Environmental Assessment Office

February 21, 2012

February 20, 2012

Regarding the blasting report from the KGHM website:

http://www.ajaxmine.ca/pdfs/Abacus-MSW-Report-10-May-2011.pdf

Note page 23 (Table 9) and page 24(Map) shows 19 perimeter points and the estimated BOP- Blast Over Pressure in dB.

Note perimeter point 9 and 2. Point 9(Sahali) is predicted at 114.2 dB at 6.4KM from test blast site, yet Point 2(Aberdeen) is predicted at 113.6 dB at 3.7KM.

The closest perimeter point #5 is 2.4 KM away, yet is estimated at 108.2dB...???

Why are the closer perimeter points showing a lower dB level? Is this a common occurrence? How was is estimated? What factors could have caused this?

The following is written on page 22 (note the term "PREDICTED"):

Table 8 summarizes the predicted PPV from the two small production blasts. It can be seen that the

blast vibrations at the perimeter points are well below the vibration limit of 25.4 mm/s that is

normally adapted by North America municipalities. The predicted PPV is even well below human

perception - 0.5 to 1.5 mm/s PPV. Table 9 shows the predicted air over pressure at all the perimeter

points from the two small blasts. Again, the predicted over pressure is well below 120 dB that begins

to cause complaints (Persson et al, 1994).

Why are the noise levels being predicted? Why didn't they use real monitoring instruments for a real blast?

My concerns regarding the proposed Ajax mine within city limits are: 
 -air quality. Fine dust from the mine will occur. The prevailing winds in the Aberdeen area are south to north or down hill from the mine. The air quality in our valley is compromised at times and health warning are made aware on the radio due to stale air sitting in the valley. When this occurs if the mine is in place there will be  increased respiratory health risks to all.
 -water quality. Massive quantities of water contaminated by the mineral extracting process will be kept in a storage facility. I believe the likelyhood of leaking of contaminated water is too great. The storage like the mine are too close to homes and schools. 
 There are lakes streams and underground springs in the Aberdeen area all which are likely to be contaminated by the process. Water runs down hill and our drinking water supply is from the river at the bottom of that hill.
 Blasting- vibrations will have an impact on ground shifting, making it more likely for leaching of contaminates. No one was able to give a definate answer on how much noise there will be from blasting. 
 I am concerned that blasting and shifting of land/water will have a negative impact on my house/foundation. Who will be head accountable is this happens?
 Light polution. how much light will be released 24 hours per day?
 Lack of health care professionals- Royal Inland Hospital has difficuly attracting specialists. Our wait times are longer here than in other communities. If the mine goes ahead it is my view that it will make it far more difficult to attract doctors and other professionals to come to our community.
 roads- At the information session I was not given informatiion on what route/road the trucks will transport materials to and from the mine. I was told it was not yet known.
 It is my belief that this mine is far too close to schools and homes.   

February 19, 2012

Kamloops suffers from a negative image that is, at least in part, the result of industry. The negative image resulted in the B.C. Cancer Agency refusing to come to Kamloops.  Instead they went to Kelowna.  The developers of Sun Rivers found that selling attractive, reasonably priced property was a challenge because of negative perception of Kamloops. To properly assess the impact of the mine on Kamloops it will be necessary to poll non-Kamloops residents to determine whether the presence of a mine would increase or decrease the likelihood of their moving to Kamloops. The potential  economic benefits of the mine will be short lived and stagnant if people will refuse to move to Kamloops.  Perception is every bit as important as reality.

If the image of Kamloops does plummet, will it be in the same situation it was when the Cancer Agency refused to come?  What might the health effects on the population be if physicians and other health care professionals decide they don’t want to live next to a mine? Will we be traveling to Salmon Arm or Vernon or Kelowna for all of our medical care?

