FEDERAL REVIEW PANEL (COFEX) AND
PROVINCIAL REVIEW PANEL (COMEX)
INFORMATION SESSION PRESIDED BY :
Chief John Longchap
Mr. Benoit Taillon
Mr. Pierre Mercier
__________________________________________________
MATOUSH URANIUM PROJECT
__________________________________________________
INFORMATION SESSION
held in Mistissini (Quebec)
May 25, 2010
RD-5400-A
RIOPEL, GAGNON, LAROSE & ASSOCIÉS
215, rue Saint-Jacques
bureau 1020
Montréal (Québec)
H2Y 1M6
May 25, 2010
- 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
OPENING PRAYER
OPENING REMARKS
CHIEF JOHN LONGCHAP............................... 4
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON................................ 7
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER................................ 9
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH.............................. 12
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER............................... 13
PRESENTATION BY STRATECO RESOURCES
Mr. GUY HÉBERT................................... 14
PRESENTATION OF THE STRATECO VIDEO
Mr. GUY HÉBERT...................................
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT..........................
Mrs. CAROLINE HARDY..............................
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE.........................
25
29
37
54
CONCLUSION
Mr. GUY HÉBERT................................... 59
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON............................... 60
PRESENTATION BY THE CNSC
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR................................. 61
DISCUSSION
PRESENTATION BY HEALTH CANADA
Mrs. KARINE MENEZES.............................. 72
QUESTION PERIOD
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER............................... 77
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE........................... 91
Mr. LEN TAYLOR................................... 98
Mrs. CHERRY GUNNING............................. 115
Mr. HUBERT PETAWABANO........................... 121
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR................................ 123
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE.......................... 126
Mr. ABEL TRAPPER................................ 131
Mrs. ELISABETH ROBINSON......................... 139
Mr. ROD QUINN................................... 144
Mr. RAMSEY HART................................. 152
Mr. WILLIAM MIAMSCUM............................ 161
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT............................... 165
Mrs. ROBIN CAMPBELL............................. 167
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 3 Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT...............................
Mrs. ANNE-MARIE AWASHISH........................
Mr. LEN TAYLOR..................................
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE..........................
Mr. ANDREW COON.................................
Mr. ROD QUINN...................................
Mr. THOMAS COON.................................
Mr. ROD QUINN...................................
Mr. THOMAS COON.................................
Mr. LEN TAYLOR..................................
Mrs. PAMELA McLEOD..............................
Mr. THOMAS COON.................................
Mr. CLAUDE COONISHISH...........................
Mr. ANDREW COON.................................
Mr. LEN TAYLOR..................................
Mrs. SOPHIE GUNNER..............................
Mr. HUBERT PETAWABANO...........................
174
176
184
188
194
200
202
205
206
213
217
220
221
223
231
236
239
CLOSING REMARKS................................. 244
CLOSING PRAYER.................................. 244
_________________
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 4 -
OPENING
REMARKS
1
IN THE YEAR TWO THOUSAND AND TEN (2010), this
2
twenty-fifth (25th) day of May:
3
CHIEF JOHN LONGCHAP:
4
... languages, I think there is French translation,
5
English translation, and Cree translation. (in
6
Cree) So, before I do my opening welcome address,
7
I'll ask Peter, Peter Coonishish will do the
8
opening prayer. (in Cree) Okay? Peter? Peter
9
Coonishish?
10
OPENING PRAYER
11
Mr. PETER COONISHISH:
12
(in Cree)
13
OPENING REMARKS
14
CHIEF JOHN LONGCHAP:
15
Thank you Peter. Amen. (in Cree) So I'd like to
16
welcome, first of all, the people of Mistissini. As
17
we all know, that it's in our territories that, you
18
know, that work may take place, of this nature.
19
So, welcome also to everyone in attendance,
20
thank you for coming, thank you for coming to show
21
your interest and participating at this information
22
session regarding the Strateco proposed project.
23
I'd like to welcome everyone, whether you're
24
from the community or visiting from outside, or if
25
you are here on behalf of a particular
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 5 -
OPENING
REMARKS
1
organization. So, welcome, and thank you for coming
2
here. (in Cree)
3
There are different... First of all, this is
4
an information session. It's not a consultation
5
process. The consultation will happen later, if it
6
comes to that. Okay?
7
there yet, but this is an information session. An
8
opportunity to... for the panels that are up here,
9
in front, to hear your questions, your concerns,
10
your comments about uranium, the Uranium Matoush
11
Mine Project.
12
(in Cree)
13
THE INTERPRETER:
14
He's translating into Cree what was already said in
15
English and French.
16
CHIEF JOHN LONGCHAP:
17
(in Cree) So, up in front here, we have various
18
committees, a couple of committees on different
19
panels. I'd like to introduce them now. (in Cree)
20
We don't know yet, it's not
First of all, before I introduce the different
21
committees and guests here with us today, I'd like
22
to first welcome the people, the Committee sitting
23
on COMEX. That's the Review Panel for the Quebec
24
Government, and then we also have COFEX, which is
25
the Federal Review Panel, on behalf of the Canadian
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 6 -
1
OPENING
REMARKS
Government.
2
We also have people from the Canadian Nuclear
3
Safety Commission, the CNSC are also here. We also
4
have a member from the Health Canada. (in Cree) We
5
also have, in front, the proponent of the project,
6
which is Strateco Resources. (in Cree) We have the
7
president here, Mr. Mercier, and also the president
8
of (in Cree) the Federal Review Panel, the COFEX-
9
South, Mr. Benoit Taillon, who is also here, and
10
they will, these gentlemen will also be addressing
11
the crowd, after I do my introduction.
12
We also... (in Cree) We also have Strateco
13
Resources, as I said. (in Cree) So, in the back
14
table here, we have the Canadian Nuclear Safety
15
Commission people, and one of the gentlemen, you
16
might recognize, the guy with the nice gray hair.
17
So he was here before, at one of the information
18
sessions, so welcome. Welcome to everyone. (in
19
Cree)
20
Thank you once again to everyone that's here.
21
Thank you also to the people that organized the
22
event, the information session, people from our
23
office in, working with the people from the Grand
24
Council and the Quebec Office. Thank you again. (in
25
Cree)
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 7 -
OPENING
REMARKS
1
So, I've done my little introduction, and
2
welcome to everyone that's here, so without further
3
ado... (in Cree) Benoit Taillon, (in Cree) the
4
Federal Review Panel, or COFEX-South as they call
5
it. So he's gonna talk to you guys first, and then
6
Mr. Mercier will talk after, and then, probably, I
7
think Philip will also speak after Mr. Mercier.
8
9
And then, you have a schedule, as you probably
picked up on your way in, of the order of the
10
meeting. (in Cree) Thank you very much. Benoit?
11
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
12
Thank you, Chief Longchap. The Federal Review Panel
13
is a body established by Section 22 of the James
14
Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, as you know,
15
that's comprised of five members. I would like to
16
introduce them to you.
17
Philip Awashish is a member of the Federal
18
Review Panel. Ginette Lajoie, member of the Federal
19
Review Panel, both appointed by the Cree Regional
20
Authority. Anne-Marie Gaudet and Claude Delisle are
21
the two other members of the Panel. They're both
22
appointed by Canada.
23
I would like to emphasize with, on what has
24
said Chief Longchap. We're here to make sure that
25
information is provided to you, it's an opportunity
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 8 -
OPENING
REMARKS
1
to talk about the project, to talk about its
2
effects. It's also an opportunity to ask questions
3
about the regulatory system.
4
When we will invite you to come to the
5
microphones and ask questions, feel free to ask
6
questions, whether to the proponent, or to the
7
member of the public authorities, or public
8
administrations present here. Chief Longchap has
9
identified two persons, two people from the
10
Canadian Nuclear Safety Act, an expert from Health
11
Canada. There is also an expert from the department
12
of Sustainable Development, Environment and Parks,
13
a department of the Government of Quebec.
14
We hope, during this session, to exchange with
15
you. Do not... We will try, if we need more
16
information on your own questions, to exchange with
17
you, and I will invite the members of the Panel, if
18
they do have some questions regarding your own
19
questions, to talk to you and exchange, in order to
20
have a better understanding of what you want, what
21
you need, what are your concerns, but especially to
22
make sure that the question you have is addressed
23
in the coming weeks, so that, that information will
24
be provided to you in due course.
25
Needless to say that this public meeting will
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 9 -
OPENING
REMARKS
1
be a real success if we all show respect to each
2
other. I would like to invite you to respect the
3
opinions of people that have a different view, so
4
that we have a fruitful and successful meeting.
5
Now, Mr. Chair of the COMEX, monsieur Mercier,
6
will introduce you, will talk to you about the
7
agenda for today.
8
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
9
Merci Benoit. First of all, I would like to thank
10
Chief Longchap for having accepted to preside this
11
meeting, this information meeting. And we
12
appreciate very much, Chief, because we know that
13
you have a lot of things to do in your community,
14
and we appreciate that, by your presence, giving
15
the example for your population, to demonstrate the
16
importance of this kind of meeting concerning the
17
information of, on this project specifically.
18
[translation] So, on behalf of my colleagues, I'd
19
like to thank Chief Longchap for having accepted to
20
chair this information session. I'd also like to
21
introduce the members who accompany me, the members
22
of COMEX, the Provincial Review Committee.
23
We'll start on my far right, a citizen from
24
Mistissini who probably many of you have met and
25
known, Mr. Philip Awashish. He represents the CRA.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 10 -
OPENING
REMARKS
1
He's also accompanied by Brian Craik, who is also a
2
representative of the CRA on COMEX, the Cree
3
Regional Authority.
4
We have Robert Lemieux, who is a member... We
5
have Robert Q. who is a member of this Committee
6
for many years, who is bringing his experience, his
7
vast Northern experience that he has accumulated
8
over many years in the James Bay sector.
9
I'd also like to emphasize the contribution of
10
our executive secretary, Michael O'Neil, and he is
11
celebrating his birthday today, but he told me I
12
couldn't mention his age. We also have Benoit
13
Théberge, who is the executive secretary of COFEX.
14
I'd like to present Ms. Lucie Vallée, who is
15
an analyst in the Ministry of Sustainable
16
Development, who has coordinated the action of our
17
project, of the Matoush Project, the Strateco
18
Resources Project, with our Quebec Government
19
partners, and different ministries and departments.
20
So, I would like to emphasize our appreciation
21
towards my colleague, who is the president of
22
COFEX, and the members of COFEX, for this welcome
23
that will be fruitful, and this productive work.
24
We've been together for the works, and this allows
25
us to be here, together, at this information
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 11 -
1
2
OPENING
REMARKS
session.
So, I also think that we mentioned that Chief
3
Longchap, and Benoit Taillon mentioned it too,
4
today is a meeting that is beneficial to all of us.
5
For us, as representatives of the different
6
committees, and you, from the community of
7
Mistissini. We have a lot of information, but
8
through your questions, you might be able to learn
9
even more. Because I would also like to emphasize
10
the delegation that is chaired by Mr. Hébert, who
11
is the president of Strateco Resources, who came
12
here with a group of experts to answer your
13
questions.
14
So this is the ideal opportunity to ask
15
questions and gain information, like Chief Longchap
16
previously mentioned. We'll have the opportunity to
17
come back to your community to hold public hearings
18
in a few months.
19
20
21
This being said, I would just like to glance
at my notes, because at my age...
We have the information part and the
22
consultation part, that I wanted to say. It would
23
be important, then, for you to take part by asking
24
questions, and this will allow us to reach a vaster
25
understanding of what the Strateco Project
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 12 -
1
OPENING
REMARKS
involves.
2
I'd also like to specifically welcome the
3
delegations that bring with COFEX-South. They come
4
from the Ministry of Health and the federal group
5
of experts on nuclear security or safety. So, we
6
talk about COMEX, which is the Provincial Review
7
Panel. I'm going to call on someone who is very
8
wise, someone who started this review panel because
9
he sat on all of the discussions that led to the
10
signing. He was also the co-signer of the James Bay
11
and Northern Quebec Agreement.
12
Philip Awashish, who you know very well, has
13
been involved in these circles for many years, and
14
his actions have been emphasized in many ways. Last
15
year, they were honoured by McMaster's University,
16
they gave him an honorary Ph.D. as well. Which is
17
quite an honour for our friend Philip Awashish, who
18
is from Mistissini.
19
So, now I'll ask him to say a few words about
20
COMEX.
21
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
22
Thank you. (in Cree)
23
THE INTERPRETER:
24
Je ne t'entends pas plus. (technical problems)
25
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 13 -
OPENING
REMARKS
1
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
2
(in Cree)
3
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
4
[translation] Thank you Philip. So, I don't
5
think... I couldn't tell you that I understood
6
everything, unfortunately. The translation wasn't
7
working.
8
9
This being said, I would like to ask the
president of Strateco Resources, Mr. Guy Hébert, to
10
continue with the presentation of the Strateco
11
Project. Could we please ensure that the
12
translation will function? Because we totally lost
13
the translation of Mr. Awashish's presentation. And
14
we would like to hear the people who will speak to
15
us in the Cree language, so we can fully understand
16
their questions. So, can we tell me if it's working
17
or not, or show me a sign if it's working?
18
THE INTERPRETER:
19
Well, English to French is working fine, but
20
anyways...
21
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
22
[translation] So, then we'll take a short break,
23
we'll take a few minutes and get this straightened
24
out.
25
So then, if you allow us, we'll move on to Mr.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 14 -
OPENING
REMARKS
1
Hébert's presentation. And hopefully the problem
2
will be changed. And now...
3
THE INTERPRETER:
4
Je t'entendais. Je t'entendais quand tu jouais avec
5
le micro. Oui.
6
_____________________
7
PRESENTATION BY STRATECO RESOURCES
8
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
9
(in Cree). [translation] ... president of the
10
Review Panel, Mr. Mercier, president of the
11
Provincial Review Panel, and people from the CNSC,
12
and the different other committees.
13
(himself) ... information session on the Matoush
14
Uranium Project. Let you... Let me introduce
15
myself. My name is Guy Hébert, I'm the president
16
CEO of Strateco Resources, owner of the Matoush
17
Project. I graduated as a geologist. During my
18
thirty-seven (37) years of experience, I had the
19
privilege of bringing three mines into production,
20
two of which are in Quebec, and one in Costa Rica.
21
I would like to present to you my colleague,
22
who will participate in today's presentation. Mr.
23
Jean-Pierre Lachance, executive and exploration
24
vice-president. Jean-Pierre is a geologist, he has
25
more than thirty (30) years of experience in the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 15 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
industry. We have been working together for over
2
fifteen (15) years.
3
Since the start of the project, in two
4
thousand and six (2006), Mr. Lachance is, among
5
others, in charge of relations with the
6
communities. Jean-Pierre will introduce to you
7
members of his team. He will deal with this part of
8
the study. Relations with the communities. For
9
Strateco Management, community relations have been,
10
are, and will always be an extremely important
11
element in the preparation and accomplishment of
12
our projects.
13
Mr. Pierre Terreault, vice-president
14
operations and engineering. Pierre is a mining
15
engineer. He has a master's degree in project
16
management. He also cumulated over thirty (30)
17
years of experience in the mining industry. Mr.
18
Terreault is responsible for the preparation of the
19
environmental impact study, and of the technical
20
documentation concerning the license to obtain from
21
the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.
22
Today, he will introduce to you the surface
23
and underground installation, as well as the impact
24
study characteristics and the extreme conservative
25
criteria used with the context of the study.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 16 -
1
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
Mrs. Caroline Hardy, geological engineer.
2
Caroline is the director of the environmental
3
department, and therefore the environmental impact
4
study coordinator. She cumulates twelve (12) years
5
of experience in the industry, seven (7) of which
6
are in the environmental field. Mrs. Hardy will
7
introduce to you the conclusion of the
8
environmental impact study. As you will see, these
9
impacts are negligible.
10
Also member of the Strateco team, Maude
11
Hébert, public affairs analyst. She has prepared a
12
brochure (inaudible) on the facts, the first in two
13
thousand and seven (2007), and a new one in two
14
thousand and ten (2010), based on the concerns
15
raised to the public hearing in two thousand and
16
eight (2008). You can get the brochure at the end
17
of, on the table in the back.
18
She's also responsible, since December, of the
19
website, and also the ad you saw in the Nation
20
Magazine about the project, the radon and different
21
subjects treated during the six issues.
22
And from Golder, at the table here, Ernest
23
Becker, Mrs. Chantal Rossignol. They have
24
participated in the study. And from SENES, Mr.
25
Grant Feasby. Change slide... Oh! I just... Sorry.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 17 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
Okay.
During the course of this presentation, which
3
should last about fifty minutes (50 min), we will
4
present the results of the environmental impact
5
study on the advanced exploration phase of the
6
Matoush Project. This study allows us to identify
7
and assess the potential impact of work on the
8
Matoush Project on the environmental and social
9
environments. It responds to a joint directive by
10
the ministère du Développement durable, de
11
l'environnement et des parcs, MDDEP, the Canadian
12
Environmental Assessment Agency, and the Canadian
13
Nuclear Safety Commission.
14
It's enabled us to provide you with more
15
information on the project, and to answer some of
16
the questions people in the community asked us at
17
the December two thousand and eight (2008)
18
preconsultations.
19
Today, Strateco's presentation is divided in
20
two parts. Part 1, a video presentation on the
21
Matoush Project, underground exploration period and
22
production period. And part 2, presentation of the
23
environmental impact study. A question period will
24
follow. I therefore ask you to keep your
25
interventions for the end of the presentation.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
- 18 -
1
We will then start with the video
2
presentation. Since the filing of the environmental
3
impact study in November two thousand and nine
4
(2009), we have received an extensive list of
5
questions. Several of these questions concern
6
subjects not covered in the scope of the
7
environmental impact study. Because they are aimed
8
at the subsequent phase, the production phase.
9
The video is divided in two parts. Part 1
10
introduces the underground exploration program, and
11
part 2 presents the production phase. Please keep
12
in mind that the second part of the video is
13
generic. The environmental studies related to this
14
second phase are not underway, and will be partly
15
based on the result obtained in the context of the
16
phase that we propose to start during fall two
17
thousand and ten (2010). So please, let roll the
18
video. It's a nine minute (9 min) video, and it's
19
pretty impressive. At least for me. It's not full
20
screen?
21
sound. I have to start again. If someone at the
22
back can take care of the sound?
23
that.
24
PRESENTATION OF THE STRATECO VIDEO
25
Can we have some sound?
Sound please. No
No. Sorry about
Strateco Resources is proud to present the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 19 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
Matoush Uranium Exploration Project. This project
2
is considered one of the most uranium-rich projects
3
in the world today. The uranium industry not only
4
helps meet the world's continuously increasing
5
demand for energy, it is essential to other
6
industries as well, such as agriculture, food
7
production and medicine.
8
9
The project is located in the Otish Mountains,
northeast of Mistassini Lake, approximately two
10
hundred and seventy-five kilometres (275 km) from
11
Chibougamau. To ensure the protection of the
12
environment and of human health, the project's
13
proponent will scrupulously apply all of the
14
applicable laws and regulations from the various
15
levels of government. We want to stress that the
16
regulations governing uranium mining and
17
exploration are among the strictest.
18
The dominant winds on the Matoush property
19
blow in a south easterly direction. The data from
20
the environmental impact study show that the
21
project will not affect the air quality of the
22
future Albanel-Témiscamie-Otish National Park,
23
which will be located about fifteen kilometres
24
(15 km) to the east.
25
The site's effluents will be treated according
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 20 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
to the strictest standards before they reach the
2
nearby water system, which leads to the Camie
3
River. The regional water system is not expected to
4
be affected.
5
The Route 167 extension, to be carried out by
6
Transport Québec, will provide year-round access to
7
the Matoush Project site. A landing strip will also
8
provide access to the project. The Strateco
9
property covers three hundred and twelve square
10
kilometres (312 km5), and the Matoush Project will
11
occupy a section of approximately zero point
12
fifteen square kilometres (0.15 km5).
13
An analysis of boulder deposits from the last
14
ice age confirmed the site's high concentrations of
15
uranium. The project will take place in two major
16
phases. Once the required authorizations and
17
permits have been obtained, the first phase, the
18
exploration phase, will take place over a twenty-
19
four (24) month period. If the economic analysis
20
stemming from this phase provides positive results,
21
a new impact study will be conducted to receive the
22
authorizations and permits necessary for the next
23
phase. The second phase will consist of the actual
24
mining of the site over a ten (10) year period.
25
Several facilities will need to be built for
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 21 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
the exploration phase, including a water treatment
2
plant. The plant will treat the ground water from
3
the ramp excavation, mining exploration and other
4
activities. Daily monitoring of the water quality
5
will be part of the procedures that are
6
implemented.
7
A fuel depot and a power plant will also be
8
built. The depot will comply with Quebec's building
9
Code, to prevent any soil contamination. The power
10
plant will supply the energy for the powerful
11
ventilation system that will be installed. The site
12
will also include the infrastructure to house
13
ninety-six (96) workers. We note that local labour
14
will make up fifteen percent (15%) of the total
15
number of workers.
16
The dormitories, kitchen and comfort station
17
will be housed in weather-haven type tents, with
18
wooden floors and in trailers.
19
An organic matter storage area will be used to
20
store the surface soil, until it is used to restore
21
the site. The underground exploration phase will
22
also require a ramp, five metres (5 m) wide by five
23
metres (5 m) high, and approximately two thousand
24
eight hundred metres (2 800 m) long for the
25
trackless equipment that will be used in the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 22 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
excavations. The ramp will be equipped with a
2
ventilation system that complies with Canadian
3
Nuclear Safety Commission standards. The system
4
will evacuate used air from the underground
5
galleries to the outside. Air quality will be
6
continually monitored to ensure workers' safety.
7
Two (2) waste rock piles are the final
8
installations required for the first phase. They
9
will be able to hold two hundred and eighty-six
10
thousand tons (286 000 t) of rock. The first pile,
11
which will be one hundred metres (100 m) wide by
12
one hundred and fifteen metres (115 m) long, will
13
be used for clean waste rock. According to chemical
14
and mineral analyses, this sterile rock is non-
15
acid-generating and non-radioactive.
16
The second pile, sixty metres (60 m) by fifty
17
metres (50 m), will be used for the special waste
18
rock found during the ramp excavation, and whose
19
uranium content is more than three hundred parts
20
per million (300 ppm).
21
Finally, an estimated seven hundred and fifty
22
tons (750 t) of uranium ore will be stored
23
underground.
24
25
In the event that the project is not feasible,
the entire site would undergo a full restoration
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 23 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
process. This process would include the dismantling
2
of the buildings and equipment, and reforestation
3
with indigenous species, as well as gray pine and
4
alder.
5
When the mining phase begins, new
6
infrastructures will be added. The camp will be
7
expanded to serve one hundred and eighty (180)
8
residents. The proportion of local labour will
9
increase to twenty-five percent (25%).
10
The new facilities will include an ore-
11
processing plant to process the uranium concentrate
12
called yellowcake. A product with a low degree of
13
radioactivity that poses a very low risk for health
14
and the environment. The yellowcake will be
15
transported according to the applicable regulations
16
by a company that is certified by the Canadian
17
Nuclear Safety Commission.
18
The mine tailings will be deposited at a
19
specially designed twenty metre (20 m) deep open
20
pit. Contrary to the waste from other mining
21
operations, which is generally deposited and held
22
in tailing ponds contained by dikes, uranium mine
23
tailings are now stored in a way that will ensure
24
their long-term stability that prevents the need
25
for dikes.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 24 -
1
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
At the same time, a wind farm will be erected
2
near the site, to reduce hydrocarbon consumption.
3
The actual mine operations will require the
4
establishment of a network of new underground
5
galleries going to a depth of six hundred and
6
eighty-eight metres (688 m).
7
To compare, here is a land use example taken
8
from an open pit mine in the same area. The Matoush
9
Project will have a significantly smaller built-up
10
area.
11
Once the mining phase is completed, all
12
facilities will be fully dismantled in an orderly
13
manner, and all the mine's surface openings will be
14
filled in. Reforestation will be undertaken
15
throughout the site, using local species such as
16
black spruce, as well as using gray pine and alder.
17
The project prescribes strict environmental
18
monitoring for the entire site and the for the
19
duration of the exploration and mining phases. A
20
surveillance system will ensure that the site is
21
secure at all times. Strateco will ensure
22
compliance with the strict rules set out by the
23
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission regarding the
24
exploration and mining of the site, and its
25
restoration. To this end, the Canadian Nuclear
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 25 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
Safety Commission requires an escrow deposit for
2
one hundred percent (100%) of the site restoration
3
cost prior to the beginning of each phase.
4
Strateco Resources would like to thank you for
5
your attention.
6
END OF THE STRATECO VIDEO
7
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
8
Thank you. Slide. Okay. We will proceed now with
9
the second part, the presentation. Before we're
10
going on, I would like to review the various steps
11
involved in preparing an environmental impact
12
study. You can see it on the slide. We will come
13
back to these same points throughout the
14
presentation.
15
First, we have to identify the various sources
16
of impact, and each Pierre and Caroline and Jean-
17
Pierre will go through each part of the
18
presentation. So this slide will be repeated.
19
I think we have to talk a little bit about the
20
uranium. As I said, they have a brochure which
21
includes a lot of information about uranium,
22
different points. Oops! I have to move. The use of
23
uranium, concerns associated with uranium, Canadian
24
standards and regulations, the upturn in the
25
uranium market.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 26 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
Uranium is used in many industries, mainly for
2
generate the energy. I would say about ninety-eight
3
percent (98%) of the uranium is used for energy,
4
and also for medicine. Treatment of cancer, and
5
detection of cancer. Agriculture, food. A lot of
6
foods you are eating here have been irradiated, and
7
that preserves the freshness. And drinking water
8
supply. In Africa, a lot of water is coming from
9
desalination from a nuclear plant. As I said, for
10
more information, I invite you to see the pamphlet
11
on uranium.
12
Uranium public concerns, relative undeveloped
13
market in Quebec, causes a public concern on
14
health, the environment, and the military industry.
15
Because it's relatively undeveloped in Quebec, the
16
uranium market raises legitimate questions and
17
concerns for the public. By acting with
18
transparency and sharing information based on
19
scientific data, we hope to contribute to a better
20
understanding of the nuclear industry and issues
21
related to uranium exploration and mining.
22
Based on the knowledge of gain from fifty (50)
23
years of uranium use, we can say that in Canada,
24
the modern uranium industry is safe and secure for
25
workers, the public and the environment. I think
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 27 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
some of your brothers from Saskatoon came from
2
Rupert on March the first (1st), four (4) chiefs
3
living nearby uranium mines, and have been living
4
around uranium mines for over thirty (30) years,
5
and they told you then it's safe, it's good for the
6
community also. So, I think even if you don't trust
7
a lot of white people in front of you, I think you
8
should trust your brothers who have experience on
9
uranium. Living nearby uranium mines.
10
Regarding the military industry, no Canadian
11
producer can sell for military purposes without the
12
risk of losing his license, and it's completely
13
forbidden in Canada to sell to military industry.
14
So for us, you know, there is no point, it's... It
15
cannot be done.
16
Canadian standards and regulations. The
17
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is a pretty
18
tough regulator, and we have to follow the rules.
19
At every step we do, we have to be qualified. We
20
have got qualification to apply for the license,
21
and at every step, we have to renew our application
22
our qualification. And a mining license is good
23
only for two (2) to five (5) years. So if we do a
24
mistake, if we don't follow the rules, we cannot
25
operate the mine. We will lose our license. And a
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 28 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
hundred percent (100%) of the money, we have to put
2
the money a hundred percent (100%) before we start.
3
I asked for, you will see the exploration project,
4
we have, we estimate about six million dollars
5
(6 M$) we have to put before we even can start, to
6
be sure that if the project is not going forward,
7
then we have the money, or at least they have the
8
money in their hands to reclaim the site.
9
And as you saw also in the video, the impact
10
is very very small compared to other projects.
11
Without naming it, (inaudible) project you saw in
12
the picture, the video, comparison with the
13
(inaudible) project, the impact is very very small.
14
So the regulation standard is very strict, and
15
we have to apply every time. It's nothing as a gold
16
mine, where even there the rules are strict, you
17
cannot lose your license, it's the case for us. We
18
have to follow the rules. In Quebec, we are
19
followed by the CSST, the Environmental Department,
20
the Ministry of Energy, Transport, Industry
21
Ministry, so a lot of regulation we have to follow.
22
There are a number of reasons why the Matoush
23
Project is important. Uranium demand has been
24
increasing since the turn of the twenty-first
25
century, primarily because of the increased demand
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 29 -
PRESENTATION
Guy Hébert
Strateco
1
for nuclear power. Given the fluctuation price for
2
oil and other fossil, uranium is an energy source
3
well-suited to economy and to the present and
4
future needs. Some of the international criteria of
5
(inaudible) our growing energy demand, particularly
6
in countries like India and China, the need to
7
reduce greenhouse gas emission, and the need for
8
reliability and affordability.
9
The uranium industry must do more than meet
10
global energy demand. It must also meet demand in
11
other sectors like agriculture, food and medicine.
12
Canada is among the largest uranium producers in
13
the world. Our deposits are the richest on the
14
planet outside Athabasca. This is why we are
15
seeking the proliferation of uranium projects in
16
Quebec and throughout Canada as a whole. So, once
17
again, I would like to invite you to see the
18
brochure.
19
And so now, I will ask to Pierre to take and
20
explain the criteria used, the very severe criteria
21
used, and he will also give you more detail on the
22
surface and on the ground infrastructure. Pierre?
23
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
24
Thank you Guy. I'm just gonna put it like that.
25
Okay. Good day to everyone. I will now introduce
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 30 -
PRESENTATION
Pierre H. Terreault
Strateco
1
the study team and talk about, a bit about the
2
legal and regulating framework in the mining
3
industry. I will also discuss a very conservative
4
working assumption that guides the study process as
5
a whole.
