Nunavut Impact Review Board

  • My Father's Land

    uploaded by: Norman Cohn

    My Father's Land (Attatama Nunanga) by Zacharias Kunuk and Norman Cohn. 163 mins. Inuktitut and English, (c) Kingulliit Productions 2014.… Read more

    uploaded date: 11-07-2014

  • 15m 27s

    NIRB Hearing for Mary River Project - Baffinland (Inuktitut)

    uploaded by: Carol Kunnuk

    channel: Pond Inlet | Mittimatalik | ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃ

    The Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) public hearing in Pond Inlet (Nunavut) to assess Baffinland’s revised Early Revenue Phase proposal and Environmental Review for the Mary River iron ore mining project.

    Day 1 (January 27, 2014)

    Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation Presentation (Inuktitut Version)

    Camera: David Poisey, Zacharias Kunuk

    Editor: Carol Kunnuk

     

    Read more

    uploaded date: 07-04-2014

  • 15m 27s

    NIRB Hearing for Mary River Project - Baffinland

    uploaded by: Carol Kunnuk

    channel: Pond Inlet | Mittimatalik | ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃ

    The Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) public hearing in Pond Inlet (Nunavut) to assess Baffinland’s revised Early Revenue Phase proposal and Environmental Review for the Mary River iron ore mining project.

    Day 1 (January 27, 2014)

    Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation Presentation (in English)

    Camera: David Poisey, Zacharias Kunuk

    Editor: Carol Kunnuk

     

    Read more

    uploaded date: 04-04-2014

  • 14m 30s

    NIRB Hearing for Mary River Project - IsumaTV

    uploaded by: Carol Kunnuk

    channel: Pond Inlet | Mittimatalik | ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒃ

    The Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) public hearing in Pond Inlet (Nunavut) to assess Baffinland’s revised Early Revenue Phase proposal and Environmental Review for the Mary River iron ore mining project.

    Day 1 (January 27, 2014)

    IsumaTV’s Digital Indigenous Democracy’s presentation by Zacharias Kunuk and Jonathan Frantz (in English)

    Read more

    uploaded date: 03-04-2014

  • N.I.R.B. hoping for more power

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: DID News

    Regulatory board can issue terms and conditions for mine projects, but not enforce them

    Regulators in Nunavut are hoping new legislation will give them more power when it comes to making mining companies comply with regulations.

    Currently, the Nunavut Impact Review Board can only issue terms and conditions for mine projects, but doesn't have the authority to enforce those terms or punish companies who violate them. 

    Ryan Barry, the executive director of the NIRB, says something has to change. 

    "We do have legislation coming through, we're waiting for it to come into force — the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act. That actually will carry prohibitions for not being in compliance or breaking terms and conditions of project certificates," Barry said. "So that will have fines, even up to and including jail time."

    Shear Diamonds high priority

    Shear Diamonds, the owner of the Jericho diamond mine site, has failed to meet certain basic requirements to maintain and monitor the site.

    But the NIRB can't do much about it except ask for compliance.

    Shear Diamonds took over the Jericho project a few years ago, hoping to re-open the mine. But money problems interfered andShear quickly packed up and closed the site more than a year ago. It left behind barrels of waste, untreated fuel spills, and some unlucky investors.

    The federal Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development has been doing some basic monitoring, but the long-term future of the site, including any cleanup, is not known.

    In the meantime, many are having trouble getting in contact with representatives from Shear Diamonds.

    "We have had enough contact to get an appropriate name and listing of a contact that does maintain responsibility for Shear Diamond's affairs currently," Barry said. "That's about as far as we've gone.

    "So as you'll see detailed in our public report, we really haven't had much success in engaging this particular proponent in the last year, neither have — to the best of our knowledge — other parties with monitoring responsibilities."  

    www.cbc.ca

    CBC.CA COMMENTS:

    AmazingNunavut

    Anything and everything that is in the site are now owned by Kitikmeot Inuit Association so if you "steal" you are stealing from KIA and will face justice. 

