
123 DFO 3.2.1 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland commits to provide a summary of the following information as part of its annual reporting requirements, and in preliminary field NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to reports within 35 days of Spring shoulder season shipping activities commencing and 15 days of Fall shoulder season activities ending:
Updated Technical i. marine monitoring programs,
Comments ii. determinants for opening and closing the shipping season,
iii. ecological and cultural (or “Inuit use”) factors that influence shipping activities
iiii. other information, as requested by DFO and other regulators and key stakeholders, relevant to the marine environment
The requirement for, and format of, these reports will be included in the final Marine Monitoring Plan, should Phase 2 be approved. Additional
information requested after submission of the preliminary field report is to be provided by Baffinland as a memo within 35 days and will be
included in Annual Reporting.
122 DFO 3.2.2 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland commits to updating the Draft Early Shipping Season-Operational Guide, to better characterize considerations used in NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to determining the nominal shipping season.
Updated Technical See response to DFO 3.2.2 for the commitment to report on determinants of opening and closing the shipping season.
Comments
121 DFO 3.3.3 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland commits to collecting acoustic data in the RSA using AMARs to characterize the degree of conservatism in the sound propagation NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to modelling, at an appropriate frequency for the duration of the Phase 2 construction and operation periods. Baffinland will collaborate with Inuit
Updated Technical and DFO on the development of the draft program prior to submission to the MEWG for additional advice and recommendations.
Comments Recommendations from MEWG members will be treated consistent with the consensus-based decision requirements of the final updated
MEWG Terms of Reference. Baffinland commits to updating the marine monitoring plan (MMP) with this long-term monitoring
plan, should Phase 2 be approved.
120 DFO 3.4.1 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland has provided a draft Marine Monitoring Plan (MMP) as part of the Phase 2 review process. Should Phase 2 be approved, NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to Baffinland will update this Plan to reflect all relevant
Updated Technical commitments and terms and conditions.
Comments
119 DFO 3.4.1 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Rather than develop a separate, stand-alone monitoring plan specific to icebreaking as suggested by DFO, Baffinland will include a specific NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to section relevant to icebreaking and shoulder season shipping activities in the MMP. Survey methodology and indicators (including rationale)
Updated Technical will be determined in consultation with the MEWG, of which DFO is a member. Recommendations from MEWG members will be treated
Comments consistent with the consensus based decision requirements of the
final updated MEWG Terms of Reference.
118 DFO 3.4.1 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - An updated draft MMP will be provided to the MEWG for comment and the NIRB within 180 days of issuance of an amended Project Certificate, NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to should Phase 2 be approved. Baffinland commits to
Updated Technical continue working with DFO and the MEWG to finalize the Plan.
Comments
117 DFO 3.4.3 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland commits to produce a response plan for the potential event of an ice entrapment, should this be observed during the annual end of NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to season clearance surveys. This plan will include action level triggers and associated response actions. This plan will be developed in consultation
Updated Technical with the MHTO and DFO, understanding that these two groups are ultimately responsible for determining
Comments the appropriate course of action should an entrapment event occur.
116 DFO 3.5 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will prepare and submit to DFO a literature review of ship-based marine mammal remote monitoring systems. This literature review Complete This document was provided in May 2020
Environment Response to will include a summary of commercially available remote wildlife monitoring systems that could be installed on vessels to supplement
Updated Technical existing marine mammal monitoring programs and enhance detection of ship strikes on marine mammals. The remote monitoring systems
Comments identified in this literature review will inform adaptive management, should the need be triggered. For clarity, in the event of a ship strike on a
marine mammal, a single event, although unlikely based on present mitigations (i.e. speed restrictions), would trigger an adaptive
management response.
115 DFO 3.5 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will implement an incidental marine mammal monitoring program with vessel operators calling on Milne Port, which will request NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to incidental observations of marine mammals to be recorded and relayed to Baffinland. In support of this program, Baffinland will develop
Updated Technical educational materials for vessel crew to assist in marine mammal identification and data recording. Baffinland will provide
Comments a draft of the materials and program for review by the MEWG before they are finalized.
114 DFO 3.6.1 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Project vessels are limited to releasing ballast water at one of the three anchorage locations at Milne Port, or while berthed at the ore dock. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to Further, prior to any ballast water discharge D-1 compliance testing must be completed. Instructions to not release ballast water prior to
Updated Technical arrival at Milne Port and completion of ballast water testing is provided to all ship operators in Baffinland’s
Comments Standing Instruction to Masters (SITM). This requirement will remain under Phase 2.
113 DFO 3.6.10 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland commits to work with the MEWG and DFO to establish species-specific Rapid Response Plans. Rapid Response Plans will be developed NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to for species identified as high risk through ongoing NIS monitoring in the receiving environment, the ROV (or any other future) biofouling
Updated Technical monitoring program, results yielded from the 2021 biological ballast water sampling pilot program (and any ongoing ballast monitoring),
Comments examination of existing invasive species databases and lists in key ecoregions where vessels calling originate from (as per Goldsmit et al.,
2020 Global Change Biology),
and based on ranking of potential risk using the Canadian Marine Invasive Screening Tool.
112 DFO 3.6.2 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland commits to record the Milne Port anchorage and associated coordinates where compliance testing and discharge occurs in the NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to ballast water testing forms, completed by Baffinland’s environmental monitors. A dataset with discharge coordinates will be provided to
Updated Technical MEWG members as part of annual reporting requirements.
Comments
111 DFO 3.6.3 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will require all vessels calling on Milne Port that treat their ballast under the D2 Standard to also perform a ballast water exchange prior NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to to treatment. For ships unable to conduct exchange as specified in Canadian Ballast Water Regulations (e.g. ships on Canadian domestic trips),
Updated Technical exchange is to be conducted as specified in revised ABWEZs for Eastern Arctic as per DFO CSAS advice (see DFO 2015, Stewart et al. 2015 and
Comments Goldsmit et al. 2019). This updated commitment will be reflected in the 2020 Standing Instructions to Masters.
110 DFO 3.6.4 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will consider discontinuing exchange plus treatment requirements should treatment systems efficacy reach a point that makes NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to the benefits of an exchange plus treatment system negligible. This decision will be made in consultation with TC and DFO, and will be
Updated Technical based on a consideration of factors outlined in DFO 2019 (i.e. if ballast water organism concentration or composition, environmental
Comments conditions, shipping patterns, proportion of voyages meeting the D-2 standard, or available data describing these conditions change in the future,
and updates to global research on ballast systems). In this event Baffinland will update ballast water dispersion modelling
to more accurately reflect the spectrum of salinity, temperature, and discharge volumes that can be expected to be discharged at Milne Port under
Phase 2 operations if prior exchange were to be discontinued.
109 DFO 3.6.5 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Transport Canada appreciates the efforts by BIM to ensure current regulations are followed with respect to their plans for ballast water NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
TC-02 NEW Environment Response to management. Given the learning curve associated with use of ballast water treatment systems, for Phase 2, Transport Canada (TC) in
Updated Technical consultation with Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), recommends, in conjunction with present sampling and testing protocols being
Comments proposed/adopted [NTD - will be summarized in complete package] by BIM, that BIM implement a ballast water compliance sampling plan
based on a risk-based targeting methodology to be developed in consultation with DFO and TC.
Such a risk-based methodology should be applied to evaluate the risk of all vessel ballast water management (D1, D2) with subsequent salinity
and D-2 biological compliance sampling conducted on vessels identified as high or very high risk. The respective risk-based methodology and
associated ballast water compliance sampling plan will be developed in consultation with DFO and TC following completion of DFO’s Project-
specific sampling conducted on a subset of vessels calling to Milne Port. The risk-based methodology and associated ballast water compliance
sampling plan should include a consideration of other compliance initiatives or research being undertaken elsewhere by TC relative to
implementation of the D-2 standard.
Sampling conducted that supports building a body of knowledge for D-2 treatment systems, beyond biological compliance sampling conducted
on high risk and very high risk tanks, should not compromise Baffinland’s ability to transport annual ore quantities as approved under a
modified Project Certificate No 005. Understanding that the rationale for this program is tied to a learning curve associated with the use of ballast
water treatment systems, the compliance sampling program and risk based methodology will be adapted as deemed necessary based on
the results of the
108 DFO 3.6.6 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland remains committed to conducting ship hull biofouling monitoring surveys using an ROV on ore carriers, with focused efforts on areas of NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval;
Environment Response to the hull and niche areas where biofouling has the greatest potential to occur (e.g. chain lockers, stern tube, rope guard, bottom, rubber side, etc.). Baffinland and DFO are currently developing new
Updated Technical The projected number of ore carriers that will be sampled annually will be determined in consultation with the MEWG, of which DFO is a member. commitments that would resolve this issue.
Comments Recommendations from MEWG members will be treated
consistent with the consensus-based decision requirements of the final updated MEWG Terms of Reference.
107 DFO 3.6.7 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland commits to updating the marine monitoring plan (MMP) in consultation with MEWG members and this will be completed prior to NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to the start of the Phase 2 increased shipping season. The updated MMP will detail the revised MEEMP sampling design which includes greater
Updated Technical seasonal and spatial coverage and increased sampling effort and sample sizes to address DFO concerns related to achieving sufficient statistical
Comments power for detection of project effects (≥0.8) (as per recommendations in DFO 2020, pages 4-7).
Background
The Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) Monitoring Program is a biological screening program (species ID, presence/absence data); as such, it does not
involve any statistical analysis. The updated MMP will include clear protocols for determining identity and status of species collected as part of
this program (as per recommendations in DFO 2019 and DFO 2020 and comments on disposition table provided in June (DFO 3.8.1) and
November (DFO 3.10.4). The sampling effort for the AIS Monitoring
Program is currently very rigorous.
106 DFO 3.6.8 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland continues to maintain that the identification of high-risk biological species or groupings of species of concern is the primary NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to responsibility of DFO. Despite this, Baffinland is committed to supporting the development of a trigger list of species and associated response
Updated Technical plans through the process outlined in response to DFO 3.6.9 and 3.6.10, and to refining that list with DFO following
Comments Phase 2 approval.
105 DFO 3.6.9 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland commits to follow the most updated version of DFO’s AIS Rapid Response Framework in the event that a nonindigenous species is NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to introduced and/or becomes established.
Updated Technical
Comments
104 DFO 3.8 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will provide decision criteria and decision matrix for the selection of water crossing methods for fish bearing watercourses in NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to support of any regulatory permit applications made to DFO.
Updated Technical
Comments
103 DFO 3.9.1 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will analyze monitoring reports related to the Tote Road existing watercourses crossings and provide comprehensive lessons learned NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to report (for the Tote Road crossings) that would include strategic analysis of what will be done differently to ensure the fish-passage issue will be
Updated Technical mitigated, avoided and addressed. This report will be included as part of any regulatory applications made to
Comments DFO.
102 DFO 3.9.2 NEW Marine 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland will provide an updated hydrological assessment of proposed watercourses crossings that includes, but is not limited to, crossing NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment Response to selection and design criteria, flow rates, velocities and discharge, and fish passage. This content will be included as part of any regulatory
Updated Technical permit applications made to DFO.
Comments
101 ECCC-1 NEW Atmospheric 02 - February 2020 - Baffinland to provide the preliminary feasibility assessment 30 days prior to a Public Hearing, and a follow up report in the 2020 Annual Report On or before October 16, 2020
Environment Response to (which wouldn’t be until 2021)
Updated Technical
Comments
100 CIRNAC-05 Freshwater 01 - November Baffinland shall complete thermal modeling of the Waste Rock Facility and include the results in the Waste Rock Management Plan prior to the NA This issue is resolved for environmental assessment
Environment 2019 - Public conclusion of Water Licence Amendment process, subject to NWB requirements. purposes and will be further addressed during water
Hearing license
99 CIRNAC-07 Freshwater 01 - November Baffinland shall confirm the origin of elevated concentrations of aluminum, mercury and copper in Shake Flask Extraction test results for rock NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval;
Environment 2019 - Public materials sourced from quarry and borrow pits for road CIRNAC 2 NEW aligns with response to CIRNAC-07.
Hearing / railway construction, and develop and implement an appropriate water quality monitoring and management strategy for railway corridor rock
quarries as part of water licensing.
The monitoring results shall be compared with the FEIS Addendum predictions and appropriate mitigation measures shall be identified and
implemented.
98 DFO 3.10.2 TC-02 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will revise the Ballast Water Management Plan to include a requirement for all vessels to conduct ballast water exchanges (with or NA Replaced by DFO 3.6 NEW Commitments
Environment 2019 - Public without D2 treatment systems) prior to calling on Milne Port, until such a time that ballast water treatment systems are compliant with the D2
Hearing standards set by the IMO.
Should Baffinland wish to discontinue the practice of exchange plus treatment, Baffinland will provide updated ballast water modelling that
reflects the range of salinity that may be present in the ballast water tanks where no exchange occurs.
97 DFO 3.10.5 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will update the AIS monitoring program to describe the process it follows for identifying high-risk biological species discovered through NA Replaced by DFO 3.6 NEW Commitments
Environment 2019 - Public its sampling programs.
Hearing
96 DFO 3.10.6 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will work with DFO to develop a management and response approach in the event a nonindigenous species is identified during NA Replaced by DFO 3.6 NEW Commitments
Environment 2019 - Public monitoring. This response approach will be added an
Hearing attachment to the AIS monitoring program.
95 DFO 3.3 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will implement the following requirement for vessels serving the Mary River Project: Once advised of the presence and location NA Baffinland notes that the surveillance measures
Environment 2019 - Public of bowhead whales, Masters of project ships operating within the RSA will be instructed to exercise due caution in order to minimize the implemented in the Gulf of St Lawrence, as referenced
