In 1994 Redfern entered into the Mine Development Assessment Process (MDAP) in British Columbia to secure approval-in-principle for mine development. Concurrently the project application was entered into the federal environmental assessment process at the screening level under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). By June of 1995 the new BC Environmental Assessment Act superseded the MDAP and the project application was transitioned into the new process at the Draft Specification stage.

Redfern was granted a Project Approval Certificate (PAC) in March of 1998 and immediately applied for key operating permits as well as conducting work to meet conditions imposed by the Certificate. Most of the effort was dedicated to the Special Use Permit (SUP) governing the construction and operating approval for the mine access road. The SUP was obtained in conditional form in 1999 and most of the conditions were removed in May 2000 pending submission of final engineering design documents and final construction approval.

In early 1999 a legal challenge to the Project Approval Certificate was filed by the Taku River Tlingit First Nation (TRTFN), with the support of environmental organizations opposed to development. In June of 2000 the BC Supreme Court ruled that the final stages of the project environmental review had not sufficiently addressed aboriginal concerns and ordered the PAC quashed. The court subsequently ordered that the final stage of the review be re-done commencing in September 2000 for a period of two months. Redfern put the further development of the Tulsequah project on hold pending a resolution under the order. Meantime, the BC government and Redfern filed an appeal of the BC Supreme Court decision.

The formal Project Committee re-consideration process started in September 2000 but continued past the court’s suggested time frame in order to more fully explore all issues. In fact, the review committee were still examining the issues in January 2002 when the BC Court of Appeal made public its decision. The Appeal Court found that the earlier Supreme Court decision was in error and that the original review process had indeed been properly conducted. The Court further ordered that the re-consideration process be set aside and that the project instead be remitted back to the ministers to re-do their decision on a Project Approval Certificate. The rationale for this centred on the Court’s interpretation of how the province had dealt with the asserted rights of the TRTFN in its original decision. Since the Crown had argued that it only considered established rights, the Court ordered that the Ministers also give consideration to the potential impacts of the project on asserted rights in reaching their new decision.

The Ministers were provided with all of the necessary documentation at the beginning of June 2002. A final decision was made in December of 2002 and Redfern was awarded a new Project Approval Certificate for the project.

The Province applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada concerning that aspect of the BC Court of Appeal decision requiring the Crown to consider asserted aboriginal rights. Leave was granted by the Supreme Court on November 14, 2002. A cross-appeal application by the TRTFN was dismissed. In March 2004 the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal and rendered its decision on November 19, 2004. In this decision the Supreme Court unanimously decreed that the province of BC had met its obligations, upholding the adequacy of the provincial consultation and accommodation of the interests of the Taku River Tlingit First Nation in the environmental assessment and certification of the Tulsequah project.

Environmental Assessment

The Environmental Assessment process that reviewed the Tulsequah project was rigorous and lengthy. All of the project components were examined in detail. Redfern was required to address a detailed list of Project Report specifications in completing the environmental baseline studies and providing design information for the Project Report, which was the final subject of review. Throughout this process Redfern engaged in a comprehensive public consultation process including very intensive consultations with the Taku River Tlingit First Nation. This was evidenced in the comments of the presiding judges in the subsequent litigation process where no fault could be found with Redfern’s consultation record or conduct in completing the review.

The Project Committee formed to oversee and direct the review of the Tulsequah project encompassed all of the key jurisdictional groups. Members of the Project Committee (as struck in 1995) were:

Provincial:
Ministry of Transportation and Highways
Ministry of Energy and Mines
Ministry of Environment Lands and Parks
Ministry of Forests
Ministry of Small Business, Tourism and Culture

Federal:
Environment Canada
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Coast Guard

Extra-provincial:
Yukon Territorial Government

Municipal:
Atlin Advisory Planning Commission

First Nation:
Taku River Tlingit First Nation

USA:
State of Alaska
US Department of the Interior
US EPA

The multi-faceted Project Report submitted by Redfern in July of 1997 consisted of 5 volumes and 5 appendices in separate volumes. Most of the work was broadly subdivided into the two key geographical components of the project: the mine site and associated infrastructure, and the access road.