    You should never ever leave any site uncleaned, esp toxic fuel waste where wild animals live. This is close to a calving ground for caribou so it is a real concern.


    inuk

    Griffin you do not know what you are talking about no one living in the area give me a break. Regardless if anyone is in the area clean up your mess and there are people in the area. I say let all of kitikmeot go to the mine and grab what they can no one will know.

    Griffin Aldjoy

    There's no inhabited communities in the nearby area. Bathurst Inlet was the closest community. 2011 population = 0, 2001 population = 5. 

    Your ethics are wonderful. On the one hand you're telling them to clean their mess up, and on the other you're telling people to go in and steal. It's little wonder that they've left if they're surrounded by thieves.

    Filipino Di Pizzo

    Having a regulatory authority, let alone an environmental assessment agency like NIRB, take care of enforcement, is like having the judge hear a case, make a decision, then investigate and go after a party if they fail to meet the terms and conditions of that decision. While I understand it may be frustrating to a regulatory authority like NIRB to see this obvious lack of enforcement, the fact is that legislation in place contain defined provisions for inspection, enforcement action, fines and ... » more

    Griffin Aldjoy

    There is no one who lives anywhere near this mine. The land has no use in the foreseeable future for anything except mining. It's no surprise that the mining company didn't do any reclamation work.

     

    Read more

    uploaded date: 04-12-2013

  • NIRB Announces Additional Mary River Hearings

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: DID News

    The Nunavut Impact Review Board has announced additional hearings reconsidering the Mary River Project Certificate Terms and Conditions and Process for Interventions.

    The NIRB first issued the project certificate to Baffinland for the Mary River iron project on December 28, 2012.

    New hearings are being held to assess the potential ecosystem and socio-economic impacts of the Early Revenue Phase proposal associated with the Mary River project as proposed by Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation.

    At present, hearings are only scheduled in the community of Pond Inlet: all day January 27, 28, 29, 30 and 31 at the Community Hall.

    Those wishing to participate in the hearings must apply to become formal intervenors by submiting a completed Intervenor Application to the NIRB by December 13, 2013. Full details on how to apply can be download here.

    Read more

    uploaded date: 20-11-2013

  • Iqaluit Inuit elders tell Nunavut board they’re worried about hydro project, ask for IIBA

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: DID News

    “It’s going to have a large social impact for us Inuit”

    JIM BELL

    Inuit elders fear the effects of a hydroelectric project near Iqaluit and they want the Qulliq Energy Corp. to negotiate an Inuit impact and benefit agreement, elders told the Nunavut Impact Review Board Sept. 10.

    “I believe we need an IIBA in the millions,” said Simon Nattaq, the chair of Iqaluit’s community land and resources committee, a land claim body also known as a “CLARC.”

    The review board organized meetings in Iqaluit aimed at helping them figure out the project’s scope: a list of things that ought to become part of the QEC’s draft environmental impact statement, or DEIS.

    Following similar meetings this week in Kimmirut and Pangnirtung, NIRB staff will produce a “scoping list” and use it to create guidelines. QEC is expected to follow those guidelines when completing its DEIS.

    The power corporation has been planning a hydroelectric project near Iqaluit since at least 2005. That work stopped for a while, then resumed in 2012.

    The latest version of the QEC’s plan would see them spend up to $450 million on two dams and power stations over the next 20 years or so: the first at Jaynes Inlet and the second, planned for the decade following 2030, at a site called Armshow South near the Bay of Two Rivers.

    Those sites are about 60 and 30 kilometres south-west of Iqaluit and would be connected to the city by 84 kilometres of power lines.

    Nattaq said this project would likely generate a “large social impact for us Inuit,” because of the potential disruption of areas used for fishing, camping and travelling.

    And he said that because of this, the QEC must be prepared to compensate Inuit for any harmful impacts through an IIBA.

    “We are very concerned,” Nattaq said.