Hearing likelihood of interaction with the mammals. In such events, Masters will be authorized to adjust speed or alter course within safe and prudent by DFO, are to spot right whales and implement the
navigational constraints to avoid to the extent possible interaction with bowhead whales. 10 knot speed restriction. This additional mitigation
measure is not required in the RSA as a blanket 9 knot
speed limit is in place for the entire season. The only
mitigation measure more restrictive than the speed limit
is a 15 day shut down for non-tended fixed gear fisheries.
Again, this is not applicable to Mary River operations.
Baffinland strongly urges DFO to consider the
commitment provided above and work with
Baffinland to implement it.
94 DFO 3.4 Marine 01 - November Environmental and ecological criteria for the opening of the shipping season is described in the Shoulder Season Shipping Operational Guide. NA Seals - During the Fall Season Seals are just beginning to
Environment 2019 - Public The following clarifications will be added to the Shoulder Season Shipping Operational Guide to reflect the environmental and ecological establish breathing holes in the ice as part of their
Hearing conditions for closing the shipping season. development of an overwinter territory, but this is not
 Environmental - The formation of fastice along the shipping route will trigger the end of the shipping season. considered a critical life cycle period. Seals may avoid
 Ecological - There are no ecological triggers to close the shipping season, however, monitoring and adaptive management will be applied to establishing breathing holes along the shipping route
ensure no significant impacts occur. during this period, but this would be limited to general
area of the ship path, which is minimal in extent. Seals do
not start denning until January when enough snow is
available on the ice for them to build a den. Shipping
would not overlap with the denning period.
Narwhal- The fall shoulder season will overlap with
the outmigration of narwhal throughout October and
November. Aerial surveys are planned each year to
confirm no entrapment events have occurred, and to
inform adaptive management, should it be required.
93 DFO 3.5.1. Marine 01 - November During Phase 2 Operations, Baffinland commits to using the walrus haul out buffer zone guidelines set by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public and the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
Hearing
92 DFO 3.5.2 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will not break ice in closed embayment’s and inlets where landfast ice exists. Should other areas of high seal density be NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public encountered along the shipping route during the shoulder season, the Ship Board Observer Program will record and report this for
Hearing potential adaptive management actions. This may include notices to Masters of project ships operating within the RSA to exercise due caution in
order to minimize the likelihood of interaction with the mammals. In such events, Masters will be authorized to adjust speed or alter course
within safe and prudent navigational constraints to avoid to the extent possible interactions with high density seal areas.
See other commitments related to the SBO Program in response to DFO 3.5.3 and 3.5.6.
91 DFO 3.5.3 Marine 01 - November Baffinlands Ship Board Observer Program will confirm the current predictions that no seal strikes will occur as a result of project shipping. Should NA Baffinland will not provide an updated estimate of ship
Environment 2019 - Public monitoring demonstrate that the predictions are incorrect, Baffinland will implement adaptive management measures in consultation with strikes on seals based on a study that covers a period in
Hearing the time and location that are fundamentally different from
MHTO and MEWG. what is proposed under Phase 2.
90 DFO 3.5.4 Marine 01 - November Baffinland is not proposing to ship during sensitive lifecycle periods for seal, which typically occur in the months between March and May. No NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public additional mitigation measure is necessary for the
Hearing current Shoulder Season Shipping Guide.
89 DFO 3.5.5 Marine 01 - November  Before commencing shipping, Baffinland must receive written confirmation from the MHTO that the floe edge is no longer being used by NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public community members. No transits to Milne Port will be permitted until confirmation is received.
Hearing  Baffinland will not break ice during ringed seal denning, pupping, nursing or mating periods and will manage its vessel traffic during the Eclipse
Sound narwhal summer stock spring migratory period.
 Furthermore, Baffinland has established several precedent-setting mitigations to minimize potential effects on ringed seal as a result of ice
breaking activities, including:
 Restricting the number of transits during the early shoulder season where ice concentrations above 3/10 cannot be avoided.
 Implementation of speed restrictions (9 knots) that are more conservative than Government of Canada guidelines for speed reduction to 10
knots.
 Local Inuit Marine Wildlife Observers (MWOs) will be stationed on all icebreaker transits in the RSA and are responsible for alerting vessel
Master and crew to observed potential risk of ship strikes on pinnipeds and other marine mammals, or record other signs of disturbance to marine
wildlife.
Implementation of a 40-km buffer zone around the floe edge at the entrance of the RSA to reduce interactions between Project vessels and
marine mammals (vessels entering the RSA during the spring shoulder season must wait 40 km to the east of the RSA until clearance from the Port
Captain
88 DFO 3.5.6 Marine 01 - November iBaffinland
bt i dwill
t updated
t th theRSA)Marine Monitoring Program to make it clear what behavioral indicators are recorded during the Ship Board Observer NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public Program. These indicators include breaching, flipper slapping, lob tailing, diving, fluking, blowing, resting, looking, feeding, hauled-out,
Hearing milling, swimming, surfacing. Other recorded information includes initial distance from vessel, minimum distance from vessel (i.e. closest point
of approach), and bearing from vessel and movement direction. These methods and indicators are currently described in annual Ship
Board Observer
Reports.
87 DFO 3.6.2 Marine 01 - November Baffinland is committed to undertaking an end-of-season aerial survey of the LSA for each year shoulder season shipping occurs, to confirm NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
DFO 3.6.6 Environment 2019 - Public no narwhal entrapment events have occurred. Baffinland will work directly with the Mittimatilik HTO in implementation of this survey.
Hearing
Background
Mitigation measures are limited, Baffinland has proposed having an icebreaker re-enter the RSA to create an exit pathway, assuming it is safe to
do so. it is uncertain if this is a desirable action from the communities perspective. There is also an issue of identifying a natural event from a
project affected one. Baffinland suggests the MEWG is an appropriate forum to investigate such an event occurs in the future, and development
adaptive mitigation measures, should they be necessary. Baffinland’s commitment to annual aerial surveys is for the life of the project.
86 DFO 3.7.2 Marine 01 - November Empirical data on ship noise levels have now been collected as part of JASCO’s passive acoustic monitoring program for the Project. These NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public data have been analyzed to calculate LRR for these additional areas in the RSA (Eclipse Sound, North Milne Inlet, Koluktoo Bay). Calculations
Hearing of LRR associated with ship transits at these representative locations will be presented in a ‘technical memorandum’ or ‘technical
response’, scheduled for delivery to DFO on February 17, 2020. The technical memorandum will include an analysis to estimate the LRR
estimations for Phase 2 shipping
operations based on the empirical results calculated for 2018 and 2019 shipping operations.
85 DFO 3.7.4 Marine 01 - November An analyses will be conducted using data collected during the 2019 shipping season to characterize the degree of conservatism in the sound NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval;
Environment 2019 - Public propagation modelling that has been conducted. Additional AMARs have been deployed and will collect data during the Fall 2019 and Spring See commitment to DFO 3.8.4 for long term acoustic
Hearing 2020 seasons to further this analysis. monitoring.
See response to DFO 3.8.4 for commitment to long term acoustic monitoring.
84 DFO 3.8.4 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will continue to undertake acoustic monitoring supportive of its operations in accordance with terms and conditions of the existing NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public Project Certificate No. 005.
Hearing
83 DFO 3.9.1 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will implement an incidental marine mammal monitoring program with vessel operators calling on Milne Port, which will request NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public incidental observations of marine mammals to be recorded and relayed to Baffinland. In support of this program, Baffinland will develop
Hearing educational materials for vessel crew to assist in marine mammal identification and data recording. Baffinland will provide
a draft of the materials and program for review by the MEWG before they are finalized.
82 DFO-3.10.3, Marine 01 - November Baffinland will implement a pilot ballast water biological monitoring program for ships calling on Milne Port. This program will be designed to NA Replaced by DFO 3.6 NEW Commitments
DFO-3.10.4, TC-02, Environment 2019 - Public reflect a more appropriately scoped form of a ballast water sampling protocol provided by DFO to Baffinland in 2017. This program will include
QIA-45, DFO- Hearing sampling from one ballast tank on a total of five vessels per shipping season.
3.10.4, QIA-44 Baffinland remains committed to continue conducting temperature and salinity test sampling of one randomly selected ballast water tank for all
vessels calling to Milne Port, and biological sampling in the marine receiving environment to monitor for non-native species in Milne Port and at
Ragged Island.
81 DFO-3.12 Freshwater 01 - November Baffinland will include the requested information in the application for the Fisheries Act Authorization. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public
Hearing
80 DFO-3.13.1 Freshwater 01 - November Baffinland will include the requested information in the application for the Fisheries Act Authorization. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
75 ECCC-FC1 Atmospheric 01 - November Baffinland will reflect the commitments provided in its response in the Air Quality and Noise Abatement Management Plan following the NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
HC- FC-02 Environment 2019 - Public issuance of an amended Project Certificate. In the interim these commitments will be captured in a commitment register, to be provided to the
Hearing Board during the Public Hearings. Baffinland does not object to having relevant terms and conditions modified to reflect this commitment.
74 ECCC-FC2 Atmospheric 01 - November Baffinland commits to investigate and implement NOX reductions measures, where feasible, and report on this in the 2020 annual air quality NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public report (to be submitted by March 31, 2021).
Hearing
73 ECCC-FC3 Atmospheric 01 - November Baffinland will reflect the commitments provided in its response in the Air Quality and Noise Abatement Management Plan following the NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
HC-FC-02 Environment 2019 - Public issuance of an amended Project Certificate. In the interim these commitments will be captured in a commitment register, to be provided to the
Hearing Board during the Public Hearings. Baffinland does not object to having relevant terms and conditions modified to reflect this commitment.
72 ECCC-FC4 Marine 01 - November Baffinland commits to investigate and implement black carbon reduction measures, where feasible, and report on this in the 2020 annual air NA Replaced by ECCC-01 NEW Commitment
Environment 2019 - Public quality report (to be submitted by March 31, 2021). The investigation will consider the use of distillate fuels as a reduction measure for local black
Hearing carbon
emissions.
71 ECCC-FC-5 Marine 01 - November Baffinland remains committed to updating the Phase 1 Waste Rock Management Plan and evaluating the appropriateness of the 0.2% cutoff NA This issue is resolved for environmental assessment
Environment 2019 - Public for PAG classification, irrespective of the Phase 2 approvals process. purposes and will be further addressed during water
Hearing license
70 ECCC-FC6 Marine 01 - November Baffinland commits to conduct additional Arctic diesel fuel spill modelling to account for shoulder season shipping and update the SSRP as NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
WWF-FWS 06 Environment 2019 - Public necessary (Appendix G). This will occur prior to the 2021 shipping season.
Hearing
69 GN-01 Corporate 01 - November Baffinland is no longer pursing trucking of iron ore in excess of 6Mtpa during the Phase 2 construction period. This commitment will NA
Environment 2019 - Public require modification.
Hearing
68 GN-02 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland is committed to work with the GN to develop a mutually agreed upon research agreement (also referred to as the Research NA Baffinland and the Government of Nunavut commit to
WWF-FWS 07 Environment 2019 - Public and Relationship Agreement) that includes the following aspects, which are based on GN's internal budgeting and community complete a caribou research agreement and data
MHTO-03 Hearing consultation schedules for its North Baffin Regional Monitoring Program: sharing agreement prior to the Public Hearing for Phase 2.
• By July 30 of each year, the GN to share a preliminary proposal with Baffinland (the "GN Preliminary Proposal") outlining the planned Should this not be possible, an Agreement in Principle
activities that may be carried out as part of its North Baffin Regional Monitoring Program for the twelve-month period commencing on January 1 will be developed to identify a timeline for the
of the following year, which would be subject to any future revisions arising as a result of consultation by the GN with communities and the anticipated completion of both agreements. The caribou
Qikiqtani Inuit Association. research agreement is currently with BIM for review.
• By October 1 of each year, the GN to share a final proposal with Baffinland (the "GN Final Proposal") based on the GN Preliminary
Proposal and including any revisions as a result of consultation.
• Baffinland would provide its total annual financial contribution to GN on or before November 30 of each year following review and acceptance
by Baffinland of a GN Final Proposal. The financial contribution could include monetary and/or in-kind support.
• Collaboration as possible regarding scientific peer-reviewed research into mitigative measures or potential disturbance effects, as related to the
Mary River Project.
• GN will provide Baffinland with reports on work carried out under its North Baffin Regional Monitoring Program.
• GN-generated data needed to support Baffinland's assessment, monitoring and mitigation programs for the Mary River Project (which
would remain Baffinland's sole responsibility) will be released upon request by GN to Baffinland, in accordance with the terms and conditions
of the
67 GN-03 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland commits to build the North Railway with the general specifications for the purposes of increasing caribou permeability NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public  Use of Type 8 over Type 12 fill material for the entire alignment
Hearing  For embankment heights under 4 meters the slope ratio will be 1V:2H; for embankment heights over 4 meters the slope ratio will remain
1V:1.5H
Baffinland commits to a pilot program that will investigate the effectiveness of gentler slopes on caribou crossing. To evaluate this pilot program,
Baffinland will support regional studies of caribou movements to assess caribou responses to the railway. The assessment of this pilot program’s
success shall be based on results from studies that have statistical power to detect Project effects exceeding those predicted in the FEIS
addendum. The details of this program include:
 The gentler slopes will be built with a slope ratio of 1V:3H
 The total amount of fill required to build the North Railway will remain unchanged from currently proposed i.e. the fill material required to
build sections with a slope of 1:3 will be acquired by reverting other areas previously allocated a 1V:2H slope (at an embankment height of 4m and
below) back to a 1V:1.5H slope
 The pilot program will include a minimum of 10km of 1V:3H slopes
 Members of the Terrestrial Environment Working Group will be required to identify and agree on the areas to build the gentler (1V:3H) slopes,
and where to revert back to the steeper (1V:1.5H) slopes.
 The pilot program shall not prevent fish passage or cause serious harm to fish.
 This program will be implemented prior to and during the North Railway’s construction.
66 GN-04 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland will update the Additional Level Crossing Construction Decision Matrix to include advice from the Terrestrial Environment Working NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public Group (TEWG).
Hearing
65 GN-05 Terrestrial 01 - November BIMC will update the Terrestrial Environment Mitigation and Monitoring Plan to reflect that it will undertake research to estimate the Zone(s)- NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public of-Influence (ZOI) and disturbance coefficients (DC) exerted by the Project on caribou, and shall provide to NIRB updated estimates of
Hearing cumulative habitat losses for caribou, at least every 5 years.
64 GN-06 Socio-economic 01 - November 1. The Proponent shall work with the GN through their MOU to promote greater female employment at the Mary River Project, with the NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public goals of a) employing and retaining more women with the Project including in more senior level positions, and b) attracting more women into the
Hearing mining industry more generally.