6
Finally, I will look at various project
7
elements which have a very small footprint, and the
8
potential source and impact on the environmental
9
and the social components.
10
At Strateco Resources, this study was led by
11
my colleague Caroline Hardy and myself, with the
12
cooperation of the Strateco employees. The study
13
was prepared in close collaboration with the
14
consultants whose name you see on the screen. The
15
experts from Golder and SENES are with us today,
16
and will be available during the question period.
17
We began collecting the data present in the
18
document beginning in fall two thousand seven
19
(2007). The study plan and specifications were
20
designed to comply with federal and provincial
21
legal requirements as they applied to the mining
22
industry. They take into account the many laws,
23
regulations and environmental policies. They also
24
take into account the directive 019 for the mining
25
industry, issued by the Quebec Ministry of
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 31 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Pierre H. Terreault
Strateco
Sustainable Development, Environment and Parks.
To assess these impacts, Strateco consultants
3
based themselves on extremely prudent working
4
assumptions. What we mean by prudent assumptions is
5
that all the impact assessments were performed on
6
the basics of the worst-case scenario.
7
For each type of impact, the consultants
8
exaggerated the possibility of negative
9
consequences for the environmental and the human
10
health. For instance, the impact on water, they
11
overestimated the influence relative to the Matoush
12
Lake and used simulated mine water. This water is
13
not realistic because it was very high level of
14
uranium.
15
To assess the impact on human health, they
16
overestimated the exposure to radiological and non-
17
radiological contaminants as thought as a person on
18
site was exposed twenty-four hours (24 hr) a day
19
over the life of the project, which is impossible.
20
To assess the human exposure to carcinogenic
21
contaminants, they assumed an exposure period of a
22
lifetime at the maximum concentration estimated for
23
the production period. The addition concentration
24
generated by the project are expected to be very
25
low and virtually identical to the existing
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 32 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Pierre H. Terreault
Strateco
conditions.
In each case, they are highly improbable
3
scenarios. The global... The goal of this
4
conservative approach is to prepare an
5
environmental impact study with a significant
6
safety barrier, to ensure that we never exceed the
7
standard in the application of law and regulation.
8
9
10
This table and the next one show the working
assumptions used. If you have any question, at the
end our experts will answer it to you.
11
The consultants therefore used prudent,
12
conservative assumptions to analyze the impact of
13
human health, water, waste water treatment, et
14
caetera. They also used safe conservative
15
assumptions to assess the impact on plants, animal,
16
air, water and animals. Already... Je pense que je
17
l'ai dit deux (2) fois. En tout cas.
18
For the development of the exploration phase,
19
the Matoush Project will require surface and
20
underground facilities. On the next slide, I will
21
show you what the surface installation will look
22
like. This image shows all the surface
23
installations as seen on the video presentation.
24
The waste pad. To build the underground
25
decline, we will excavate in unmineralized rock
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 33 -
PRESENTATION
Pierre H. Terreault
Strateco
1
which does not contain uranium ore. This is what we
2
call waste. The waste rock will be brought to
3
surface and placed on the south pad of the two (2)
4
pads, waste pads, they're all around, and are
5
around, surrounded by a ditch.
6
The mineralized rock, which contains uranium
7
ore, over three hundred (300) ppm, is what we call
8
special waste. If we came across any special waste
9
while we are driving the decline, we would bring it
10
to surface and store on a separate stock pile. The
11
north pad.
12
The water treatment plan and its pond, the
13
contaminate water on the side, comes mainly from
14
the ramp excavation and the diamond drilling
15
program. This water will be sent to an underground
16
settling pond before being pumped to surface. The
17
plant will be inspected daily. Later, my colleague
18
Caroline will present a diagram of the water
19
treatment process.
20
The fuel farm. All the tanks in the fuel farm
21
will be built with a membrane designed to prevent
22
hydrocarbons from contaminating the soil in case of
23
an accident spill. The fuel farm will be inspected
24
daily. Any water that flows into the area will be
25
collected and tested before being released into the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 34 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Pierre H. Terreault
Strateco
environment by a Strateco technician.
The power plant and ventilation. The power
3
plant will power the ventilation system, the
4
pumping, and all the surface installations. The
5
ventilation system will evacuate the exhaust air to
6
surface during the excavation and the drilling
7
activity. This system will be equipped with an
8
alarm system in case of ventilation system fail. No
9
exploration activity will take place in the ore
10
until the permanent ventilation system will be
11
fully operative.
12
For the advanced exploration phase, the
13
Matoush Project will also need the underground
14
facility. On the image on the screen, you can see
15
the 3-D section of the (inaudible) and the decline
16
that will be built to go underground. These
17
facilities will provide access to the minus three
18
hundred metres (-300 m) level underground. Which is
19
this one. This level will be used to carry out
20
diamond drilling program, including definition and
21
exploration program.
22
For the next two years, the Matoush site will
23
be accessed by air, using our landing strip, by
24
winter road along the Eastmain Road, and eventually
25
by the Road 167 to the Otish Mountain Road.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 35 -
1
PRESENTATION
Pierre H. Terreault
Strateco
Now that you have a rough idea on the legal
2
and regulating framework as pertains to the mining
3
industry, the conservative approach used to assess
4
the impact in the main project elements, I would
5
like to review the various steps involved in the
6
preparating an environmental impact study.
7
These are the steps that Guy mentioned
8
earlier. We will use this slide regularly during
9
the presentation, so that you can track each step
10
of the study. First, we have identify the various
11
sources of impact. Then we analyze each impact.
12
Point 2.a., the community's concerns.
13
In December two thousand eight (2008), we came
14
to Mistissini and Chibougamau for the pre-
15
consultation with the local community, to talk to
16
them about the Matoush Project. These meetings
17
allowed us to hear about the public concerns.
18
Then, the point 2.b., we identified the
19
mitigation measurements, the residual impact. We
20
must then assess the risk for the ecosystem and
21
human health arising from the residual impact.
22
That's point 4. The risk assessment is what tells
23
us exactly what the actual effect of work in the
24
Matoush exploration Project are on the human health
25
and ecosystem.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 36 -
1
PRESENTATION
Pierre H. Terreault
Strateco
Then, the point 5, where we are presenting
2
additional mitigation measurements, and protection
3
and monitoring programs to be implanted.
4
Let's now move to the actual results of the
5
environmental impact study. I will present the
6
various sources of impact identified, then my
7
colleague Caroline will present points 2 to 5 of
8
the study.
9
To do a full analysis, every mining
10
exploration and construction activity that could
11
potentially have an impact on physical, biological
12
and human environment, was identified. The sources
13
of impact that appear on the screen and on the next
14
slide covers all the elements into consideration on
15
the study. So we have stripping and clearing, waste
16
rock excavation and management, construction of
17
facilities, equipment used and traffic on site,
18
waste management, storage of use of hazard
19
substances. Here we mean the management of
20
petroleum produced and exposed.
21
The treatment of contaminated water and
22
release of effluents. Airborne emissions. Ongoing
23
rehabilitation work as the job progresses. For
24
example, the (inaudible) will be graded with soil
25
and receded. Dismantle of the facilities. At the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 37 -
PRESENTATION
Pierre H. Terreault
Strateco
1
end of the exploration phase, a decision will be
2
made regarding the production. If the decision is
3
negative and the project does not go into
4
production, we will dismantle the surface and the
5
underground facilities. In this case, we will also
6
reseed and replant any clearance area, as you saw
7
on the video. And finally, job and procurement.
8
9
I just presented the sources of impact and the
very conservative assumption of the study. In
10
additional, as you saw in the video, the surface
11
infrastructures have a very small footprint on the
12
environment. I will now the floor over to my
13
colleague, Caroline Hardy, director of the
14
environmental department, which will present the
15
results of the impact assessment study. Caroline?
16
Mrs. CAROLINE HARDY:
17
Thank you Pierre. Good day everyone. So I'll
18
present each of the next points in the study,
19
starting with the impact analysis on the physical
20
environment.
21
So, by physical environment, we mean the
22
following elements. Hydrology, surface water and
23
sediment quality, air quality, and hydrogeology,
24
meaning the ground water.
25
So, starting with hydrology and water quality,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 38 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
the main source of potential impact on surface
2
water in the project area would relate to the
3
quantity of water treated and released into the
4
lake 5, which is Lake Matoush. The other potential
5
impacts are the release of the treated water itself
6
and the possibility of accidental spill.
7
So, when we talk about impact related to
8
water, the table that you see here presents very
9
important results. These tests are done on the
10
simulated mine water that Pierre talked about. The
11
simulated mine water contains much higher uranium
12
concentrations than the water that will come out
13
from the underground workings during ramp
14
excavation and the site exploration phase.
15
On this table, on each side of the green
16
column, you can see the concentrations of the
17
substances in the simulated mine water and the
18
concentrations of the substances in the lake water
19
in its natural state.
20
In the center, in the green column, you can
21
see Strateco's concentration objective for the
22
effluent release. This means that the water that
23
Strateco will use for underground exploration will
24
later be treated in the water treatment plant
25
before being discharged into Lake Matoush. For each
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 39 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
substance, Strateco will meet, at minimum, the
2
release concentration in the green column. These
3
are well under the current allowable limits which
4
are shown in the two columns to the right.
5
For example, for uranium, the tests done on
6
the simulated mine water showed uranium
7
concentration of about two point eleven milligrams
8
per litre (2.11 mg/l). The directive 019 criteria
9
for this parameter is two milligrams per litre
10
(2 mg/l). Strateco's release concentration
11
objective is zero point one milligram per litre
12
(0.1 mg/l). This is well below the directive 019
13
requirements.
14
So the image you see on the screen shows the
15
various stages of the contaminated water treatment
16
process. The water used for excavation and
17
exploration activities is treated in several
18
stages, until it meets Strateco's release
19
concentration objectives. So, we see the following
20
stages in the diagram.
21
So first, we have the removal of suspended
22
solids in the water from the ground through the
23
addition of flocculents that cause solids to
24
coagulate and settle at the bottom of the
25
sedimentation basin.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 40 -
1
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
Follows the first treatment, involving the
2
addition of regents at low pH to precipitate
3
certain metals. The water then flows to the first
4
settling pond, where metals precipitated in the
5
first phase of treatment will settle at the bottom.
6
The clarified water is then sent to a second
7
treatment stage.
8
9
The second, and in theory the final treatment,
involving the addition of regions at higher pH to
10
precipitate the remaining metal that might still be
11
present in the water. So, the water then flows to
12
the final settling pond, where the remaining metals
13
precipitated in the second phase will settle at the
14
bottom of the basin. And finally, we have the
15
release of the treated water into Lake Matoush.
16
So, multiple internal control sampling points
17
are planned throughout the treatment process, to
18
ensure that the system is working efficiently. If
19
needed, the water can be returned to an earlier
20
stage at any stage of the treatment. Water samples
21
will be sent to an external lab on a weekly basis.
22
So here, you see a simplification of the
23
watershed in which the Matoush site is located. You
24
see the area drainage, meaning the route that the
25
treated water will take once it has been returned
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 41 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
to Lake Matoush. So, the water will drain into a
2
small eighteen kilometre (18 km) stream before
3
flowing into the Camie and the Temiscamie River. It
4
then flows into Lake Albanel, and then Lake
5
Mistissini, and then continues its course towards
6
the Rupert River, and finally James Bay.
7
So, according to the environmental impact
8
study, no effects of the project are anticipated on
9
the regional watershed. So now, let's look at the
10
11
community's concerns in this regard.
So questions raised during the December two
12
thousand and nine (2009) pre-consultation touched
13
the points that you see on the screen. Water, and
14
particularly the quality of the water around and at
15
the Matoush site are issues that were raised
16
repeatedly by the public.
17
As we have seen on the tables and images,
18
Strateco will meet release concentrations that are
19
well within the allowable limits. The contaminated
20
water treatment process will follow strict stages
21
with regular sampling, and the volume of effluent
22
generated by Matoush Project will not have any
23
negative effects on the natural shoreline of Lake
24
Matoush or the waterways and lakes into which it
25
flows.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 42 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
As for air, the main source of potential
2
impact on air quality relates to the dispersion of
3
potential airborne contaminants. First, let's
4
precise that there are no villages, towns or homes
5
near the Matoush site. Furthermore, the maximum
6
additional annual concentration of radon expected
7
from the project activities are in the order of one
8
Becquerel per cubic metre (1 Bq/m;) on site, and
9
zero point zero five Becquerel per cubic metre
10
(0.05 Bq/m;) at the edge of the future national
11
park.
12
For your information, a Becquerel per cubic
13
metre (1 Bq/m;) is the unit of measure used to
14
indicate radon concentrations in the air. So in
15
nature, radon concentrations in air at the site
16
range between seven (7) to nineteen Becquerel per
17
cubic metre (19 Bq/m;).
18
So the concentration limit of sixty Becquerel
19
per cubic metre (60 Bq/m;) recommended by the
20
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is therefore
21
never exceeded, and the effect of the project on
22
existing concentrations is negligible. As for
23
airborne dust concentrations, they are minimal.
24
The map that I will show you in the next slide
25
shows wind direction at the Matoush site. So at the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 43 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
site, we see that the prevailing winds are aligned
2
on a west-northwest southeast axis. The winds
3
therefore do not blow towards the local communities
4
of Mistissini, Chibougamau-Chapais or other
5
inhabited areas.
6
Other questions were raised by residents
7
regarding the potential presence of harmful dust or
8
radon gas in the air. People are afraid that the
9
substances released by underground development will
10
11
contaminate the air and harm their health.
As we saw in the slides that I just presented,
12
the allowable limits will never be exceeded, and
13
the dust in the air will be minimal. Furthermore,
14
the wind that blows across the site does not blow
15
in the direction of the local communities. So now,
16
let's look at mitigation measures.
17
Strateco will use a number of measures at the
18
Matoush Project site to limit the effect of human
19
activities on the physical environment. Here are
20
some examples of the measures that will be used. So
21
rain water will be diverted away from the site to
22
sedimentation basins before being released. Air
23
sampling stations will be set up at strategic
24
locations, and water quality will be assessed in
25
the catch basins and the mine water treatment
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 44 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
plant.
So now, let's look at the analysis of impact
3
on the biological environment. So, by biological
4
environment, we mean the following elements:
5
and vegetation, fish and fish habitat, birds and
6
wildlife. The main source of potential impact on
7
the soil and vegetation around the site relates to
8
the tree filling required to prepare the site and
9
build the surface facilities. Vehicle and machinery
soil
10
traffic could potentially have an impact if they
11
drive outside the permissible limits, or if they
12
generate dust or cause oil or fuel leaks.
13
It should be noted that no rare or endangered
14
plant species were found on site. And this area is
15
not particularly valued by the Cree community in
16
terms of gathering.
17
The potential impact on the fish of Lake
18
Matoush is related to the change in the quality of
19
their habitat due to the release of the treated
20
water into the lake. It's also related to the
21
possible increase in fishing activities, due to the
22
number of workers at the Matoush site.
23
The potential impact on wildlife is
24
essentially related to the loss or modification of
25
their habitats due to the clearing of trees and the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 45 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
impact of certain sensory disturbances, like
2
increased noise, light or certain vibration. It's
3
possible that individual birds or animals could be
4
disturbed, but not the population as a whole.
5
Furthermore, the Matoush Project does not in
6
any way prevent wildlife from moving to
7
neighbouring habitats.
8
9
Finally, there is a possibility that
collisions could occur between animals and vehicles
10
on site. So now, let's look at the community's
11
concerns in this regard.
12
During pre-consultation, questions touched on
13
the points that you see on the screen. The
14
preservation of fish and wildlife habitats, fishing
15
and hunting emerged as issues, particularly for the
16
members of the Cree Nation. So now, let's look at
17
the mitigation measures.
18
So, Strateco will use a number of measures at
19
the site to limit the effect of human activities on
20
the biological environment. Here are some examples
21
of the measures that will be used.
22
So, a procedure has been set up to deal with
23
accidental spills of petroleum or chemical
24
products, and recovery kits will be placed at
25
strategic locations to allow a fast response to
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 46 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
this type of situation.
Non-aboriginal workers will be prohibited from
3
fishing at the Matoush Project site. Clearing will
4
be limited to a strict minimum to preserve wildlife
5
habitat as much as possible. So now, let's look at
6
the study of impacts on the human environment.
7
So, to conclude the impact assessment, the
8
study looked at the human environment, and more
9
precisely at the positive and negative impacts for
10
the people living nearest the poverty, namely the
11
Cree Nation of Mistissini and the residents of
12
Chibougamau-Chapais.
13
So, when we talk about human environment, we
14
mean the following elements:
15
of life and cultural context, economic benefits,
16
land use, heritage and archeology. So now, let's
17
look at the community's concerns and demands in
18
this regard.
19
human health, quality
So during the pre-consultation, the questions
20
raised touched on the points that you see on the
21
screen. Concerns were raised in terms of health and
22
safety of the public and the miners. Many people
23
expressed their fear of contamination of
24
radioactive accidents, the potential negative
25
effects of radiation from uranium ore and available
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 47 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
protection measures, and the uranium transport
2
safety criteria.
3
Residents also made certain demands. They
4
wanted access to training and jobs. They also
5
wanted business opportunities in relation to the
6
project. And they expressed the desire to see an
7
office opened locally. So now, let's look at the
8
mitigation and improvement measures planned.
9
So, Strateco will use many measures at the
10
Matoush site to limit the negative effects of the
11
project which are really minimal in human terms. It
12
will make a particular effort to maximize the
13
positive spinoffs of the project for local
14
communities.
15
The measures that will be used to limit the
16
negative impacts are, for example, workers
17
potentially exposed to radiation will be outfitted
18
with safety equipment like the dosimeters that are
19
supplied and analyzed by Health Canada in Ottawa.
20
Environmental monitoring and protection
21
programs, as well as radioprotection and health and
22
safety programs, will be set up. Air quality
23
underground will be monitored continuously. Daily
24
inspections will be done for all the potential
25
sources of impact. Workers and contractors will be
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 48 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
trained. And a communication program for the
2
employees and the community will be set up.
3
As for archeological heritage, we do not
4
anticipate any impact, as the inventory of the
5
Matoush Project site did not turn up any evidence
6
of archeological sites.
7
Workers at the Matoush Project will acquire a
8
professional expertise, which is a long-term
9
benefit for the region and for Quebec as a whole.
10
This will build Quebec's uranium expertise.
11
Salaries of workers at the Matoush Project will
12
improve the standard of living of the workers and
13
their families. Here are a few examples of
14
improvement measures.
15
Given equalibility and qualification, Strateco
16
will hire Cree and local manpower first to work in
17
the Matoush Project. Hiring will also take into
18
account the workers' availability, skills and
19
previous training, competition with various mining
20
projects, and the workers' interest in taking
21
necessary training.
22
The underground exploration phase will result
23
in one hundred and eighty (180) jobs. Our objective
24
is for the Cree to fill fifteen percent (15%) of
25
these. If the project goes into production,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 49 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
Strateco will need to hire an additional three
2
hundred (300) workers or so. Our goal is for the
3
Cree to fill twenty-five percent (25%) of these
4
jobs.
5
We estimate that each direct job will generate
6
two indirect jobs. Strateco already sourced goods
7
and services from local businesses on a priority
8
basis. So overall, the Matoush Project has a
9
positive influence on the quality of life, cultural
10
context and job creation in the local community. So
11
now, let's look at the residual impacts.
12
So, of the twenty (20) or so physical,
13
biological and human elements for which we assessed
14
the residual impacts, seventeen (17) residual
15
impacts were considered very minor or minor. The
16
real risk is therefore really very limited, as the
17
residual impacts result from very conservative
18
working assumptions.
19
Three residual impacts are to be considered,
20
but they're still overestimated because of the
21
conservative assumptions. These three impacts
22
involve the release of treated effluent into Lake
23
Matoush, the risk of an accidental spill of oil or
24
other product near a lake or a waterways on the
25
site, the risk of disturbing fish communities by
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 50 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
overfishing. Finally, health and safety issues were
2
clearly a source of concern for the communities.
3
So once the potential residual impacts were
4
identified, the experts assessed the likelihood
5
that these would have an effect on the ecosystem or
6
human health.
7
So, the last step in the environmental impact
8
study is the risk assessment for the residual
9
impacts on the ecosystem and the human health. So
10
the risk study concluded that radiological and non-
11
radiological substances of interest would not have
12
any undesirable effects on the environment or human
13
health. Here is how the consultants went about
14
assessing the risks.
15
First, they selected the substances present at
16
the site that could have effects on elements of the
17
ecosystem and human health. These are called the
18
substances of interest. Then the valued elements on
19
the ecosystem that could potentially be affected by
20
these substances were selected. These include
21
certain types of plants, wildlife and aquatic life.
22
In terms of human elements, the risk study
23
looked at two profiles in particular. An adult
24
member of the Cree Nation practicing traditional
25
activities in the area of the site, and a cook
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 51 -
1
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
working at the site.
2
Finally, they assessed the possible
3
interactions between the ecological and human
4
elements and the substances of interest. Here, we
5
mean ingestion, absorption or inhalation. For
6
instance, human consumption of fish caught in the
7
area, ingestion of water and plants by animals near
8
the site, and so on.
9
The additional concentrations of the
10
substances of interest, meaning those that would be
11
added by the project activities, were assessed
12
using models created by the consultants. Modelling
13
was done for air, water and soil. These
14
calculations generated an assessment of the
15
additional concentrations for each ecological and
16
human elements.
17
The objective here is to assess the risk of
18
undesirable effects on the ecosystem and human
19
health. We therefore compared the additional
20
concentrations to the existing toxicity reference
21
values.
22
So here are the conclusions, then, of the risk
23
assessment on the ecosystem and the human health.
24
Humans could be exposed to the substances of
25
interest primarily through the consumption of food
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 52 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
exposed to these substances, and exposure to
2
radiation. In terms of exposure to radiation,
3
analyses show that all the estimated doses for our
4
two receivers, namely the camp cook and a member of
5
the Cree community, were far below the one thousand
6
(1 000) microsievert per year criteria, and
7
therefore, human are not at any risk of exposure to
8
radiation on site.
9
The non-radiological substances of interest
10
assessed for the study showed relatively high
11
natural background concentrations. The additional
12
concentrations from the project activities is
13
generally minimal and lies within the existing
14
natural range. We can therefore conclude that no
15
potential undesirable effects on human health are
16
to be expected.
17
As for the aquatic environment, the study
18
conclusions show that the increase in radiological
19
and non-radiological substances of interest due to
20
the site activities would have very little to no
21
potential undesirable effect on fish, plankton,
22
benthic invertebrates and aquatic plants. The
23
natural background concentrations are already
24
relatively high, and the contribution from
25
activities lies within the natural range seen on
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 53 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
site.
The same observations can be made for the land
3
environment, meaning that in some cases, natural
4
background concentrations were already very high,
5
and the additional concentrations from future work
6
are minimal. We can therefore conclude that the
7
project will have very little to no potential
8
undesirable effect on the land environment.
9
The last step in the environmental impact
10
study involves the additional mitigation measures
11
and the implementation of protection and monitoring
12
programs. Here, I'll give you an overview of the
13
additional measures that will be used to minimize
14
the impacts on the environmental front, as well as
15
to provide optimal health and safety conditions for
16
workers and subcontractors involved in the project.
17
So for example, there will be an environment
18
protection program, environmental monitoring and
19
supervision program, health and safety program,
20
permanent nursing staff at the site, setting up of
21
emergency procedures for accidental spills, daily
22
inspection of facilities like the fuel farm, the
23
water treatment plant, the propane storage area,
24
the pipes, ditches, containment basins, internal
25
control water sampling, and many others. So the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 54 -
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
1
complete list of these measures can be found in the
2
environmental impact study.
3
So, in summary, our study has been conducted
4
following strict guidelines, using very
5
conservative working assumptions. The potential
6
impacts identified are negligible, and the
7
mitigation measures and monitoring programs will be
8
in place throughout the duration of the project, to
9
ensure the safety of people and the respect of the
10
11
environment.
So, I will now turn things over to Jean-Pierre
12
Lachance, our executive vice-president, who will
13
talk to you about stakeholder relations. Jean-
14
Pierre?
15
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
16
Well, thank you. Thank you Caroline. I'm sure that
17
everyone here appreciated the clarity of your
18
allocation.
19
Chief, it's nice to be here in your community
20
again. It's always a pleasure. Following the
21
introduction of the presentation by Guy, the
22
technical part by Pierre and the environmental
23
section by Caroline, I'm here to talk to you about
24
how important it is for us to maintain strong
25
relations with the local communities, and
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 55 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Caroline Hardy
Strateco
especially Mistissini.
But before going any further, I would like to
3
introduce you two colleagues of mine who are
4
helping me a lot to achieve our corporate goals.
5
Well, first of all, we have Daniel Bergeron. Where
6
is Daniel?
7
director of community relations. He's a resident of
8
Chibougamau, our relations for Chibougamau-Chapais
9
and Mistissini. And Daniel is also assisted by
Daniel is over there. Daniel is our
10
Peter, Peter Coonishish over there. I guess Peter
11
is very well-known, of course, from members of
12
Mistissini. But also, for those who would not know
13
Peter, Peter also, being more than a member of the
14
Mistissini community, whose family has trap lines
15
surrounding the Matoush Project.
16
So far, many presentations and meetings were
17
held with the population at large to keep you
18
informed of the advancing stages of the Matoush
19
Project, and to reinforce the communications. Since
20
the project began, in two thousand and six (2006),
21
we have insisted on establish open and transparent
22
relations with the local communities and the main
23
participants in the Matoush Project.
24
25
A number of meetings and presentations took
place in Chibougamau and Mistissini in order to
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 56 -
PRESENTATION
Jean-Pierre Lachance
Strateco
1
keep the participants regularly informed on the
2
project's progress, as well as the results of the
3
exploration work.
4
The Matoush Project was presented to local
5
governments, business people, and the public at
6
large. Two important meetings were also held at the
7
Matoush Camp in February two thousand and eight
8
(2008) and February two thousand and nine (2009),
9
with families whose trap lines surround the
10
project, once again to inform the families on the
11
exploration activities underway, and to respond to
12
questions and concerns.
13
It is essential for us that the Matoush
14
Project and its goals are clear for residents of
15
Mistissini and Chibougamau-Chapais, as desire the
16
communities that are the closest to the project,
17
and the most "lively" to benefit from it. Likely.
18
In order to increase communications with local
19
communities, Strateco has now an office in
20
Mistissini and another one in Chibougamau. As
21
Caroline mentioned a little bit earlier, this was a
22
request. This was a request in December two
23
thousand and nine (2009)... two thousand and eight
24
(2008), and we said yes, it will come. So there we
25
are, now, with these offices, and that should
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 57 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Jean-Pierre Lachance
Strateco
reinforce the communications quite a bit.
It's also important for us to keep the lines
3
of communication open with the various local
4
provincial and national governments, as well as
5
with the shareholders of Strateco. But let's get
6
back, here, to here in Mistissini and Chibougamau.
7
In December two thousand and eight (2008), we
8
came to Mistissini and Chibougamau to present the
9
Matoush underground exploration ramp project to the
10
public at large, and to inform the public on
11
uranium, particularly potential concerns, and the
12
health and safety aspect. This presentation took
13
the form of pre-consultations held in French and
14
English in Mistissini.
15
We also organized discussion workshops with
16
representatives of the Chibougamau-Chapais
17
financial sector, including the mayor of
18
Chibougamau, municipal counsellors, members of the
19
Chamber of Commerce, members of the James Bay
20
Action Committee and many others. Here, in
21
Mistissini, discussion workshops were also
22
organized with representatives, of course, of the
23
Cree Nation people, including trappers, Cree living
24
in the area of the Matoush Project, and elders.
25
These various information and discussion
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 58 -
PRESENTATION
Jean-Pierre Lachance
Strateco
1
sessions attracted over a hundred and fifty (150)
2
participants. Well, perhaps some of you here were
3
present.
4
These pre-consultations enabled us to gather
5
many comments and questions in relation to the
6
various aspects of the project. People also shared
7
their concerns about health, the environment and
8
the economic benefits of the Matoush Project for
9
the residents of Chibougamau-Chapais, but mainly
10
here, of course, for the Cree Nation of Mistissini.
11
The main thing to retain about these pre-
12
consultations is that they clearly strengthened
13
local communications with both Mistissini and
14
Chibougamau. I hope the presentation today helped
15
address these concerns and clarify what the
16
advanced exploration phase of the project involves,
17
by throwing some light on the very legitimate
18
questions that a uranium mining project raises.
19
Most of all, I hope that the results of the
20
environmental impact study allowed you to see that
21
the negative effects of the Matoush Project on
22
people's health and the environment will be
23
negligible. And in a few moments, we will be very
24
pleased to answer your questions.
25
Also, like Caroline mentioned, it's important
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 59 -
PRESENTATION
Jean-Pierre Lachance
Strateco
1
to reiterate that economic benefits for the local
2
community will be substantial. I invite you all to
3
read the environmental impact study that we
4
presented and its key aspects. It's essential for
5
us to ensure that we are addressing all of your
6
questions. The French and English versions of this
7
study can be found on the Internet and on the
8
website of the Canadian Environmental Assessment
9
Agency. You can also find publicly available copies
10
of the study at the Mistissini Band Council, at the
11
Chibougamau Municipal Library, and on request, in
12
the council room of the Chapais Town Hall.
13
As you can see, the relations with the local
14
communities, especially Mistissini and Chibougamau-
15
Chapais, are a top priority for us, and we clearly
16
intend to keep reinforcing the relationship between
17
all parties.
18
After talking about the importance about...
19
for communications within our company, I leave the
20
floor to our president, Guy Hébert, for the
21
conclusion. Guy?