    Hunters in Iqaluit had earlier favoured the Jayne’s Inlet site because it’s less likely to disturb popular fishing areas.

    But the proposed Armshow South site, which wouldn’t be developed until the 2030s, appears to threaten well-used fishing spots around the Bay of Two Rivers.

    “The Bay of Two Rivers is my main fishing spot,” Mosesee Atagooyuk told the review board.

    “Let’s look at alternatives that would have less of an impact on our lives,” Atagooyuk said.

    He also said that site could interfere with an important travel route to Kimmirut.

    Alacie Joamie said he same thing when she first heard of the power corporation’s hydroelectric plans but she “had a change of heart and I agree with it.”

    But at the same time, she said she wants to be sure that the people of Iqaluit will benefit from the project.

    “Our land is pristine and wild and natural and has never been affected by these developments,” she said.

    Other residents who attended the meeting said QEC should provide more detailed information about its plans.

    A QIA employee said the power corporation should be asked if they plan to remove fish from any lakes.

    And Seth Reinhart of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency said the QEC should be asked to provide more detailed information about the potential economic impact of the project and its affect on the cost of power.

    Adla Itorcheak of Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. said the QEC should be asked if mining companies and other developers would be allowed to tap in to the hydro project’s system and if electrical power would be available to cabin owners on the side of the bay opposite Iqaluit.

    The QEC has said in the past that a hydroelectric plant could replace the use of dirty diesel-generated electrical power in Iqaluit, which consumes about one-third of all diesel imported into Nunavut this year.

    They also claim that a hydro plant would produce lower electrical power rates.

    The NIRB was planning to hold similar meetings Sept. 11 in Kimmirut and Sept. 12 in Pangnirtung.

    www.nunatsiaqonline.ca

     

    COMMENTS on Nunatsiaq Online

    #1. Posted by assu on September 11, 2013

    Ah, screw it. Let’s just keep shipping petroleum from the south and burn it here for energy. Self-sufficiency is over rated.

    #2. Posted by LP on September 11, 2013

    Glad to see the elders standing up for the community!

    #1: What good is self-sufficiency if you plow through and destroy the resources that can make you self-sufficient?

    #3. Posted by heerdtell on September 11, 2013

    I like the Iqaluit Elders.  Especially those showing in the pictures on Nunatsiaq.  We should always hear their side of the story.  Good for them to voice their concerns.

    #4. Posted by Well on September 11, 2013

    Just cancel the whole thing..end of story

    #5. Posted by resident of Iqaluit on September 11, 2013

    No, do even think about the darn dam, it will destroy our way of life and our way of fishing the mercury that will happen to all the sea mammals and of course the arctic char we have, It will destroy our way of life and our health, the elders are not even from our home town, I know who is orginally from our home town so they do not even see anything yet what it can do. “A change of heart”, hello, how can someone have a change of heart of what will happen to our lives and our health, No, please do not build dams here at all.

    I have seen many people from northern quebec when the James Bay Project went through, there was lot of sick people with mercury in their body, What do you think you are trying to do here, this is our hometown where we were born and raised and do not have any problems with the fishes we catch, and once you have build it, our way of life will change. If only they elders were told properly what it can do, change of heart, is driving me mad…I went to the night time meeting at 7 and got very emotional and cried as this is out land you will be destorying. It is not your land it is only your job.

    #6. Posted by wondering on September 11, 2013

    what a joke!
    #1 hit the nail right on the head.
    and #2, the problem is , is your not self sufficient anymore..or you, like most “elders” don’t pay for electric costs anyways???

    #7. Posted by assu on September 11, 2013

    #2, everyone, perhaps I should not of spoken with sarcasm. This would have been more productive:

    This isn’t a southern company coming here to extract & exploit Nunavut resources. This is an Nunavut/Inuit organization trying to build infrastructure to improve self sufficiency and the standard of living for everyone. Sacrifice, collaboration, and compromise will be a must as we build a future for our children. Everyone should agree on the best place they should build this, and an environmental plan should be in place. Rather than asking how you can use this project to help your other agenda’s, do what you can to make this projects agenda a success.