A second area which needs to be strengthened is the section on Health. Noise, vibration, light, and dust are four potential sources of health problems. What is missing is an evaluation of the effects the new economic conditions will have on the health of the population. For example, if the mine does proceed, the property values in Aberdeen will, in all probability, decrease. The property values may well decrease below the level of a mortgage. Will this have any effect on the health of the Aberdeen residents?   If people decide that they do not wish to move to Kamloops and there is a decrease, city wide, in property values, will there be any health implications? Will there be an impact on morbidity or alcohol and drug use or on life expectancy?  

Another issue which is not addressed is an assessment of the health effects of the loss of the positive benefits of the natural environment?

To be believed the answers to these questions must be provided by individuals/agencies that are not in any conflict of interest. The methods used, the sources of data, the analysis and the interpretation of the data will have to be rigorous, explicitly stated, and made available to the public. The current pronouncement on the economic benefits by the mine’s proponents don’t meet any of these characteristics.

Thank you.

February 18, 2012

I attended the two day info session at the Kamloops Convention Center February 8th and 7th.  While the EIS will address a number of areas impacted by the proposed Ajax mine, nothing I heard convinced me that the long term effects will be, or can be adequately managed. There are too many unknown variables.  With concerted effort over the past 20 years, Kamloops has shifted its image as a pulp mill town to a vibrant, healthy city that supports a diverse economy.  This reality now stands in jeopardy. I have several areas of concern.

1.   The monitoring and enforcement program.  There will be numerous changes over the course of 25 years that could affect both the Proponent or the EAO’s willingness or ability to effectively manage environmental impact.  
•    The Environmental Management Plan suggests a potential role of community by developing and maintaining an ongoing community group to advise the development and implementation of follow-up and monitoring programs.  Would a community group have the expertise necessary to adequately monitor and advise?  Would this group be paid and by whom?  If such a group were volunteer, what assurance would we have that they would remain in place for the duration of the mine’s operation? 
•    The monitoring and enforcement program will be the responsibility of EAO.  Given the BC Auditor General’s current report that the province is not meeting the enforcement of environmental standards due to staff and financial shortages, I have little confidence in trusting timely reporting and follow-up on detected infractions.
•    I would suggest that the management of the monitoring and enforcement process would be more effectively served by independent consultants with the necessary expertise, financed by the Proponent and at arm’s length from the government.

2.   The Kinder Morgan pipeline runs through the operation site.  
•    While the potential effects of blasting and vibration on the Kinder Morgan pipeline have been identified, there is little in the proposed assessment methods that address this issue.  
•    In 2007, in North Burnaby, a puncture in the Kinder Morgan pipeline from an excavator resulted in the release of 234,000 litres of crude that flowed into the Burrard Inlet.  An oil pipeline in the middle of a mine site seems like a recipe for disaster.  How can the EIA or subsequent planning assure the absence of an accident over a 25 year period?

3.   Potential water shortages.  Water withdrawal from Kamloops Lake is identified as a concern as well as an area to be assessed.  Just how this will be assessed isn’t clear.  
•    Kamloops has a semi-arid climate with potential for water shortages.  Summer water rationing is common.  Should the city experience water shortages that require rationing, what guarantee will we have that the mine will be required to reduce their water usage?  
•    A mining operation uses an abundance of water and there will be considerable water required to manage the dust.  What contingency will be put in place should we find ourselves in an unusually dry spell, with water shortage and a choice between using  water for residential use or to keep the dust controlled at the mine site?

4.   Social and Economic Effects.  The social effects have focused predominately on pollution, aesthetics and health issues and the economic effects have focused on the benefits to the community. While important this does not give a broad enough assessment.  
•    There also needs to be a social and economic assessment that looks at the overall social and economic costs as well as benefits.
•    Will we be able to attract the professional people that support our community, doctors and other health practitioners, teachers, lawyers, entrepreneurs, etc?  Will people who have the option choose to relocate?  Will TRU continue to be a university of choice for Canadian and International students?  How will our ‘brand’ as The Tournament Capital of Canada be affected?