2. The Proponent will assess the ongoing implementation of current and proposed gender-specific initiatives, including their successes and
challenges, in conjunction with monitoring female employment rates at the Project through its Socio-Economic Monitoring Plan. The
Proponent will report to the QSEMC and SEMWG, as appropriate, on the effectiveness of these gender-specific initiatives.
63 GN-07 Socio-economic 01 - November 1. The Proponent will update its Workplace Harassment Policy and Workplace Harassment and Violence Program and include a component NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public on sexual harassment that addresses the unique nature of sexual harassment in the workplace and supports the specific needs of sexual
Hearing harassment victims. The Government of Nunavut will be engaged in this process. This update will occur within 6 months of amended Project
Certificate issuance.
2. The Proponent will update its employee orientation program to reflect the revisions in the Workplace Harassment and Violence
Program, including components related to sexual harassment in the workplace and bystander intervention. This update will occur within 6 months
of amended Project Certificate issuance.
3. The Proponent will work with the GN to establish a sub-committee through their MOU to review implementation of Company policies and
initiatives regarding sexual harassment in the workplace, subject to all applicable privacy laws, and to explore potential new ways to address this
issue at the Mary River Project. The proponent and GN will move forward on this issue through the MOU within 6 months of issuance of the
Project Certificate. Baffinland Human Resource Staff will be available to specifically address this topic through the MOU subcommittee as and
when required
62 GN-08 Socio-economic 01 - November 1. The Proponent shall work with the GN through their MOU to promote employment opportunities with the Mary River Project across all NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public Qikiqtani communities, consistent with relevant provisions of the Mary River Inuit Impact and Benefit Agreement. Initiatives may include training
Hearing opportunities in non-point of hire communities, posting employment and training opportunities in all Qikiqtani communities, communicating with
unsuccessful job applicants, and continuing to provide travel for all Inuit Baffinland employees from across the Qikiqtani Region to a point of hire
community.
61 GN-09 Socio-economic 01 - November 1. Baffinland will submit to NIRB a Safety Protocol and a Communications Plan prior to construction of the North Railway or within 18 months of NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public issuance of the Project Certificate; and a Safety Protocol and a Communications Plan prior to operation of the North Railway. The protocols and
Hearing plans will include:
Safety Protocol and Communications Plan – prior to railway construction or within 18 months of Project Certificate issuance:
a. Complete a risk register prior to construction
b. Address safety issues related to both the road and rail, during the construction period
c. Be implemented by the Company, its contractors, and non-Project land users
d. Integrate Baffinland’s existing Hunter and Visitor Site Access Procedure
e. Communicate to land users the rules and procedures for using the Tote Road and other project roads, visiting the project site, and the risks
associated with the road and the North Railway during the construction period
f. Include Rules of the Road, such as speed limits, signs on the road, right of way protocols, safety restrictions regarding the discharge of firearms
in proximity to the road and rail construction areas, etc.
g. Identify potential hazards on the road such as mine traffic, snow drifts, steep hills, sharp corners, construction areas, and washouts
h. Identify the location of safety features such as rail crossings, emergency shelters and safe access routes to the Mine Site and Milne Port
i. Identify the location of safety features such as emergency shelters and safe access routes to the Mine Site and Milne Port, and construction
shelters and accommodations
j. Be developed in consultation with the North Baffin Communities, with a particular focus on the Communities of Pond Inlet and Igloolik
k. Identify the means and frequency of communicating the safety protocol, and to whom the information will be communicated
Safety Protocol and Communications Plan – prior to railway operation
a. Complete a risk register prior to operation
b. Address safety issues related to both the road and rail, during operations
c. Be implemented by the Company, its contractors, and non-Project land users
d. Integrate Baffinland’s existing Hunter and Visitor Site Access Procedure
e. Communicate to land users the rules and procedures for using the Tote Road and other project roads, crossing the North Railway, visiting the
project site, and the risks associated with the road and the North Railway
f. Include Rules of the Road, such as speed limits, signs on the road, right of way protocols, safety restrictions regarding the discharge of firearms
in proximity to the road and rail
g. Identify potential hazards on the road such as mine traffic, snow drifts, steep hills, sharp corners, and washouts
h. Identify potential hazards with the rail line such as train traffic, sharp corners, loading and unloading areas
i. Identify the location of safety features such as rail crossings, emergency shelters and safe access routes to the Mine Site and Milne Port
60 HC-FC-01 Socio-economic 01 - November See commitment to ECCC-FC2. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Hearing
59 HC-FC-02 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland will update the Air Quality and Noise Abatement Management Plan with the following text: "Use the existing continuous air quality NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public monitors on site to validate the predictions of NO2 and other air quality contaminants in the EIS moving forward. Share results through
Hearing reporting mechanisms, such as the annual report. Should exceedances occur beyond the EIS predictions,
include an updated human health risk assessment in the annual report."
58 HC-FC-03 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland will continue with monitoring of COPCs reported in the country foods risk assessment during all phases (including closure). If increases NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public in a specific COPC are confirmed to be occurring outside or inside (in the closure phase) of the Potential Development Area (PDA) and if country
Hearing foods could be influenced by those changes, Baffinland will update the human health risk assessment model with the new data. Decisions
related to extending the monitoring program to any relevant country foods would be made based on consideration of risk assessment outcomes.
Updated modelling would be triggered by changes from any of the monitoring stations where harvesting could occur. Any remodeling
effort should also consider changes (or lack thereof) using a distance gradient approach from the edge of PDA: Near (0–100 m); Far (101
–1,000 m); and Control (>1,000 m) and more ecologically relevant distant stations (i.e., those stations located between 100 m and 1,000 m
from the PDA boundary). Consideration of change at PDA (closure phase), near sites (0 – 100m) and far sites (100 – 1,000 m), relative to
baseline data, and environmental quality guidelines, in conjunction with statistical analyses, would be used to identify the need for
supplementary risk assessment modelling.
57 HPI Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland will undertake to encourage students and youth to consider possible careers with Baffinland. NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Environment 2019 - Public environmental assessment purposes
Hearing
56 HPI Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland will undertake to promote access to employment for Inuit women. NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Environment 2019 - Public Following the Technical Meeting held in Iqaluit April 8-10, 2019, Baffinland committed to working with the GN through the implementation of environmental assessment purposes
Hearing the MOU to promote female employment at Mary River.
55 HPI Socio-economic 01 - November As part of Baffinland’s early engagement in the planning stages for the Phase 2 Project, Mittimatalik raised concerns with respect to year round NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Environment 2019 - Public icebreaking resulting in Baffinland's commitment not to ship in land fast ice environmental assessment purposes
Hearing
54 HPI Socio-economic 01 - November To further Baffinland’s goal of meaningful consultation and engagement it has committed to the development of community-specific engagement NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public guidelines. The development of these guidelines will serve to improve the two-way dialogue between the Company and Inuit.
Hearing
53 HPI Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland remains committed to ongoing engagement with Mittimatalik throughout the Project’s lifetime. As noted in Baffinland’s new IQ NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Environment 2019 - Public Management Framework (Baffinland, 2019a), the Company is in the process of developing community-specific consultation guidelines for the environmental assessment purposes
Hearing North Baffin communities; these will be developed in consultation with individual communities in the near future. As the guidelines are
developed, they will be appended to Baffinland’s Community and
Stakeholder Engagement Plan (TSD-28, Appendix Z).
52 HPI Socio-economic 01 - November Pending approval of the Phase 2 Proposal, Baffinland has committed to provide $1.2 million/year to each of the five North Baffin communities for NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public the life of the mine ($6 million/year total). These amounts are intended to support socio-economic opportunities, cultural opportunities, and
Hearing hunter support opportunities.
51 HPI-1 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland will conduct a review of internal procedures related to the conduct of community- focused research and identify areas for NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public potential improvement. Baffinland will update its IQ Management Framework with information on research ethics and will provide clear
Hearing direction on the procedures to be followed when applying for, securing, renewing, and reporting on research licensing. Baffinland will continue to
engage the Nunavut Research Institute (NRI) in this process
and will additionally provide NRI with annual IQ work plans for review and comment.
50 HPI-10 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland is committed to using best efforts to improve its Inuit employment record each year, whether the MIEG has been met or not. NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Hearing
49 HPI-11 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland commits to working with the Hamlet of Mittimatalik: NA (a) Ongoing
Environment 2019 - Public  to establish community- specific engagement guidelines, and (b) Post PC Amendment
Hearing  to ensure the active participation and representation of Mittimatalik on the Inuit Advisory Panel.
48 MHTO-2a Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland will undertake geotechnical drilling to further establish technical feasibility for Route 3, but at this time based on a preliminary review NA Baffinland has selected Route 3 as its preferred
Environment 2019 - Public Baffinland does not anticipate that such drilling will reveal any fundamental issues with the route. This work will be carried out prior to deviation alignment. There are no Post PC Amendment
Hearing construction. conditions required to finalize selection, including the
results of geotechnical drilling.
47 MHTO-2b Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland has committed to the development of Community-specific engagement guidelines. Baffinland believes that the development NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public and implementation of these guidelines will serve to improve the two-way dialogue between the Company and Inuit. These guidelines will be
Hearing developed in consultation with the MHTO, as well as North Baffin community representatives. As the guidelines are developed, they will be
appended to Baffinland’s Community and Stakeholder Engagement Plan.
46 MHTO-3 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland is committed to continual improvement of its terrestrial monitoring program design, data analysis, and integration of Inuit perspectives NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Environment 2019 - Public and IQ. environmental assessment purposes
Hearing
45 MHTO-4a Marine 01 - November Baffinland confirms it is committed to consultation with the MHTO regarding shipping plans. NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Hearing
44 MHTO-5c Marine 01 - November Baffinland is not proposing any additional shipping routes under the Phas 2 Proposal. This includes the use of Navy Board Inlet and the Northwest NA
Environment 2019 - Public Passage.
Hearing
43 MHTO-5e Marine 01 - November Baffinland commits to continue to evaluate the feasibility of the development of a laboratory in Pond Inlet, in consultation with MHTO. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Hearing See also DFO-3.10.3, QIA-44 (re pilot ballast water
biological monitoring program)
42 MHTO-6 Socio-economic 01 - November With the discontinuation of ore haulage under Phase 2, it is possible for Baffinland to develop a policy that ensures the safety of all land users to NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public travel the Tote Road with recreational vehicles, and that of Baffinland employees. Baffinland will look to engage the MHTO in the development of
Hearing this policy, as well as the timeline for its implementation.
41 MHTO-7a Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland is committed to incorporating Inuit knowledge into its identification of indicators and development of thresholds. One example NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public where this is currently being done is at the MEWG, which the MHTO is a member of, which is currently working on the development of early
Hearing warning indicators for marine mammals.
40 NRCan-01 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland commits to: NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public  Conducting the summer 2019 mapping program in areas where the railway corridor deviates from the Tote Road, including along the Route 1
Hearing deviation alignment. This summer mapping program was completed in summer 2019.
 Conducting the winter 2019/2020 drilling program along the deviation route, following the proposed Route 3 deviation alignment, and near the
port terminus to obtain additional information on subsurface conditions to inform the final design.
 Conducting a pre-drilling program, to be completed by the railway contractor and supervised by BIM’s Engineer during the construction period.
Boreholes will be advanced into permafrost along the rail alignment prior to the railway earthworks. Boreholes will be used to delineate zones of
ice-rich and ice-pore permafrost and to determine the required permafrost treatment prior to making cuts and placing fill for the embankments.
 Installing thermistors and other monitoring instruments along the rail alignment including along the Route 3 deviation during the pre-drilling
programs to establish baseline conditions prior and during rail construction.
39 NRCan-02 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland commits to: NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public  Implementing the recommendations to accommodate the 30-year design life provided in the project memorandum ‘Analysis of Proposed Rail
Hearing Line Cut Sections and Port Area Structures Considering a Mine Life of 30 Years’ (Hatch, 2019) including those related to pile length embedment
and number of piles required for foundations.
 Continue to refine the thermal, stability and creep analysis incorporating new data collected during geotechnical investigations and from
instrumentation along the railway corridor, along the Route 3 deviation alignment as well the rail alignments outside the rail deviation, to support
final design of embankments and bridges.
 Consider local factors (such as snow accumulation and presence of water bodies) in the 2D thermal modelling to support final design of
embankments, cuts and bridges.
 Establish instrumentation along the rail alignment, including along the Route 3 deviation alignment, prior to and during construction to improve
characterization of baseline ground conditions, support final design, evaluate impacts due to construction and railway performance, and to inform
the implementation of mitigation /maintenance measures when triggers are reached
38 PCA-02 Marine 01 - November Baffinland commits to amend the Terms of Reference for the MEWG in collaboration with MEWG Members. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Hearing
37 PCA-04c Marine 01 - November Should Phase 2 be approved, Baffinland will continue to engage DFO and Parks Canada through the MEWG for the purposes of ensuring our NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public proposed mitigation and monitoring programs are robust, effective, and responsive.
Hearing
36 QIA-01 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland commits to support a harvester’s survey as described by QIA in QIA-01, however, such a study must be led by harvesters, not NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval;
Environment 2019 - Public Baffinland. BIM and QIA to determine integration with Inuit
Hearing Stewardship Plan
35 QIA-01 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland and QIA will jointly develop a culturally appropriate component of the Culture, Resources and Land-Use (“CRLU”) monitoring program NA Replaced by ICA Commitments
QIA-03, Environment 2019 - Public that addresses harvest surveys. Adaptive management measures will be informed by the results of the surveys and the CRLU monitoring
QIA-05, Hearing program. This development will be completed within 12 months of the issuance of the amendment to the Project Certificate implementing
QIA-08, Baffinland’s Phase 2 proposal to align with the development and implementation of the CRLU monitoring program.
QIA-10,
QIA-11