22
CONCLUSION
23
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
24
As you have seen, either through the video or
25
through my colleagues' presentations, the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
CONCLUSION
- 60 -
1
environmental impact study on the Matoush Project
2
has been performed very seriously by qualified
3
people. The underground exploration project impact
4
is truly negligible. Even if extreme criteria have
5
been used.
6
The study answers the population's
7
preoccupation on water, air, animal and vegetable
8
life, and on the social environment. The study is
9
well made. And I can assure you, by my many years
10
of experience, that no exploration project in
11
Quebec has been subject to such a study.
12
The information and communication efforts that
13
we have made since two thousand and six (2006)
14
allow us to estimate that our project is socially
15
accepted. We'll answer questions received from
16
various authorities during the next few weeks. But
17
the study conclusion will not change. The Matoush
18
Project is for us a vector of regional socio-
19
economic development, in Quebec and in Canada, with
20
a negligible environmental impact.
21
I thank you all for your attention throughout
22
this presentation. I hope it will have been useful
23
for each and everyone of you. I now invite you to
24
share your comments and questions with us, and
25
maybe pass the word to monsieur Benoit Taillon.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
CONCLUSION
- 61 -
1
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
2
Merci monsieur Hébert. Avant que... [translation]
3
Before... (himself) ... Canadian Nuclear Safety
4
Commission to present some slides on the regulatory
5
system, and after him, madame Karine Menezes,
6
sorry, from Health Canada, will also present to you
7
some slides, and after that we'll start with the
8
questions.
9
PRESENTATION BY THE CNSC
10
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
11
Thank you. Thank you for giving us the opportunity
12
here to speak a bit about the Canadian Nuclear
13
Safety Commission and the processes that we go
14
through as part of a licensing project such as the
15
Matoush Project. Some of you may recognize me, I
16
was here last fall, provided a quick overview of
17
who we are and what we do. So, for some of you who
18
are here, you may be hearing a lot of the same
19
information again. For those of you who haven't
20
been here before, I hope you'll benefit from this.
21
Basically, I'll give you a quick overview of
22
who we are, who is the Canadian Nuclear Safety
23
Commission, how we regulate. I'll talk very quickly
24
about environmental assessment, and I'll focus
25
mostly on licensing, and what we do in the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
CONCLUSION
- 62 -
1
licensing processes. And then a quick conclusion.
2
Just a quick context, you kind of heard a
3
little bit about it from Strateco, uranium is fuel
4
that's used for nuclear reactors. Nuclear reactors
5
generate electricity. There is currently eighteen
6
(18) operating nuclear reactors in Canada, and
7
Canada is a major supplier of uranium around the
8
world.
9
Another thing is that for Canada and other
10
countries, nuclear is already part of the mix.
11
Several countries around the world have nuclear
12
power plants. There are some signs of potential
13
growth and construction of new reactors around the
14
world. Canada is a rich source of uranium, and
15
there is a few things that have come out that might
16
lead to some increasing demands for uranium. But
17
perhaps what's most important from the Canadian
18
Nuclear Safety Commission context is these are not
19
our decisions to make. The CNSC does not decide on
20
the nuclear mix, or the mix of energy. We are here
21
to regulate and ensure that the facilities are safe
22
when they are chosen to be constructed.
23
24
So what's our role?
If governments and/or
proponents take decisions to pursue nuclear
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 63 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
projects, what we do, our mandate is clear, we
2
protect the health, safety and security of persons
3
and the environment, and respect Canada's
4
international commitments on the peaceful use of
5
nuclear energy. We are not proponents for the
6
industry, we are proponents for safety.
7
We are headed up by a Commission Tribunal,
8
that's an independent, quasi-judicial
9
administrative judicial, which there is seven
10
independent members and a president. They are
11
independent, they are even independent from us as
12
staff, they make their decisions independently,
13
taking into account the recommendations that we
14
make, the information that's provided to them by
15
the proponents, and taking in consideration the
16
input that they receive from different members of
17
the public interested groups.
18
We are a science-based organization, our
19
hearings are public, they are open to the public,
20
and they are also webcast on the Internet, for
21
those who cannot be in attendance. We're supported
22
by a secretariate, and we have independent legal
23
services as well.
24
25
We're a fairly large organization, scientific,
technical, professional staff, we're about eight
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 64 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
hundred and fifty (850) employees. We're
2
responsible for implementing the decisions that are
3
made by the Commission, and verifying that the
4
proponents, the licensees are in compliance with
5
the obligations, under the regulations and the
6
licenses that they've been provided.
7
We are also involved in reviewing the license
8
applications and environmental assessments, and
9
engaging in the public throughout (inaudible)
10
11
activities such as this one.
We are the principal federal regulator for
12
uranium mining in Canada. We also work with other
13
federal departments, human resources skills,
14
Development Canada, Health Canada, Environment
15
Canada, Fisheries and Oceans, Transport Canada in
16
their roles, we work with them in harmony as much
17
as possible. We also work with provincial local
18
governments who may also have responsibilities for
19
workers' safety, environment, protection and
20
decommissioning. We really want to work with them,
21
work together to make sure that things are
22
effective.
23
We regulate a number of facilities and
24
activities. We regulate the fuel cycle, so uranium
25
mines and mills, uranium fuel fabrication and
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 65 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
processing facilities, nuclear power plants,
2
facilities that are used for storing radioactive
3
waste, facilities activities with regards to
4
processing nuclear substances, use of the nuclear
5
substances, whether it be medical uses or
6
industrial uses, research facilities, research
7
reactors, educational facilities, and finally
8
import and export of nuclear substances, equipment
9
and technology.
10
We are governed by the Nuclear Safety Control
11
Act. It's a modern Act in two thousand (2000),
12
fairly well-recognized internationally as a very
13
modern Act with a lot of powers that are given to
14
us. Under that, we have a number of regulations
15
that are specifically applicable. We have general
16
regulations, general nuclear safety and control
17
regulations, we also have regulations that are
18
specific to uranium mines and mills, and we have
19
regulations specifically with regards to radiation
20
protection.
21
What's important is licensees ultimately are
22
responsible for ensuring the security, protection
23
of health, safety, protecting the environment,
24
respecting Canada's international commitments. Our
25
responsibility is regulating them and assessing
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 66 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
that they're complying with the Act, the
2
regulations and the international obligations.
3
A license from the CNSC is required for
4
advanced exploration such as the Matoush Project,
5
where underground uranium exploration activities
6
are going to be conducted. Our licensing process
7
basically comprises the receipt of an application
8
from a proponent. We go through a number of reviews
9
to determine the adequacy of the application. As
10
well, in parallel, we can be doing an environmental
11
assessment such as this one.
12
We conduct public hearings where applications
13
are brought forward to the Commission, and
14
considered for a decision. Licenses are multiple
15
stages. So proponents, when they get involved with
16
the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, get to see
17
us many many times throughout the process.
18
An important component of our licensing is the
19
requirement of financial guarantees. A financial
20
guarantee, basically, what that is, is that at any
21
time, if the proponent were to suddenly leave the
22
site, we have to... They need to make sure that
23
there is monies that have been set aside, so that
24
we can take that money and use it in order to
25
properly take care of the site. That's an important
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 67 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
requirement. This ensures that should, for whatever
2
reason, the proponent choose to abandon the site,
3
that there are provisions in place in order to take
4
care of it.
5
opportunities for public involvement.
6
Throughout the process, there is ample
Moving on, under the Canadian Environmental
7
Assessment Act, the main things under the Canadian
8
Environmental Assessment Act is to minimize or
9
advise, or avoid adverse environmental effects
10
before they occur, and to incorporate environmental
11
factors into decision-making, including some
12
requirements for environmental monitoring and
13
follow-up work that might come out during the
14
licensing phase.
15
With regards to the Matoush EA process, we are
16
providing technical expertise to the COFEX EA
17
process under the James Bay Northern Quebec
18
Agreement. We are also a responsible authority
19
under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act,
20
and we will continue to follow all the requirements
21
under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.
22
With regards to license application, these are
23
some of the things that we will look at in
24
consideration for an application. We will look at
25
all the detailed designs of the facilities and
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 68 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
equipment, look at the processes that are being
2
proposed by the proponent, we will look at how the
3
site will be managed, how it's organized, the type
4
of people that they have, the qualifications of the
5
people who will be working there, the training
6
programs that are in place to ensure that their
7
workers are properly trained, in order to properly
8
exercise their duties and responsibilities.
9
We will look at the radiation protection
10
programs, environmental protection. How they manage
11
conventional health and safety, and how they deal
12
in the event of an emergency.
13
With regards to protection of the environment,
14
the things we look at is how they control the
15
releases to the air, to surface water and to ground
16
water. We look at how they measure the
17
environmental releases, how they measure the
18
effects in the receiving environment, and ensure
19
that what actions, that they're prepared to take
20
whatever actions are necessary when and if
21
required.
22
With regards to the public, we look at
23
measurements of radiation in the environment,
24
calculating the maximum potential radiation
25
exposure to a member of the public. In this, we are
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 69 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
conservative. We need to ensure that should someone
2
want to be in proximity to the site, that they are
3
protected as well. We look at additional exposures
4
from the facilities to ensure that they don't
5
exceed regulatory limits.
6
With regards to radiation protection of the
7
workers, we look at how they've designed the
8
facility in order to protect workers, again how
9
they're managing the radiation protection, to
10
ensure that adequate controls are in place, that
11
radioactive materials are properly controlled, that
12
the work is properly controlled, and that they're
13
properly measuring the radiation, radiation
14
exposures to the workers, to ensure that regulatory
15
limits are not exceeded.
16
Once they've received their license, they're
17
still not done with us. The compliance process, we
18
verify, we do on-site inspections at operating
19
facilities. We conduct these verifications, these
20
inspections with a set frequency. We also look at
21
events that may have occurred. They have a
22
requirement to submit compliance reports to us that
23
tell us how they perform. We review those reports
24
as well.
25
When we do field inspections, we do these
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 70 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
reviews. If we're not satisfied that they're taking
2
appropriate measures and that they've taken
3
appropriate actions, we have a number of
4
enforcement tools at our disposal. Anywhere from
5
voluntary compliance, where we ask them to take
6
action and they voluntarily do it. We can order
7
them to take necessary actions if we're not
8
satisfied by what they're doing. In a more severe
9
scenario, the Commission may choose to amend their
10
license or remove their license. And finally, one
11
final case is we can propose and make
12
recommendations for possible prosecution of the
13
company, including its management.
14
We also promote safety culture, we want to
15
ensure that safety is foremost in how they manage
16
their activities.
17
We mentioned you have different opportunities
18
for getting involved in licensing. We're in the
19
middle of the application right now. We're going
20
through the review. This is part of the process as
21
well, where you have an opportunity to provide
22
input. As well, when we go through the public
23
hearings for licensing, we're currently looking at,
24
depending on how the process goes through, when the
25
public hearing takes place, we are currently
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 71 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
reviewing the possibility of holding a public
2
hearing somewhere in the area here, to facilitate
3
participation. Because most of our hearings are
4
conducted in Ottawa. So, this is one thing that
5
we're currently pursuing and looking into.
6
One very important point is that no licensing
7
decision can be made until this particular process
8
is completed. So while we're doing our reviews of
9
the licensing application, no decisions will be
10
made until the outcome of this process is known,
11
and we know whether in fact we're proceeding or not
12
to the next stage.
13
In conclusion, we are Canada's nuclear
14
regulator, we're responsible for licensing,
15
compliance and enforcement of the uranium mining
16
industry in Canada, where the protection of
17
workers, the public and the environment is our top
18
priority. Transparency and public consultation are
19
strongly valued, and we work cooperatively with
20
other agencies to ensure that the industry is
21
properly regulated. Thank you.
22
DISCUSSION
23
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
24
Thank you very much, monsieur LeClair. Chief
25
Longchap will say a few words before your
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 72 -
PRESENTATION
Jean LeClair
CNSC
1
presentation, Karine.
2
CHIEF JOHN LONGCHAP:
3
(in Cree) So I just wanted to say that I have
4
another function to go to, which was scheduled
5
before this hearing, so I'll have to excuse myself.
6
(in Cree) I think some refreshments will be brought
7
in, some cold cuts will be brought in at six
8
(18h00), five thirty (17h30), six (18h00), around
9
six (18h00), or later on today, so... I also want
10
to say that this forum is an opportunity for people
11
to ask questions, comments, that's the purpose of
12
this meeting. So take the opportunity to ask your
13
questions and make your comments. So... (in Cree)
14
Thank you.
15
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
16
Et maintenant, je remets la parole à Karine
17
Menezes, l'experte de Santé Canada.
18
PRESENTATION BY HEALTH CANADA
19
Mrs. KARINE MENEZES:
20
... is Karine Menezes. I work for Health Canada,
21
and my role is to make sure that every project we
22
receive within Health Canada is seen by experts, by
23
our experts, by the right experts, and those
24
experts, we make sure that they can address issues,
25
health issues and express their concerns about
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
DISCUSSION
- 73 -
1
2
those projects.
So, I'm the original environmental assessment
3
coordinator, and today, I will talk to you a little
4
bit about our mandate within the Canadian
5
Environmental Assessment Act.
6
So, Health Canada has no power to prohibit, we
7
have no permit, we have no rules to enforce, so we
8
have the power to recommend. And how do we... are
9
we doing that, is by providing expertise when it is
10
required. So, when the Act is triggered, the
11
responsible federal authority, like, for this case,
12
the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, if they
13
see, if they foresee impacts or issues of, for
14
health, for human health, they ask us to provide
15
some expertise, to look through the study.
16
So, this is a few examples of the expertise we
17
provide. This is in general, so we then provide all
18
those expertises for the Matoush Project.
19
For example, air quality, we could ask, our
20
experts can ask for the baseline, the actual state
21
of the environment. What the concentration at...
22
What is the concentration now. And they will ask to
23
be able to compare what will be the concentration
24
of all chemicals, or all emissions with the
25
project.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 74 -
1
PRESENTATION
Karine Menezes
Health Canada
It's about the same for all experts in Health
2
Canada, so, to be able to compare what's gonna be
3
the state after a project is being started, we need
4
to know what's the actual state, and what will be
5
the adding of the project.
6
So, to give you a little bit more example, for
7
contamination of country food, when we talk about
8
country food we talk about local food resources,
9
for subsistence or recreational activities, like
10
11
fish, wild game and berries.
We can ask for a study for a consumption
12
survey, for example, to know a little bit more
13
about the consumption habits, the rate and types of
14
species people are feeding with. Like for air
15
quality, we like to know the baseline concentration
16
and the future levels of potential contaminants.
17
For drinking water quality, we like to know
18
about chemical and microbiological contaminants. We
19
have also expertise on treatment requirements.
20
Noise effects, we'll go through the existing
21
and predicted future daytime and nighttime sound
22
levels to be able to assess or to evaluate the
23
impact of the project.
24
25
For radiation, we assess human exposure to
ionizing radiation, and we look the type of
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 75 -
PRESENTATION
Karine Menezes
Health Canada
1
radiation, like radon and radioactive isotopes for
2
all medium.
3
And the last one I put there is a little bit
4
special, is human health risk assessment. It's
5
special because the expert has to understand and to
6
take into account all the other aspects of the
7
project. So, I thought it would be a good idea to
8
talk to you about a little bit more of these human
9
health risk assessments, and what our experts are
10
looking for when they look, when they go through a
11
human health risk assessment.
12
So, they ask themselves one question, one
13
principal question:
is there a risk?
So, to be
14
able to answer this question, they need three
15
things. If one of those three... these three things
16
are not there, they cannot assess the risk, and
17
they can... Well, they just, it does, just doesn't
18
have any risk.
19
So, the first things that we need to have in
20
order to have a risk is hazards. So in this case,
21
could be chemical. So, they will look at the
22
chemical before the project and after. They will
23
look at the type and concentration of all
24
contaminants of potential concern. If there is no
25
chemical or hazards in the area, there is no risk.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 76 -
1
2
PRESENTATION
Karine Menezes
Health Canada
There just can't be any risk.
The second thing that we need in order to have
3
a potential risk is the receptors. In our case,
4
it's human receptors. So, it can be a man, a woman,
5
children, workers, these are all kinds of receptors
6
that are evaluated in a different way.
7
So, if there is no receptor, there is no risk.
8
If there is no hazard, there is no risk. But we
9
need one more thing in order to have a potential
10
risk. We need an exposure pathway. So, we need
11
something that will bring the hazard to the
12
receptors in order to have a risk. The exposure
13
pathways will link the receptor to the hazard.
14
Well, the hazard to the receptors.
15
So, it can go through aerosol, water, food, or
16
any consumer product. By ingestion, your receptor
17
can ingest, so he will ingest food or water. He can
18
be exposed by inhalation, by air or dust, or he can
19
be exposed by skin absorption, by soil or water. So
20
if you... Those three things, you might have a
21
risk. You might have a potential risk.
22
So, in order to have this human health risk,
23
you need information in all those three areas. And
24
if you miss one of those areas, if you don't have,
25
one of those is not there, you won't have any risk.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 77 -
1
PRESENTATION
Karine Menezes
Health Canada
So, now that I talked to you a little bit
2
about our mandate and our expertise, the way we
3
will assess, or evaluate, or go through the Matoush
4
Project, here is some of our contribution to the
5
Matoush since October two thousand and eight
6
(2008), the date we received the request from the
7
COFEX.
8
So in... We contributed in defining the
9
requirements. In our jargon, we call that the
10
directives. What is... Some guidelines, some
11
requirements that we need to be present, or need...
12
Some information that we need to be evaluated or in
13
the EA, in the study, in order to assess health
14
impact, or to comment the study.
15
Since October two thousand and nine (2009), we
16
reviewed the report, the first version of the
17
report. We analyzed it, our experts went through
18
it, and they asked some questions and comments. So,
19
we addressed some issues, we are actually waiting
20
for more information in order to be able to submit,
21
or to analyze the report and tell, or give our
22
final comments about the project.
23
So, this is a little bit fast. It was an
24
overview of what we do, of our role. So, if you
25
have questions after that, I will be happy to
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 78 -
PRESENTATION
Karine Menezes
Health Canada
1
answer. Thank you.
2
QUESTION PERIOD
3
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
4
Alors nous allons procéder maintenant à la période
5
de questions. Il serait peut-être bon que vous vous
6
identifiiez... [translation] ... the question
7
period. It would be good for you to identify
8
yourselves, and also address your question to the
9
person who made the presentation, or the person
10
it's intended for.
11
So now, citizens of Mistissini, people, ask
12
questions. It's your turn. (himself) ... specify
13
which person you are, in your mind, to ask the
14
question.
15
As we mentioned a few minutes ago, and Chief
16
Longchap mentioned, he had to leave, and with your
17
permission, I will ask to our colleague, Philip
18
Awashish, to act as president of this meeting, and
19
to take place between Benoit and I. Philip?
20
Now, who is starting the questions, the first
21
question?
22
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
23
Bonjour.
24
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
25
Bonjour.
JR/lp/lh
Feel free, and...
May 25, 2010
- 79 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
2
Oui. So, my name is Élène Hébert, I'm a teacher at
3
VMS, I have a question for the lady at Health
4
Canada. I would like to know what are your
5
concerns, actually, about this project, that keep
6
you from answering totally about this report?
7
Mrs. KARINE MENEZES:
8
We have a first review of the project, but we
9
cannot tell right now what are our concerns,
10
because we don't have all the information we need
11
to, in order to make a final statement or a
12
final... final comments. So, we'll... Our expert
13
will continue our analysis or assessment with this
14
project when we will receive the final version, and
15
all the questions will be answered.
16
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
17
So, this means that the project cannot start until
18
those questions are answered?
19
Mrs. KARINE MENEZES:
20
We are not a regulatory institution. We are an
21
expert on the situation. And our role within this
22
process is to give our expertise as an expert. So,
23
we give our expertise to the Canadian Nuclear
24
Safety Commission, we give it to the COFEX, and our
25
concerns will be posted on the website, so the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 80 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
public will be aware of it. But we cannot... We
2
have no regulation to, for this process.
3
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
4
Okay. Thank you. I have other questions to monsieur
5
Hébert. You were talking, in an interview, that
6
first, when you first started talking about this
7
project, you were saying that there would be no
8
leftover from the mine. A few months later, half of
9
those would be left outside the mine, and half
10
would be buried. And now, I've read lately, you
11
said that the finer residue would be used as a
12
glazing for the wall of the mine. Now, actually,
13
this is supposed to be an exploration project. It
14
sounds very much like a baby mine to me. But I
15
don't know if, and this is another question, is it
16
on a regular happening that a company that is doing
17
exploration has actually to dig underneath, and
18
test machinery, and different procedures for the
19
produce that is coming out of the mine?
20
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
21
Yes, it's a normal procedure to do two different
22
phases. The phase we are talking here today is the
23
exploration phase. We use assumptions to estimate
24
the economic of the project, so we are asking the
25
permission to go underground and test different
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 81 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
things. One is really the continuity of the ore
2
body, so that means we do a drift, and we do
3
definition drilling. We cannot perform from the
4
surface because it's too deep.
5
Secondly, we asked also permission to extract
6
seven hundred and fifty tons (750 t) of ore,
7
mineralized ore we'll keep on the ground, and then,
8
that means we are not processing. Normally, in an
9
exploration program, they are doing a bulk sample.
10
Here, we have specified they will have no bulk
11
sample on the extracted seven hundred and fifty
12
tons (750 t) we keep on the ground, and the reason
13
for that is to estimate the water quantity, water
14
quality. Secondly, to estimate the radon gas, the
15
air ventilation system, is it sufficient or not for
16
a mining operation, and also, we are mining to, or,
17
the project is to, we call the Matoush Fault, and
18
so we have to test the mining method we'll use, and
19
the costs related to that.
20
So, this is a very very normal way to do an
21
exploration program, to go and go there. And maybe
22
the project will not be feasible, because not
23
economic, too expensive, or the continuity of the
24
realization will not be there. So then, we will
25
stop and reclaim everything.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 82 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
So, but if we, as we hope, honestly we hope
2
that will be all economics and our assumptions are
3
good, and then we'll go to the second phase. And
4
then, that means we have to do another
5
environmental impact study, coming back here, do an
6
information session as we do, and then we will have
7
public hearings, and, but we'll have the real
8
question about the water quality, water quantity,
9
the radon gas, about the ventilation, the dust, and
10
it's the reason why we have to do that at that
11
actual phase. We do, this is completely normal
12
procedure.
13
Which is not normal, honestly, in Quebec, is
14
do what we are doing for an exploration program.
15
Because as I said, I put two mines into production
16
in Quebec:
17
which has a big impact... A base metal mine, as you
18
know, in the area here, you have a lot of base
19
metal. This is a process we're doing, I never went
20
through in thirty-five (35) years of experience.
21
So, protection is there, and this is normal.
one gold mine, one base metal mine,
22
What I was saying about a mine, through the
23
different asked questions in the past, you know,
24
this is normal, the way we are acting, because, the
25
video is done because it's a request from the COFEX
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
QUESTION
PERIOD
- 83 -
1
and COMEX to say what will be a real mine. You
2
know, what will be a real mine. Because for us,
3
today, we don't have the information.
4
The picture you saw through the video for
5
phase 2, location of the camp, the plant location,
6
the tailing location, we don't know. We have not
7
started the study yet. Okay?
8
years, or the next twenty (20) months. There, we'll
9
start to see where the tailings will be.
That will be in two
10
So, but the big, big, big impact here is
11
the... We have only, we are talking one point six
12
million tons (1.6 M t) of ore. One point six
13
million tons (1.6 M t) of ore, and actually what we
14
have, we hope to find more. We hope to find a lot
15
more. And the...
16
But the one point six million ton (1.6 M t),
17
if you compare what we have been mining Troilus or
18
in other mines in the area, in the Chibougamau
19
area, this is so small. This is so small. But it's
20
very very (inaudible), so it's very rich. You know,
21
it's very high value.
22
But the point is, the way we do actually, it's
23
an exploration phase, and the license we'll get
24
from the CNSC if ever we get it. As they explained,
25
you know, we have a lot of steps to go through, and
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 84 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
the... So if we are getting it, then we'll do an
2
exploration phase and start again for the
3
production phase. But it's a small, small impact,
4
you know? Point fifteen kilometre (.15 km) is
5
small, small, is smaller than the village here.
6
Compared to the, per example again, the video show
7
you Troilus, five kilometres (5 km) long, the
8
impact. This is underground, it's an open... You
9
know, the hole in the ground is five metres by five
10
metres (5 m X 5 m). And everything, they have no
11
dike there, they have no, we call tailing ponds. So
12
everything is under the surface, you know?
13
It will be excavated, and at the end it will
14
be, we put "heart", earth... earth above, and put
15
ground, you know?
16
from the area. And the area is covered of boulders.
17
You know?
18
saw the picture of the big blocks. They have
19
uranium all over the place. Including in the park.
20
Never been tested. In the park, I guarantee they
21
have uranium on the surface.
22
This is... We remove uranium
The area is, we call a big block. You
And that explains also why we find uranium in
23
the fish, in the water, in the bones of the fish,
24
in the flesh of the fish. We find uranium. It's not
25
because us. This has been put there one billion
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 85 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
(1 G) years ago, and have been, last glaciation,
2
six thousand five hundred (6 500) years ago,
3
created blocks. The glaciers move, it creates...
4
scratch the surface, and creates those blocks you
5
see on the picture.
6
The property, everybody is going to their trap
7
lines in the north. They see boulders, those
8
blocks, all over the place. So for six thousand
9
(6 000) years, the uranium in those blocks has been
10
eroded by the wind, the ice, the water, and those
11
particles of uranium went in the ground and the
12
soil. And there is a reason why we find that amount
13
of uranium.
14
So what we propose is really to take large
15
high grade uranium out and move somewhere else, you
16
know?
17
answer...
18
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
19
This is a joke, I hope, Sir.
20
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
21
Ah, it's not a joke at all.
22
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
23
I think that to say that you will remove uranium to
24
have less radon coming off the ground is totally
25
insane.
It will be only more clean. It's a long
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 86 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
2
Oh, radon is not the issue. No, no, no, it's
3
insane... it's not insane.
4
5
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
6
Yes, it is insane, and you haven't answered my
7
question about the sterile. You were also talking
8
about taking the sterile of the mine...
9
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
10
The what?
11
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
12
Sterile of the mine.
13
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
14
What is the sterile?
15
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
16
The sterile, it is after the "mort-terrain", what
17
you get out of the mine, and you said that you
18
would do the road with that.
19
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
20
What?
21
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
22
So you said it yourself. Okay...
23
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
24
Ah, the waste?
25
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
I never...
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 87 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
The waste, that you're gonna take it to build the
2
road. And I'm very surprised that this is just out.
3
I say, you're saying that this mine is actually
4
just prospective, so to speak, and I'm sure you're
5
not the one who will be asking for the next review.
6
It's gonna be, probably be Cameco or AREVA, because
7
you're not a mining company, you're just a junior
8
venture with experience, let's say.
9
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
10
You know, in the past, I put three mines into
11
production. This is... I started in nineteen eighty
12
(1980), and I started from exploration projects,
13
and one of the companies became Cambior, which is
14
not a small company. But I started from scratch,
15
and one of the other mines, in Rouyn-Noranda,
16
called the Bouchard-Hébert Mine, and it's my name
17
on the mine, and the... because I started from
18
scratch. And the company is Audrey Resources, was
19
Audrey, and Audrey is the name of one of my
20
daughters.
21
So, our objective is really to bring this mine
22
into production. Is someone as Cameco will come and
23
buy us out, this is... You know, we are a public
24
company, and the... We have shareholders. The
25
shareholders will decide if we have an offer. But
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 88 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
we are not there yet. And is...
2
When you're talking, just coming back to your
3
question I have not answered, regarding the waste.
4
The waste has been from the rock. We call the waste
5
the two hundred and eighty-six thousand tons
6
(286 000 t) we will remove. That waste is
7
completely sterile. There is no acid generator,
8
they have no pyrite in it, they have no uranium in
9
it, and this has been tested, you know, it's very
10
clean waste. We can use to build roads.
11
I don't think we'll use it to build the
12
surface plan, because it's possible, even from...
13
But from the tailing, where we'll excavate a
14
tailing, is very small. Two hundred by three
15
hundred by twenty metres (200 X 300 X 20 m)
16
roughly, for one point five million tons (1.5 M t).
17
That rock, the waste, will be used to backfill the
18
underground. We have to use backfill, because the
19
mining method, for people who know about it, it's
20
room and pillar, so that means we create a room,
21
and then we backfill with waste. And the waste will
22
come from the tailings. But can be used for a road
23
construction, but this is not my decision. This is
24
the Minister of Transportation's decision.
25
But the rock is meeting A-1 quality for road
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 89 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
construction. It's not me saying that, it's not a
2
joke, it's reality. You have to learn a little bit
3
more about the reality of that project. And since
4
two thousand and seven (2007), we are doing all the
5
studies required, and they... you asked questions
6
to the health and safety, they have asked
7
questions, we received ninety (90) questions and
8
it's not finished, you know? They are asking
9
questions, and we are answering the questions they
10
are asking, and we have experts with us who help us
11
to answer questions.
12
And, no, I think the... We can answer all your
13
questions, and you are making your point. I will
14
never convince you, Mrs. Hébert. But we can give
15
you information, and the reality of the
16
information, your brothers who came here on March
17
the first (1st) can answer your questions. The
18
people living nearby the uranium mine in
19
Saskatchewan.
20
I've been thirty (30) years living there, and
21
they have no problem with their caribou, they are
22
doing commercial fishing in the lake nearby the
23
mines over there. For sure they had problems fifty
24
(50) years ago, but that has changed, you know?
25
Regulation, the new Act in two thousand (2000),
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 90 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
they have a lot of regulation we have to follow.