It is impossible to summarize here the full scope of the environmental assessment studies and documentation but a sense of the rigour and scope of the work can be obtained through a brief examination of the main study elements for the access road review:

Environmental Assessment and Special Use Permit (Access Road)

Figure 1 shows the existing access roads in the project Area. As can be seen there are no roads providing access to the Mine. In the north Atlin is served by Highway 7 which provides access to the Alaska Highway and the continental road network. In the immediate Atlin area public roads extend a short distance east and south providing access to residents in these areas and to the Five Mile reserve of the Tlingits. A large number of unregulated roads web the area east and south of Atlin. These roads have been developed over the previous century of placer mining operations in the Atlin district and have been used for recreational purposes by local residents. At present in excess of 200 kilometers of these roads traverse the 1000 km2 area around Atlin.

Currently only one road extends south of the O’Donnel River. The Tlingits use an unregulated 4WD trail/road to access the IR5 reserve at Kuthai lake.

Not shown on the map is the Golden Bear Mine access road which is located below the bottom of the map in the southern Taku/Inklin watershed. That 150 km road served the former Golden Bear gold mine from 1987 to 2002, providing access south to Telegraph Creek and provincial Highway 37.

Figure 2 shows the road corridor options evaluated by Redfern in the early stage of feasibility and environmental assessment permitting (EA). Redfern consulting engineers and environmental consultants evaluated the feasibility of these options at a preliminary stage with respect to construction impediments, slope and terrain stability, consultations with TRTFN and public, and early stage assessments of environmental issues such as habitat values and sensitivities.

As a result some of the options were discarded early. Key among these was the F-B segment which considered utilizing the main Taku River valley. Construction feasibility and costs as well as highest environmental parameter sensitivities quickly removed this corridor from further consideration. The J-I, I-M and I-F segments were also considered to be undesirable options. The first two were considered by the TRTFN to potentially impact on their fishery and sockeye spawning values at Kuthai Lake. The I-F segment was found to suffer from geotechnical terrain instabilities and higher resulting costs to protect sensitive fisheries values in Sloko and Goldbottom creeks with higher risk of failure. Wildlife habitat values were also higher in this option.

Option T-J utilizing the Warm Bay public road was opposed by many residents of the community and also by the Ministry of Highways due to the difficulty and cost of re-configuring the existing road to meet safe truck hauling parameters. For this reason an alternate route heading east of Atlin via Spruce Creek and Wilson Creek was evaluated as a preferred option.

Figure 3 shows the area defined by the Project Committee for detailed wildlife surveys and habitat assessment, primarily through the use of Terrain Ecosystem Mapping (TEM). This 1600 km2 area was the focus of a two-year program of TEM mapping and ground-truthing at 1:50,000 scale. Once completed, the data provided the basis for generation of detailed maps rating habitats for both suitability and capability. These were completed to provincial Resource Inventory Committee (RIC) standards for 5 key species: caribou, sheep, mountain goat, moose and grizzly bear.

The TEM map base covered all of the potential road corridor options except for the Spruce Creek valley and the Warm Bay Road (considered by the Committee to be already impacted by existing access).

Wildlife work included participation by local community representatives and TRTFN in multi-season surveys, mapping crews, and progress reviews in Project Committee meetings.

 Figure 4: EA Fish and Fish Habitat Assessment Scope (View PDF 1,317 KB)

Figure 4 adds the areas of detailed fisheries surveys which were mandated by the EA process. These surveys characterized the presence/absence of anadromous and non-anadromous fish species, key habitats and relative fisheries value of the various rivers, streams and creeks along or traversing the potential road routes. The fisheries studies were expanded in the mine area and also extended outside the wildlife TEM mapping area to cover Spruce Creek and the end of the Warm Bay Road.

This two-year multi-season survey program was conducted by qualified independent fish biologists with assistance of local community participants, including TRTFN, at various times and areas. Special attention was focused on potential crossing areas and information gained by these surveys was later utilized, where possible, to assist in selecting crossing sites in areas of less-productive habitat.

Additional study information included DNA testing of DollyVarden/Bull Trout hybrids to determine relative dominance and fish tissue sampling for background metals content in selected sites – primarily in the mine area.

During the later phases of the fisheries work Redfern initiated field work by land surveying crews to define a preferred alignment which selected a road route minimizing impacts to the various and sometimes conflicting values presented by the overlain wildlife, fisheries, community and aboriginal information and geotechnical stability constraints – within the context of the regulated road design parameters for concentrate hauling. Surveying crews physically established a centre line alignment through the entire proposed road route over a 2.5 year period. This included reconnaissance terrain features and soils mapping, sufficient surveying of proposed major crossings to complete conceptual plans and sections of crossing designs, and preliminary road design including cut and fill volumes and alignment plan and section layout. This information was used to provide a well-qualified estimate of road construction and maintenance costs for both the original Feasibility and Feasibility Update study.