34 QIA-01 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland will continue to comply with the existing QIA caribou protection measures and will work with relevant IPG’s as well as the TEWG and NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-02 Environment 2019 - Public Inuit Advisors to develop a Caribou Protection Map and project protection zones, if and where appropriate to enhance caribou protection.
Hearing Development of any Caribou Protection Map or project protection zones will take into account all relevant available IQ and scientific information,
including results of an IQ study of caribou use with HTOs and QIA to be carried out through the CRLU Monitoring Program;
33 QIA-02 Terrestrial 01 - November Based on input provided during the Crossing Selection Workshop from HTO participants representing Pond Inlet, Igloolik, as well as QIA and GN, NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public the following modifications have been proposed for the design of the North Railway to aid in caribou crossing:
Hearing • 30 level crossings to be installed at locations identified by community representatives during the workshop (subject to Transport Canada and
Community Acceptance).
• A smoother fill material (Type 8 - 6 inches or less in size) will be used along the entire railway embankment (change from Type 12 - 24 inches or
less).
• A gentler slope (1:2 ratio) will be used for all portions of the railway embankment between 2 and 4 meters (change from 1:1.5).
• A gentler slope will be created at the edges of crossings to assure approach from any angle is safe.
• 4 additional plate arch culverts will be installed in areas where the railway embankment is high enough to allow an underpass (10 plate arch
culverts were already proposed at fish bearing water crossings, which may also serve to allow passage for terrestrial wildlife throughout the year).
32 QIA-02 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland commits to the following mitigation measures with respect to the operation of the railway to reduce interference with caribou: NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public  Temporary speed restrictions may be implemented in areas where caribou have been observed over the previous 24hrs.
Hearing  Permanent speed restrictions of 30km/hr will be applied to sections with steep hills for train safety.
 If large groups of migratory caribou are moving through the area, rail operations will be temporarily
 suspended to allow caribou to cross the rail line.
 In white out conditions, train crews will be required to travel at a speed suitable to stop before hitting an object based on sight distance, i.e. if
you can see 50m ahead you need to be able to stop in 25m.
31 QIA-03 Socio-economic 01 - November  Baffinland will carry out engagement with the 5 North Baffin communities during 2020 in order to identify, together with Inuit and in NA Replaced by ICA Commitments
Environment 2019 - Public consultation with QIA, the specific metrics that Inuit identify should be monitored as part of the CRLU program, and to identify, together with Inuit
Hearing and in consultation with QIA, thresholds for change that should trigger adaptive management by the company.
 Baffinland would report on changes and trends in monitoring, based on previous reports. Baffinland will consider adaptive management actions
and consult with the community on the best path forward in relation to any changes to CRLU identified through the CRLU monitoring program. For
clarity, Baffinland would not only consider adaptive management in the event that effects exceed the FEIS addendum estimations but instead
would have regard to triggers for
action identified through consultation with the community
30 QIA-04 Marine 01 - November Baffinland commits to developing a ringed seal monitoring plan that incorporates Inuit perspectives into the design, planning and implementation NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public phases.
Hearing
29 QIA-07 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland commits to integrating IQ into the objectives of its terrestrial and marine environmental management plans. Reporting will focus on NA Replaced by ICA Commitments
Environment 2019 - Public the topics as outlined in the QIA’s original technical comment:
Hearing 1. Show respect to animals;
2. Leave animals alone unless hunting them;
3. Animals are to be used, not wasted;
4. Each animal has its own habitat; and
5. Protect animal habitat.
28 QIA-08 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland commits to develop a risk communication strategy focused on gathering and dissemination of information to Inuit related NA BIM and QIA to determine integration with Inuit
Environment 2019 - Public to the Baffinland Iron Ore Mines Project, and linkages between the Project and human health and ecological risk assessment topics. The strategy Stewardship Plan
Hearing will focus on building capacity within community groups to understand the mining process, elements of the mining process and how substances
produced from the mining process move in the environment.
27 QIA-21 Freshwater 01 - November Implementation of the Water Compensation Agreement, particularly with respect to the integration of IQ, will require a collaborative effort NA Replaced by ICA Commitments
Environment 2019 - Public between Baffinland and the QIA to which Baffinland remains fully committed. As a Water Compensation Agreement is required under Section 63
Hearing of the Nunavut Waters and Surface Rights Tribunal Act and Article 20 (Part 3) of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, Baffinland maintains
that a process to establish compensation in respect of Inuit Water Rights exists and will be adhered to outside of the Project Certificate
amendment process.
26 QIA-22 Corporate 01 - November Unless otherwise approved by the NIRB, in any given day, the total number of ore haul truck transits along the Milne Inlet Tote Road should not NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public exceed 280 for the duration of the Phase 2 construction
Hearing period.
25 QIA-24 QIA-26 Corporate 01 - November The final monitoring plan for the operations phase of the railway will be finalized following completion of the construction monitoring NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public phase, when data collected has been analyzed and final recommendations can be provided. Adaptive management will be incorporated into
Hearing the rail geotechnical monitoring program, to the extent practical.
24 QIA-31 Corporate 01 - November Regarding the North Railway, Baffinland is committed to providing a construction plan that indicates specific monitoring locations and site-specific NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public conditions that would lead to additional monitoring locations, and what construction monitoring results would trigger additional monitoring
Hearing during operations which will be provided through the water licensing and Commercial Lease. These monitoring programs are currently
being incorporated into an update to the Surface Water and Aquatic Ecosystems Management Plan that will be provided to the Nunavut
Water Board in advance
of the NWB technical meeting on November 12-13, 2019.
23 QIA-33 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland will work with QIA to develop an updated Inuit Training Plan that covers the period between Phase 2 construction and the first NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
QIA-34 Environment 2019 - Public three years of operations. This plan will provide updates on programs that will be offered and how Baffinland intends to maximize Inuit
QIA-35 Hearing engagement with the Project. This updated plan will be developed within six months of issuance of the amended Project Certificate.
QIA-36
22 QIA-37 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland commits to continue to work with QIA to mitigate negative impacts and enhance positive Project opportunities and benefits through NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
QIA-39 Environment 2019 - Public the Mary River IIBA. environmental assessment purposes
Hearing
21 QIA-38 Socio-economic 01 - November Baffinland commits to the development of socio-economic monitoring thresholds and actions, in consultation with the Mary River Socio- NA Replaced by ICA Commitments
Environment 2019 - Public Economic Monitoring Working Group (SEMWG). Once finalized, these will be reflected in an updated Socio-Economic Monitoring Plan.
Hearing
20 QIA-41 Freshwater 01 - November The Tote Road Monitoring Program will be expanded to include the future railway development, both in proximity to the existing Tote Road NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public Monitoring Program locations and along the rail route deviation from the Tote Road. Baffinland has committed to long-term monitoring of water
Hearing quality within the Northern Transportation Corridor with the Tote Road Monitoring Program to assess the potential for project-related effects on
water quality. Until monitoring of water quality indicates the potential for the Project to have an effect on water quality, the expansion of
monitoring to include sediment quality and biota in Phillips Creek is not necessary. Should impacts to Arctic char populations be identified
through the AEMP studies, the source of these effects will be evaluated though review of all potential variables including sedimentation.
Baffinland will continue to utilize the 1mm threshold for sedimentation effects.
19 QIA-42 Freshwater 01 - November Baffinland has committed to continue to address existing fish passage issues on the Tote Road, and to address fish passage issues on the railway NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public during the design phase, with verification monitoring post-construction. Baffinland will evaluate fish passage along the alternative rail line but this
Hearing may not be done before the November NWB technical meetings. This c is mainly an issue for the Fisheries Act authorization.
18 QIA-43 Terrestrial 01 - November Baffinland has committed to conducting a desktop review of available data to evaluate the hydrological, geomorphological and sediment NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public transport regime at the Project site.
Hearing
17 QIA-45 Marine 01 - November Baffinland has committed to implementing a pilot ballast water biological monitoring program for ships currently only subject to the D1 NA Replaced by DFO 3.6 NEW Commitments
Environment 2019 - Public standard (open water exchange). This program has been designed to reflect a more appropriately scoped form of a ballast water sampling
Hearing protocol provided by DFO to Baffinland in 2017 and will include sampling from one ballast tank on a total of five vessels per shipping season.
Baffinland remains committed to continue conducting temperature and salinity test sampling of one randomly selected ballast water tank for all
vessels calling to Milne Port, and
biological sampling in the marine receiving environment to monitor for non-native species in Milne Port and at Ragged Island.
16 QIA-46 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will continue to work with members of the MEWG on the selection of appropriate Early Warning Indicators (EWIs) for noise impacts on NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Environment 2019 - Public marine mammals, for implementation prior to the environmental assessment purposes
Hearing start of Phase 2 shipping.
15 QIA-47 Marine 01 - November Baffinland provided a detailed Draft Communication Protocol as part of the Phase 2 submission. The communication protocol is considered a live NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
Environment 2019 - Public document, and will be updated on an annual basis, as needed, based on feedback about the effectiveness of the communication system received environmental assessment purposes
Hearing by MHTO during annual pre- and end-of-season shipping meetings. Additional communication tools or frequencies may also be adjusted
ad hoc throughout the shipping season to address real-time concerns, which would again be captured in annual updates to the protocol as
needed.
14 QIA-48, Marine 01 - November Baffinland will ensure there is a consistent description of ice conditions amongst its relevant management plans and standards of practice NA Implementation is ongoing, completion not required for
TC-04 Environment 2019 - Public and that these terms are translated to Inuktitut for use more generally. Baffinland commits to providing dates and information on the conditions environmental assessment purposes
Hearing under which the shipping season was opened and closed each season in its Annual Report to NIRB.
13 QIA-50 Marine 01 - November Baffinland formally commits to not having vessels go into the North Water Polynya (Pikialasorsuaq), subject to vessel safety. This commitment will NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public be recognized in the Shipping and Marine Wildlife Management Plan and the Standing Instructions to Masters.
Hearing
12 QIA-53 Marine 01 - November BIM does recognize that there may be interactions between its vessels and other activity outside the RSA and agrees to participate as a key NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public stakeholder in regional federal government initiatives and programs including federal initiatives aimed at evaluating regional cumulative effects in
Hearing the Eastern Canadian Arctic.
11 TC-01 Corporate 01 - November Baffinland will contact Transport Canada’s NPP Office prior to the submittal of any information to confirm regulatory requirements under the NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public CNWA, should the project be approved to proceed.
Hearing
10 TC-02 Marine 01 - November Transport Canada appreciates the efforts by BIM to ensure current regulations are followed with respect to their plans for ballast water NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
DFO 3.6.5 Environment 2019 - Public management. Given the learning curve associated with use of ballast water treatment systems, for Phase 2, Transport Canada (TC) in
Hearing consultation with Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), recommends, in conjunction with present sampling and testing protocols being
proposed/adopted [NTD - will be summarized in complete package] by BIM, that BIM implement a ballast water compliance sampling plan
based on a risk-based targeting methodology to be developed in consultation with DFO and TC.
Such a risk-based methodology should be applied to evaluate the risk of all vessel ballast water management (D1, D2) with subsequent salinity
and D-2 biological compliance sampling conducted on vessels identified as high or very high risk. The respective risk-based methodology and
associated ballast water compliance sampling plan will be developed in consultation with DFO and TC following completion of DFO’s Project-
specific sampling conducted on a subset of vessels calling to Milne Port. The risk-based methodology and associated ballast water compliance
sampling plan should include a consideration of other compliance initiatives or research being undertaken elsewhere by TC relative to
implementation of the D-2 standard.
Sampling conducted that supports building a body of knowledge for D-2 treatment systems, beyond biological compliance sampling conducted
on high risk and very high risk tanks, should not compromise Baffinland’s ability to transport annual ore quantities as approved under a
modified Project Certificate No 005. Understanding that the rationale for this program is tied to a learning curve associated with the use of ballast
water treatment systems, the compliance sampling program and risk based methodology will be adapted as deemed necessary based on
9 TC-04 Corporate 01 - November For the purposes of shoulder season vessel traffic management, Baffinland considers uninterrupted transits through ice concentrations of 3/10 or NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public less as the open water shipping season. This will be
Hearing considered in any relevant management plans or operating procedures.
8 TC-05 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will make the recommended change from TC-05 to the Spill at Sea Response Plan (SSRP). NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Hearing
7 TC-06 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will update the SSRP to designate additional Tier 2 response equipment at Milne Port to enable a dual response as proposed by NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public Transport Canada.
Hearing
6 TC-07 Marine 01 - November Baffinland agrees that the use of lifeboats should be avoided and will be removed as part of the spill response equipment on pages 88 and 103 of NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public the SSRP.
Hearing
5 TC-08 Marine 01 - November Baffinland will update the SSRP to make it clear no oil discharge is permitted in Arctic waters per the ASSPPR. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Hearing
4 WWF-FWS 01 Marine 01 - November Baffinland is committed to the development of Early Warning Indicators but must reiterate this is not a conventional undertaking and all members NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public of the MEWG are expected to provide meaningful input.
Hearing As Phase 2 levels of shipping are not expected to occur before 2024 Baffinland is confident that Early Warning Indicators will be developed by that
time based on a rigorous investigation of IQ and Inuit perspectives, scientific literature, and the expert opinions of MEWG members.
3 WWF-FWS 02 Corporate 01 - November The NIRB has already initiated the development of the Mary River Monitoring Framework for attachment to Project Certificate 005, NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public circulating a draft Appendix A Framework for public comment in 2017. Baffinland supports this initiative and will continue to participate in
Hearing the development process following the completion of the Phase 2 reconsideration process.
2 WWF-FWS 04 Marine 01 - November Baffinland commits to take part in a Marine Spatial Planning exercise, should an appropriate regional body lead the initiative. NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Hearing
1 WWF-FWS 08 Atmospheric 01 - November Baffinland is committed to developing a comprehensive Climate Change Strategy. A critical component of this strategy will relate to the NA This commitment will be implemented post PC approval
Environment 2019 - Public marine environment, where important developments are occurring at the international level that our world class fleet of vessels and ship
Hearing contractors are poised to comply with, including the 2020 Sulphur Cap and a potential ban on Heavy Fuel Oil in the Arctic.
Appendix D: NIRB COVID-19 PROTOCOL