2
And, you know, you can trust me, not, yes or no,
3
but your brothers are... They didn't come here to
4
lie to you.
5
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
6
Well, you're not my brother...
7
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
8
No, no, we aren't related even if we have the same
9
name, but...
10
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
11
But I'm sorry to say that in Saskatchewan, there
12
are tailings that have been there for sixty (60)
13
years, it's gonna cost billions of dollars to
14
clean, and there is always a radon dome that forms
15
ten kilometres (10 km) around radon tailings.
16
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
17
Do you want to have the real answer?
18
expert.
19
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
20
And if there is a still wind, and it is proven by a
21
toxicologist in the University of Saskatchewan.
22
Thank you very much.
23
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
24
Thank you, Mrs. Hébert.
25
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
JR/lp/lh
We have an
May 25, 2010
- 91 -
1
Okay madame. Thank you. Next question.
2
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
3
I love it.
QUESTION
PERIOD
4
5
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
6
My name is Claudine Cholette. I would like to
7
pursue upon radon gas. I work as, in the relocation
8
business, and any home in the States that was, how
9
could I say, insured by the company relocating an
10
employee, would always require a radon inspection.
11
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
12
Hum, hum.
13
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
14
Now the thing was that they even went to the length
15
of insuring for measure for that radon gas. In
16
other words, a house that would have radon in it
17
would lose...
18
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
19
Value.
20
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
21
Value.
22
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
23
Yes.
24
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
25
So why is it that in the States it's such a big
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
QUESTION
PERIOD
- 92 -
1
thing, and here it is not? It says here that
2
according to Health Canada, with the data they
3
have, is there anything we know about what's being
4
done in the States? Moreover, it says in this that
5
there is no risk for the miners, because the air
6
ventilation will help them in that sense. However,
7
that air ventilation, where is it going?
8
surface?
9
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
To the
10
Yes, the air.
11
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
12
So, if it goes in the surface, what's happening
13
with it?
14
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
15
I will answer... Is the complete question?
16
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
17
Almost, yes.
18
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
19
Okay. I will answer the first part, okay?
20
Montreal also, in St-Hilaire, in the south shore of
21
Montreal and the north, they have a lot of radon in
22
the house, okay? And you just install a small fan
23
and the evacuate. Radon is a very very dangerous
24
gas, you know, it's "cancerigene" and has to be
25
taken...
JR/lp/lh
In
May 25, 2010
- 93 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
2
I lost somebody to it.
3
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
4
Oh!
5
Anyway. The... But the air, air in the mine, the
6
ventilation... I prefer to, some expert here in the
7
room about ventilation, Mr. Michel Parent, who
8
are... Is he still here?
9
Ernie? You can answer about the radon?
Okay. I lost a lot of people at cigarette.
Expert in the... Or
Yes?
10
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
11
Hi. My name is Ernie Becker. I have been working
12
with uranium mines for many years, and yes, radon
13
in people's homes is, I would, on average, the
14
largest source of radiation exposure that people,
15
in general, in the public, have. This is natural,
16
it has nothing to do with any uranium mines.
17
There are also, there is also radon naturally
18
in the air, everywhere, at quite low levels. The
19
difference between the homes, the houses and the
20
natural outdoor air is that the homes tend to trap
21
the radon and keep it inside the home. Whereas the
22
radon that's naturally in the air, everywhere, is
23
at low levels and doesn't pose any sort of health
24
risk.
25
The uranium mines, when they are ventilated,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 94 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
they will give off radon, and at the large mines in
2
Saskatchewan, they have measured the level of radon
3
at, say a kilometre (1 km) from the mine site, and
4
there is no measurable increase in the radon
5
levels. The outdoor radon levels. At one kilometre
6
(1 km) from the mine.
7
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
8
In Saskatchewan, how far are the closest
9
communities?
A couple of hours plane?
10
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
11
It would depend. It might be a hundred kilometres
12
(100 km).
13
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
14
Also, in here, on page 2, it states the life
15
expectancy from uranium to radon to lead. This is
16
assuming that all particles of uranium will be,
17
will have had the same birth date. So in other
18
words, there can be a part that, yes, will expire
19
in so many days, but there will be other exposure.
20
So in other words, this can become cumulative.
21
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
22
The radon gas has a half-life of about four days.
23
So it does not accumulate. As I said before, it is
24
released from the mine, it disperses into the
25
atmosphere, mixes with the radon that's already out
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 95 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
there everywhere, and at a distance, one kilometre
2
(1 km), there is no measurable increase in radon
3
from natural levels, and in fact, that's really the
4
extreme case. If you look at how the mines are
5
designed, they usually have the fresh air intake
6
about thirty metres (30 m) from the exhaust, and
7
again it has no impact on the radon levels, even on
8
the mine site, for the workers.
9
So, we know the radon gas does not accumulate,
10
because it does have a fairly short half-life. And
11
it simply disperses into the atmosphere and mixes
12
with the radon that's already everywhere.
13
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
14
So, if I understand well, you're stating that there
15
is no accumulation. But if we look at the air of
16
the fourth day, okay, there will still be radon
17
from day 1, day 2, day 3. From the ventilation
18
system and others.
19
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
20
The half-life is the time that it takes for half
21
the radon atoms to decay. So after four days, you
22
have half as much radon as you did at the
23
beginning. After eight days you'll have a quarter,
24
and it just keeps on decreasing by a half every
25
four days. So it does... It does last longer than
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 96 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
four days, but it doesn't accumulate, simply
2
because it just simply mixes and disperses, and it
3
goes with the air everywhere.
4
5
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
6
So if it goes in the air, it can still be absorbed
7
by lungs?
8
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
9
Yes. Along with all the other naturally-occurring
10
radon that's everywhere in the air. Yes.
11
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
12
Even though we say natural, it can still be
13
harmful?
14
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
15
That's right, except that when you look at the
16
radon levels in the atmosphere, and there were some
17
slides to that, you see that the radon levels in
18
the atmosphere are really quite low, whereas for
19
homes, this is a different story entirely, because
20
the home traps the radon, and in homes, the radon
21
levels can go much higher than you will find them
22
in the normal atmosphere outdoors.
23
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
24
Excuse me, but we are assuming that all houses live
25
with closed windows. Because it stays there. It's
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
QUESTION
PERIOD
- 97 -
1
in capture. But in regular houses, not everybody
2
uses air conditioning.
3
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
4
Yes, and normally you'll find that the radon levels
5
are higher in a house in winter than they are in
6
the summer.
7
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
8
What about the States in California?
9
Or elsewhere?
Why is it so important for a relocation company to
10
insure its clients against future radon claims for
11
their own employees?
12
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
13
Radon in homes is a complicates subject. Again,
14
nothing to do with uranium mining. The highest
15
radon levels in homes I've ever seen in Canada were
16
in southern Saskatchewan, six hundred kilometres
17
(600 km) or more from any uranium mine. Manitoba,
18
some municipalities also have problems with radon.
19
I think they tend to be somewhat lower in Ontario,
20
although Elliot Lake also had radon issues, simply
21
because of the ore that was close to the surface
22
naturally.
23
It varies a lot. It depends on house
24
construction, there is a lot of different
25
parameters that control the level of radon in a
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 98 -
1
home.
2
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
3
As well as wind direction, concentration?
QUESTION
PERIOD
4
5
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
6
The air has very low levels of radon in it. It
7
comes into the house, it leaves again. There is no
8
way that it can concentrate from the atmosphere.
9
It's always coming up from the soil, through the
10
basement or the foundations.
11
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
12
So there is a possibility that it travels?
13
Mr. ERNEST BECKER:
14
Yes.
15
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
16
Hello. Two and a half years... Two... A year and a
17
half...
18
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
19
Excuse me. Would you please give us your name?
20
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
21
Len. A year and a half ago, a year ago or maybe a
22
year and a half ago, you people came up here, and
23
in this very room, one of the CSN... the Canadian
24
Nuclear Safety Commission stated to me and the
25
people that radon gas comes up from the ground and
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
QUESTION
PERIOD
- 99 -
1
dissipates in the air, and there is nothing to
2
worry about.
3
I've done research on radon gas, and radon gas
4
is seven times heavier than air. So, it floats low
5
to the ground. One thing about the radon gas is
6
that it emits alpha, beta and gamma radiation, and
7
for our people here in Mistissini, alpha radiation,
8
beta and gamma radiation is carcinogenic. Which
9
means that it can cause cancer.
10
They said that it just comes up, floats in the
11
air and disappears. When they told us that, they
12
were actually lying to us, because I found out,
13
like he just mentioned, that it has a half-life of
14
three point eight two (3.82) days, and in total,
15
it'll be around roughly about eight days, as he
16
mentioned, give or take a few hours.
17
But my question is, why didn't the person who
18
came here at that time say that to us then?
19
did they lie to us and the people?
20
I think about it, and I want to read a couple of
21
things that I prepared for this event, but why did
22
they lie to us and our people?
23
just say that it lasts three point eight two (3.82)
24
days?
25
Okay?
Why
And when
Why didn't they
If they're willing to lie to us about radon
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 100 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
gas and say that it'll float away, disappear in the
2
air, what else are they willing to lie about?
3
Now, I just want to read some stuff here.
4
5
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
6
Excuse me, sir, would you like to have the...
7
monsieur LeClair answer your question?
8
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
9
No. After... After I finish my presentation, she
10
can answer whatever she wants, and then I'll make a
11
rebuttal after.
12
Now, in my research that I've been doing, and
13
I've read, I mean, I just got a small portion of
14
the material that I've read, and for our people
15
that live in this community, and others that don't
16
live here, even this panel here, and all our
17
respective guests, I did my research when... If you
18
want to check it out, type into your Google, Google
19
on the health cost of nuclear energy. And there is
20
many different documents, some as long as three
21
hundred (300), four hundred (400) pages long that I
22
have read. That talk about the dangers of the whole
23
nuclear industry.
24
25
Now, I'm just gonna read portions, and this is
from the health, human health implications of
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 101 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
uranium mining and nuclear power generation. I'll
2
give you the author in a few minutes. I was trying
3
to find the author, but...
4
Ever since the discovery of
5
radioactivity at the turn of the last
6
century, it has been recognized that
7
ionizing radiation has a deleterious
8
impact on human health. Radiation
9
damage can affect any part of the cell
10
and can interfere with many cellular
11
processes. Most importantly, damage to
12
the genetic material of the cell can
13
lead to cancer, birth defects and
14
hereditary illness. It is generally
15
accepted by the scientific community
16
that there is no safe level of
17
radiation exposure, and that any
18
amount of exposure to ionizing
19
radiation is harmful.
20
Doctor Karl Z. Morgan, and I quoted this last
21
time when your group came up here, has, and others
22
like him, such as doctor Alice Stewart, doctor
23
Ernest Sternglass and many others have shown the
24
dangers of uranium and uranium mining, and the
25
whole process of, you know, nuclear power
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 102 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
generation, and even the fact of atomic bombs,
2
which is associated with the nuclear industry.
3
Uranium mining contaminates the air. Now, they
4
said in their report that there is no contamination
5
to human health. They said in their report there is
6
no, or very little contamination to the
7
environment. But I'm gonna show you otherwise.
8
9
Uranium mining contaminates the air, water and
soil. Crushing tons of radioactive rocks produces
10
dust, and leaves behind fine radioactive particles
11
subject to wind and water erosion. Radon gas, a
12
potent lung carcinogen, is released continuously
13
from the tailings in perpetuity. Drilling and
14
blasting disrupt and contaminate local aquifers. So
15
the water underneath the ground, that we drink.
16
And I remember a colleague of mine showed me a
17
map of the distribution of water from the Otish
18
Mountains. And those waters flow down into the
19
Temiscamie River, into Lake Mistissini, and they
20
actually flow down into Lake St-Jean, and out into
21
the Rupert River, affecting, and will affect all
22
our people.
23
Okay, let me...
24
Radon gas, a potent lung carcinogen,
25
is [...]
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 103 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
I already read it, excuse me.
2
Drilling and blasting disrupt and
3
contaminate local aquifers. Water used
4
to control dust and create slurries
5
for uranium extraction becomes
6
contaminated. Tailings contaminated
7
can leak, leach or fail, releasing
8
radioactive material into local
9
waterways. Various organisms can
10
transport radioactive material away
11
from the contaminated sites. These
12
sites remain radioactive for many
13
thousands of years, and will be unsafe
14
to use for most hunting purposes, for
15
that long as well as being a source of
16
continuing contamination for
17
surrounding populations.
18
In this report that I have here, it talks about at
19
a four kilometre per hour (4 km/hr) wind, it can
20
travel nine hundred kilometres (900 km) easy. We're
21
only about a hundred and fifty (150), a hundred and
22
seventy-five kilometres (175 km) away from that.
23
And they say that we have a... They showed on
24
their... the wind direction. That's only one way.
25
We get the east wind in here, we get the south wind
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 104 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
in here, and we get... We get all four winds. And
2
eventually, that radon gas will come into our
3
community, affecting our people and our health.
4
Uranium refining and enriching
5
facilities release radioactive
6
contamination which can impinge on
7
nearby populations. These processes
8
also necessitate transporting many
9
tons of radioactive material by rail
10
or truck. This carries with it the
11
risk of accidents or spills, with
12
further risk of air, water and soil
13
contamination.
14
In 1925, in recognition of the newly
15
appreciated dangers of radioactivity,
16
the first radiation exposure standard
17
was introduced. It was set at 500
18
mSv/yr (milliSieverts/year; the
19
Sievert is a unit of radiation
20
effect), this being the dose which
21
caused reddening of the hands. In
22
1934, the newly formed International
23
Commission on Radiological Protection
24
(ICRP) set its first standard at 300
25
mSv/yr. This was reduced in 1950 to
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 105 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
150 mSv/yr. In 1956, the level was
2
further reduced to 50 mSv/yr for
3
workers in the nuclear industry and
4
other occupations with known exposure,
5
and 1 mSv/yr for the general public.
6
In Canada, the current Canadian
7
Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC)
8
exposure limit is set at 20 mSv/yr
9
averaged over 5 yrs for workers, and
10
1.0 mSv/yr for the general public.
11
These more recent limits are based on
12
the observed incidence of fatal
13
cancers. They do not take into account
14
birth defects, lowered IQ from
15
(inaudible) exposure or subtle genetic
16
damage and multi-generational effects,
17
hazards which we are only beginning to
18
have the technology to investigate.
19
20
That's one aspect I want to...
Another aspect I'm gonna read, and this one
21
might take a little bit longer, but...
22
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
23
Listen, Sir. We suggested, at the beginning of this
24
meeting, to leave fifteen minutes (15 min) to
25
people to resume their comments. Then, with your
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 106 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
permission, if you want, on your first subject, to
2
ask questions precisely, and after we'll permit
3
other people to ask questions. If you... It will be
4
possible for you to come back with the other
5
subject, if you agree.
6
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
7
Do you people want that, or you want to hear more?
8
9
People of Mistissini? You want to hear more?
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
10
Well, excuse me...
11
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
12
People of Mistissini, what do you want?
13
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
14
Excuse me, sir. We just want... We just want to
15
make sure that people have the ability...
16
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
17
Well, our tradition, sir, here, is that we're
18
allowed to speak 'til we're through.
19
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
20
Yes.
21
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
22
That should be the tradition. Not the fifteen
23
minute (15 min) limit.
24
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
25
It's not a question of fifteen (15) or ten minutes
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
QUESTION
PERIOD
- 107 -
1
(10 min). I just want to...
2
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
3
Well, let me finish, then.
4
5
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
6
We just want to make... We just would like to
7
suggest to you, if you would like to have
8
(inaudible)...
9
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
10
No. I prefer to have it with my people present.
11
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
12
Okay. You don't want answers to your questions.
13
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
14
I do want answers to my questions, but when I'm
15
finished.
16
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
17
Okay. Go on, Sir.
18
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
19
Now, these people come up here, saying to us that
20
uranium mining is safe, is safe, it's safe, it's
21
safe, it's safe. That's what they've been telling
22
us ever since they've been coming up here.
23
But let me ask you this:
what's safe of being
24
exposed to *carcinic+ radiation? What's safe about
25
being exposed to thyroid cancer? What's safe of
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 108 -
1
being exposed to leukemia?
2
exposed to "genetical" defects? You know?
QUESTION
PERIOD
What's safe of being
3
In my research that I've done, one of the
4
things I found is the fact that they say there
5
is... low level radiation is safe. That's what
6
they've been telling us. There is not much that
7
happens.
8
But what I found in this paper and other
9
papers I've read, from nuclear physicists who
10
worked for the Department of Energy in the United
11
States, and particularly doctor Karl Z. Morgan and
12
doctor Alice Stewart, showed that these things are
13
dangerous.
14
Now, the nuclear fuel chain, uranium mining.
15
Uranium mining is the messiest and
16
most contaminating stage of nuclear
17
power generation. Yet, without it, the
18
whole process cannot go ahead. The
19
cost to the global environment, and to
20
persons, of this stage must be
21
factored into the cost of nuclear
22
power generation.
23
Uranium mining, in particular open-pit
24
mining, which is what is currently
25
proposed in several locations in
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 109 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
southern Ontario, involves digging
2
thousands [...]
3
I know they're talking about having a pit and it's
4
different, but just with that ventilation system,
5
all that... You know, he just talked about the
6
exposure of radiation being just in the house, is
7
dangerous. Well, when they pump out that radiation
8
into the air, it's gonna travel. There is gonna be
9
dust, there is gonna be the radon gas itself, and
10
altogether, I think there is fourteen (14)
11
different types of, in the decay process, four
12
different types of radiation properties. Which emit
13
alpha, beta and gamma radiation. Which is dangerous
14
to us as a people. Okay. Let me look at... Where
15
was I...
16
One of the things he said, I think a hundred
17
and eighty-three tons (183 t) of, what you call,
18
so-called waste, well, if a house that is
19
excavated, a foundation for a house that is
20
excavated, it produces radon gas, and it's
21
dangerous, what's a hundred and eighty-three tons
22
(183 t) gonna do? A hundred and eighty-three tons
23
(183 t) of waste rock. It's surely gonna produce
24
radon gas.
25
Because a house, you dig for a house, the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 110 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
foundation, it produces radon gas, this gentleman
2
just said so, Mr. Ernest Becker. And so you dig a
3
hundred and eighty-three thousand... a hundred
4
and... What is it, a hundred and eighty-three tons
5
(183 t)? To a hundred and eighty-six tons (186 t).
6
A thousand pounds (1 000 lb), okay, excuse me.
7
Tons. Excuse me. Is it gonna produce radon?
8
think so.
9
I
Why no... Why yes in a house and no in that
10
situation?
11
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
12
Excuse me. Because it's absolutely not the same
13
rock. It's absolutely not the same rock at all. We
14
are talking quartz. Quartz without minerals
15
producing radiation, it's no radon gas at all. It's
16
not radon all over the planet. It's certain places.
17
In the States, maybe, maybe in...
18
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
19
Wherever there is...
20
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
21
But not in (inaudible).
22
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
23
... uranium, there is... I mean, where there is
24
uranium, there is radon gas.
25
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
JR/lp/lh
Yes?
May 25, 2010
- 111 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Yes, but not in the waste. In the ore. In the ore.
2
Not in the waste. When we are talking waste, it's
3
nothing. In that waste. Each project is different.
4
But in our waste have been, (inaudible) have been
5
done. We've done a lot of tests on it, and not only
6
us, but different experts, in a lab, and the waste
7
is not producing radon. The rock, the ore, the
8
seven hundred and fifty tons (750 t) we are talking
9
will produce radon. Is producing radon. But not the
10
waste. Don't mix stuff, you know? You're supposed
11
to be an expert. Don't mix stuff.
12
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
13
I ain't an expert. I just do research.
14
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
15
Okay. Let's go. Let's go.
16
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
17
Anyways. I want to continue reading.
18
19
Uranium mining, in particular [...]
I read that.
20
The Rossing uranium mine in Namibia is
21
1 km wide, 3 km long and 1/3 km deep.
22
Large quantities of this rock are
23
dumped onto the earth's surface. The
24
ore is then transported to a milling
25
facility [...]
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 112 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
Which they show they're gonna do there,
2
[...] usually nearby, and crushed to a
3
fine sand-like consistency, creating
4
large amounts of radioactive dust and
5
a huge volume of finely ground mill
6
tailings. The uranium is separated
7
out, usually with strong acids or
8
alkalis. The sand-like tailings,
9
containing about 85% of their original
10
radioactivity, and often the chemicals
11
used in the extraction process, are
12
deposited in large tailings ponds or
13
containments nearby.
14
Dust containing uranium and its
15
progeny is produced in large
16
quantities by rock-crushing
17
operations. This particulate matter,
18
containing long-lived radioactive
19
isotopes, can leave the site on wind.
20
Wind erosion of tailings piles can be
21
significant as long as these remain
22
exposed to weather. Radon gas is
23
continuously produced by the decay of
24
thorium 230, a radioactive product of
25
uranium 238, through radium into radon
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 113 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
gas. Thorium 230 has a half-life of
2
76,000 years, and will produce radon
3
gas unabated for millennia.
4
Seventy-six thousand (76 000) years that we're
5
gonna have to be faced with carcinogenic radiation.
6
In undisturbed uranium deposits, most
7
of the radon gas is trapped within
8
rock formations until it decays into
9
other radioactive by products.
10
However, crushed tailings on or near
11
the earth's surface allow considerable
12
radon to escape. In a 10 km/hr breeze,
13
it can travel 960 km within 4 days;
14
much further in higher winds. Radon
15
gas decays sequentially into several
16
other solid radioactive isotopes of
17
polonium, bismuth and lead, before
18
finally becoming the non-radioactive
19
lead 206. These radioactive progeny of
20
radon settle onto crops, bodies of
21
water and soil. Their patterns of
22
accumulation in the biosphere,
23
including our food species, are not
24
well known. The three isotopes of
25
polonium produced by radon, in
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 114 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
addition to being radioactive, are
2
among the most toxic naturally
3
occurring substances on earth. The
4
toxicity of lead is well documented.
5
One of the things that our people need to know
6
is that radon gas likes two particular places to
7
go. One is into the leach, you know, the leach and
8
the, that the moose eat, and the caribou eat? It
9
concentrates in that. And it also has a high
10
concentration in our blueberries which we eat. We
11
eat the moose, we eat the caribou that radiation
12
is, will get into them from low level exposure of
13
radiation which will come from the mine, which will
14
affect our fish, our water, our air, our animals
15
which we eat, and eventually affect us.
16
So, you keep saying it's safe, you keep saying
17
it's safe, yet there is much research that has
18
shown that it's not safe. Why... Why the
19
discrepancy? Why... Why do we have that? I'm just
20
gonna read a little bit more.
21
Uranium in drinking water, at levels
22
in excess of the safe drinking
23
standard of .02 mg/L or 20 ppb, is
24
principally toxic to the kidney, in
25
particular the proximal tubules.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
QUESTION
PERIOD
- 115 -
1
Uranium can affect fertility, fetal
2
growth and postnatal visibility. It
3
may cause malformations in fetuses and
4
might be associated with reproductive
5
cancers. It concentrates in bone and
6
may interfere with the activity of
7
osteoblasts, possibly contributing to
8
bone cancers and osteoporosis.
9
My question to this whole group is:
what is
10
safe? You come up here, into my... our community,
11
you tell me and my people that this uranium mining
12
is safe, it's safe. My question is:
13
about exposure to these radioactive nuclei? What is
14
safe about it? Thank you.
15
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
16
Do you want to add some comments?
17
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
18
Yes, (inaudible) Gunning?
19
UNIDENTIFIED VOICE:
20
Are you going to provide additional information,
21
or, monsieur LeClair, are you going to provide
22
additional information?
23
Mrs. CHERRY GUNNING:
24
I'd just like to respond, so (inaudible), 'cause I
25
believe...
JR/lp/lh
what's safe
May 25, 2010
- 116 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
2
Who are you, first?
3
Mrs. CHERRY GUNNING:
4
My name is Cherry Gunning, and I work (inaudible)
5
technician, and I worked in Saskatchewan,
6
regulating uranium mines for fifteen (15) years,
7
and then I moved to Ottawa and I worked as a
8
radiation protection specialist for three years.
9
And now I'm working on licensing new uranium mines
10
11
and mills.
But basically, I believe that I am probably
12
the person from the Canadian Nuclear Safety
13
Commission who is being accused of being a liar and
14
lying to the people, and I really want you to
15
understand that I understand very clearly that I
16
work for the people. I don't work for the mining
17
company. My job is to make sure that if they are
18
going to mine uranium, that they're going to do it
19
safely. And the people that I work for are you. And
20
the most important people I work for are the
21
workers that are working at the mine.
22
So, where I come from, it's not all right to
23
call people liars. So it's... My mother wouldn't be
24
too happy about this right now. So, I...
25
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 117 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Okay. You're the one that said that?
2
Mrs. CHERRY GUNNING:
3
I would just like to say one other thing. We seem
4
to have a misunderstanding about the word
5
"dissipate". Dissipate does not mean disappear. It
6
means, yes, there is a lot of radon that's gonna
7
come out of the mine, it's gonna come off rock
8
piles, it's gonna come off tailings, and it just
9
goes into the air. And that may seem wrong.
10
But the fact is, if you took a clear bucket of
11
water and you dropped a little bit of blue ink in
12
there, and you watched it, you would see it
13
disappears. But it doesn't mean it's gone. It means
14
there is so much air out there, it mixes with the
15
air. And at the mines in Saskatchewan, they measure
16
that air. And what people are telling you is true.
17
If you make a measurement a kilometre (1 km) away
18
from the mine, you can't see any difference. You
19
can't measure that radon. Because it's been
20
diluted. There is so much air that you're not
21
seeing any higher level than if you were far away
22
from the mine.
23
So... So that's what we're talking about.
24
Nobody is saying that this radon is not going
25
anywhere. It is going into the air, and it's
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 118 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
getting diluted.
2
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
3
That wasn't said when you first came here. You just
4
said it came... it comes into the air and
5
disappears. That's what you said.
6
Mrs. CHERRY GUNNING:
7
And I would say, if I said something like that, and
8
you thought that I was lying, then, the correct
9
thing to do is to say:
"What did you mean by that,
10
because I don't think that's right."
11
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
12
Well...
13
Mrs. CHERRY GUNNING:
14
And then, maybe I would have corrected myself.
15
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
16
I didn't know that...
17
Mrs. CHERRY GUNNING:
18
So, that's all I really want to say.
19
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
20
... at the time. I didn't know that at the time,
21
about radon gas. I said I did my research into it
22
after you guys left. That's when I found out that
23
we were lied to. Because, I don't know if it was
24
you. All I know, it was a lady who stood up over,
25
where this gentleman at the end is sitting,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 119 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
somewhere around that area, who stood up and said
2
that it comes up from the air, from the ground, and
3
disappears. That's what they said. They didn't say
4
anything about the three point eight two (3.82)
5
days, they didn't say any of the new things that
6
you're adding today. That's why I believe that we
7
were lied to.
8
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
9
Just... Just, and... Excuse me, Len. Just to talk
10
about the video or the presentation we made and
11
with the wind and everything, and with the
12
concentration of point five (.5), not millisieverts
13
but the becquerels, which is a measure of the radon
14
gas, you can see the effect, you know? Then we have
15
radon going out, but mixed with the air. At the
16
end, the level at the... We were talking of the
17
level at the park, fifteen kilometres (15 km) away.
18
It's so low, lower than, which is the norm, which
19
is sixty Becquerels (60 Bq). The limit, sixty (60).
20
And we're adding point five (.5).
21
So, and the general... We are going all over
22
the place. The normal is ten Becquerels (10 Bq). So
23
we are adding point five (.5) to one (1). It's
24
nothing, you know? It's... It's the reason why we
25
say it's no danger at all. It's not dangerous.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 120 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
2
There is no danger. You keep telling that to us,
3
our people, but in my research, I'm telling this to
4
my people, in the research I've done, they keep
5
telling us that a low level of radiation is not
6
dangerous. But nuclear physicists from the United
7
States have shown that it is dangerous. It's more
8
dangerous, they said, than if, a high level
9
radiation. And high level radiation is, if they
10
dropped a bomb, like they did in Hiroshima, that's
11
high level radiation. But the after-effect of the
12
low level radiation in those cities in Japan,
13
they're still living out the deadly consequences of
14
that radiation.
15
And they come up here, they tell us that it's
16
safe. They keep... I mean, they've been...
17
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
18
It's really safe. It's...
19
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
20
It's really safe. That's what you keep saying.
21
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
22
It's really safe. And I keep saying that...
23
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
24
But other... I've read other reports that said it's
25
not safe. Even this book from Saskatchewan has
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 121 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
shown it is not safe.
2
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
3
Yes. There are some experts who think the earth is
4
still flat. You know? You can read, people who
5
think the earth is still flat. So...
6
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
7
I haven't heard that since Christopher Columbus.
8
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
9
Yes, I read that, yes, from experts, so it's kind
10
of... It's... You can read. You know, we know about
11
that book. We know about that book, I've been
12
reading it years ago. But anyway. Appreciate your
13
comments anyway. Thanks.
14
UNIDENTIFIED VOICE:
15
If I could just have one...
16
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
17
Just...
18
UNIDENTIFIED VOICE:
19
Sorry.
20
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
21
After you, sir, I just want to tell you that we're
22
going to have a very short break. I think that some
23
beverages will be delivered, and so we... And after
24
maybe ten minutes (10 min), we'll resume this
25
meeting. So, let's go. Carry on, sir. What is
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 122 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
your... What is your question?
2
Mr. HUBERT PETAWABANO:
3
Listen. Okay. My name is Hubert Petawabano, I'm a
4
member of this community, I'm also the local
5
environment administrator. I'll direct my two
6
questions to the Review Panels here. COFEX and
7
COMEX. I know it is an information session on the
8
exploration of the Matoush uranium mining, but is
9
this the only chance you want to have in hearing
10
questions from the people, like, today, and the
11
other one that's coming later in the summer or in
12
the fall? Is this the two times we're gonna have
13
opportunities to express our concerns, or... That's
14
my first question.