February 15, 2012

How will the mitigation strategies address the issue of enforcement?  I've already indicated my concerns about a monitoring process that is inadequate unless it includes periodic evaluation from independent experts to verify the accuracy of reports submitted to the Environment Office by the proponent.  I also wish to register my concerns regarding enforcement which also seems inadequate.  The present system to address infractions is first, discussion, then fines, then what?  How big will the fines be?  sufficient to really be a deterrent?  Is the local government involved at all in the process of identifying infractions and assessing penalties?  They should be.

I have concerns regarding the proximity of the proposed Open Pit to the existing Kinder Morgan pipeline.  The pipeline is dangerously close to a considerable portion of the perimeter of the Open Pit.  The location of the existing pipeline combined with the unstable soil conditions in this area of the City seem to me to be a recipe for disaster.  When a small City excavation in Vancouver can result in a ruptured pipeline and a large spill of oil and contamination of Burrard Inlet,  then I question what the massive excavation and potential soil movement in the mining operation create as a risk for a pipeline rupture here with the attendant safety and environmental damage issues?  Are there plans to reroute the pipeline?  If so who pays the millions of dollars to do this?  Has Kinder Morgan been consulted regarding the pipeline issue?  I also have concerns regarding the lack of information in any of the maps of the proposed project regarding the location of an ore storage pile. There are indications of two sites for waste rock, but there must have to be a place where ore is stored as well.  Where will it go?  What will its dimensions be? 

February 14, 2012

Another concern is the waste water. Where will it go?

How many thousands of cubic liters will be pumped from Kamloops Lake to replace the water that can not be recycled anymore?

Inks Lake has a limited capacity, how long will it take until it has reached its limits? Some of the solids will settle, some of the water will evaporate, but there will be a hell of a lot of polluted water seeping into the ground, and going...  where? De-stabilizing the ground and joining that already seeping into upper Aberdeen?

I attended the Open house at the Town Lodge; I thought I could get answers there, but those people at the displays did not have them, or did not want to give them.

One of my concerns is the dust coming from that operation.
I was told at the open house that information about the wind patterns could be obtained from the Ministry of Environment who has projections of the wind patterns around the valley.

In my view, that is very inadequate. Computer projections are useless unless you can input the proper data, and the data is presently missing.

The wind in the valley is no indication of what is happening at Jacko Lake, Knutsford or Aberdeen.

For instance, a few days ago I was at the Knutsford Airstrip where the windsocks were indicating a wind coming from 130 degrees; at Knutsford Corner a few minutes later the flag at the Hall was pointing to 10 degrees. At the same time, I was in my car listening to the airport frequency, and they were advising an incoming aircraft that the wind was at 250 degrees!

Only a network of wind monitoring stations between Jacko Lake and Aberdeen-Knutsford-Sahali(that should have been installed a long time ago...) would give the real picture.

Also, as an ultralight pilot with hundred of flying hours in that area, I can state that it is where I find the most turbulence on almost any day, and from my five years working at HVC I know that the dust can go a long way.

February 13, 2012

Ajax 
I do live in Aberdeen and cannot support a mine so close to the City for a number of reasons, from a personal, environmental and a financial perspective.  First the personal reasons, my health and my families along with my neighbour’s, the main reason we bought in the Highlands was to escape the pollution in the valley in the first place, for those that suggest they mined up in this area in the past that’s true, however the scale was hundreds of times smaller.  There are just too many variables for this to go ahead and I have some questions below that address them.  For anyone to compare this mine with Sudbury, Timmins or Val D’Or is almost laughable, first Kamloops has way more to offer than any of those cities, also none of these cities have the same geographic characteristics as this area, not even close.  We already have a wind monitoring station our street, our neighbour’s flag and for the last 17years it indicates a northerly wind 90% of the time, many times a very strong wind, not the east/ west direction you see in the valley, we will be constantly bombarded with dust particles, there will be no escaping this regardless of the water and bonding agents the proponent suggests using. What about the blasting and the effect it will have on the hill, 2 years of shockwaves going through the ground in an area already unstable, this alone should halt this project, just too many questions and possibilities.  If it does go through what will happen to this huge pit, 2 kilometers long, 1 kilometer wide and 1500 feet deep, let it fill with water? If so will the water end up toxic like so many other old mine pits?, Butte Montana is an example.  Location, location, location is a motto the realtor’s use when selling a home, well I do not see as the proponent suggests that a mine site this close to the neighborhood would actually increase value, again another statement on their part that is less than truthful much like their claim last year that the mine was 10 kilometers from Kamloops.  We have worked hard to build equity in our home and should not be subject to it being devalued for a project of this type and location, what’s next, mining in our Provincial and National Parks?  

