Symbol of the Government of Canada

Independent Peer Review Panel

Author: (Giant Mine Remediation Project)
Date: (June 2007)

PDF Version   (229 Kb, 2 pages)

Accessibility Notice

Help on accessing documents in PDF format
can be obtained on the help page.




Independent Peer Review Panel experts answer questions at a public information session in Yellowknife

Background

After conducting extensive research and preparing its reports, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) needed to know that the recommendations of its Technical Advisor – SRK Consulting Inc. – were sound.

Therefore INAC brought together an Independent Peer Review Panel (IPRP) of nine recognized experts whose qualifications and experience collectively cover the fields relevant to the Remediation Plan – namely geotechnology, mining, mineral processing and environmental engineering, toxicology, hydrogeology, risk assessment, and public health.

The IPRP reviewed both the Report on Arsenic Trioxide Management Alternatives and the Remediation Plan for Giant Mine and provided expert feedback to INAC.

Who is on the IPRP?

The membership of the Independent Peer Review Panel was based partly on suggestions from stakeholder communities and the local public, who recommended individuals able to provide independent expert technical review. The names, credentials and professional resumes of the nine experts are available in the IPRP Report.

What did the IPRP conclude about the Remediation Plan for Giant Mine?

The IPRP unanimously supported the approach described in the Remediation Plan, and encouraged INAC to proceed with its application for a water license.

Where can I get a copy of the IPRP Reports?

Both IPRP Reports – Report on Arsenic Trioxide Management Alternatives and Report on the Remediation Plan for Giant Mine – are available through the Public Registry.

What did the IPRP say about the Frozen Block Method?

“Artificial freezing has been used for several decades and on various projects to provide efficient impervious barriers to water flows (McArthur River Mine, large shaft drilling, etc.). Furthermore, detailed thermal analyses given in Supporting Document J1 provide strong support to the proposed remedial plan and to its feasibility to achieve the desired objectives. IPRP reviewed these analyses and agrees with the conclusions presented in SDJ. Finally, it is worth stressing that the proposed remedial plan also includes an exhaustive and comprehensive monitoring program during and after freezing is complete, together with a series of contingency measures. These measures can be readily implemented in case of poor performance, either during initial freezing or in the long term. They include replacement of defective components, installation of additional freeze pipes, extension of active and/or hybrid freezing.”

What did the IPRP say INAC did well?

“The IPRP commends INAC on important recent activities undertaken for purposes of the Remediation Plan, such as dam safety inspections; a comprehensive dam safety review; tailings and sludge water balance; tailings and sludge properties; and of course, cover design, construction and long term reclamation maintenance.”

“The executive summary and main text of the Final Draft Report are effective in communicating the current environmental conditions that are important to the Remediation Plan. The documents provide a clear and concise description of the key surface and subsurface hydrological, hydrogeological and geochemical aspects of the Remediation Plan for Giant Mine.”

What were the IPRP's official conclusions?

  1. Based on the Panel's review of the Final Draft Report, the Panel unanimously supports the approach described in the Remediation Plan and encourages INAC to proceed with the plan into the regulatory approvals process.

  2. The work produced by INAC and their Technical Advisor is of high quality using state of the art methodology and has adequately defined existing conditions at the Giant Mine site for purposes of developing the Remediation Plan at this stage. The IPRP understands that a detailed engineering phase will commence once the project is approved.

  3. The Remediation Plan as described will, in the long term, provide protection of human and ecosystem health.

  4. Stability concerns within the mine may compromise the Remediation Plan if not dealt with in a timely fashion e.g., arsenic Chamber 208.

  5. Anumber of recommendations on specific items have been included within the text but they do not alter the basic conclusions regarding the viability of the Plan from a technical perspective.

  6. The objective of integrating the original sub-surface and surface remediation plans for the Giant Mine has been adequately achieved for present purposes of the proposed integrated Remediation Plan.

Giant Mine Remediation Joint Project Office

2nd Floor, Waldron Building, 5103 - 48th St.,
Yellowknife, NT X1A 1N5
Tel.: (867) 669-2426
Fax: (867) 669-2439
Email: giantmine@ainc-inac.gc.ca
www.giant.gc.ca
QS-Y289-007-EE-A1 Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre:
Comité indépendant d'évaluation par les pairs