15
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
16
If I may, I will answer this. Indeed we have, both
17
COMEX and COFEX have made the decision to have two
18
meetings, one, the one we have today. The purpose
19
of that meeting is to have the opportunity to have
20
a presentation from the proponent as well as from
21
the regulatory agencies, and to have the
22
participants pose questions to the various bodies
23
present here.
24
25
The second phase of the public consultation
will be a moment where each and every organization,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 123 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
people, families will be able to comment on the
2
project, express their concerns, opposition or
3
support to the project, or express certain
4
requirements they understand would be required for
5
the eventual licensing of the project.
6
Aside from that, we have a website, and on
7
that website, you will see the names of the persons
8
or individuals who are responsible, at the federal
9
level, as well as with the provincial government,
10
who can receive your additional questions and maybe
11
provide you with some answers. So, there is a
12
website.
13
We will have a poster, where the website
14
address will be clearly presented, so that you can
15
take notice of it and browse, see what are the...
16
what is the information presently available and how
17
to contact various people.
18
In addition to that, and I will pass on to
19
you, there will be a... The work of the Nuclear
20
Safety Commission itself. And I will leave Jean, or
21
the Nuclear Safety Commission representative, to
22
explain to you the steps, and how you can
23
intervene.
24
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
25
So, after the environmental assessment is
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 124 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
completed, and assuming that the project was going
2
to proceed, we'd still have to go through a license
3
hearing, which is another public hearing
4
opportunity where the Commission now makes a
5
decision whether they actually give a license or
6
not to proceed with the project.
7
So, even once the EA is done, the
8
environmental assessment is completed, and again
9
assuming that the outcome of that is the project
10
can proceed, the Commission still needs to render a
11
decision whether they're gonna give them a license
12
or not. There is another public hearing for that as
13
well, where people have an opportunity to provide
14
input.
15
The other thing I should mention is that
16
the... Today we're talking about process, to try to
17
help people understand the process. The next
18
meeting that will be occurring with regards to the
19
EA, we will have with us experts, radiation
20
protection and environmental protection experts. In
21
fact, some of the RP experts, I wouldn't be
22
surprised, they've probably worked on some of the
23
reports that are being quoted, so that they can...
24
They certainly will have an in-depth understanding
25
to be able to speak to the specific issues with
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 125 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
regards to health (inaudible).
2
Mr. HUBERT PETAWABANO:
3
All right, thank you. One additional question to,
4
directed to the Review Panels again. I know any
5
exploration work in that area, we need to... I
6
mean, I assume the companies will need an all-
7
winter road. So, I know there is... We've been
8
hearing this road the last few years, and mining
9
companies are doing their exploration work, same
10
with Strateco, so I guess my question is, are you
11
anticipating a similar process with the all-winter
12
road that's proposed? Are you gonna have an
13
environmental impact assessment? Do you foresee
14
that in the near future?
15
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
16
With your permission, I would ask to my colleague
17
Daniel Berrouard, responsible...
18
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
19
Okay. I'm not sure if I can answer to your
20
question. But what I would say, I would say that if
21
you are talking about the permanent road, yes, of
22
course, we will have to review this project in the,
23
with the COMEX process. So we will have to see if
24
we will have to come back for a public
25
consultation, but we have to review this project
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 126 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
like we do here today for the Strateco Project.
2
Mr. HUBERT PETAWABANO:
3
Thank you.
4
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
5
Okay, other questions? Or comments? From...
6
7
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
8
Just a quick question. I would like to know how
9
much it costs for insurance, regarding the
10
operation of mining.
11
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
12
Actually, we have a protection, maybe Pierre can
13
answer that. We have, we are talking exploration
14
program here, okay?
15
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
16
No. Insurance.
17
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
18
Yes, but for the exploration phase. We are not a
19
mining company, we're in exploration phase.
20
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
21
Okay.
22
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
23
Okay? Pierre, do you know the answer for that? We
24
have different insurance...
25
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 127 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Well, we... Yes. We got different insurance. We got
2
one for our fuel tank that we got presently on
3
site, and that's... It's, I think, the coverage,
4
it's around five million dollars (5 M$) to clean up
5
the site if we have to. The cost for that is, it's
6
around twenty-five (25) to thirty-five thousand
7
dollars (35 000$) a year, just for that part.
8
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
9
And what does it cover? I mean, like a car
10
insurance, I am covered for up to much, and there
11
is a deductible.
12
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
13
Yes. We do have a deductible, like all the
14
insurance, we... Everybody have, even for your
15
house, you have one. It's the same principle. But
16
the cost covered on that is the cleanup of the
17
site, put it back as it was before any
18
contamination.
19
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
20
Okay.
21
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
22
So if whatever thing happen, and, but before that
23
will happen, first, as Caroline said, we have daily
24
inspections, so we know before it happens. That's
25
very important. And the second thing, all our tanks
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 128 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
are double-walled, to meet the Quebec regulations,
2
as they ask for it. And we put membranes, and the
3
fuel, the big fuel farm that we'll have on the
4
exploration will have membranes that will stop any
5
leak too (inaudible).
6
So we'll have two and three protections to
7
control anything that could happen.
8
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
9
So what is the square kilometres of that membrane?
10
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
11
Oh, it's very small, it's... The tank farm is, I
12
would say it's about a hundred and fifty feet by
13
seventy-five feet (150' X 75'), something like
14
that.
15
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
16
And you mentioned this is just for exploration.
17
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
18
Just exploration.
19
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
20
What is the cost of the insurance to an operational
21
company?
22
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
23
It's hard to know presently, because it's... The
24
first thing we have to think about is the... Before
25
going to the production phases, first we have to
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 129 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
decide if we're going to the production phases
2
first. Second, we have to design for our needs,
3
which we don't know presently. That's why we're
4
going underground.
5
If you ask me that question in two years from
6
now, roughly, I will be able to answer it, but for
7
now it's very hard, because we don't know the size
8
of the, eventually, the mine itself, depending of
9
the exploration.
10
And thirdly, it will depend, too, depending of
11
the size and the design of the mine and the
12
underground, then we'll have to get the new license
13
from the CNSC before anything could be done, and
14
the CNSC has to approve the design, as they said in
15
their slide.
16
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
17
So...
18
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
19
So, we have a lot of steps before knowing those
20
things.
21
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
22
And until when will the community be able to ask
23
questions?
24
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
25
Now the... For presently, today, it's mainly for
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 130 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
the exploration, as we told everybody, and it's
2
only for the exploration phases, only. As the CNSC
3
told you, and as we already told you in the
4
presentation, we'll restart from scratch everything
5
and all the hearing for the mine.
6
So, before going any step further extra from
7
the exploration, we'll meet again several times to
8
explain the project, and we'll have several hearing
9
programs to hear your concerns and with the people
10
concerned, with the CNSC and the other Panels,
11
before going any step in the production phases. So
12
it's a long procedure before that.
13
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
14
Okay. Just one last comment. BP. They were drilling
15
for fuel, oil, for a long time. Right? And...
16
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
17
I think so.
18
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
19
Oil has been a marketable product for a very very
20
long time too. So, if we compare that to uranium
21
mining or drilling, do we have enough to assume a
22
risk for? And I'm asking that question to everybody
23
here.
24
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
25
We are not talking the same thing anyway. It's...
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 131 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
It's not... It's no comparison between oil and what
2
we are doing here. It's a small operation, and I...
3
I don't see your point, here. It's no comparison at
4
all.
5
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
6
There is always surprises.
7
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
8
Ah!
9
reason why we are happy. Oh yes, but you don't have
A mine... Life is a surprise. This is the
10
to say that, you know, it's... Yes. We are here,
11
and your brothers in Saskatoon also have been there
12
for thirty (30) years without problems.
13
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
14
Hello. Okay. The Chair had suggested a small, well,
15
short break. 'Cause we've been sitting here since
16
the past two, and so we're gonna take a ten minute
17
(10 min) break. We will continue with the
18
questions, and the people standing up will be
19
permitted to speak and ask questions.
20
Mr. ABEL TRAPPER:
21
I gotta be on the road...
22
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
23
(Inaudible) at the back. What?
24
Mr. ABEL TRAPPER:
25
One of these... I gotta be on the road. So, I want
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 132 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
to ask my questions before I leave. I gotta get the
2
road... I gotta head out to Val d'Or, so...
3
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
4
Okay. Go ahead. After your question...
5
Mr. ABEL TRAPPER:
6
It's gonna be...
7
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
8
... we'll take the break. Go ahead.
9
Mr. ABEL TRAPPER:
10
Yes. Pretty fast. My questions will be directed to
11
Strateco Resources. So, on the statement you guys
12
made, you talked about fifteen percent (15%) quota
13
of Cree workers out of the work force of a hundred
14
and eighty (180) workers, which means around thirty
15
percent (30%) of the potential (inaudible) were
16
Crees. The questions are, what kinds of jobs would
17
these be for the Crees, and what kind of training
18
will be provided for each of these job categories?
19
20
That's one of my questions.
And the other one, maybe you can jot it down,
21
so what do you mean when you say you will favour
22
Cree employment, favour employment for Crees with
23
equal competence and qualifications? It's on page
24
180 of your report.
25
And my last question would be, for each year,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 133 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
since two thousand and six (2006), can you provide
2
the number of workers at the camp, and the
3
proportion of Crees? And where were the non-Crees
4
from, as well. So...
5
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
6
Okay. Since two thousand and six (2006), we started
7
with about... Normally we have, we started with
8
twenty (20) employees, and Jimmy McLeod was
9
providing the camp and everything. Two thousand and
10
six (2006), okay? And the... It was... We had one
11
drill, and we did a small drilling program. This
12
was two thousand and six (2006). And as I said,
13
Jimmy McLeod was supplying the different stuff, you
14
know, the fuel and all that. And in two thousand
15
and seven (2007) we started our big camp we have
16
there, for fifty (50) employees.
17
And then, we started to do work, we are
18
working a lot with the Coonishish family, and
19
they're supplying the fuel, they're supplying...
20
They are working also with the road construction,
21
the winter road with Karsa. They are in kind of a
22
joint venture with Karsa. And we just gave the
23
contract to Ascan, you know, for the catering, for
24
a four million dollar (4 M$) contract, for the next
25
two three years. And this is owned by the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 134 -
1
2
QUESTION
PERIOD
community, you know? Part. And the...
So, to answer your first question is the... We
3
have always about three (3) four (4) Crees on the
4
site, okay, our objective is to go to fifteen
5
percent (15%) during the exploration phase. Because
6
one thing to be said is the, to get the license,
7
the CNSC asked us to get a contractor. The
8
contractor is from Saskatoon, is Tyson. Because
9
they have expertise with uranium, you know, it's...
10
No contractor from the area was meeting that
11
criteria with expertise from uranium.
12
We will have, as Cameco is doing in Saskatoon,
13
a formation program. This, all the formation
14
program is ready. Okay? This was a lot of technical
15
people formation, you know? We have to start from
16
scratch. And Tyson has a formation program. We are
17
talking on health and safety control, technical,
18
environmental. That is... That is, will create a
19
new formation. This doesn't exist in Quebec, you
20
know? It's a new industry.
21
So, really, our objective is to get fifteen
22
percent (15%), eventually going to twenty-five
23
percent (25%), an objective Cameco has in the
24
north, and they never reached that objective. But
25
the catering, you know, job and surface, a lot of
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 135 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
are Cree. And our objective is fifteen percent
2
(15%). We'll reach it, I know, Troilus has always
3
problem to meet those. But the formation, we'll
4
have a lot of new jobs.
5
As you saw, the water treatment plant has to
6
be put in place, and formation of the technicians
7
to take water control, you know, and tests. We see
8
very Cree. And when you go underground, you know,
9
if the people want to get the formation, you know,
10
to control, the different kinds of control
11
technicians, and naturally the miners also.
12
Tyson, out of Saskatoon, you know, it's not
13
economic for us at all to bring people from
14
Saskatoon because they have the experience. So an
15
extensive formation program would be put in place
16
very very soon. But we will not start that until we
17
have the license to do it. And so we have to do
18
another process, maybe late August or September,
19
where the people will put their reports and
20
questions, and then we have the technical in
21
November, with the CNSC, around November, the...
22
for the license.
23
So, that means we will not start before
24
December or January two thousand... at the best,
25
two thousand and eleven (2011). But people has to
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 136 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
be in place before we can start. The water
2
treatment plant, the technicians taking that, and
3
this can be done with, we hope, with the people
4
from the community here, give them the formation.
5
We have to form. Those job doesn't exist in Quebec,
6
actually, you know? So it's better for us to have a
7
very good, to keep people working here in the area,
8
you know?
9
Mr. ABEL TRAPPER:
10
So, on all the training you're talking about, now,
11
the formation, "toute la formation", basically,
12
you'll be delivering in-house, or be outsourcing
13
your training?
14
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
15
Ah, we will... For sure, we'll outsource some. As
16
for the radiation control, stuff like that, you
17
know, we will have people coming and form our own
18
people on site, you know? Here or in Chibougamau,
19
depending who can offer this formation program, you
20
know? But for sure, if we can have the facilities
21
here in Mistissini, we'll use the facility which is
22
offered. We tried, up to now, to use much facility
23
as we can. As the air strip, you know, the slash
24
and everything, it's all the people from Mistissini
25
working on it. And the, on the survey also, we saw
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 137 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
one of your teams here, on the road, and the...
2
What is the name? Horizon, Horizon? Horus? Horus? I
3
know we have a lot of Cree people who have worked
4
on our site for Horus, you know, the survey
5
company? So we try to do our best. But it's a new
6
technology, and we have a lot of formation to give,
7
and we have our formation program in place, we have
8
a lot of volume on the forma...
9
The training has to... People have to be in
10
place before we can even start. So... But we need
11
the license to start it, you know? It's a lot of
12
money, and we don't waste our time and your time,
13
and say we form you, and there, it's no job
14
possible because we cannot go forward.
15
But at the exploration phase, we will have to
16
have, to form people. But when we start, we start
17
with people from Saskatoon, because they have the
18
expertise, the top guys, and there they will form
19
people here with the time. We start with one phase,
20
in the waste, we will not have access to the ore
21
before two years, roughly, but every procedure has
22
to be in place. So that is kind of training period
23
before, really, we have access to the ore in three
24
years from now, or eighteen (18) months.
25
So, we'll have the time to do a formation.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 138 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. ABEL TRAPPER:
2
Why I ask these questions is basically, I think
3
you'll be dealing with me, 'cause I work with the
4
Cree Human Resources Development. So that's why I'm
5
trying to learn more about the project too, so...
6
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
7
We have an office we just opened here in
8
Mistissini, and we have one with Daniel in
9
Chibougamau, and the... You know, we really want to
10
develop that relation. We have since two thousand
11
and six (2006). It's not new, it's not a newborn.
12
We know the importance to have the support from the
13
community, and we know we cannot convince
14
everybody, then they will be for the project, so
15
it's impossible, you know. But we expect, then,
16
people, with the way we have worked in the last
17
three years, will pay out at a certain point.
18
Because people know exactly the Taliman or the
19
tribe lines of the elders in the area, we know they
20
have, I will say good support of the project.
21
Mr. ABEL TRAPPER:
22
I thank you very much.
23
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
24
Thank you.
25
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 139 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
(in Cree) Thank you. We'll have a short break, I
2
mentioned, for people to have refreshments and
3
snacks. (in Cree) The tradition dictates that
4
guests and non-residents be served first, so they
5
should all go and help themselves first. That's
6
guests and non-residents of Mistissini. And then
7
others can help themselves to the refreshments. (in
8
Cree) Ten minute (10 min) break. (in Cree)
9
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
10
Thank you, Philip.
11
SUSPENSION OF THE SESSION
12
_________________________
13
RESUMPTION OF THE SESSION
14
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
15
... public session information concerning this
16
project and the processes. With, also with the
17
presence of the review bodies, the proponent, the
18
regulatory bodies as well. (in Cree) We shall
19
continue with the question session and comment
20
session. So, just, anybody who wishes to ask a
21
question or make a comment, just take one of the
22
microphones. Proceed. Please remember to give your
23
name before speaking. Thank you.
24
Mrs. ELISABETH ROBINSON:
25
Okay. It's working now, hey? My name is Elisabeth
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 140 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Robinson, I'm a public health physician, a doctor,
2
I work with the Cree Health Board, and I have done
3
so for quite a few years. Too many. I don't want to
4
reveal how many. And I work out of Montreal right
5
now, but I have worked in Fort George and
6
Mistassini as well, but quite a few years ago.
7
So I have a couple of questions, and also, I
8
just want to say that, you know, I do think the
9
whole idea of uranium, nuclear, radioactivity, it's
10
scary. And it should not be minimized. We have to
11
be very, very careful with that. And we have to get
12
very informed about this. Because when we think
13
about these things, we think about Hiroshima, we
14
think about that horrible bomb that was dropped on
15
Japan, and we think about Tchernobyl. And those
16
were very major incidents in the history of our
17
plant, that we would never want to have happen
18
again.
19
So, I don't think just going around and saying
20
it's safe, it's safe, it's safe, you know, we have
21
to weigh the risks and the benefits of this. And
22
mining is a dangerous industry. We know that. And
23
uranium mining, in the past, did cause lung cancer.
24
And it caused lung cancer, it increased the rates
25
of lung cancer among Navajo miners in the U.S.,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 141 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
where uranium was mined in the fifties (50s) and
2
sixties (60s).
3
Now personally, I think that the technology
4
has advanced, and we can ventilate mines properly
5
to get the radon out of them, so that the risk of
6
lung cancer to miners is no longer a problem. But
7
we have to be very vigilant.
8
9
So, because of, I think there is a potential
for spills of various kinds and for major
10
accidents. And one kind of accident or spill that
11
concerns me has to... And you mentioned it tonight.
12
That the fuels, and the storing of the fuel, the
13
fossil fuels and the transport of the fossil fuels.
14
So, my question is, did you look into using
15
hydropower instead of fossil fuels to power your
16
system and the ventilators and all that stuff?
17
And my second question is about the chemicals
18
used in the water treatment. You talked about
19
acids, and bases, and... I'd like to know a little
20
bit more about that. So those are my questions.
21
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
22
I will answer...
23
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
24
Will you give some comments on this?
25
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 142 -
1
I will answer the first question...
2
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
3
Okay.
4
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
5
... and I will ask...
QUESTION
PERIOD
6
7
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
8
Go ahead.
9
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
10
... one of my colleagues to answer about the
11
chemical part of the water treatment plant.
12
Regarding the use of fuel, for the exploration
13
phase, we have no choice, because it's a short
14
period of time, and Hydro-Québec has made a study
15
for us and it is very expensive. It's over a
16
hundred and fifty million dollars (150 M$) to bring
17
the power lines on site. So, it will not be
18
economic.
19
But as you... On the video, you saw that we
20
plan, we had tests, and we are starting extensive
21
tests to have a windmill on the project. And we
22
expect to use a windmill, normally, in the best-
23
case scenario, you can save thirty (30), maximum
24
forty percent (40%) of your time on the windmill.
25
But at least, we will save some issues with the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 143 -
1
2
QUESTION
PERIOD
fuel.
And also, having the permanent road, the
3
extension of the Road 167, and part of the
4
environmental impact study, we'll minimize or
5
storage fuel on the site. We will use the... We
6
will have tankers, as you are coming here, you
7
know, we will travel on the road, and the... It
8
will be a lot safer than a winter road.
9
But for, we are planning to have a windmill,
10
you saw in the video, and we are, we'll start to
11
carry additional tests to see if it's possible.
12
To answer your second question, I will ask
13
Grant to talk about the water treatment plant.
14
Mr. GRANT FEASBY:
15
Thank you. My name is Grant Feasby. The chemicals
16
that would be used in the water treatment plant for
17
the exploration phase would be barium chloride,
18
barium to remove small amounts of radium, and
19
perhaps either some lime or a flocculent that would
20
not cause any hazard to fish.
21
Mrs. ELISABETH ROBINSON:
22
Okay, thanks. I just want to mention something,
23
finally, about radon. I know that isn't the subject
24
really of... Radon in people's homes is not the
25
subject of this Panel. But the Public Health people
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 144 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
in Quebec have done quite a lot of work on that,
2
and in our department, my colleague Mathieu
3
Trépanier has actually measured radon in some
4
houses in two Cree communities, and I... He's away
5
on holiday now, and I don't want to say too much
6
about it, but I imagine we'll be continuing that.
7
So, if people have any concerns or questions about
8
that, feel free to ask me.
9
Mr. ROD QUINN:
10
Hello. My name is Rod Quinn, and I work on behalf
11
of... I work with Hubert, actually, with the local
12
Environment Department, on behalf of the Cree
13
Nation of Mistissini. This question is directed
14
towards Strateco, it's specifically oriented
15
towards the project's economics.
16
You're basing your project economics on...
17
Well I've read the Scott and Wilson study released
18
April two thousand and ten (2010), a preliminary
19
assessment of the Matoush Project, and you're
20
basing your economics on the fact that the price of
21
uranium was at seventy-five dollars per pound
22
(75$/lb), your actual cost of extraction for this
23
resource is forty-seven dollars per pound (47$/lb),
24
and the current uranium price in market is forty-
25
one dollars per pound (41$/lb).
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 145 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
So my question is, how does this project make
2
sense to you? Would you be losing money per pound
3
on every, on all the uranium? And the secondary
4
question is how can this community be comfortable
5
with the fact that this company will be able to
6
afford to complete this underground exploration
7
work and then clean up the site once it's done? I
8
know you've addressed it a little bit, but I think
9
it's important that the community does hear how you
10
want to go about that.
11
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
12
I will answer the question. Regarding the economics
13
of the project, we have the, in the scoping study,
14
we have a section we call marketing, and the
15
expert, which is from France, Sachi Davis, she
16
estimated the price of uranium between sixty (60)
17
and ninety (90) by two thousand and thirteen
18
(2013). Okay?
19
The actual long-term price... The spot price
20
is not a reality for the producer. It's mainly the,
21
we call a long-term price, which is actually at
22
fifty-eight dollars (58$). Fifty-eight dollars
23
(58$).
24
25
And in the operating costs, we have operating
costs between twenty-three (23) and twenty-five
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 146 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
(25), twenty-six dollars (26$), depending the
2
Canadian exchange rate. We are using pretty low,
3
eighty-five (85), and so the production cost is
4
between twenty-five (25) and, twenty-three (23) and
5
twenty-seven dollars (27$), depending the exchange
6
rate you are taking.
7
So, on operating at sixty dollars (60$), you
8
know, or making money, in the scooping you have, I
9
can give you a copy, a sensitivity table, and the
10
project is very economic. This is done with three
11
hundred and forty-two million dollars (342 M$)
12
investment project, three hundred and forty-two
13
(342), and the, also with a discount rate of ten
14
percent (10%) for the annuity, you know? So, that
15
gives you... For us, the rate of return is around
16
forty-one percent (41%), with the assumption it's
17
seventy-five (75).
18
The... If you are using at sixty (60), which
19
is actually, the rate of return is going down to
20
about eighteen percent (18%), which is the minimum
21
we are looking for. But we are so far from the...
22
This project, as we are talking, is the highest
23
grade in the world outside Athabasca. Per example,
24
our grade is six thousand ppm (6 000 ppm), and Len
25
was referring to a mine in Africa, the Rosenberg,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 147 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
and the grade is two hundred (200), three hundred
2
ppm (300 ppm). And so our grade is a lot higher,
3
we're at six thousand ppm (6 000 ppm), than what
4
they are mining in Africa. It's the reason why we
5
can make money.
6
The price actually is very low. Actually, at
7
forty dollars (40$), forty-one (41), the spot
8
price. But long-term stay at fifty-eight (58), so
9
the project is economic. But we will have to see
10
with the bank. We are doing a bankable feasibility
11
study to see all the assumptions, including the
12
investment of three hundred and forty million
13
dollars (340 M$). We think it's very high, because
14
we are talking operation about seven hundred tons
15
(700 t) per day. And for the mill, for a seven
16
hundred ton (700 t) per day mill, we are talking
17
two hundred million dollars (200 M$) in the
18
scooping study.
19
And actually, as you know, Osisko is doing a
20
huge mill in Malartic, open pit, fifty-five
21
thousand tons (55 000 t) per day for two hundred
22
and sixty million dollars (260 M$). So, I think we
23
have some room there. I built a mill at three
24
thousand tons (3 000 t) per day, base metal, for
25
about forty million dollars (40 M$). So, we have to
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 148 -
1
2
QUESTION
PERIOD
take our consultants' figures, and the...
So that, for us, the economic is there, you
3
know? If we're not making money, no other project
4
will make money, except in Saskatchewan.
5
On the question of how you can protect, or how
6
the company will finance it, we have no choice.
7
Before even we can start the decline, we have to
8
put the guarantee, if it's five or four or six
9
million dollars (6 M$), has to be in the hands of
10
the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, for sure,
11
and eventually, in the closure, the mine closure,
12
if we are going, actually we are talking thirty
13
million dollars (30 M$). Thirty million dollars
14
(30 M$). So, that means a lot of money has to be
15
guaranteed before we can go. And the possibility to
16
do that is to have partners, or, depending, with
17
the license, there is a big milestone in our story
18
of company, so we can estimate that the share price
19
will give us a possibility to finance the project.
20
We can borrow money from banks if the economic...
21
The section, the exploration phase we are
22
doing, we call that also a bankable feasibility
23
study to prove the assumptions we are using. So, on
24
this, if we are not making money, except in
25
Saskatchewan, I don't see any other producing
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 149 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
project would make money, you know? It is a very
2
good grade.
3
Mr. ROD QUINN:
4
I still haven't heard an answer to my questions I
5
asked earlier. I don't think anybody has heard an
6
answer to what's safe about being exposed to
7
carcinogenic radioactivity through uranium mining.
8
And the cancers it causes. Can you please give an
9
answer on that?
10
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
11
I... I'll try to answer that as best as I can. As I
12
mentioned, we also will have a radiation protection
13
specialist here at the next hearing, who will be a
14
lot more well versed than I am on the health
15
effects. But perhaps one thing we need to say is, I
16
don't think anyone here has said that it can't be
17
dangerous. We wouldn't be here as a regulator if it
18
weren't dangerous. That's the reason why we
19
regulate it.
20
Safety is not based just on whether something
21
can cause an effect or not. Safety is based on how
22
you manage it. A simple analogy is, if you drive
23
your car at three hundred miles per hour (300 mph)
24
and you smash into a post, you're probably gonna
25
have a problem. So that's why we have laws that say
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 150 -
1
2
QUESTION
PERIOD
you can't go three hundred miles an hour (300 mph).
So the issue of safety is gonna be based on
3
what measures do you have to ensure that you keep
4
exposures to levels that are acceptable.
5
One of the other analogies I guess I can make
6
is, one of my colleagues here at the table was
7
mentioning, is if you take something like bleach.
8
We know that you use bleach for your clothes to
9
whiten it, make it nice and white, but we also know
10
you use bleach to sterilize water so it's safe to
11
drink. But bleach is actually quite dangerous. And
12
I would not recommend you drink a cup of bleach.
13
'Cause it probably wouldn't be very good for you.
14
But if I take a little bit of bleach and I put it
15
in water, I can actually make that water safe to
16
drink.
17
Now again, it may not be a completely fair
18
comparison, but the whole idea on safety is it's
19
not just on the basis of whether something is
20
dangerous or not. I agree, there certainly is all
21
kinds of studies that have shown that there are
22
potential effects as a result of exposure to
23
radiation. That's why we regulate it. That's why we
24
try to keep things limited. To keep the exposures
25
down as low as possible.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 151 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
The other thing maybe I didn't mention is that
2
we set regulatory limits. The regulatory limit is
3
one milliSievert per year (1 mSv/yr) to a member of
4
the public. There is no one in Canada that gets
5
anywhere near one milliSievert per year (1 mSv/yr)
6
exposure. Anywhere. Whether it's a nuclear power
7
plant, whether it's a uranium mining mill, and the
8
reason why is 'cause we, as a regulator, believe in
9
a principle called ALARA. And that means as low as
10
11
reasonably achievable.
So, that means that if you can take measures
12
that are reasonable, to make sure that the
13
exposures are much less than one milliSievert
14
(1 mS), that's what we expect. That's what we hold
15
people accountable to. You can look at the reports,
16
our reports are available, you can find out what
17
the exposures to the public are. You can also find
18
out what the exposures are to workers. We set a
19
limit of a hundred millisieverts per year
20
(100 mSv/yr), twenty millisieverts per year
21
(20 mSv/yr) averaged over five (5) years, fifty
22
millisieverts (50 mSv) in one year.
23
Those are all fancy numbers, but the big thing
24
is, is that we don't let them get anywhere near
25
that. We expect people to take appropriate measures
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 152 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
to keep the exposures as low as possible. That's
2
ALARA. That's one thing we pride ourselves in as a
3
regulator. We're very demanding, and we expect it,
4
and we hold them to account.
5
I can tell you we've had situations where a
6
mine was almost shut down. No worker had ever
7
exceeded the regulatory limit. But it was clearly
8
obvious that that company was not taking adequate
9
measures to keep those exposures as low as
10
possible. And we threatened to shut them down. And
11
you can be guaranteed that when you threaten a
12
company to shut down, they suddenly start adjusting
13
their attitude. And we've done that, and we've made
14
it happen, and if you look at it, you see the
15
exposure is going down.
16
So, I want to make sure people understand
17
we're not saying that there aren't dangers. That's
18
why they have to be managed, that's why they have
19
to be controlled. And that's a big part of what our
20
role is as a regulator.