Ajax Questions

What pre planning work was done prior to present plan as proposed?
Why are the waste rock sites planned where they are, they take no consideration at all to the local residences at all?
These piles should not be allowed to be placed where planned, the east pile is especially bad, nearby residents would hear the trucks going up and down the ramp road, hear the waste rock being dumped and the cascading sound of rock going down a slope, the beeping of trucks backing up, the dust generated would blow directly toward Aberdeen Highlands this would have a lasting effect for decades with the dry heat and wind we get in the area, would the proponent move these to another area, maybe the original Afton site so all piles are in one area? 
Would the proponent ensure there is no dust by enclosing in the waste rock locations before they start mining and dumping waste rock to ensure there is no air borne dust issues?
What blasting tests were done, how big was it, what were the results?
Other than all the “common” elements the proponent says are in the rock waste what are the bad, what composition of elements does the area rock contain?
Is the water currently in the old Afton Pit at this site safe, does it support aquatic life now?
Does the main Afton pit west of the city support aquatic life in that water?
What time of day would they blast?
These computer blasts, are they a bunch of small blast going off down a bench milliseconds apart?
Will the tailings pile have an odor?
Will the proponent guarantee payment for any future structural damage to homes in the area they cause by blasting?
Will the proponent guarantee payment for any future infrastructure damage to the municipal works of the City of Kamloops attributed to their working of this mine?
Will the proponent guarantee they make no noise(s) that can be heard from nearby residences, for instances noise from heavy equipment not just mitigate it to a level of 40 decibels?
Will the proponent pay for dust, noise and seismic monitoring stations at Pacific Way School and in at least 2 other areas on Pacific Way east of the school?
If the mine goes through what will be done with the left over open pit?
Why is there not a 3D scale model of this project available for viewing in a public place so the public can see the size and location of this project more clearly?
Why did Ajax originally state on its web page that the mine was located 10 kilometers from Kamloops?
Where are the current dust stations they are using to collect data?
Will they show the public the models they are using to do this study?
What effect would the blasting have on fishes in Jacko Lake?
This 2 kilometer by 1 kilometer by 1500 feet deep pit when the proponent is finished mining will it be left to fill with water, or whatever, if water would this new “lake” make the Aberdeen Hill more unstable after 23 years of blasting?  1 blast per day, 30days x 12months =360blasts/ year x 23years= 8280 blasts?
Would this water slowly seep into the hill potentially saturating the ground which could lead to slippage?
If the water becomes toxic like many other open pits, like the open pit in Butte Montana for instance are we the people left holding the costs for the cleanup effort?
We know Aberdeen Hill is unstable now and there is an underground water problem and issues already how can we be sure these problems will not increase with the shockwaves going through the ground?
Have they done any studies of dust at Highland Valley Copper another open pit mine close by and subjected to high winds, maybe not the heat we get but close?

After attending the open house I found it very interesting that one of the ranchers Mr. Strand? seemed to be asking some really good questions quizzing the "experts"  about the land and water supply. There seemed to be quite a few occasions he would ask questions and they would have puzzled looks on their faces.  This worries me when the so called "experts" cant answer questions by the locals. 

I have multiple concerns with traffic, dust, loss of grasslands, riparian impacts etc. that I have little faith that mitigation will alleviate.