    #8. Posted by Anything Else? on September 11, 2013

    Yeah, and those dumb hospital buildings get in the way of berry picking.  We should tear those down now.

    #9. Posted by Atagooyuk's daughter on September 11, 2013

    I totally agree with my dad, he is a regular hunter, it is what he does for a living after retiring, he often talks about hunting with his hunting buddies, and its their life! please dont build dams here, we are good without it. It doesnt only go to my dad, but it goes out to everyone else that hunts or go out on the land for many reasons. Our land, not theirs.

    #10. Posted by Your Dad on September 11, 2013

    #9 Then what do you propose we use for future power?  I assume you like your lights on in the dark of night, your TV, computer, and heat?  Do you realize that Nunavut is currently being powered by diesel generators?  Nasty, dirty, expensive diesel generators?  OH, and by the way most of these diesel generators are outdated and lack the capacity to supply power to match the growth in Nunavut (and by growth I mean more Inuit being born which equals more houses/schools etc.)

    I am also curious why you say “our land, not theirs”?  This is about supplying power to “your people”. 

    Calm down, get informed before passing judgement.

    #11. Posted by Observer on September 11, 2013

    So, to summarize: no building dams because it might interfere with a few people who hunt or fish now, instead continue burning greenhouse-gas producing fuel which adds to the problem of climate change and ruining hunting and fishing for everyone, everywhere, in the future.

    That about right?

    #12. Posted by North on September 11, 2013

    This place gets more and more redonk everyday, millions for what. Inuit owned company on Inuit owned lands…

    Inuit want all the amenities of down south, but want southern prices all in isolated communities… mmmmm talk about greed

    I say let anyone that wants to live on the land live on the land, but go back to your traditional ways, no more white influences. Those who want to stay in the communities stay in the communities and follow the normal rules that Canadians follow

    #13. Posted by Need power on September 11, 2013

    You can build it near my town. There is a good spot for it not too far. Explore other communities for the dam so we can build electrical poles to feed surrounding communities,...IIBA would be,...cheapest rate for the closest community. Dam,...c’mon up!

    #14. Posted by Scamp on September 11, 2013

    #5 you got it backwards Hydro does not put Mercury in the water. Hydro is a clean energy. It the emissions for our dirty diesel power plants that is polluting our fish, wildlife and drinking water. Yes let’s keep adding more pollution to our air and water until we kill everything including ourselves. Lets built more diesel power plants, fuel storage farms and increase the oil tankers into our bays until eventually we have a major spill in our bay. A good message coming from our wise elders, you can only bring clean energy to our land provided you compensate us will millions. If not we don’t want it.

    #15. Posted by Qulliq, NTI Talk Micro Nuclear on September 11, 2013

    Why doesn’t Qulliq Energy Corp. talk about Micro Nuclear generators for power? In 2009 they studied them.  Now new models on the market. Millions less then building dams. Or flooding.  NTI should be pushing for Micro Nuclear, them being NTI in the Uranium mining business. Why Quilliq and NTI are so silent on bringing this information and technology to Nunavut is disturbing.

    #16. Posted by Think on September 11, 2013

    After today we shouldn’t worry about the clean energy a dam would
    provide but all the cars and trucks that are now here in town. also would the dams provide just iqaluit or southern baffin.

    #17. Posted by just wow on September 12, 2013

    There is a lot of uninformed people commenting here against CLEAN energy as opposed to burning diesel fuels to supply power for this town. I just want to be clear that you are crazy. Think before you speak, and educate yourself on the topic at hand before you type.

    Show of hands… How many people would rather burn fossil fuels to enjoy the benefits of electricity rather than using a clean renewable energy source such as a hydroelectric damn? This is not a trick question, I promise.