21
So, if there is any... If you're getting this
22
impression that there is absolutely, this is
23
totally safe and that you can do whatever you want
24
with it, that's totally wrong. That would be very
25
very misleading. It can be dangerous if it's not
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 153 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
handled properly. That's why we regulate it, and
2
that's why we put the controls that we put in
3
place.
4
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
5
My name is Ramsey Hart, I'm the Canada program
6
coordinator with Mining Watch Canada. We're not big
7
fans of uranium mining at Mining Watch, for a
8
variety of reasons, from mining to, all the way
9
down to fuel cycle. One of our biggest concerns is
10
around long-term risks associated with tailings
11
management, and as a person from CNSC just
12
mentioned, that these things are dangerous if
13
they're not regulated over the long term, and so
14
our concern is who will be looking after tailings
15
in a hundred (100) or a thousand (1 000) years,
16
when they're still toxic?
17
And I was very interested in Strateco sort of
18
passing comment about looking at alternatives for
19
managing tailings that don't require "impelments",
20
and I was wondering if that could be elaborated on,
21
and I'd also like to know why that's not in the
22
EIS. Or if it is, direct me to it 'cause I didn't
23
see, but I'll admit I haven't had time to
24
thoroughly go through all of it, so...
25
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 154 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
No, it's not in the EI. Because it's not in this
2
phase of work, the exploration phase. We don't have
3
any tailings. We are not taking a bulk sample.
4
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
5
The directive clearly indicates that you need to
6
look at issues regarding a mine, not just the
7
exploration.
8
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
9
This is the reason why we have produced the video
10
here. I don't know if you saw it. And no, it's...
11
To answer the question here, is the... You're
12
right. In the directive we received in January or
13
February two thousand and nine (2009), the document
14
you mentioned, they were talking about that issue,
15
and we are answering that also. One of the ninety
16
(90) questions we received from the Canadian
17
Agency, or the COFEX-South, we received ninety (90)
18
questions, including that question. And to be able
19
to give you some information, because the answer,
20
we cannot answer. You know? We cannot answer it.
21
Because we don't know what kind of tailings, or
22
what kind of ore, the exact ore.
23
We have to go and do the exploration work on
24
it. And to explain, we have agreed with the people
25
here to have prepared a video, and what I said is
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 155 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
the generic view of the video, because we don't
2
know exactly. We know that will be an open pit, we
3
know the size, a little bit, of the open pit, it's
4
no tailing pans, it's strictly, now, open pit, a
5
small open pit, to put about two million tons
6
(2 M t). Actually, our resources are one point six
7
million tons (1.6 M t). And the... Of ore. And the
8
sub...
9
But we have to go through this first phase of
10
exploration to answer the question about the
11
tailings, what kind of product we will reject, and
12
this is one of the ninety (90) questions we have to
13
answer in... And in the next meeting, when you will
14
come here, the answer will be there. But the answer
15
will be, really, we don't know. Because we are not
16
at that phase. We are here for an exploration
17
phase.
18
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
19
I get your point. Thanks. So this is a question, I
20
guess, for the Panel, then. Are those ninety (90)
21
questions available? Can we look at them? We'd also
22
be very interested in seeing Health Canada's
23
concerns about sufficiency. In other panel reviews
24
that I've been involved in, there has been a very
25
transparent back-and-forth between federal
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 156 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
regulatories and interested agencies and the
2
proponent in terms of the sufficiency. Whether or
3
not we all have, everybody in this room, and many
4
many more people that are interested and concerned
5
about this project, have enough information in
6
order to really evaluate what's being proposed. And
7
from my reading of the requirements, and my
8
reading, my preliminary reading of the EIS, I don't
9
think we do have that information that was required
10
11
by the directive.
So, is the Panel gonna do a basic sufficiency
12
determination and make that information public? I
13
guess you already have with the ninety (90)
14
questions, but this is the first I've heard about
15
the ninety (90) questions and about Health Canada's
16
concerns around the adequacy of the information.
17
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
18
Well, indeed, after the submission of the
19
environmental impact statement, both Panels, as
20
well as regulatory agencies and departments, have
21
gone through it and made what you call a
22
determination analysis, is that what you said? We
23
tried to compare the guidelines with the actual
24
impact assessment, and we've identified some areas
25
where the information was not provided, or where
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 157 -
1
2
QUESTION
PERIOD
the information was not provided in details.
So the Federal Review Panel has released, I
3
think it's a month ago, a list of questions, and as
4
I said earlier, we have a website where all the
5
information is available, you can go to the website
6
and have a look at the questions, and, well, the
7
requirement for additional information, this Panel,
8
the Federal Review Panel, has sent to the proponent
9
a similar exercise that is presently underway, with
10
the COMEX, and I will leave the Chairman of the
11
COMEX to explain...
12
Mrs. ANNE-MARIE GAUDET:
13
Benoit, just before you pass the microphone to
14
Pierre for the Federal Review Panel, the questions
15
and comments will be posted, we expect soon. The
16
document has to be translated in English before
17
it's posted on the website.
18
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
19
Okay.
20
Mrs. ANNE-MARIE GAUDET:
21
But as soon as the document is in both languages,
22
it will be posted.
23
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
24
So, it's not there yet. Just 'cause...
25
Mrs. ANNE-MARIE GAUDET:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 158 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
It's not there yet.
2
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
3
Okay. Good. 'Cause I had looked. I am aware of the
4
website, and I am trying to follow it, but I'm also
5
busy in looking at many different projects, so... I
6
thought maybe I had missed it, but I haven't. It
7
hasn't been posted yet.
8
Mrs. ANNE-MARIE GAUDET:
9
No no.
10
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
11
Okay. Thanks.
12
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
13
But if you want a French version of it, because the
14
document was written in French...
15
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
16
J'attendrai la traduction. Merci.
17
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
18
Okay.
19
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
20
Okay. On our side, we are working on, you know, and
21
it will be concluded probably this week. However,
22
we have a different way to proceed. And to explain
23
the processes, I will ask Daniel Berrouard to give
24
you some details, because we have an obligation to
25
make report to the administrator, provincial
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 159 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
administrator, on the James Bay Convention,
2
before... Okay.
3
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
4
Okay. Simple. In fact, like Pierre said just
5
before, we will transmit to the provincial
6
administrator, probably after this session of
7
information, in the next week, our supplementary
8
questions. In fact, we will have questions to ask
9
to proponent. After that, the provincial
10
administrator will transmit to the proponent our
11
questions. So, at that time, we will wait the
12
answer from the proponent. And this document will
13
be public when the provincial administrator will
14
transmit to the proponent.
15
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
16
And, I guess my final question, I'm not sure it's
17
Mining Watch's place to ask this, but I think it
18
needs to be asked, is, is this, in a fall meeting,
19
the extent of the Crown's duty to consult, in your
20
constitutional obligations to consult with the
21
Mistissini Cree, and if not, what other measures
22
are you proposing?
23
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
24
No, it's different. It's...
25
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 160 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Oh you're in the James Bay, so it's all falling in
2
that ca...
3
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
4
Yes. It's included...
5
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
6
Right.
7
8
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
9
... in the process of chapter 22 of the James Bay.
10
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
11
Okay. Right.
12
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
13
Yes.
14
Mr. RAMSEY HART:
15
I'd also just like to reiterate the fellow's
16
concerns about the uranium price, and especially
17
for the people of Mistissini, if they're hoping to
18
get revenues generating from this project in the
19
long-term.
20
We don't agree with the proponent's assessment
21
of the long-term trajectory of uranium and the
22
future of the nuclear industry. We don't think it's
23
necessarily going in that direction. You can make
24
up your own minds about that. But I think it's
25
important to evaluate that, to not take their word
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 161 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
for a long-term increase in price. You just need to
2
look at a graph of the uranium price, which wasn't
3
included in their uranium document. But there is a
4
sharp spike in the price during the eighties (80s)
5
and nineties (90s), and it's crashed since then,
6
and it's currently trajecting down. Thanks very
7
much.
8
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
9
Maybe a small comment. I would like to recall that
10
this fall coming, next fall, we will have some
11
public hearings, specially to take note on the
12
point as you mentioned, and the people of
13
Mistissini will be able, at that time, to give to
14
us other comments or to tell to us if they are for
15
the project or against the project, and the reason
16
why.
17
As we mentioned at the beginning of this
18
morning... this afternoon, today, you know, it was
19
a public information meeting. Generally speaking.
20
Yes. And at the fall, it will be a public hearing.
21
And it will be for your people the occasion to
22
transmit your official opinion or... Exact. On
23
different subjects.
24
25
Okay. Next question. Sir.
Mr. WILLIAM MIAMSCUM:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 162 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Hi.
2
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
3
And after you, after, madame, you will have the
4
opportunity. Sir, go ahead.
5
Mr. WILLIAM MIAMSCUM:
6
Yes. My name is William Miamscum. I'm a member of
7
this community. I was having a little bit of
8
difficulty with the language of this. I was
9
originally informed this was going to be an
10
information session provided by Strateco. And then
11
I'm hearing words like the next public hearing. Is
12
this a public hearing? Is this an information
13
strategy? And if... I listened very well to the
14
report information that was given by Strateco. And
15
I was a little puzzled.
16
Within that report, there are contained the
17
results of the environmental impact assessment
18
study. My question is, if the review, the
19
environmental watchdogs have not yet answered to
20
that environmental study, why is Strateco using
21
that information to give to the general public?
22
It's misleading.
23
I mean, when you tell the people that are, the
24
results of our studies say that the prevailing
25
winds, they blow away whatever contaminants are in
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 163 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
the air away from Mistissini, away from
2
Chibougamau, that environmental impact study has
3
not even been reviewed yet. We haven't had a chance
4
to kick it around yet. And yet you're using that
5
information in your public consultations with the
6
people. That's my question. Thank you.
7
8
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
9
I can make a comment. We filed the environmental
10
impact study in November two thousand and nine
11
(2009), which is seven (7) months ago. And this has
12
been accessible here, in the Council office. And
13
what we are presenting here is what we got. Okay?
14
And we... The risk assessment, our experts show
15
they had negligible risks that were used. And based
16
on the information we have, following that we
17
received, as I said, ninety (90) questions, the
18
CNSC sent us some questions on January the
19
fifteenth (15th), two (2) months later, and
20
normally, in the process, forty-five (45) days
21
after we have filed our environmental impact study,
22
they have this session today. Okay? This session
23
was supposed to be held forty-five (45) days. This
24
is the (inaudible) norms, I will say.
25
And, but, for many reasons, they had delay and
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 164 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
delay, and we got the questions from CNSC on
2
January the fifteenth (15th). We started to answer
3
the questions. Pierre Groulx started to answer, and
4
then we received, about a month ago, ninety (90)
5
questions from the Federal Agency, and we expect,
6
within the next few weeks, from the COMEX.
7
But the base, the base line, we started in two
8
thousand and six (2006), we have spent about five
9
million dollars (5 M$) on different studies. So,
10
this is the information we are giving you today.
11
But as some people mentioned, they have questions.
12
They have questions about direction of wind, you
13
know, more criteria, questions about the birds,
14
questions about the mine process, and we, it was
15
answered and we don't know yet, but they answered
16
all the questions.
17
But the session today, it's in the norms, it's
18
not misleading, it's based on the information we
19
have. It's... And as I said, that was supposed to
20
be held forty-five (45) days after the filing of,
21
in November. And the... And today, we have more
22
information because we started to answer the ninety
23
(90) questions, we expect to finish answer those
24
ninety (90) questions sometime in July, to be able
25
to give. We distribute to different consultants,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 165 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
and (inaudible), they are asking that question,
2
this is not clear, they want a little bit more
3
information here and there.
4
But the conclusion, for me, will not change, you
5
know? That will not change. They'll have more
6
information, but this is not, really not
7
misleading. It's strictly a session, information
8
session, and when we will have the public hearing,
9
and when the Mining Watch, and the federal
10
government gave about sixty-five thousand dollars
11
(65 000$) to different groups in total, to hire the
12
experts and revise our application, and some made
13
comments, and the fellow with Mining Watch said,
14
"Hey, you missed that part. The question that I've
15
been asking to you and you didn't answer", that's
16
true. But this has been repeated, that same
17
question, because we don't know. We'll say, we
18
don't know, with the information we have, the next
19
phase, if we go there.
20
But the last thing we want to do is misleading
21
the population here.
22
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
23
Yes sir. Call it democracy, all those hearings and
24
all those information sessions that you had were
25
actually held in between one (13h00) and five
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 166 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
(17h00). Now I know on the "res", no one works, but
2
actually it's not the case, and so I would like to
3
know, and monsieur Benoit Théberge can maybe answer
4
this question, as to whether or not we will have
5
the next meeting at a decent time, that is after
6
work hours. Monsieur Théberge?
7
8
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
9
Mr. President...
10
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
11
It's not up to monsieur Théberge to answer that
12
question.
13
Mr. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
14
Well, maybe it is the Band who has to answer.
15
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
16
Yes. We are the Panels who planned this, and during
17
the preparation of this, we wanted to consult with
18
the commu... the Band mana... the Band itself, and
19
the management of the community. And indeed, we
20
thought that we would need a long period of time to
21
address various questions, so this is why, after
22
consulting with the community, the Band management,
23
we... It was suggested to start earlier. So we made
24
the decision to come here and open the meeting at
25
two o'clock (14h00).
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 167 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
We are here today, and we are going to listen
2
to the questions. Even if it is eight o'clock
3
(20h00). People are welcome, and they can come
4
here, and as I said, this is a decision that was
5
made by Panel, by both Panels, after having
6
consulted with the local authorities.
7
8
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
9
So I guess we will have to address the local
10
authorities. Another thing is that you say that
11
people can go and consult the "rapport d'impact",
12
which has only eight thousand (8 000) pages in a
13
very specific language to geology or whatnot. And I
14
don't think that most people here have that type of
15
knowledge, and a lot of people do not speak
16
English. So I think that... I haven't heard many
17
translation going on this afternoon. Thank you.
18
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
19
This is a concern that we received. Indeed, it is
20
always a challenge to make sure that these thick
21
studies are synthesized and put in lay man terms.
22
There is probably a need for that in this kind of
23
project, most certainly, and we welcome your
24
comment.
25
Mrs. ROBIN CAMPBELL:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 168 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Good evening. My name is Robin Campbell. My
2
question is geared towards the proponent. The
3
review process is just beginning, and many people
4
in Mistissini haven't even learned about the
5
project, or fully understand the review process it
6
is going through. So there is no way that they
7
would be able to form an opinion either way, on
8
whether it is a good thing or a bad thing for the
9
community. And yet, Strateco has already stated
10
publicly that it has the full support of local
11
aboriginal Cree Nation people, as well as the local
12
residents of Chibougamau.
13
The same holds true for the issue of worker
14
absence from family life, that you admit is a
15
negative project impact, but of low importance,
16
because very little concern was shown for the
17
subject during the community's pre-consultation
18
process.
19
So my question is, you only did one open house
20
in the community in late two thousand and eight
21
(2008), along with a few focus groups with elders
22
and Taliman. How can you say the community, as a
23
whole, supports the project, or has no concern for
24
the issue of how workers' absence for two weeks at
25
a time will affect families?
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 169 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
2
I will start to answer the question, and I will ask
3
Jean-Pierre Lachance, who is really in charge of
4
the relations with the community, started in two
5
thousand and six (2006), to explain.
6
I don't think we can say we have a full
7
support from the population, you know? It's not
8
our... I think we have support from part of the
9
population in Mistissini, the people living in the
10
area where the project is. We have identified
11
people who are supporting, some Taliman, elders
12
over there. And the... But they have an article in
13
the Nation, I was really saying, then, no, you
14
know, we expect to have maybe fifty (50), sixty
15
(60) persons' support eventually, but it's
16
impossible to get a hundred percent (100%) of
17
support from any population. It's impossible, you
18
know? This is not democracy.
19
And I think, then, we have to have
20
information, and it's what Jean-Pierre did since
21
two thousand and six (2006), it's what Strateco did
22
in two thousand and six (2006). So Jean-Pierre, if
23
you can answer the question, please?
24
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
25
Yes. Thank you for your answer. Well, first of all,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 170 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
you're right, we were here for the open house, and
2
forums in December two thousand and eight (2008).
3
Previous to that, we had several presentations with
4
the Band. As always, families were there all the
5
time, and in February two thousand and eight
6
(2008), two thousand and nine (2009), which is very
7
very important, because we believe that the support
8
or not of this project starts where, right there,
9
on the land, where the Taliman and their families
10
11
are. And I think we've put our efforts.
You could ask if there are representatives of
12
the families here tonight, except maybe Peter,
13
because he's working with us, so it's not, maybe
14
it's not good. But we've done our efforts. And I
15
will give you a good example that, with the efforts
16
we're putting together. It's why we opened this
17
office in Mistissini. This is why we opened the
18
office in Chibougamau. This is why Daniel Bergeron
19
was named. He's from Chibougamau. He's not from
20
Mistissini, but he's known this area here. He knows
21
the people.
22
But to make sure we could get closer to the
23
people, to the people from Mistissini, for the
24
people going from here to Temiscamie up to Matoush,
25
we retained the services of Peter. And lately, I
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 171 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
could maybe get the right answer from Daniel or,
2
and probably better from Peter, they visited,
3
together, everybody along the road. From Mistissini
4
up to La Perche, and name it. So I guess we do put
5
our efforts. It's not perfect yet, but we will
6
continue and reinforce.
7
It's a top priority for Strateco to
8
communicate with the people. In order, eventually,
9
to get their support or what. But also, I want to
10
point out that sometimes, because we're the, let's
11
say the promoter, the proponent, we're being said,
12
"Well, of course, you're... that's what, you're
13
saying this. We want to hear it from somebody
14
else."
15
Then, through the learning together, the
16
Chief, the Band, I guess, and Chibougamau, the four
17
Chiefs, all from Saskatchewan, for me, I think it
18
was fantastic to be able to have your brothers
19
right down here in Mistissini and tell you what
20
they lived, what they went through. Working thirty-
21
five (35) years... Like Guy was mentioning before,
22
in uranium mines, they're happy people, they
23
have... It's good economic for them, they're
24
healthy.
25
Well, I think it's an indirect way. But if the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 172 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
proponent will do something like this, it will not,
2
it will have not been well received, I think.
3
So, I could keep on going like this for
4
fifteen minutes (15 min), but, are you satisfied
5
with the answer?
6
Mrs. ROBIN CAMPBELL:
7
Yes. Thank you very much.
8
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
9
Thank you.
10
Mrs. ROBIN CAMPBELL:
11
My second question is, what is the status of the
12
potential advisory counsel that is referenced in
13
the environmental impact assessment document?
14
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
15
I can start to answer, and I will ask Jean-Pierre
16
again to finish. We... I will say a year ago, we
17
spoke with the, I think it's the Chief, or the
18
Band, to try to put together a group, you know, for
19
discussion with us. It's very very hard. It's very
20
hard, you know, to get people to sit and discuss
21
about, or to organize a committee, a committee of
22
people to see discussion. We know we will have to
23
have one, but up to now, with help with Peter and
24
Daniel, they are in place now in full time. We are,
25
they are not in Montreal or elsewhere.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 173 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
So, we have to put that things together, you
2
know, and we try to work. But you know a lot more
3
than me, because you are living here. It's not easy
4
to ask people to sit around a table and be... put
5
that together. But this is a commitment we took,
6
and we have no choice, you know? We will have to
7
have a group of people sit, to sit with us and
8
discuss different subjects, you know? Formation,
9
job, the business creation, business support. This
10
is all a request we got, and the only way we can go
11
is have a committee of five, six, seven people,
12
depending who you will select, and sit with us and
13
discuss about financial compensation and... You
14
know, they have different things to start.
15
This is coming... We are ready to do it now,
16
and it's a commitment, but it's more when a mine is
17
into production, and some people believe will not
18
make money, so they have not enough money to share.
19
But I really believe, then, that project is good,
20
it will be good for the community.
21
So, Jean-Pierre, do you want to add something
22
on this?
23
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
24
Yes, Guy, thanks. Yes indeed, we have been, let's
25
say, on track for, to create this committee, like
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 174 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Guy was just saying, for about two years now. Well,
2
first of all, you have to choose the right people.
3
And I've personally talked with Chief Longchap
4
several occasions. Well, I guess it was, the
5
decision, it was, timing is everything. And that's
6
where we are now.
7
You ask your questions tonight, and I can tell
8
you that just a few weeks ago, I was... Daniel can
9
say we're... That's... We are there, in the next
10
months, we want to create this committee, but like
11
Guy mentioned, we cannot be twenty-five (25) people
12
on this. So it's... We have to turn around. Daniel
13
will be looking through, I don't want to name the
14
person, but try to help to find the right people
15
that could represent the entire community. Not only
16
the... There is a (inaudible), it's very important.
17
Remember, in December two thousand and eight
18
(2008), there was supposed to be a focus group with
19
the (inaudible) people. There was nobody. Nobody
20
came. But it's not because nobody came that we
21
don't care. Daniel, again, with Peter, they
22
addressed that with Marlene and how... Who could we
23
talk to, to be able to get closure to the
24
(inaudible).
25
Daniel, I think again, last week, he had a
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 175 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
meeting with somebody here in Mistissini, just
2
regarding this. So we're keeping track, and the
3
committee will be created. I won't make any promise
4
when, but we are working on this.
5
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
6
I have a question for you, monsieur. We just talked
7
about the Dene people. How come that the Dene...
8
Monsieur Jean-Pierre, I think your name is? Yes?
9
The Dene people, if they did so good, how come that
10
they were so poor that they had to put their meat
11
into the mine shaft, and that they were left
12
without electricity or propane stoves and fridges?
13
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
14
Well, is this... How many years ago, that happened?
15
Mrs. ÉLÈNE HÉBERT:
16
Well, you should ask you friend monsieur Déranger.
17
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
18
Unfortunately, I did not attend at this
19
presentation, the four Chiefs were here. Well,
20
I'm... I guess if you're saying it, it's true, but
21
I don't know. I could not, I cannot answer your
22
question, because I didn't hear about that. But I
23
would say perhaps this is one exception. 'Cause I
24
could tell you, I was coming back from a major
25
operation, but I had dinner with people from
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 176 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
running together and the Chiefs before they came
2
here. I wasn't here at the presentation. I was
3
not... I didn't have to be here.
4
But I can assure you that the Chiefs said that
5
they were... They were really, their communities
6
really did benefit of the uranium mining
7
surrounding, like for Cameco, rabbit ears and so
8
on, or commercial fishing. So I thought it was
9
pretty positive. So what you're... I'm not really
10
aware what, precisely what you're asking.
11
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
12
Just a moment please.
13
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
14
Okay. Okay, yes.
15
Mrs. ANNE-MARIE AWASHISH:
16
All right. My name is Anne-Marie Awashish, and I am
17
very new to this uranium idea, this uranium issue,
18
if you want. But I thought that it would be a good
19
time to share with you, when I hear that you're
20
having problems setting up a committee and all
21
this, I think it's a good time to share with you
22
our experience, let's say, the community experience
23
with mining in a general way.
24
25
I came here in nineteen seventy (1970). So I
do have a little historical background. And at that
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 177 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
particular time, and the late Chief Jimmy Miamscum
2
could tell you, that when a mining company came and
3
wanted to set the place, and when they did on
4
Campbell Point, they never asked any authorization,
5
they never asked the Crees for any opinion. They
6
just set the mine, left the tailings there, and
7
years after, people, it's common knowledge that the
8
Oujé-Bougoumou people had a much higher rate of
9
cancer than other people in the territory. At,
10
11
let's say, an earlier time.
In around nineteen seventy-two (1972), the
12
Campbell Mine, I guess, decided that they did want
13
to have some Crees involved, and they presented a
14
training program for underground mining. And as a
15
matter of fact, I think some of the people that are
16
sitting here took that course, and I think it was
17
something like ten (10) or twelve (12) people from
18
Mistissini and Oujé-Bougoumou, took the training
19
with Campbell for underground mining. And to my
20
knowledge, ten (10) years later, there wasn't one
21
person that worked underground.
22
As we move along through history, the mining
23
industry around Chibougamau went down, the forestry
24
took over, the agreement was signed, and there
25
wasn't much relation between the mining industry
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 178 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
and the Crees again. Until recently, with the
2
Troilus Project, which was probably the first
3
agreement which included the Crees at many
4
different levels.
5
With that agreement in Troilus, it was an
6
agreement which impacted family, and there was some
7
involvement of the Cree Nation. But I can say that
8
because it was a first, it had its weaknesses and
9
its strength. But it was the beginning of getting
10
some form of consultation from the people on
11
establishing mining.
12
With the uranium, I think it's another step,
13
we're going in the same direction, except that it's
14
a lot more complicated. Because it's an industry
15
that's highly regulated, immediately it brings up
16
all the fear issues. And I was thinking about that,
17
and I was talking to Peter recently, I said, the
18
way I see it is, there is a number of fears that
19
are related to the use of uranium. When you talk
20
about... There is only eighteen (18) reactors in
21
Canada, and how many people sitting in this room
22
have seen maybe more than one or two?
23
If you travel to Europe, the landscape is
24
filled with uranium, I mean, nuclear reactors. And
25
that's how they get their power. But of course, us,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 179 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
with Hydro-Québec, no need for... no need for the
2
nuclear reactors.
3
The second thing from, again from Tchernobyl,
4
and the past history, and how the industry, let's
5
say... Well, I imagine there are other sets of
6
regulations for the actual exploration there, the
7
actual running of the nuclear... I'm losing
8
(inaudible) here...
9
Anyways, what we see now, it's the first time
10
where we're actually seeing a project coming for
11
the actual exploration of the mine. And I was here
12
when the people came from Saskatchewan. And of
13
course, they shared their experience, which, as was
14
mentioned, that was, seemed to be out, and if you
15
weigh it, seemed to have been quite positive.
16
The only thing that they were very concerned
17
about is the experience of the past. They talked a
18
lot about Uranium City, and the tailings that were
19
left there, and were not being dealt with by the
20
government yet. And those still constitute a risk.
21
And they're having a very difficult time to get the
22
government to actually address this issue.
23
Now, my... Let's say if I have one question,
24
we're talking about a very preliminary part of this
25
project phase. We're talking about exploration. And
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 180 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
we're putting a lot of energy in thinking what are
2
the risks in exploration. Then we're talking about
3
the second phase, the operation. And we're also
4
talking about the evaluation and the risks.
5
But one thing struck my ear. This mine will
6
operate for ten (10) years. And in ten (10) years,
7
okay, the works will be done to shut down, and I
8
don't remember the term that you used, there, to
9
either renaturalize the environment, but who takes
10
over? And I guess the question goes to you. Once
11
the mine is no longer in operation, because I think
12
that's a big issue, because when there is no longer
13
a mine, and the mining company to be responsible,
14
who deals with the not likely situation?
15
And I heard a person before talk about, make
16
an analogy to the crisis happening in the Mexican
17
Gulf. And it's funny, because I had that thought.
18
And I didn't have the thought because of the
19
industry per se, but because of how complaisant the
20
company was in not thinking about the risk, and
21
going ahead with the exploration.
22
So, let's just say my question, the safeguard
23
has to be there, in some way, long after the
24
operations are shut down.
25
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 181 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Thank you madame. Who wants to express some
2
comments? We made comments and passed the word only
3
for ten (10) years, only for ten (10) years, and
4
then I will, they will continue to answer, a
5
gentleman from CNSC. It's kind of rule of thumbs,
6
in mining. You always develop your project for
7
eight to ten (10) years. You establish the capacity
8
of the mill for eight to ten (10) years. But this
9
is what we have, we had last year.
10
As you are maybe aware, we are doing a
11
tremendous exploration program this year and next
12
year. We're drilling one hundred and twenty
13
thousand metres (120 000 m) of drilling additional,
14
we are doing, to increase the resources. The
15
structure is about fifteen kilometres (15 km) long.
16
We have explored one point two kilometre (1.2 km).
17
But the point, for us, is by two thousand and
18
eleven (2011), we'll decide what the size of the
19
mill. Actually, ten (10) years or eight years is
20
seven hundred tons (700 t) a day. It's... A mine,
21
it's a rule of thumb that you develop your mill
22
capacity or mine capacity for ten (10) years. This
23
is, we hope that we'll be there fifteen (15) and
24
twenty (20) and forty (40) years, you know? But
25
normally, when you start, you always... This is a
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 182 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
rule of thumb in mining. You always talk ten (10)
2
years. And eventually, we hope, with the
3
exploration program we are doing actually and next
4
year, we hope to go for fifteen (15), twenty (20)
5
years.
6
But those pounds, you know, we will not prove
7
it, it's just to establish they are there.
8
Eventually, when you start to mine the first year,
9
you try to replace your reserve, you have
10
(inaudible) during that year. And when we are
11
talking ten (10) years is really to follow the
12
rules of the industry in general, and talk eight,
13
ten (10) years.
14
And then, to answer your question about what's
15
happening after ten (10) years, I think a gentleman
16
from the CNSC can answer that.
17
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
18
With regards to what happens after operations,
19
they'll go through what we call decommissioning,
20
the rehabilitation and the cleaning up of the site.
21
They'll actually maintain a license, so even though
22
they're not operating anymore... In fact, we
23
have... I'm speaking now for Modern Minds. Uranium
24
City is somewhat a historic site, and we can talk
25
about all kinds of historic mines and the problems
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 183 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
that we've been encountering with those, but
2
speaking about the ones today, they get a
3
decommissioning license, and they'll continue to
4
monitor it, and they've gotta be able to
5
demonstrate that what they had predicted and the
6
effects that they were expecting to see are being
7
demonstrated, and they won't be released from their
8
license until they can demonstrate that.
9
And after that time period would go by, what
10
would happen is the Government would then assume
11
responsibility, and there would continue to be
12
monitoring over the longer term. But the company
13
would have to provide funds to cover those costs,
14
to provide that ongoing monitoring.