PUBLIC MEETING EXPOSURE CONTROL PLAN
Sign in procedures
The NIRB will maintain a sign in desk for all participants entering a venue to sign in with their
name and phone number. The NIRB staff member administering this desk will either have a
protective glass separating them from the participants entering. Where this is not achievable, the
NIRB staff member will be required to wear a face mask.
The NIRB staff member will keep an accurate count of participants inside the venue. are not
exceeded. Entry will be denied once the capacity target is reached.
Participants when signing in will be asked if they have a cough, fever or shortness of breath and
have been outside of the territory in the last 14 days. If they do, they will be asked to refrain from
the meeting. If the symptomatic person has an inquiry that they want addressed, they provide their
concerns in writing to be presented by a proxy.
Social Distancing
Social Distancing of 2 meters will be mandatory for all meeting Participants.
Personal Protective Equipment

Current advice for Nunavut concludes that non-medical facemasks are not mandatory for daily
wear, NIRB will follow suit. The NIRB will supply daily masks for individuals who choose to
wear them at Public Meetings, but they will not be mandatory until Public Health Orders change.
If, during the meeting, social distancing cannot be maintained (i.e.: small meeting spaces, non-
compliant members of the Public on the 2-meter social distancing order, etc.) masks will become
a mandatory requirement for entering the Public Meeting space.
Disposable Gloves will also be kept on site for safety measures and staff who may be required to
handle sound equipment.
Where the NIRB is required to fly community members to be active in a meeting, each
participating community will be provided with masks for air travel for their community
representatives.
Hand Washing and Sanitizing