My major concern is with the huge tailings pile between two highways that will be a terrible eyesore and major source of dust through our valley.  Please make us a model so the people of Kamloops can see what is really planned for this major entry to our city.  The only reason Ajax hasn't made one yet is that they know the response it will get. 

I am an 18-year Kamloops Aberdeen resident and have the following comments regarding the Ajax Mine proposal:

(1) With regard to negative social and health impacts, the assessment needs to strongly consider the fact that the proposed project is heavy industrial and will encroach on an existing fifteen to twenty year established neighborhood. The neighborhood is NOT encroaching on an existing industrial facility, and this is a very important distinction.

(2) With regard to dust, noise, and vibration at levels less than those considered necessary to produce direct chronic health effects, these nuisance emissions, if permitted, can increase anxiety and stress in individuals leading to ill health effects. For instance, an individual may become quite upset having to listen to back ground noise from heavy equipment operating in the distance while sitting in his back yard where prior to the project no such noise existed. The noise is low in decibal reading and has no direct health concern, but this individual is agrivated by the change and his lack of power to stop or reduce it. Consideration of this type of low level intrusion on people's health and well being needs to be evaluated and considered.

(3) With respect to waste rock storage piles, no piles should be visible from any point in the Aberdeen neighborhood. Property owners did not purchase their homes in Aberdeen to view industrial waste. Certainly if the piles are visible, excessive dust and noise will encroach on the neighborhood as well regardless of promised controls.

(4) With respect to the ground water evaluation, a comprehensive review of potential negative impacts and probabilities needs to be determined to ensure the Aberdeen ground water situation is not altered and worsened. The ground stability in the Van Horne area is maintained stable only with constant removal of ground water via pumps. The proposed mine sits upslope from Aberdeen and its construction (structures, pit, ponds) and operation (blasting) can not be allowed to negatively alter the ground water situation in Aberdeen.

(5) An evaluation of the social, environmental, economic, and health impacts should be performed if the mine closure plan is not executed as a result of the corporation becoming insolvent. What legacy will the community have to live with? There is a significant legacy of abandoned mine properties across this nation with ongoing negative impacts to the environment. This cannot be allowed to occur here.

Thank you for your consideration.

February 12, 2012

If this project can operate within scientific standards for dust levels, noise levels, vibration standards, and air quality, it should be allowed to go forward, with scientific monitoring by Provincial regulatory bodies. 

My only concern would the proximity to Jacko Lake and the impact on  fish habitat & sport fishing.

February 11, 2012

Members of my family have been diagnosed with allergies to dust. We live in the Aberdeen area. What is the exact projection of anticipated increase to atmospheric dust if the mine is approved? 
If this mine was in operation before we purchased our home in Kamloops, we would not have bought it. 
Will we now be forced to relocate? If so, how does this seem fair?

I attended the information session held here in Kamloops on Feb 7th, 2012.   Many of the my concerns have already been raised but it is very clear that whether you are for or against having the Ajax Mine the need for an independent panel review is essential.   Why?   As it stands right now most Kamloops residents feel that we have no say in whether the mine is approved or not.  I constantly here the comment "the decision has already been made".   Ultimately, it is a political decision made by a federal minister at a time when the Conservatives will have a majority government & have already stated that they want to open up Canada to more resource industry.
It is unprecedented to have an open pit mine withing city limits.
Over the past few years Kamloops has been positioning itself as a toursim & retirement destination.   We need to be able to decide what we want to be known for.

I am in favour of the Ajax Mine providing the following concerns are addressed:  The ore truck route must not include the Lac Le Juene roadway, rather the preferred route should be directly west along side Inks Lake to the Coquihalla Highway. Secondly,a guarantee that there won't be any leeching of contaminants into Jocko Lake. Finally, an action plan from KGHM outlining how they will respect our environment once they are in production.