15
But basically, they can't... Because that's
16
one thing, right? At one time they operate a mine,
17
and then once it was done, they would leave. They
18
can't do that now. There is these financial
19
guarantees that are quite substantial, that hold
20
them there. They'll continue to have a
21
decommissioning license. We have one mine, for
22
instance, that was decommissioned, I think it's two
23
thousand and four (2004), so it's been
24
decommissioned now for six years, and there is
25
still people on the site that are continuing to
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 184 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
take samples and monitor and verify that what they
2
were expecting to see is exactly what they're
3
seeing.
4
So, there is a longer whole point. They won't
5
be released until it could be demonstrated, and
6
then there is a transfer over to a Government,
7
normally provincial Government, but it depends on
8
the different situations.
9
There is no set time limit, actually. It's not
10
like there is a, you know, you've got your
11
operating license and done your ten (10) years. It
12
depends. It'll be case by case. And it depends on
13
when they did all their... when they applied for
14
their license to decommission. They have to figure
15
out what their effects are, and when they plan on
16
observing them, and then there needs to be a
17
sufficient period of time to be able to see what's
18
going on. So it could take quite a number of years,
19
actually.
20
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
21
Thank you. Gentleman, your question.
22
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
23
My colleague was talking about the economic
24
benefits concerning a uranium mine. Prior to...
25
After you guys came, my colleagues and I showed the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 185 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Taliman of the affected area a DVD called "Uranium"
2
by Eric Matheson? Eric Matheson. And in this DVD,
3
this happened in Elliot Lake Ontario, for our
4
people to understand, and the mine promised them
5
economic benefits from this mine. And they were
6
promised a whole bunch of different things.
7
In that DVD, and if you want to see it, you
8
can see myself or my colleague here, we can get
9
together and show it to you. But it showed...
10
Remember how it was twenty-five (25) years ago
11
here, with the log houses? Well that's what those
12
people were living in after the uranium mine left.
13
They were promised medical benefits, they didn't
14
get any. A lot of their waterway is contaminated
15
from the tailings from that mine in Ontario in
16
Elliot Lake. A lot of their people are now... It
17
takes about twenty (20) years before the cancer,
18
some of the cancers begin to be known. But a lot of
19
them are getting cancers now. They were told no, it
20
won't happen, from the mining companies.
21
So, these guys are telling us that we're gonna
22
have economic benefits, that we're gonna get jobs,
23
but do you really want to work in a place where
24
you're gonna be exposed to "carcenic"
25
radioactivity? Where you're likely, cancer, a
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 186 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
couple of years down the road? Do you want to
2
expose our people and the other Quebec people?
3
Because if you look at their map on the air flow,
4
most of that air is flowing right into Lac St-Jean,
5
of our Quebec brothers and sisters over there,
6
exposing them to radioactivity. Do you want that? I
7
don't want that for us. I don't want it for them.
8
And in this DVD we have, those people in
9
Elliot Lake, today, are still living in poverty. No
10
economic benefits. Even though they were promised
11
by the mines. Are we gonna face the same thing from
12
your promises? From this mine that happened at
13
Elliot Lake? Is that what we're gonna receive from
14
our people? Thank you.
15
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
16
Thank you for your comments. Other questions?
17
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
18
Can I have a response, please?
19
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
20
Well, would you precise your question?
21
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
22
I did. I asked you a question. My question was, are
23
we gonna receive the same type of response that the
24
natives of Elliot Lake received, that the mining
25
companies promised them, but never fulfilled? Will
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 187 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
that happen to us also? Can I have a response?
2
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
3
It's hard to answer to that, because I know that
4
Elliot Lake area is very, it's a place where a lot
5
of people retire, because the quality of life
6
there, it's (inaudible) and a lot of people from
7
Toronto are retiring in this area. And I don't know
8
about the First Nations people, but I know this is
9
a very good... They had a referendum just before
10
Christmas, and people were asking, because they
11
have an exploration program going over there. And
12
they got support from local population. But I
13
cannot talk for the people. I don't know them.
14
So, for us, you know, what's the promise they
15
made thirty (30) years ago, regulations have
16
changed, and your people here... You know, I worked
17
here in nineteen sixty-eight (1968), across the
18
channel. Nineteen sixty-eight (1968). Forty (40)
19
years ago. Okay? And I will tell you, the place
20
here has changed a lot, you know? It's the first
21
time in forty (40) years I was coming here. Just
22
across, I was living in a tent across the channel.
23
And the... But people here are very well-organized.
24
You know, you just see the quality of the
25
infrastructure.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 188 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
A lot of people are with the James Bay Treaty,
2
you know, and people are very well-organized and
3
protected. You see, someone mentioned about the
4
Troilus. Yes, some... This was a first, really,
5
agreement between a mining company, and Troilus,
6
they missed some commitments and they have to pay
7
for it, you know? And I imagine that they will sit
8
with us, they will remember the Troilus Agreement,
9
and they will try to, then us, put the guarantee
10
11
and we'll respect it, you know?
This... The past is the past, and the future
12
is the future. I don't need any... Nothing good in
13
the past, you know, it's experience. You have to
14
learn from the past. But the future, it's something
15
else, you know? It's today. We start today, and
16
based on the experience from Troilus, based on
17
Elliot Lake, the bad experience they got over
18
there. But things have changed. And you have to
19
follow that very closely. It's the reason why the
20
Committee has to be there, and they have lawyers
21
now, you know? They had no lawyers in... I don't
22
know. But Elliot Lake. Today, it has changed. It's
23
my answer.
24
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
25
Yes indeed, we cannot rewrite history. But we can
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 189 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
learn from it. And that's why there is so many
2
reference to other situations. That is a statement.
3
Now I would like to tell people that saying
4
they invested five million (5 M), you know, to
5
accommodate the requests of the people, that
6
doesn't impress me at all. Ask them what percentage
7
of their total, total budget. Because some
8
companies, they might hide it somewhere, under a
9
different name. So five million dollars (5 M$)
10
11
doesn't impress me.
Now the question is, they foresee an increase
12
in the price. Now there are two factors that may
13
encourage them to speculate on it. The scarcity of
14
the product, which could be other country,
15
enforcing stricter law, and it can also be an
16
increase in the demand. And because of the number
17
of reactors overseas, yes indeed, the demand will
18
increase.
19
The question is, why is there a decline in
20
production? What are the factors that justify your
21
statement?
22
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
23
You have to remember my statements. I did, I made
24
so much tonight. Which one?
25
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 190 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
The statement that there will be speculation, okay,
2
that the price will rise from forty-something to
3
ninety (90). What are the factors that your company
4
is taking into consideration?
5
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
6
They have a lot of... It's not me saying that, it's
7
some expert. You refer, you have your own expert,
8
you know, I have my own expert. And the point is,
9
the demand. The demand for the generation of clean
10
energy. The China... I've been in China three years
11
ago, and the air is brown. Okay? They are using
12
coal to produce their energy. And China, they have
13
one point three billion (1.3 G) people, about five
14
hundred (500) are, start to be what they call
15
industrial, and more and more people, they are
16
building cities of twenty million (20 M) people
17
every year in China, you know?
18
India is the same. They are one point two
19
billion (1.2 G) people. And those guys need energy.
20
If you want to protect the nature, and for sure the
21
only way you can get clean energy and massive
22
energy is nuclear energy. Okay? And the.... If you
23
go solar panels, windmills, I will say windmills,
24
you know, twenty (20), thirty (30) at the best,
25
Hydro-Québec is thirty (30), their parks, thirty
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 191 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
percent (30%) efficiency, you will never invest
2
your own money in something which efficiency is
3
only twenty (20) or thirty percent (30%). Never,
4
never.
5
So, windmills, you know, it's good, but it's
6
not "efficace", you know? It's not "efficace" at
7
all. It's twenty (20), thirty percent (30%)...
8
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
9
It's still in its infancy, sir.
10
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
11
Excuse me?
12
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
13
Windmill. It's still in its infancy.
14
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
15
Yes but it's still, it's only twenty (20), thirty
16
(30), forty (40), we hope to have forty percent
17
(40%) efficiency on our site.
18
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
19
But you said that you would consider windmills to
20
supply the production. Didn't you?
21
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
22
Can I answer your question, please? Okay? And the
23
windmill is, it's a part... It's not "efficace". We
24
will say maybe thirty (30), forty percent (40%) is
25
better than nothing, okay, for us. But industrial
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 192 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
civilization cannot live on that.
2
So China, India, even the States, they left...
3
they lift the ban on nuclear power, you know, after
4
Three Mile Island, they had a ban, they cancelled
5
forty (40) reactors. Now they're rebuilding it.
6
Okay? Obama just announced fifty-four billion
7
dollars (51 G$) loan guarantee for nuclear energy.
8
9
In Germany, they had a ban on nuclear power.
They just reproduced their nuclear power. So it's a
10
future, and the demand, when you see all the
11
projections, actually the supply from mines is one
12
hundred million pounds (100 M lb) per year. One
13
hundred seven million pounds (107 M lb) per year.
14
The demand is two hundred million pounds
15
(200 M lb). And the projection talks about four
16
hundred million pounds (400 M lb). And they have no
17
more mines.
18
This project, if ever it's going into
19
production, will be the first in North America to
20
go into production in four years from now, five
21
years from now. So we are long... So they have very
22
shortage. When you have a shortage of something,
23
the price normally increases. And you don't wait
24
the gold price at twelve hundred dollars (1 200$)
25
to start to develop a gold mine. You start when
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 193 -
1
2
QUESTION
PERIOD
it's lower, you do the same thing.
The targers, our experts are saying, you know,
3
with the demand, the construction almost, they
4
doubled the reactors, about four hundred (400),
5
they will go, from two hundred and thirty (230).
6
And the demand is there, you know?
7
So it's the reason it's not speculation, it's
8
really based on future demand. This is strictly
9
supply and demand. Supply and demand.
10
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
11
This is regarding the developing country. Now what
12
is the record for China in regard to environment
13
protection?
14
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
15
They will do now with nuclear power. They will do.
16
If you go there, you know, the air is brown. And
17
they have no choice. And it's so bizarre. Some
18
people here, in Quebec, are talking that in Canada
19
we have two provinces who have a ban. Okay? Nova
20
Scotia and B.C. And it's the two provinces who
21
produce coal. And Nova Scotia, eighty percent (80%)
22
of their electricity is coming from coal. Okay?
23
It's the most polluted energy you can find on the
24
plant.
25
And by means, you know, the two only provinces
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 194 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
who have a ban on the expiration of uranium are
2
B.C., who produce coal, and Nova Scotia, who are
3
using eighty percent (80%) energy is coming from
4
coal, it is one of the largest coal producers in
5
Canada. So, you know, they don't have uranium. So
6
it's very easy to be, ask a ban on it, you know?
7
So this is, for me, the future of uranium is
8
very bright, and this is a time to look at it, this
9
is a time to look at it, it's not, you know, it's
10
almost perfect location to have this kind of
11
project, you know?
12
Mrs. CLAUDINE CHOLETTE:
13
I would just like to point out that where they have
14
a ban, they are coastal. Meaning that they could
15
access the tide effect to harness energy. Of
16
course, this would take more time than windmills.
17
But those provinces, it is an opportunity for them
18
to invest in something else. And you know as well
19
as I do that being aware, or sensitive to
20
environment doesn't arrive from one day to the
21
other. It's a culture that needs to be developed. A
22
culture.
23
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
24
Thank you. Someone else?
25
Mr. ANDREW COON:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 195 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Yes. Well, good afternoon, folks. My name is Andrew
2
Coon. I work for the Tourism Office as a tourism
3
coordinator. First, I'll put on my, you can say my
4
tourism hat, and I'd like to welcome all of you to
5
Mistissini. All the first-time visitors. I hope
6
that you are impressed by what you see.
7
You know that the general media sources,
8
Internet, TV, radio, whatever, has always produced
9
a negative image of a native person. I hope what
10
you see today... This community has worked hard in
11
the past to... it is what it is today. And I hope
12
that when you go home, you'll have more positive
13
comments about the reserve, more than negative.
14
I have a few questions that I'm gonna ask, and
15
after I ask my questions, I'll put on my hat as a
16
regular community member, and put my opinion forth.
17
The questions I have concerning tourism, in Matoush
18
exploration project, the environment assessment
19
does not include an assessment of the upgrading of
20
the current winter road access, making it to an
21
all-weather road access.
22
The question is:
have you met or talked with
23
the Cree Outfitting and Tourism Association to get
24
their perspective on the impact of the all-weather
25
road tourism in the area, the benefits?
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
QUESTION
PERIOD
- 196 -
1
And the second question is:
have you talked
2
with the representatives from the Provincial
3
Government about the potential impact on the
4
planned Albanel-Témiscamie-Otish Mountain National
5
Park? Those are the questions, two questions I have
6
right now.
7
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
8
Who wants answer to maybe the first question? Yes.
9
Mr. ANDREW COON:
10
As you know, I met with COTA, Cree Outfitting and
11
Tourism Association.
12
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
13
About the... About the question of the permanent
14
road.
15
Mr. ANDREW COON:
16
Yes.
17
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
18
Of course, like I said before, the project is
19
submitted to the process, we have emitted
20
guidelines, (inaudible) statement to the proponent,
21
to Transport Québec, and he will have to consider
22
those aspects. The aspect of tourism.
23
On the other question about...
24
Mr. ANDREW COON:
25
The other question is, have you met, or have you
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 197 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
talked with representatives from the government on
2
the, the members that are sitting on the Albanel-
3
Témiscamie-Otish Mountain National Park?
4
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
5
Okay.
6
Mr. ANDREW COON:
7
You know, there is a plant park open. Actually, I
8
would say I'm one of the representatives on that
9
committee.
10
Mr. DANIEL BERROUARD:
11
Okay. And for those questions, you make the link
12
with the Matoush Project and the (inaudible). I
13
would say that of course, we consider this aspect
14
in our supplementary questions that we have to ask
15
to the proponent, and I suppose that the proponent
16
has met the people from the park.
17
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
18
Yes, we have withdrawn our demand in the park. For
19
the all-winter road. All-season road. The four-
20
season road. We have withdrawn it about two months
21
ago, Jean-Pierre? And that was to help the Minister
22
of Transportation to go to the park. And because we
23
are, we'll say, not a public authority, we are, I
24
will say a private party, and a private party has
25
not the right, except to have exemptions, or you
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 198 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
have to go to the "Conseil" of the "Ministres".
2
So, to accelerate the process, we withdrew,
3
withdraw our request to build a road to the park.
4
And so we will wait for Road 167 to be completed.
5
So, I hope it will be at a certain point. But I'm
6
pretty sure all your group will be part of the
7
consultations. They have been going for three years
8
now.
9
Mr. ANDREW COON:
10
Yes. But, another question I had is concerning the
11
base line data for surface and ground water. This
12
question is for Strateco. There is a lot of... In
13
the statement, you said there is a lot of seasonal
14
variability with the surface water. And your
15
sampling took place at two points in one year. Do
16
you feel you have enough surface and ground water
17
data, and can Strateco provide the community with
18
simplified information on this subject?
19
Mrs. CHANTAL ROSSIGNOL:
20
Hi. I'm Chantal Rossignol from Golder Associates,
21
and we worked on the impact assessment. There was
22
some surface water that was analyzed at different
23
seasons within one year, to have all the seasons
24
over a year.
25
In our impact assessment, we say that there is
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 199 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
some variability in the concentrations. What we
2
don't know right now is, is that variability
3
related to the season, or can we expect that
4
variability over the whole year? And that will only
5
be, I mean, we'll only know the results of that
6
once more data is taken at the site.
7
Mr. ANDREW COON:
8
Ask an elder that question. They can... They'll
9
have an answer. Now, I'll put my hat on as, here,
10
community member. Not as a tourism coordinator. I'd
11
say I value more the water, the land, my culture,
12
and the air I breathe. I value that more than a
13
fifty... I believe you said a fifty-eight pound
14
(58 lb) of uranium.
15
What I'm saying to you today, with my work, I
16
do a lot of travel. I can say the Tourism Office,
17
Mistissini Tourism Office is in contact with
18
approximately one hundred thousand (100 000) people
19
per year. How? Through trade shows. We do six trade
20
shows per year. In Quebec, and in the States, and
21
in Ontario.
22
I do... I met with a lot of people at the
23
government level. For my work. I've had comments
24
about uranium. I actually met a former
25
representative of Strateco in Montreal in February.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 200 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
And he talked to me about the potential Matoush
2
Project. So, I gave him my concerns. And after a
3
discussion, he told me, "You have a good head on
4
your head. On your body. He says, you have good
5
reason why you can always say no to uranium
6
mining."
7
I'm not against development or mining. Except
8
for uranium. For me, uranium is a threat to the
9
people, to my culture, and that's something
10
personally I don't tolerate. So, I'm here to say
11
I'm against your project. Thank you.
12
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
13
Other questions? Yes sir?
14
UNIDENTIFIED VOICE:
15
Oh! You want to go first?
16
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
17
Okay, go ahead.
18
Mr. ROD QUINN:
19
Is this thing on? Yes, okay. My name is Rod Quinn,
20
I was up here before. I have one more question. It
21
basically deals with the impact study, and further
22
on in the study, it does state that one of the
23
biggest concerns is going to be the effluent
24
released into the lakes. So, this is probably one
25
of the biggest concerns.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 201 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
So, in the impact study, it basically says
2
that the flow will be approximately a hundred cubic
3
metres per hour (100 m;/hr), selected as the
4
maximum volume that'll be emptied into the
5
containment pond. And treated on the site.
6
So my question is, how do you arrive at the
7
figure of a hundred cubic metres per hour
8
(100 m;/hr), okay, as the maximum required capacity
9
for your on-site treatment facility? Is there any
10
data to support this? And what if you have to treat
11
more? What if these projections don't adequately
12
represent how much water you're gonna have to drain
13
out of that hole to get the uranium out?
14
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
15
Okay. First, the hundred cubic metres an hour
16
(100 m;/hr) came from our consultant who designed
17
the plan. That's with the experience he had in the
18
west, which was the worse, worse case he ever had.
19
Mr. ROD QUINN:
20
In the west?
21
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
22
In the west.
23
Mr. ROD QUINN:
24
Okay.
25
Mr. PIERRE H. TERREAULT:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 202 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Okay? That's the basic design of the plan. The...
2
If we got more water than we could treat, as you
3
suggest, the exploration ramp has an extension, at
4
the bottom of the ramp, that will take the overflow
5
of all the water. And the last resource is to shut
6
down the ramp, to make sure that no water will go
7
in the lake before being treated. And that's
8
already in one of the programs we got, and we
9
submit. To make sure that everything is under
10
control before do anything else. Yes.
11
12
Mr. PETER COONISHISH:
13
(in Cree). Our local economic development is very
14
urgent right now. It's very urgent. Any
15
development... (in Cree) And I would challenge it
16
again and again. (in Cree)
17
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
18
Your question, sir?
19
Mr. THOMAS COON:
20
I think we're coming to the end. Before you all run
21
off, I gotta say my concerns. First, I want to
22
thank you...
23
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
24
What is your name, sir?
25
Mr. THOMAS COON:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 203 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Thomas Coon. I'm the vice-president of Cree
2
Trappers Association. First, I want to thank you
3
all, Strateco, for the presentation. The Health
4
Canada. My fear a little bit is going down, but
5
it's not gone yet. The Canadian Nuclear Safety
6
Commission people, thank you, and especially to
7
COFEX and COMEX.
8
9
Section 22 of the Agreement is very important.
Those bodies are supposed to protect the
10
environment. And I hope you do your job. Specially
11
with the uranium. Scary, scary project.
12
There is a lot of uncertainty about this
13
project. I'm not convinced, me, as an individual,
14
as a Cree, it's okay. Uranium is okay, uranium is
15
safe, your life gone without the uranium. I'm not
16
sure. I'm still not sure how I will vote. I have a
17
vote yes or no for the project. There is a lot of
18
confusion that... There is still uncertainty in
19
many of the people here in the community. We don't
20
know enough about uranium. I can understand the
21
proponent. Their job is to promote the project.
22
Sometimes I worry. Sometimes I feel I have
23
(inaudible), that the economic concerns supersedes
24
other concerns. The almighty dollar speaks.
25
Sometimes that scares me.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 204 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
I have a simple question, and I want a simple
2
answer. Maybe it could be one of the conditions
3
that be set to the promoter. There is a lot of
4
misunderstanding yet, people don't know enough
5
about uranium mining. There is also, you hear on
6
the floor, there is a lot of mistrust. But to
7
correct that mistrust, I have an idea. Maybe to
8
clarify that misunderstanding. Maybe to ease that
9
fear that people have about uranium. I have a
10
11
suggestion.
Can the promoter finance a special project,
12
the Cree Nation of Mistissini, and the project is
13
if Mistissini wants to have their own expert
14
analyze the data, including the ongoing monitoring
15
environmental, can the promoter finance an
16
independent assessment of Cree Nation of
17
Mistissini, so they can get their own experts? You
18
talk about your experts. So, Mistissini can have
19
its own experts assess all the data. If I have
20
nothing to hide, I will give you that. If Strateco
21
has nothing to hide, they should provide that
22
funding to Cree Nation of Mistissini, so they can
23
hire their own expert to assess all that data. And
24
hopefully, that it would erase that fear that
25
people have about uranium.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 205 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
It's a simple question, a simple answer.
2
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
3
Thank you.
4
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
5
I think the...
6
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
7
Yes, Mr. Hébert.
8
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
9
The Canadian Federal Agency has provided an amount
10
of forty-four thousand (44 000), forty-five
11
thousand dollars (45 000$) for the community to
12
hire... Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it's not enough. I
13
will ask the question to the Federal Agency. I know
14
they have an amount of money, forty-four thousand
15
(44 000) or forty-five thousand dollars (45 000$)
16
which has been allowed to your community to hire
17
the expert to revise the... Maybe I'm wrong. And
18
then I will answer... ask the question, and then I
19
will come back about Strateco with you.
20
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
21
Madame Anne-Marie Gaudet will provide...
22
Mrs. ANNE-MARIE GAUDET:
23
Just to answer your question, yes, that's correct,
24
the Federal... The Canadian Environmental
25
Assessment Agency has provided some funding for the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 206 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
participation and the review process.
2
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
3
But to the Mistissini... I saw an amount of forty-
4
four (44), forty-five thousand dollars (45 000$),
5
if I remember...
6
Mrs. ANNE-MARIE GAUDET:
7
It was distributed amongst several applicants,
8
several...
9
Mr. ROD QUINN:
10
Actually, Thomas was actually directing the
11
question so that it would work in a way that the
12
funding would come to someone, for someone to go up
13
and do some sampling, as the project is going on.
14
So, funds have been made available in the
15
exploration stage for someone to go over
16
documentation and make sure that it's being
17
interpreted properly.
18
His question pertains more or less to, can we
19
have someone from this community represent this
20
community in the way and capacity that they can go
21
up to where you're working and have a look at the
22
environment? Maybe take some testing, and just make
23
sure all is well, you know, and... It would put the
24
community at ease somewhat more than it would now.
25
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 207 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Is this your question? I don't... It's not the way
2
I understand that, but if it's your question, I
3
will answer.
4
Mr. THOMAS COON:
5
Yes, in a way. 'Cause I want to assure the people
6
of Mistissini the information that you provide is
7
correct. And that's not full of lies, like somebody
8
else said. I want to correct that lying business. I
9
don't like people when they lie. But in order to
10
make sure that you don't lie, I want to have an
11
expert to look at that information you provide to
12
the Cree Nation of Mistissini.
13
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
14
Yes, his...
15
Mr. THOMAS COON:
16
So I need an independent expert for the Cree Nation
17
of Mistissini. But in order to hire an expert,
18
they're very expensive. I need some funding. Can
19
the promoter, as an honest partner to the Cree
20
Nation of Mistissini, provide the funding, so we
21
can analyze your information? And if the project is
22
approved, it's gonna be more important, once the
23
actual mine is there. We have to do a very serious
24
monitoring on the environmental aspects on a daily,
25
weekly, monthly basis.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 208 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
We suffered from mines before in Chibougamau.
2
Look what happened to the town of Chapais. Just two
3
summers ago. That little dike broke. And everything
4
went down the river. To Waswanipi River, to
5
Waswanipi Lake. We don't want to have another
6
environmental disaster like that in EUC. The whole
7
agreement, all the components of the agreement was
8
to sign, to protect the land, the people and the
9
environment. That's what the James Bay Agreement is
10
all about, and especially section 22 is supposed to
11
do that. Is supposed to protect that.
12
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
13
I understand the question, I think so. So, to
14
answer your first... They have money available.
15
They have forty-five (45) to revise the specific,
16
today, what we have filed on November two thousand
17
and nine (2009) and the answer of the questions on
18
the website which will be published within the next
19
two or three next months. Okay? So money is
20
available for that, and I don't know who got that
21
money, the forty thousand dollars (40 000$), in
22
your community. Because someone has the money to
23
hire experts. Maybe we can do some research to find
24
and indicate to you who has got the money to hire
25
the expert. Okay. So this is the first point.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 209 -
1
QUESTION
PERIOD
To answer the second point, the committee we
2
are talking to, you know, to the six, seven, eight,
3
ten (10) people at the committee, we can finance a
4
part of it, or this committee will be... Some
5
people at that committee will have the
6
responsibility to do some surveys, take water
7
samples, do exactly what you propose, you know? And
8
this can be financed by the company. So we have no
9
problem, because we were ready to finance a part of
10
11
the committee.
But the committee has to be looked independent
12
also. You know, this, nobody, we don't want people
13
from the population to come and say, "Yes,
14
committee is found by Strateco", you know? It's,
15
you know, it's easy to say. But we are ready to do
16
our part of it.
17
But, to answer your first question regarding
18
the trust you can have in our study we did, and as
19
we have not lied at all, is the... We will find out
20
who got your money... the money. Because forty
21
thousand dollars (40 000$), you have enough money
22
to hire the expert to read the documents we have,
23
you know? And the... So this is, I have no problem
24
at all. But the money is already available. The
25
money is... I don't know if you have been paid for,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 210 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
who got the money, but someone here got part of the
2
money.
3
Mrs. ANNE-MARIE GAUDET:
4
Okay. Maybe I can specify. Three groups got some
5
funding:
6
funding, the Cree Trappers Association also
7
received funding, and the Cree Nation of Nemaska.
8
They were the three groups that received funding
9
within this program. That's following an
the Cree Nation of Mistissini got
10
examination by an independent committee who
11
evaluated the applications submitted, so it's...
12
It's a thorough process, and it's...
13
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
14
And that money is to hire the experts to review,
15
independent experts selected by your community, and
16
to do exactly the job you are asking to do. So we
17
have to find out who are the experts they hired,
18
you know?
19
And I know other funds, Mining Watch and other
20
groups have received money, you know, to hire the
21
experts. They're coming with conclusions and
22
recommendations for, and within the next two or
23
three months. But money, forty thousand dollars
24
(40 000$), you can pay several good experts to
25
revise a couple of good documents. It's a good
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 211 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
document, it's... It's thick, I will say. A thick
2
document.
3
But the money is there, and I have no problem
4
at all to say, well, we'll finance the follow-up of
5
the project. Because this is a commitment we have
6
already made to the organization committee.
7
But again, if you want to take the lead to
8
organize that group, you know, we'll be very very
9
happy, you know, to talk to you, or Daniel, or
10
Peter, we'll talk to you and say bring names of
11
people you want to see on that committee. I will
12
not select the people for you. You know your
13
people. And we are ready to finance a part of it,
14
you know? This is part of the deal.
15
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
16
I was wondering if maybe I could comment, if you
17
would permit me? I just want...
18
Mr. THOMAS COON:
19
Go ahead.
20
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
21
Yes. I just want to comment on... One analogy you
22
should always look at is what's going on in the
23
province of Saskatchewan, that's been mining
24
uranium for a number of years. Because they do have
25
some things in place, and I'm just tabling these
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 212 -
1
2
QUESTION
PERIOD
things more for consideration.
One thing you'll tend to observe at the
3
uranium mines in northern Saskatchewan is the
4
workers that are actually involved in radiation
5
protection and environmental protection often come
6
from the northern communities.
7
The other thing you tend to observe is they
8
also have what they call an environment quality
9
committee, which is a committee that has
10
representation, I think maybe this is a bit of this
11
advisory committee but I'm not sure.
12
The other thing, there are also provisions
13
with the province of Saskatchewan, where they do a
14
sampling program that is funded by the province,
15
that has the community participating and going out
16
and actually taking water samples from the
17
receiving from the lakes and rivers.
18
So there are all kinds of options out there,
19
that don't all rely on the proponent to be doing
20
it. So, there are different options there, and I
21
think those should be explored, and they should be
22
looked at a little bit further. We're not the ones
23
who set those things up, of course, but these are
24
options that are there to help the communities to
25
be a little bit more involved, and to help build
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 213 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
that confidence that, have them directly
2
participating in some of the sampling work, and in
3
some of this work, to just provide that reassurance
4
that helps deal with building credibility and
5
trust.
6
The other thing I'd like to mention is maybe
7
the CNSC needs to do more work, but Cherry
8
mentioned it a while ago, my colleague, that we
9
believe we're here for you. We don't, you know,
10
we're not here to be proponents for the industry.
11
We review all their work. We review to make sure
12
that it's correct, and make sure that it's
13
acceptable. And we're quite demanding with that.
14
So we do provide an independent assessment.
15
Perhaps we need to do more to show you what we do,
16
but I also want to point out that we are
17
independent, and that's our job. We're here to deal
18
with safety, and we want to make sure that these
19
facilities are safe, and that your concerns are
20
addressed.
21
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
22
I was asked to ask you what was the name of that
23
program that you just mentioned. Provincial.
24
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
25
I have to check.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 214 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
2
Okay.
3
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
4
What is it? The Athabaska Working Group, I think?