Prior to anyone entering the Public Meeting Space, all attendees must use hand sanitizer. The
NIRB will hire a runner/dedicated staffer to dispense hand sanitizing solution to all persons coming
into the meeting venue.
Cleaning and Disinfection

NIRB will ensure high touch areas, such as microphones and other shared sound gear, is
disinfected prior to the next participant using the equipment. This will also be done for tables and
chairs when Intervenors or Community Reps move from the Public Side of the Meeting to the
Round Table. At the end of each day Audio/Video technicians will ensure all equipment is ready
for the next day’s use, including cleaning and disinfection.
Venue staff will be asked to do large cleaning at the end of each meeting day.
Ensuring Proper Protocol Regarding Social Distancing is followed

Each member of the Public who does not adhere to the social distancing requirement will receive
one (1) warning, Further infractions will result in an individual being asked to leave the premises.
Examples of noncompliance include: not physical distancing when seeing family members and
friends from other communities, refusing the use hand sanitizer, trying to force entry when visibly
sick.
Warnings will be included in a logbook of incidents for back-up purposes. NIRB Staff will make
sure to use plain language and language of preference when communicating the warning and will
ensure that the message is understood before logging the incident.
External Contractors
NIRB Audio / Sound technicians and Court Reporters will be hired through an outside firm from
outside of the Government of Nunavut’s Common Travel Area. The NIRB will be seeking to
classify these external contractors as essential service workers given there are no service providers
capable of conducting the required work in Nunavut. This means they will be required to isolate
in their hotel accommodation outside of work hours, will wear a mask and disposable gloves, and
return to their hotel accommodations at the end of each day with no interaction with the Public
after the meeting. Although negative COVID-19 tests are not required for essential services
through the Government of Nunavut’s public heath orders, the NIRB will insist that all external
contractors provide evidence of a negative COVID-19 test before entering the territory.
Public Health and Health Centre