First off, I'd like to say that I have no objections to mining. My objections and concerns are with the proximity of this proposed mine to the city of Kamloops, particularily the Aberdeen neighbourhood. Here is a list of concerns:

1. Aberdeen is known for it's slope stability issues. There are areas that are "red-zoned" and construction is not allowed. How can a mine with daily blasting guarantee that there will be no structural damage to houses and/or landscapes during the mine's life or long after?

2. Aberdeen is known for it's ever-changing pattern of ground water flows. The city has constructed a network of underground pipes and a system of pumps to control the ground water. What kind of effect will the mine cause by manipulating the flow of Peterson Creek and disturbing the ground water through the excavation of a pit by means of "controlled" explosions? 

3. The City of Kamloops has tremendous growth plans for the Aberdeen neighbourhood. Infrastructure is already in place and much of the taxpayers dollars have already been spent. The city has planned for future expansion by: installing pipelines and pumping stations from our state of the art water treatment facility to serve the present and future areas of Aberdeen. A Fire hall has already been built at the top of Aberdeen to serve the ever growing community that has been proposed for the area. What kind of effect on housing sales and future development will a mine have? Keep in mind that the mine will be a 5 minute walk from this area.  If this neighbourhood is no longer capable of supporting future growth, what is the cost going to be to rebuild the infrastructure (water pipes, firehall, schools) to a more develop-able area (such as Bachelor Heights).

4. The City of Kamloops has made it clear that their opinion matters naught. They (Mayor and Councillors) say the decision is out of their hands and that the decision lies with the provincial and federal government. If a referendum were held and the majority of residents were opposed to the mine, what kind of bearing would this have on the provincial and federal governments decision?

5. Jocko Lake is a jewel that is well known for it's fishing. If there is even a 1% chance of this lake being lost due to contamination or leakage what is the value you can put on the loss of it? It is irreplaceable once it is gone! Yes, there are many other lakes that surround Kamloops but that is what makes this city such a great place to live in. Just because we have so many lakes does not mean we won't miss even one of them. You have 10 fingers on your hand; would that mean you wouldn't miss one of them if it was gone forever?

6. Kamloops has re branded itself as the Tournament Capital of Canada. It has won numerous national "Communities in Bloom" awards. It has completed a masterful "Move to Kamloops" campaign that targeted families from across BC and Alberta to "Move to Kamloops". The incentives to attract families to move here were; living in a healthy, active and vibrant community. The "big sell" was a community just large enough to provide all of the good things in life but just small enough to avoid the negatives of larger community (traffic congestion, long line ups, long wait-lists, etc. Fishing, golfing, horseback riding, world class facilities, mountain biking, skiing were all promoted and successfully branded as being what Kamloops was all about. What was the cost of these promotions and what will be the repercussions to once again being branded as a mining town. 

7.  The mine claims it will only draw 0.2% of the water in Kamloops Lake for it's proposed project. How much exactly is 0.2% in gallons. What effect will this have on the lake and the fish habitat it supports? What effect will this have during the summer when the river levels run low? What effect will this have on the recreation the river supports? What kind of effect will this have on the world famous Adams River Sockeye salmon run?

8. Air Quality - dust? potential toxins? 

9. Water Quality - contaminated ground water? 

We should be preserving this natural grassland habitat for future generations of humans and wildlife NOT destroying it for a very short term gain which may prove economically to be no gain at all.

February 10, 2012

Personal Information Withheld

Personal Information Withheld

Personal Information Withheld

As an Aberdeen resident, I have many concerns about the proposed Ajax mine; however, many of my concerns have already been brought up by other commenters.  Instead of covering the same ground, I would like to identify some less talked about problems that I believe the environmental review should cover.

1. Noise: Most discussion related to noise has been about blasting.  I believe a more comprehensive look into noise production is needed.  The noise level for each phase of the project should be quantified.  This should consider noise from crushers, conveyer belts, haul trucks (including reverse warning alarm), etc.  It should be determined if factors, such as weather, could affect the distance noise from the mine would travel.

2. Air blast: I understand that detonating explosives can cause an air blast effect, as well as ground vibration.  It should be determined which areas of Kamloops could be affected by air blast, what variables could increase air blast, and whether air blast could cause property damage or negative health effects.