The resulting alignment was advanced as the preferred alignment through the final EA review process with supporting information presented for all of the environmental baseline surveys.

The approved road alignment corridor post-EA was the subject of a more detailed round of evaluation focused on finalizing the alignment prior to granting of the Special Use Permit governing the construction approval, operating requirements and closure terms for the access road.

As outlined in Figure 5 more detailed work focused on completing 1:20,000 scale terrain stability field assessments, including mapping of erosion potential and potential geotechnical hazards. This work supplemented previous and new studies covering avalanche hazards, flood and stream debris-flow hazards. More detailed assessment to TSIL level C was conducted from the mine site to about kilometre 80, south of the Silver Salmon River. North of this point, in the less precipitous highland terrain, the work was conducted at TSIL level D.

One of the outcomes of this work was a requirement from the Ministry of Forests to evaluate an amended alignment in the lower Nakonake river valley to re-locate that portion of the alignment to the north side, change the location of the Sloko River crossing in the east and define a new crossing of the Nakonake river on the west to re-join the original alignment.

Concurrently and pursuant to commitments contained in the Project Approval Certificate, Redfern worked with the provincial government to conduct 1:20,000 scale TEM mapping over selected portions of the road corridor traversing or adjacent to high-quality grizzly bear habitat. The purpose of this work was to refine the habitat analysis at a finer scale (“patch habitat”) and determine if small-scale road alignment changes were feasible to minimize impacts or disturbance to grizzly bears.

More detailed fisheries work was conducted at selected sites and crossings to refine crossing design parameters. A detailed assessment of options to minimize disturbance of a TRTFN heritage trail was undertaken from kilometres 65 to 80 immediately east of the Sloko River.

Figure 6 displays the final road alignment after consideration of all the completed studies and impact assessments. The SUP was granted in 1999 with conditions and most of the conditions removed by June of 2000 subject to submission of final engineering plans and designs.

Amendments made to the original alignment of the EA are shown in red or with text labels.

The SUP has once again become active as a result of the new Project Approval Certificate granted by the provincial government.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) supplemental screening

As a result of changes to the road alignment instituted during the SUP permitting process, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) determined that a supplemental process was required to amend the original CEAA screening authorization. In June 2002, DFO issued a letter identifying individual issues for which new information was required. Many of these issues were in areas where provincial agency responses were required. As a result Redfern deferred a response until a new decision on the project was made by the provincial authorities. In early 2003 Redfern commenced a program of issue resolution and entered into a joint contract with the province to hire a third party consulting group (Axys Environmental) to compile all of the wildlife information on the project gathered by both the company and provincial studies.

In April 2004 Redfern submitted its response to issues identified by Fisheries and Oceans Canada in order to finalize a screening amendment approval under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. DFO began a referral process and completed its draft screening supplemental report in December of 2004. this document was released for public comment on January 5, 2005 for a six week period ending February 18, 2005. It is expected that the CEAA screening amendment process will be completed in the spring of 2005.

Operating Permits

The Tulsequah project will require a number of additional operating permits before production can commence. Although many of these are routine, a few are key. These include the mine reclamation permit, the Effluent Discharge and Waste Management Act permits, the various Mines Act permits governing the design and construction of the mine development, tailings impoundment and other project infrastructure, and the CEAA screening amendment approvals.

Progress has been made on a number of fronts in these areas although formal application for most is pending. Post 1998 certification work established more detailed baseline work in the Shazah slough and lower Shazah valley areas and Environmental Effects Monitoring (EEM) baseline information was collected in this area and at sensitive sites along the access road.

In the fall of 2003 and spring of 2004 Redfern worked with referral agencies to finalize the protocols for satisfaction of the conditions imposed in the Project Approval Certificate. These conditions relate to completion of chronic toxicity testing on proposed effluent discharge material and further test verification of substrate sediments at the tailings impoundment site. Studies and field programs were completed on these aspects in late May and early June. Final reports are issued in July and August in order to satisfy these requirements. In the late fall of 2004 Redfern received written confirmation of satisfaction of the Certificate conditions.