    #18. Posted by sad on September 12, 2013

    Thank you Alicee Joamie and Simon Nattaq for standing for Iqalumiut. Iqalumiut should stand up to go against the Dam. I wish I was in Iqaluit to help those who opposed the Dam. I know there are some rich people who owns a big company’s who might’ve push for the Dam. If being rich in Iqaluit is not enough. What else can they destroy what we were born with?. What do Iqalumiut have rights?? We Iqalumiut have no voice. Other people have pushed us away from our home.
    Dam shouldn’t even have been mention. The people who do not have ancestors in Iqaluit will not understand what our concerns are.

    #19. Posted by Bob on September 14, 2013

    The time frame that is being discussed here is in the 2030’s, and the people objecting to it, just based on the picture I see, will be dead long before that.

    The social impact of lack of affordable electricity will have on the local population, given the expected population growth by 2030, will far exceed any negative social impact from berry picking, fishing, or hunting.

    Hydroelectric power is the most sustainable kind of power that Nunavut could use relative to any other known type of power generation.  Burning hundreds of thousands (or more) of liters of diesel fuel each and every year is simply not logical or sustainable.

    But logic and sustainability is not something I’ve come to expect from a region that prioritizes $40 million dollars for an aquatic centre, over the many other priorities the City and the GN need right now.

    Read more

    uploaded date: 17-09-2013

  • Nunavut board to inform public Sept. 10 on Iqaluit hydro project

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: DID News

    Qulliq Energy Corp. promises hydroelectric power by 2019

    PETER VARGA

    If you live in Iqaluit, the Nunavut Impact Review Board invites you to learn more about the Qulliq Energy Corp.’s proposed $450 million Iqaluit hydroelectric projects at public meetings set for Sept. 10 in Iqaluit.

    Qulliq’s plan calls for two hydro plants, generating electricity from dammed waters, to be built at Jaynes Inlet and the Armshow River.

    The plants would be located about 60 and 30 kilometres southwest of Iqaluit, respectively.

    The Jaynes Inlet facility would be built first, by 2019, and generate 10 to 14.6 megawatts of electricity.

    The second plant would follow 15 to 20 years later to supply expected increases in electricity demand in Iqaluit as the city continues to grow, according Qulliq.

    That project, known as Armshow South, would generate up to 8.8 MW of power.

    Qulliq has highlighted the projects as a source of “stable” power generation, which will lessen reliance on diesel fuel and eventually bring down the cost of electricity.

    At the Sept. 10 sessions, NIRB staff will present information about the projects and listen to concerns and opinions from the public, said Ryan Barry, the NIRB’s executive director.

    “We always encourage public participation and attendance,” Barry said.

    At the meetings, residents “can learn more about the project and also have a chance to influence the assessment by letting us know what their concerns are, and what their questions are,” he said.

    Staff will then take what they hear to develop guidelines that Qulliq will have to respond to in an environmental impact statement, Barry said.

    The NIRB will hold the two public scoping meetings on Sept. 10 at the Francophone centre in Iqaluit. The first is scheduled to take place 2 p.m. to 4 p.m., and the second at 7 p.m.

    www.nunatsiaqonline.ca

     

    COMMENTS on Nunatsiaq Online

    #1. Posted by I wonder on September 10, 2013

    Just out of curiosity, why has the Sylvia Grinnell river been ignored? Its right there close to town and would be much cheaper to build.

    #2. Posted by iqalummiuq on September 10, 2013

    #1 - because people go fish there. there was another lake that was chose too and people complained it was a fishing spot.

    #3. Posted by I wonder on September 10, 2013

    There are dam’s all over the world and people can still fish, dam’s have fish ladders so they can swim down or back up, simple.

    #4. Posted by Ger on September 11, 2013

    I am very happy to hear that the President of Qulliq intends to leave in June 2014.  He’d be in over his head.

    Read more

    uploaded date: 17-09-2013

  • Nunavut reviews Baffinland's new Mary River iron ore mine plan

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: Isuma News

    CBC NEWS NORTH

    Nunavut regulators have begun the formal review of Baffinland's new plans for a proposed iron ore mine at Mary River, Nunavut.