The NIRB will advise local health centers or public health units that a public meeting is scheduled
in advanced so that they are aware of a large public gathering taking place. The NIRB will invite
members of Public Health Office or the local Health Centre to provide opening remarks at the start
of meetings in each Nunavut hub location. They will be invited to speak about social distancing
and how to interact in a public space with other members of the public to ensure the safety of
everyone. The NIRB will provide all COVID-19 action plans and measures for Public Safety to
Public Health and local Health Centers.
Security
NIRB has decided against hiring an outside security firm, as this has negative implications in a
neutral meeting space. The NIRB will endeavor to hire additional local people to help with venue
sign-in, cleaning and disinfecting, and identifying individuals not from the same households who
are not respecting the social distance rule. Individuals who do not adhere to the policies and
procedures in place will be asked to leave the meeting venue and not come back. This includes
community representatives.
Individuals who are visibly sick (in this case, with symptoms associated with Covid-19) will be
asked to leave. The NIRB will create COVID-19 specific protocols and procedures for asking an
individual to leave and associated documentation for transparency and fairness.
Signage
The NIRB will post current Publications and Signage from the Government of Nunavut and the
Government of Canada at all venues. This will include signs on social distancing, handwashing,
the Government of Nunavut COVID-19 hotline and other associated signage in English and
Inuktitut. All safety measures will be posted in the venues in clearly visible locations.
Communications
All safety measures will be clearly communicated to Meeting Participants in advance through
letters, emails and social media. All advice from the Chief Public Health Officer will be strictly
followed and this shall be communicated to all meeting attendees.
Vulnerable Populations
The NIRB will outline the risk of attending large public gatherings to vulnerable groups in
advanced. The definition of “Vulnerable populations” as outlined by the Government of Nunavut
is:
- an older adult (aged 65 an older)
- underlying medical conditions (e.g. heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, chronic
respiratory diseases, cancer)
- compromised immune system from a medical condition or treatment (e.g.
chemotherapy)
NIRB will not bar community representatives with any of the above conditions from participating.
This warning is to inform individuals of the risks of attendance.
Floor Plans
NIRB will implement floor plans including one direction walkways and social distancing seating
arrangements.
Catering
Coffee and Tea services will not be offered during public meetings, as this leads to a bottleneck
effect of many individuals grouped around a small area, with coffee and tea urns becoming highly
touched surfaces. Bagged snacks will be offered to Community Reps with choice of individually
packaged water bottles or individually packaged juice.
Policies and Procedures