5
The Athabasca Working Group.
6
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
7
Atha... Working Group. Okay, thank you. My
8
question, I'm one of the official opponents to the
9
uranium mining with the Mistissini opposition to
10
this uranium mining, and we don't see any of this
11
money. We're small. What monies can we access to
12
bring in our own experts? 'Cause I don't know the
13
lady very well, who, she says, I called her a liar,
14
but I just went by your own information, what you
15
told me, and our people will work with me on that,
16
or even this uranium, Strateco will want to work
17
with us and give us money, which I highly doubt,
18
but... We don't have money.
19
I mean, I do my own research, and I just take
20
what I learn and bring it to here, and in great
21
opposition to this uranium mine. Because of the
22
devastating effects to radio and nuclear...
23
radiation. But I don't have no money. And we had...
24
Where is my colleague? She stepped out. We had a
25
little bit of money to do some little opposition
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 215 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
signs that we can put on our cars, that we did
2
ourselves, and we used our own money to put
3
information on uranium mining into every post
4
office. We did it ourselves.
5
But we don't have... If you look at Strateco,
6
and these guys have five million dollars (5 M$)
7
that they put into this. They offer this community
8
forty-four thousand (44 000). You can only do so
9
much. And then, part of the community doesn't even
10
11
receive anything from that.
So, where is the fairness in that?
12
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
13
Okay. Other questions?
14
Mr LEN TAYLOR:
15
Where is the response? Where is the fairness in
16
that? I would like the response.
17
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
18
What you said?
19
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
20
I asked, where is the fairness in us, 'cause we're
21
part of this community. We live here, we work here.
22
Yes, we oppose uranium mining. We don't have the
23
five million dollars (5 M$) that you have to do an
24
assessment. To do our own independent assessment.
25
We don't have that money. The Band has some money,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 216 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
but we didn't receive anything from that. Ever see,
2
what forty-four thousand (44 000) according to...
3
What's your name, sir?
4
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
5
Guy Hébert.
6
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
7
Guy Hébert?
8
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
9
No relation.
10
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
11
No? And, but, you know... I'm with a small group,
12
we... We'd like to bring in some people that we
13
think would help us in our position. So we need...
14
Again, I say, where is the fairness in that?
15
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
16
I think this is more an opinion of you, because the
17
money was there, and you have some process, you
18
were able to ask money, your community has received
19
some money, and they have, I know, a procedure to
20
ask for the money. I don't know the procedure.
21
And by the way, we have spent five million
22
dollars (5 M$) on the environmental impact study,
23
but we spent another five million dollars (5 M$) on
24
the license. So, it's a total of ten million
25
dollars (10 M$) for an exploration company to come
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 217 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
here and try to prove this project can be safe...
2
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
3
Well, can't be safe.
4
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
5
... and the ten million dollars (10 M$)... It's
6
true. We said five million dollars (5 M$), this is
7
strictly for the environmental impact study. But we
8
have another five million dollars (5 M$) which has
9
been spent on the technical side of the...
10
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
11
Hum, hum.
12
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
13
... of the project, which is the license, which is
14
also (inaudible).
15
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
16
Hum, hum.
17
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
18
So it's a lot of money, I agree with you. But, you
19
know, it's... I'm sorry about your potential to get
20
the money, but...
21
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
22
We have asked for money from the Band...
23
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
24
You understand that (inaudible) money from us.
25
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 218 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
We have asked money from the Band, and to bring in
2
some people, and we never got a response. We
3
couldn't bring in the people we wanted to bring in.
4
So, you know, we're up against a stone wall. And
5
yet, we live here.
6
Mr. GUY HÉBERT:
7
I cannot answer to that.
8
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
9
Okay. Next. Yes madame.
10
Mrs. PAMELA McLEOD:
11
Just hang on. I'm a little short, so... The mike is
12
too high for me. I'm Pamela McLeod, I'm a member of
13
the community, and I guess, just to kind of... I
14
was gonna address the same kind of question where,
15
if we can get a third party, unbiased party to sort
16
of present us with the other side of the story, the
17
other results, similar kind of thing.
18
But I believe it's the responsibility of our
19
own local leaders. If we, as community members,
20
want to see that, want to get that kind of
21
information, then we don't have the money,
22
necessarily, to go and get a study done, but can we
23
not mandate our own local Chief and leaders to
24
present that to us as well too? I don't think it's
25
the responsibility of Strateco and their experts to
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 219 -
1
2
QUESTION
PERIOD
do that.
But that's, I think that's one thing that I
3
want to see. I'm neither for or against it either,
4
but I have a lot of my own concerns as an
5
individual about the project itself. And so, we
6
hear a lot of the, of your side of the story, and I
7
want to hear more about the other as well, too.
8
9
Now, one, I think one of the concerns that I
have, more of a long-term thing, I guess, and a
10
question is these nuclear power plants or whatnot,
11
do they... Are you aware of... Well, you must know,
12
but do they have... Have they found, as far as I
13
understand they don't have proper ways of storing
14
all the waste yet from these power plants, and I'm
15
thinking long-term, if, once the mine is over ten
16
(10) years, once it's closed or whatever, is there
17
that possibility that that waste will be stored in
18
those mines?
19
'Cause I think of a situation like China,
20
where they manufacture a lot of these electronics
21
or whatnot, right, and it's shipped over to us.
22
Once they're done, once their waste, their garbage
23
is no longer useful, they're shipped right back to
24
China. I saw this in a documentary.
25
So, I get... I mean, maybe it's a little farJR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 220 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
fetched, but I'm a little concerned that, you know,
2
so many years down the road, nuclear waste is gonna
3
be coming back to our territory because this is
4
where they got it from. So I don't know if anybody
5
would have an idea how to answer that.
6
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
7
For, with regards to waste management, all
8
radioactive wastes are safely stored. Right now, in
9
Canada, there is a proposal for a disposal facility
10
called a deep geological repository, located near
11
the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station.
12
In addition, with regards to actual fuel from
13
the reactors, which may be a bit more related to
14
your specific question, there is a program in place
15
for a long-term solution for nuclear fuel, used
16
nuclear fuel. It's managed through the Nuclear
17
Waste Management Organization. I think the best bet
18
is if you have access to the Internet, NWMO is the
19
organization. There is a proposal put forth for
20
final management of fuel waste, nuclear fuel.
21
There is nothing in Canada, by the way, any
22
proposal or any consideration of taking used fuel
23
from other countries and bringing it back to Canada
24
for disposal. All countries, pretty well, are
25
managing their radioactive waste independently.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 221 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. THOMAS COON:
2
I guess, to try to simplify my simple question,
3
there are two sides to every story. There are two
4
sides to every coin. Why I need an expert, 'cause
5
uranium is a very technical and complicated, way
6
beyond my little brain to understand all the issues
7
surrounding uranium.
8
9
The promoter, Strateco, has only presented one
side of the story of uranium. But I wanted to get
10
an expert to tell me the other side of the story
11
about uranium. So I can feel a little more
12
comfortable when we talk about uranium. That's why
13
I was putting that question forward. There are two
14
sides to every story. There is one side, Strateco
15
about uranium, but we need to hear the other side.
16
The pros and cons of uranium. To simplify my
17
question.
18
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
19
Thank you. Next question.
20
Mr. CLAUDE COONISHISH:
21
My name is Claude Coonishish. I want to talk... (in
22
Cree). I'm gonna speak in Cree. (in Cree) That's
23
three (3) years ago? (in Cree) Thank you.
24
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
25
(in Cree) I think we'll just, to summarize what the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 222 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
question is, basically, it's the question about
2
presence of governmental leaders, particularly on
3
the Cree side, everyone is (inaudible) represent
4
Cree people, whether at the local level or at the
5
regional level, and there was some concern about
6
their absence here, or they should be present.
7
And my comment was simply to inform people, or
8
address the question, simply, that we are
9
independent bodies up here. We're not here to speak
10
for Quebec, I'm not here... We're not here to speak
11
for the Cree Nation at all either. Either at a
12
local level, or a regional level. We're not here to
13
speak for the Government of Canada as well.
14
We're here to conduct, participate in an
15
independent review of this project. We are
16
independent bodies in that sense. We're here to
17
advise the government. Submit a report with our
18
findings and recommendations on the impacts of this
19
project, proposed project. We do not make a
20
decision whether this project will proceed or not.
21
The governmental authorities will make that
22
decision. They will take into account our findings
23
and recommendations. (in Cree)
24
25
The process, of course, permits anybody, or
any individual or representative from local or
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 223 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
regional authorities to participate. As it was
2
mentioned before, there will be further
3
consultations. Probably this fall. We will be
4
conducting public hearings on, specifically on the
5
impacts of this project. And anybody can
6
participate in those sessions. Individuals, or
7
local regional Cree authority representatives, so
8
forth.
9
But that doesn't stop, as well as anybody or
10
individual, nor any representative at the local
11
regional Cree authorities, in submitting their
12
views and comments at any time in the review
13
process. The review bodies have their own offices,
14
their website, to submit any comments, questions.
15
(in Cree)
16
So that's basically... I wanted to make a
17
distinction between the review bodies here and the
18
governmental bodies. We are merely advisory bodies,
19
we recommend to the governmental authorities, the
20
governmental authorities will make the final
21
decisions.
22
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
23
Thank you, Philip. Yes sir?
24
Mr. ANDREW COON:
25
Yes. I had a question on the fish sampling. In your
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 224 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
statement, it seems that you did your sampling in
2
areas where the community members don't fish. Why?
3
Well, because there aren't many fish. If you go to
4
places where the fish are, there is not a question.
5
First of all, does the Taliman agree with the
6
choice of lakes and rivers that you chose for your
7
fish sampling? And do you feel you have done enough
8
sampling of the local fish population?
9
Mrs. CHANTAL ROSSIGNOL:
10
The local study area for the fish sampling is based
11
on lakes that we thought were most likely to have
12
an impact from the (inaudible). And then we sampled
13
a number of lakes within that local study area.
14
Mr. ANDREW COON:
15
Okay. When I look at the map, where the exploration
16
will take place where the potential underground
17
mine will be, you have two lakes on both sides. If
18
you look at the watersheds of that lake, they fall
19
into Temiscamie River. Temiscamie River falls to
20
Albanel Lake. Albanel Lake falls to Mistassini
21
Lake. So, did you get the Taliman's choice too, or
22
was it about just a thought, these would be the
23
lakes that we should sample?
24
Mrs. CHANTAL ROSSIGNOL:
25
Well, it wasn't just a thought. We did review the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 225 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
project area. The project, at the stage that it
2
was, when we looked at it, and based on our
3
experience, we set up a local study area and looked
4
at lakes within that local study area.
5
Mr. ANDREW COON:
6
So my question is... Your answer is no, you did not
7
include Taliman?
8
Mrs. CHANTAL ROSSIGNOL:
9
No. We did include Taliman... No we didn't. Well,
10
we included, we came for the, for open houses in
11
December, and we had discussions with them. I
12
think, I'm trying to remember if our local study
13
area was set up then. But we don't think that we'll
14
have impacts beyond the local study area. So, you
15
know...
16
Mr. ANDREW COON:
17
No. Well, let me say, then, your expert, so-called
18
expert, bypassed a major step. In two thousand and
19
three (2003), we did a fish study on Mistassini
20
Lake, including Rupert River and Chené River, and
21
Papas.
22
Mistissini to get their knowledge of the lake, to
23
do the sampling, to do the study. You chose a so-
24
called expert, thought about it.
25
What did we do? We used people from
Did you include sampling on the northern of
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 226 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
the Temiscamie River? There is other lakes I can
2
tell you, indicator. Albanel Lake. Did you do a
3
fish sampling there? A sampling? If you had a smart
4
expert, he would.
5
Mrs. CHANTAL ROSSIGNOL:
6
I'll communicate your opinion to the expert. But as
7
I said, the sampling is based on the area where we
8
think that the impact is likely to occur, and not
9
beyond that point.
10
Mr. ANDREW COON:
11
How did you... How did you determine the impact?
12
How? Like what... What made you say, okay, I think
13
that lake will be impacted, I think that lake will
14
be impacted? What was the motive, what was the...
15
Mrs. CHANTAL ROSSIGNOL:
16
It's based on our experience and our knowledge of
17
the area as we're looking at it and as the project
18
is moving ahead. And...
19
Mr. ANDREW COON:
20
Your knowledge of the area?
21
Mrs. CHANTAL ROSSIGNOL:
22
Our knowledge of the area as it's coming. When we
23
looked at it in the first hand, we based our local
24
study area on our expert's experience. We had
25
public, we had open houses, as well as focus
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 227 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
groups. We saw that, obviously, water quality and
2
fish were an issue of concern, and then, once we
3
had the project information, based on the baseline,
4
then we analyzed the impacts.
5
Once we looked at the impacts, then, what we
6
look at is the dilution of the effluent, as is
7
mentioned in the impact assessment.
8
Mr. ANDREW COON:
9
Okay. I can honestly... I don't know what to say
10
about this, okay, but...
11
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
12
Can I... Can I say something? As part of the
13
answer, I believe that through the process of fish
14
sampling and, well, all through the process of the
15
environmental impact study, the local, on the trap
16
line, the Taliman were involved in the process.
17
They were... They had been talked. We can ask,
18
maybe, to their... I can say here there is Claude,
19
Claude Coonishish, maybe Peter, they can say...
20
Well, I'm pretty sure they were involved. Maybe not
21
at the exact spot where to take the samples...
22
Mr. ANDREW COON:
23
So you say yes, she says no.
24
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
25
No no no.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 228 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. ANDREW COON:
2
Who is...
3
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
4
I'm saying, like, Chantal is working with Golder,
5
you know? They did the sampling. I'm working with
6
Strateco. We did not do the sampling. Take the
7
samples. But however, I know that through the
8
process, there were people from Golder who went on
9
the field and talked with the locals. And when I
10
say the locals, I'm talking about the people from
11
the trap lines.
12
13
Mr. ANDREW COON:
14
Okay.
15
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
16
But if you...
17
Mr. ANDREW COON:
18
We are going to do another fish study anyways.
19
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
20
If... If... If...
21
Mr. ANDREW COON:
22
That's...
23
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
24
If you want, if you want, we'll... I can dig into
25
this and eventually give you the right answer.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 229 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. ANDREW COON:
2
I would like to... I want to, first of all, I want
3
to see who did it. Who is the biologist who
4
actually did the study, the sampling. I know a lot
5
of biologists in Quebec, that do studies, okay? And
6
I can tell you who is crooked, who is not. So, give
7
me a name, whatever.
8
Mrs. CHANTAL ROSSIGNOL:
9
The people that were involved in the fish
10
assessment and the fish sampling, it's indicated in
11
our project team, in our impact assessment, which
12
is included in its entirety in Strateco's EIA, and
13
we have the project team, and we have the
14
specialists that are divided per specialty.
15
So if you look under fish and fish habitat,
16
you will find the people that worked on that
17
program.
18
Mr. ANDREW COON:
19
So, in the future, I'm talking about the future,
20
when we see impact on a fish, who do we go after?
21
Mrs. CHANTAL ROSSIGNOL:
22
What person?
23
Mr. ANDREW COON:
24
Who? Do we go after Golder, or Strateco? Whoever.
25
We are gonna see impacts.
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 230 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
2
Well, I... Let's put it this way. In the future,
3
because as Guy mentioned before, there will be
4
other impact studies or stuff like this. But I can
5
assure you that you... Maybe not you personally,
6
but we will make sure that through the Committee or
7
anyhow, there will be some people from here, from
8
Mistissini, but, that they're not biased, you know?
9
Like, neutral people. And that they will be
10
involved.
11
Mr. ANDREW COON:
12
Okay. Let me... Can you inform me personally, or
13
can you inform the office...
14
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
15
I will... I will...
16
Mr. ANDREW COON:
17
... where is this sample, because here, I can...
18
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
19
I will be (inaudible).
20
Mr. ANDREW COON:
21
I can actually, I can provide the community
22
whatever your biologist, that can do a real study.
23
Hey, maybe somebody that can be on the side,
24
somebody that can speak on our behalf.
25
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 231 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
I will...
2
Mr. ANDREW COON:
3
Instead of Strateco, or Golder, a Golder
4
representative.
5
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
6
We will be... We will be happy to provide you with
7
the information. I'd like to have your directions,
8
coordinates, name?
9
Mr. ANDREW COON:
10
Sure. Thank you.
11
Mr. JEAN-PIERRE LACHANCE:
12
It would be a pleasure.
13
14
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
15
Thank you sir. Yes sir.
16
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
17
I just want to elaborate a little bit more on what
18
he's saying, and then I want to share something
19
from my book here.
20
You said you used a biologist who has done the
21
work there. A few years ago, in the very same area,
22
my brother-in-law, Alfred Coonkum, he... they're
23
were gonna build a road. They had built a road,
24
actually. They built a winter road in that area.
25
Alfred told them not to build in a specific area
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 232 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
where the snow accumulates deeply, because, he told
2
them, "If you build in this area, you're gonna have
3
to spend lots of money on snow removal."
4
didn't listen to him.
They
5
He knows the land. Our people have lived on
6
this land for thousands of years. They pass that
7
knowledge down to us, as the future generations who
8
are gonna live off the land and utilize it. And
9
(inaudible) biologist said no, it wouldn't happen.
10
They didn't listen to our elders, and it ended
11
up costing more money. Same thing that you are
12
saying, madame Chantal, and that my friend is
13
saying there.
14
Now, to just change a little bit, concerning
15
the fish, you, in your environmental assessment,
16
have said that there is gonna be a negligible
17
impact on the environment, the fish, and so forth.
18
Okay?
19
This book which I have here, and I've shown
20
this to other... I've read from this book at other
21
times when we've had these discussions. And in it,
22
this has to do with the mining in Saskatchewan. And
23
the impact, the environmental impact that this had
24
on the wildlife.
25
I'm gonna go show you the fish, but first,
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 233 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
there is a picture in here of a two-headed moose
2
that was born that way because of the uranium
3
tailings that the elders saw drinking from those
4
waters. A two-headed moose. That's the first time
5
I've ever seen a picture of a two-headed moose.
6
In this picture, there is a fish that is
7
totally blind. Because of uranium mining and
8
tailings. On page 115 of this book, it talks about
9
the toxicity of nuclear radioactive in the plants
10
and animals. In the fish, the radio isotopes in
11
plants and fish are thousands of times greater than
12
in levels of the surrounding water. And the
13
(inaudible) of uptake is isotopes, and it's
14
species-specific.
15
For example, in the three aquatic plants,
16
water lilly, the concentration of uranium is
17
greatest at fourteen thousand (14 000) times. In
18
the fish, in the bones of the fish, the radiation
19
level is eleven thousand (11 000) times greater
20
than in the lake itself, and in the flesh of the
21
fish, it's six thousand five hundred (6 500) times
22
more radioactive. Yet, they tell us that there is
23
no negligible impact.
24
25
This is scientific information. This isn't
something, you know... Other scientists have
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 234 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
proved, in the Saskatchewan area of Wollaston,
2
where the first, one of the first... not the first,
3
but one of the first uranium mining areas in
4
Canada. And it shows that there is a great
5
environmental impact.
6
If you read further in this book, right where
7
the tailings come out from the mill, there is a
8
little creek. And in that creek, there is no, zero
9
plankton, phytoplankton. Everything was destroyed.
10
And this guy is shaking his head and saying it's
11
not true, but it's documented here, in books, and
12
other books like it.
13
And they actually, in this book here, they
14
talk about taking live fish, placing it in the very
15
same creek where those effluents were released into
16
the environment, and them fish lived for only
17
ninety-six hours (96 hr). How can there be no
18
environmental impact?
19
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
20
Thank you for your comments.
21
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
22
Can I have a response, please?
23
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
24
Other questions?
25
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 235 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
You keep ignoring my question, and you keep... I
2
want a response on how can there be no
3
environmental impact.
4
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
5
I'm sorry. Then would you repeat, please, your
6
question?
7
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
8
How can there be no environmental impact in the
9
study, when in other areas in Canada, here in this
10
country that we call our home, shows explicitly
11
that there is an environmental impact. How can they
12
say there is none?
13
14
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
15
Okay.
16
Mr. LEN TAYLOR:
17
Can I have a response, please?
18
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
19
Thank you.
20
Mr. GRANT FEASBY:
21
I'd like to answer...
22
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
23
Who wants to answer this question?
24
Mr. GRANT FEASBY:
25
I'd like to answer the question about, or the
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 236 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
comments about contamination in fish, particularly
2
in northern Saskatchewan.
3
This phenomenon has been studied extensively
4
by experts who could be credibly said to be
5
independent, from the University of Saskatchewan
6
and Saskatchewan Research Council in the northern
7
area around Uranium City. And I'm not aware of any
8
findings affecting the fish coming from the old
9
Gunner tailings pile or from the El Dorado's Beaver
10
Lodge operation, the downstream operations. So, I
11
think the allegations are a bit extreme, and maybe
12
misplaced.
13
In addition, one of the mines, the Gunner mine
14
particularly, there is a pit that was flooded from
15
Lake Athabasca, and fish migrated into that. And
16
this was a captured fish population in uranium
17
mine. And they were extensively studied. And the
18
allegations, again, about accumulated
19
radioactivity, I don't believe, were reported from
20
this independent study by those scientists. Other
21
effects, lack of nutrition and so on, yes. Thank
22
you.
23
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
24
Other questions? Yes madame.
25
Mrs. SOPHIE GUNNER:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 237 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
I have a concern. I don't really need an answer. I
2
don't demand an answer, 'cause I believe that no
3
man in this room can answer me. No expert. I am a
4
member of this community, I am a mother too. The
5
most important role that I have is grandmother. The
6
little guy that was running around here is my
7
grandson.
8
9
Everyone in this room, or everyone that came
today came for a reason. I thank everybody that
10
came from the outside, all the visitors that came
11
with your reports to try and, I guess try and quiet
12
the storms within us about the fears that we have
13
about this project. And as a grandmother, I do have
14
a lot of fears.
15
My husband is a Taliman, and we have three
16
camps on the Temiscamie River, and we're always
17
there. And it's a serene place to be. It's like
18
paradise, when I go there. Whenever I'm troubled or
19
things bother me, I like to go there. I find
20
healing and the peacefulness of the land and the
21
waterways.
22
I came today, I believe your name is Guy, and,
23
your name is Guy? Okay. You know, grandmas say
24
"guy". But you said something about things from the
25
past. Not to talk about things from the past. But
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 238 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
we could learn from the past. And to look more into
2
the future.
3
My concern is about the future of that little
4
guy that was running around here. 'Cause there will
5
be a day when my husband will transfer the
6
territory to that little guy. And the way the land
7
is right now, undisturbed, healthy, uncontaminated,
8
I just hope that when that day comes, when that
9
guy, that little guy that was running around here,
10
the land will be like that. Uncontamined and
11
healthy.
12
The animals are healthy, the water is good to
13
drink from. Like right now, when we go up the
14
river, you can dip your cup in the river and drink
15
water. I don't have to buy bottled water. That's
16
how fresh it is. And that's the concern I have.
17
Now, even if I ask you or anybody in this
18
room, will that land be in the same state it is
19
today when I transfer it to my grandson? I'm
20
speaking from my heart, because no man can answer
21
me and say yes, it will be in that state.
22
You all must have children and grandchildren.
23
And you want the best for them. And that's the same
24
I want for my grandson. I want them to get
25
something from us, or from my husband, something
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 239 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
they inherit from us that's good and clean, and
2
uncontaminated. That's all I ask. That's the state
3
I want the land to be when I transfer it to them.
4
We're not gonna be around, probably. We're all
5
middle-agers, and some of us are elders. But that's
6
all I ask. I don't expect an answer, I don't need
7
anybody's money. I always used to think that, you
8
know, I used to tell my kids, "People that have
9
dollar signs in their eyes don't see clearly."
10
that's why today I say I don't want anybody's
11
money. I want the land the way it is.
12
So
With no disrespect to anybody or any report,
13
that's all I ask. And I don't demand any answer
14
today. 'Cause I believe nobody can answer me.
15
Nobody can give an answer into the future. Nobody.
16
No man can. Only God knows. And that's... That's
17
all I have to say. Thank you.
18
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
19
Thank you madame, for your reflections. And also
20
the dreams you have for your small son. Thank you.
21
Other comments or questions?
22
Mr. HUBERT PETAWABANO:
23
Okay. I was here earlier. My question will be
24
directed to CNS, Canadian Nuclear Safety
25
Commission. Maybe Strateco might want to throw in
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 240 -
1
2
QUESTION
PERIOD
their answer too.
My question is, now, what is the safe exposure
3
level from uranium dust being spread out by the
4
wind in the vicinity of the site over time? What is
5
the safe level? Or is there a safe level?
6
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
7
The safe level for dust concentrations will be
8
based, like, on how much exposure you would get,
9
radiation exposure from the dust. So, there are
10
limits. I can't specify the actual numbers, I don't
11
have the numbers in hand, I'm not sure they're
12
gonna be easy for people to understand anyways, but
13
they're dust concentrations, based on those dust
14
concentrations you would get a radiation exposure,
15
the combination of exposure from, if you were
16
drinking water, or breathing the air, or all the
17
different ways that you could get exposure to
18
radiation, has got to stay below that one
19
milliSievert (1 mSv) limit that we've mentioned
20
before. That's the regulatory limit.
21
So you have to add up all the different
22
potential sources, and it's gotta be below one.
23
Does that answer your question? I'm not sure if
24
that helps you.
25
Mr. HUBERT PETAWABANO:
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 241 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
Well, I'll just add another... It's almost a
2
similar question, but maybe you might get another
3
shot. The next part would be, is what is the
4
difference in the uranium dust exposure level
5
between the proposed exploration stage and
6
potentially, when you have the operations, assuming
7
you have operations, during the mining phase? So,
8
how much... How much more, yes? Did you get it?
9
Mr. JEAN LeCLAIR:
10
Yes, I'm just trying to figure out how to answer
11
your question. Because the potential dust exposure
12
will depend on how much production there is going
13
on at the mine at the time. There is certainly a
14
difference between exploration and a full
15
operation, because during an operation, they would
16
be bringing ore up to surface, and working with the
17
ore. That's gonna generate some dust.
18
The one thing we can say, though, is that we
19
know, we measure dust rates around existing mines.
20
Again, I use the Saskatchewan situation 'cause it's
21
the operating mines right now. And what you tend to
22
see is the dust concentrations will drop rather
23
quickly as you move away, and the main reason is
24
quite simple, is that uranium dust is actually very
25
heavy. Uranium is a very very heavy material. So it
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 242 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
doesn't go very far. It would tend to drop out and
2
will drop on the surface around the mine site. And
3
then that would get measure, and if there is a need
4
to clean that up, they would do that.
5
But generally, what you see is dust
6
concentrations in particular are gonna drop very
7
very quickly. So they're gonna be very close to
8
where the ore stock pile is, is where you're gonna
9
see dust. But from a very short distance from
10
there, you would see the dust concentrations drop
11
rather quickly. That's what we see at the current
12
operating mines.
13
14
Mr. HUBERT PETAWABANO:
15
Thank you.
16
Mr. PIERRE MERCIER:
17
Okay. Next? Other question? If not, no more
18
questions, with your permission, I would ask to, by
19
COMEX colleagues, if they have some comments or a
20
small word to add. Robert? Brian? No comments or
21
word? I don't know, Benoit, if your members have
22
some words to add? No? No.
23
Then, as co-chairman with Benoit and Philip
24
Awashish, I would like to thank again, first of
25
all, Chief Longchap for his presence this
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 243 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
afternoon, and also, I would like to thank the
2
people working for the community, who have
3
facilitated the organization of this meeting today.
4
And my thanks, evidently, on behalf of all my
5
colleagues.
6
It's for you, people living in Mistissini,
7
ladies and gentlemen who have sacrified, I will
8
say, quasi a day, you know, to pass this day with
9
us to try to understand, to receive more
10
information, and we are "conscient" that probably
11
you will have still other questions eventually.
12
Feel free to contact the promoter or the
13
committees here, to try to have some explanation or
14
information on the specific parts.
15
I didn't understand, you know, all Philip
16
said, and you understand that, but I'm sure that
17
Philip explained, has explained to you the role of
18
our committee and the COFEX-South Committee. And I
19
would like to add also our thanks, all the people
20
with us, coming from la Commission Nucléaire
21
Canadienne, or Santé Canada, and also, I would like
22
to express our thanks for the people coming from
23
Strateco.
24
25
I understand, as you have understood, that
that is their role to give to the population all
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 244 -
QUESTION
PERIOD
1
the information on this project. And they tried to
2
answer to your questions, and probably they will
3
continue to answer. And as Philip mentioned, in the
4
fall coming, we will come back here to... Yes. To
5
have some public hearings. Des audiences publiques,
6
in French. And it will be another occasion to
7
express their point of view.
8
9
Then, I don't know, Benoit, if you have some
words to add? Alors, the last word will be for
10
Philip.
11
Mr. BENOIT TAILLON:
12
I concur with you, and I just want to ask Philip to
13
say a few words in conclusion.
14
CLOSING REMARKS
15
Mr. PHILIP AWASHISH:
16
(in Cree) Peter, Thomas, closing prayer? One of you
17
do the closing prayer? Thomas? Okay. Thomas? Thomas
18
will formally close this session with a closing
19
prayer.
20
CLOSING PRAYER
21
Mr. THOMAS COON:
22
I'm gonna say the Lord's prayer in Cree, and the
23
evening prayer in English. (in Cree) Lighten our
24
darkness (inaudible) oh Lord, and by thy good mercy
25
defend us from all perils and dangers of this
JR/lp/lh
May 25, 2010
- 245 -
CLOSING
REMARKS
1
night. For the love thy only son, our saviour Jesus
2
Christ, amen.
3
_____________________
4
5
6
7
8
9
JR/lp/lh