    The Nunavut Impact Review Board is asking for interested parties to review the plans and comment.

    The Baffinland iron ore mine at Mary River, Nunavut was approved last year, but in January, the company announced a change of plans.

    Those changes involved shipping the ore out of Milne Inlet. Regulators decided that called for another public review.

    Interested parties now have until Oct. 15 to provide comments to the Nunavut Impact Review Board.

    Baffinland is sticking to its original plan to build a railway and port at Steensby Inlet, but the company says that development will come later. Baffinland says shipping from Milne Inlet means it can start making money sooner.

    www.cbc.ca

     

    Read more

    uploaded date: 21-08-2013

  • Dream of arctic broadband one step closer to reality

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: Isuma News

    Arctic Fibre begins Nunavut route surveys announces dream of arctic broadband one step closer to reality

    Tuesday, Jul 30, 2013

    A separate site visit to Deception Bay in Nunavik, Northern Quebec, will follow the Nunavut excursion to ascertain the viability of building a spur off the backbone to meet the bandwidth requirements of mining companies in the area.

    The determination of the cable landing locations and Boothia Crossing route will form part of the company’s submissions to the Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) and the Nunavut Planning Commission (NPC).  Approvals from NIRB and NPC are prerequisites to the issuance of an International Submarine Cable Landing Licence from the Minister Responsible for Industry Canada.

    Arctic Fibre submitted its licence application to Industry Canada last October but finalization of the survey schedule required ice clearance at all landing points. The finalization of landing site locations will enable Arctic Fibre to refine its undersea routes and undertake the detailed marine studies later this year and with the bulk of the work being completed in 2014. The scheduled in-service date for the $620 million backbone network between London and Tokyo is December 2015.

    By combining an Arctic broadband network in the same cable sheath with a trans-continental link between Asian and European financial centres, Arctic Fibre can build a backbone network serving half of the population of Nunavut without government subsidy.

    In February the Company submitted a $237 million proposal to Industry Canada which would extend the fibre cable to 23 additional northern communities with the assistance of nine microwave hops.  This secondary network expansion, which would require some form of government support, would ensure the provision of  virtually unlimited bandwidth to 98% of the combined Nunavut and Nunavik population, thereby supporting both economic and social development, while contributing significantly to Canada’s nation-building in its Arctic region.

    www.yourcommunicationnews.com

    Read more

    uploaded date: 30-07-2013

  • New Requirements for Kiggavik project

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: Isuma News

    Nunavut Impact Review Board releases report with suggestions from June technical meetings

    NORTHERN NEWS SERVICES

    Miranda Scotland
    July 17, 2013

    BAKER LAKE  -  AREVA Resources Canada has received further direction on what to address in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for its proposed uranium project near Baker Lake.

    The Nunavut Impact Review Board set out an additional 25 requirements in a report released July 5.

    The suggestions are based on information that came as a result of the technical meetings held in June.

    At the time, the NIRB met with people in communities across the Kivalliq region.

    The board also met with organizations such as the Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Board, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and Baker Lake Hunters and Trappers.

    The proposed Kiggavik project would see an estimated 51,000 tonnes of uranium mined from a location 80 km west of Baker Lake.

    The mine site is estimated to have an operation life of 12 years.

    The additional requirements AREVA will have to address in its FEIS include:

    • Provide a draft plan for monitoring dust from the operation. Consider ways to manage ore and waste rock storage areas in order to prevent dust contaminants from being blown around.
    • Consider the effects the operation could have on caribou and ways to mitigate them to ensure the sustainability of the herds.
    • Collect more Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and consider how the knowledge might be weighted against scientific information. Also, look at how to integrate the knowledge into plans to reduce project-related affects on the environment.
    • Provide a more comprehensive analysis of labour force projections.
    • Include a draft wildlife mitigation and monitoring plan.