Under the direction of the Executive Director or the Board, meetings may be paused under the
following circumstances:
- an active COVID-19 case has been confirmed in the territory
- the Chief Public Health Officer issues instructions to close all public meetings
- The City or Municipality has issued direction to close all Public Meetings
In the event that the meeting is paused, all attendees will be informed they must return to their
hotel room at once and await further announcements via Facebook, the local Community Radio
Station or a phone call in the case of community representatives.
A separate policy will be created for NIRB staff on a suspected COVID-19 meeting attendee. This
will include putting on a mask and disposable gloves prior to talking to the individual,
documenting the incident and advising other floor staff of the incident.
If a Board Member becomes ill and needs to leave a Public Meeting, as long as there is quorum
the meeting will not need to be paused.

NIRB Pre-Hearing Decision Report Mary River Phase 2

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

NIRB Pre-Hearing Decision Report Mary River Phase 2

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Pre-Hearing Conference Decision Report

October 30, 2020

INSIDE COVER PAGE

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Marjorie Kaviq Kaluraq Guy Alikut

Catherine Emrick Uriash Puqiqnak

Nunavut Impact Review Board

▪ Identify the nature and extent of resolved and unresolved issues;

Nunavut Impact Review Board

ᐅᓇ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᒋᐊᕐᓯᒪᔭᖓᑦ ᑲᑎᖃᑎᒌᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᖅ ᐅᐸᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔩ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᕐᓯᐅᓕᕐᑐᑦ

ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᐃᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᒃᑐᑦ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓕᒫᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᔭᐅᓂᑯᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓄᑦ ᐊᖏᕐᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ

▪ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕐᓯᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᓇᓗᓈᕿᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᓴᒐᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐃᓚᖏ ᐊᒥᒐᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᒪᑐᒧᖓ

ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᕐᓂᕋᓚᐅᕐᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐅᓇ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ ᐱᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᙱᓐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐅᑯᐊ ᐹᕙᓐᓛᓐᑯᑦ

▪ ᑐᓂᓯᔪᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓄᑦ ᓱᖅᑯᐃᓇᕐᓂᕐᓴᓂᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᑯᓇᙵᑦ ᐹᕙᓐᓛᓐᑯᓐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ

ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖓᒍᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᕐᓯᒪᓂᕐᓴᓂᒃ ᐅᕙᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᐅᑉ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᓂᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕆᔾᔪᑎᓂᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓂᒃ

▪ ᓇᓗᓇᕐᓯᓗᑎᒃ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᖏᑎᒋᓂᖏᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᕌᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᕌᓂᙱᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᑦ;

ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᕐᓯᐅᕈᑎᖃᕐᒥᔪᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᒫᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᓯᐅᓕᕐᑐᓂ ᑕᐅᑐᒃᖢᑎᒃ:

▪ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᑐᓂᒃ ᑐᓐᓂᖁᑎᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓄᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᙵᓂᒃ ᑎᓯᐱᕆ 2019;

ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐊᒥᓱᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᓈᒻᒪᒃᓴᕐᓂᕐᓴᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᕙᒡᔪᐊᕐᓇᖅ-19 ᐊᓂᒍᖅᐸᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᔪᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ

ᐊᒻᒪᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗ, ᖃᖓᑦᑎᐊᓵᖅ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᑎᐅᓚᐅᕐᑐᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕐᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐅᐸᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᖕᓂᕐᒥ ᐊᑐᓚᐅᕐᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ,

ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᕙᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ (ᑎᑎᖃᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑯᑎᖓ: 330898).

ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᓕᒫᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᖢᒋᑦ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᓚᐅᕐᑐᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᓈᒻᒪᓛᖑᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᓂᕐᒥᒃ

ᐱᐊᓂᖕᓂᐊᓵᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖁᔭᓕᔪᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Nunavut Impact Review Board

À cette époque-là, la Commission avait déclaré s’attendre à ce qu’en prévision de la reprise de

▪ Préciser la nature et l’ampleur des questions résolues et en suspens;

Certes, la Commission reconnait que plusieurs parties prenantes préfèreraient ne reprendre

En terminant, la Commission tient à remercier tous les participants de la table ronde

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Figure 3: Community Representatives in Pond Inlet and Iqaluit hub

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Figure 5: Participants in the Ottawa hub

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Update on Government of Denmark/Greenland

Community Roundtable and PHC Proceedings

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Table 1: Procedural History of the Board’s Assessment of the Proposal to Date

Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation (Baffinland)

Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern

Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern

Input received from Qikiqtani Inuit Association,

Notice of preferred Prior to submitting the FEIS Addendum, Baffinland

Request to Minister for NIRB requested clarification from Minister of

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Minister provides clarification that exemption continued

On October 28, 2016 NIRB requested Baffinland clarify

NIRB determines that the change to scope for the Phase

Phase 2 Development proposal received positive

NIRB provided direction to parties on the processing of

Following the original request for a coordinated

NIRB provided notice that the submission did not fulfill

Additional detail on updates to the Addendum provided

Nunavut Impact Review Board

NIRB accepts FEIS NIRB/NWB joint letter of acceptance of the revised

Additional time was requested to ensure effective

IRs submitted by Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA),

NIRB distributes participant funding guide and