    AREVA is expected to submit the FEIS by Sept. 30, 2014.

    The impacted parties will then have a chance to present final written submissions and the company will be given time to respond.

    The final hearing will be scheduled at a later date, likely for 2015.

    "At this time, the board is not in a position to schedule the date of the final hearing as it is highly dependent on the actual date of the filing and acceptance of a complete FEIS submission," the NIRB stated in its report, adding the meeting will not take place in May or June given that many community members are expected to be out on the land.

    Baker Lake has been selected as the location for the hearing, although representatives from each of the potentially affected communities will have an opportunity to participate.

    In the meantime, the board is encouraging AREVA to meet with people in communities across the region.

    The report stated the information sessions should address the questions raised during the community roundtables and provide an overview of how the key conclusions in the FEIS were reached.

    www.nnsl.com

     

    Read more

    uploaded date: 22-07-2013

  • Federal Minister Sends Arctic Naval Facility Plans Back to DND

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: Isuma News

    Nunavut Impact Review Board needs more information to do environmental review

    CBC News

    Apr 19, 2013

    The federal minister of Northern Development has sent the plans for the proposed Nanisivik naval facility back to the Department of National Defence for more work.

     

    Minister Bernard Valcourt said the military must clarify parts of the proposal, and then re-submit it to Nunavut regulators.

     

    The Nunavut Impact Review Board said in a January letter to the minister that it didn't have enough information to do a proper environmental review of the proposed project near Arctic Bay, Nunavut.

     

    The NIRB's letter described a series of delays in the project's environmental screening process that began in 2009, two years after plans for the Nanisivik facility were first announced.

     

    The letter says the NIRB has been frustrated in its efforts to get more information from National Defence.

     

    "Despite repeated requests and several opportunities to do so, essential information has not been provided and significant information gaps in the project proposal remain," the letter says.

     

    The original plan was for a large Arctic port and re-fuelling facility at the old Nanisivik mine site on north Baffin Island, but last year National Defence decided to scale the project back to keep costs down.

     

    The federal government has budgeted more than $100 million for the project.

     

    NIRB's letter to the minister

     

    www.cbc.ca

     

    Read more

    uploaded date: 20-04-2013

  • 4m 39s

    ᓂᐲᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ Louis Uttak Interview, Igloolik, Pt.1 of 3, 4:39

    uploaded by: derekman88

    channel: My Father's Land

    ᓂᐲᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ Louis Uttak Part 1, 4:39 Inuktitut-English May 11, 2012. See also Part 2. See also Part 3. By Zacharias Kunuk and Lloyd Lipsett.

    Louis is one of Igloolik's six members of the 42-member Baffinland Working Committee representing the seven impacted communities of Igloolik, Hall Beach, Arctic Bay, Pond Inlet, Clyde River, Kimmirut and Cape Dorset. Louis talks about the land and the animals, how things have changed since he was a child and how it can be affected by the mining that is going on.

    Read more

    uploaded date: 20-05-2012

  • 3m 10s

    ᓂᐲᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ Louis Uttak Interview, Igloolik, Pt.2 of 3, 3:10

    uploaded by: derekman88

    channel: My Father's Land

    ᓂᐲᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ Louis Uttak, Part 2 of 3, 3:10 Inuktitut-English, May 11, 2012. See also Part 1. See also Part 3. By Zacharias Kunuk and Lloyd Lipsett.

    Louis is one of Igloolik's six members of the 42-member Baffinland Working Committee representing the seven impacted communities of Igloolik, Hall Beach, Arctic Bay, Pond Inlet, Clyde River, Kimmirut and Cape Dorset. Louis talks about the land and the animals, how things have changed since he was a child and how it can be affected by the mining that is going on. Filmed May 11, 2012 by Derek Aqqiaruk for Digital Indigenous Democracy (DID). 3:10. Part 2 of 3.

    Read more

    uploaded date: 20-05-2012