3. Economic Costs: There is much talk about potential economic benefits of Ajax and little discussion about potential costs.  This issue should be explored further.  I would suggest that potential costs could include:

a. The cost to property owners from declining home values;  b. The cost of preparing new areas for population growth, including upgrading of infrastructure, if the southwest sector of Kamloops became less desirable;  c. The cost to the taxpayer and others of any subsidies or preferred rates enjoyed by Ajax, including a reduced BC Hydro rate;  d. The cost to the City and local merchants if tourism decreased;  e. The impact of losing grazing area;  f. The impact of losing Jacko Lake as a viable fishing lake;  g. The cost of reclamation if the bond posted by Ajax is insufficient; and  h. The cost of clean-up, should contamination occur.

I understand that these may be difficult to quantify because many of the costs involve assumptions.  However, I would note that the economic benefits of Ajax also involve assumptions, such as the continued strong price of copper.  Regardless, potential costs need to be factored in to any economic analysis of the project.

The proposed Ajax mine is not considering where future growth will eventually be in relation to the mine.  The Offical Community Plan for Kamloops calls for 1200 more residential units to be built closer to the mine than where current development is now.  Studies need to take this into account and not based on where development currenly is.  This land is required to support future growth of the City as all infrastructure for water/sewer etc is sized to accomadte this growth.  If this growth is to now be imapcted where will development now have to occur?  The answer is it will have to go into another area of the City that will require milions of dollars to put the infrastructure in place thus impacting every citizen in Kamloops and the Province to provide funding to accomadate these requirements.  Furtherat the public form I spoke to 2 representatives who were not even aware of the OCP growth management area as they say they have not seen this material yet??? I find it strange that they are not showing the full picture to public.  Please look at his as the Rock Pits are way too close to the furure growth areas. Please find the attached link that shows the growth management boundary that should be incuded in your assessment.

http://www.kamloops.ca/communityplanning/aberdeen.shtml


thanks

February 9, 2012

After attending the Open House, I was disappointed with the lack of personnel with more indepth information.
1.Traffic on the Lac Le Jeune road will be impacted greatly with the number of ore trucks travelling 24/7.  When questioned, there seemed to be confusion on the route these ore trucks will use.  If connected directly to the Coquihalla it would lessen the number of ore trucks and leave the passenger vehicles which would be a better solution.
2.All  the existing structures,within the Regional Study Area as stated in "noise and vibration study Figure 10.3-1 need to be inspected by an Independant home inspector,to document a baseline for future problems from the vibration.  
3.Baseline studies must be done on surrounding hayfields and pastures in order to have documentation in the event of pollution from dust drift, or leaching from the tailings storage area.
4.The spread of noxious weeds is a huge concern, for once the topsoil is distrubed and vehicles travel all over, the weeds spread easily, and it takes years to to repair the damage.
5.With the dislocation of the resident wilflife such as Mule and Whitetail deer, what measures have the mine put into place to mitigate this problem.
6.What is the reclamation schedule of the Tailings area and waste dump?  These areas need stewardship for up to 20 years after the pit is closed, for this is a semi-arid climate and vegatation takes a long time to get established.
7.There needs to be a "Conflict Management" procedure in place if problems arise.  It is very worrying that we are dealing with one set of people and in a short while, we will have new owners and mine personnel.  The Community Advisment Committee is a start, but even that group will need an avenue to follow.
8.Baseline studies on the health of the livestock being raised for human consuption must be done.  This needs to include fertility, weaning weights of calves, rate of gain,and the safe levels of heavy metals in the meat.
9.The most startling thing at the Open House was that the same question asked to the three main departments-Federal,Provicial, and the Proposed Mine manager resulted in three seperate answers and in some cases completly opposite from one another..  It does keep one awake at night wondering what is going on.  

Ajax Mine and NuGold will be sharing a common intake pipeline for water out of Kamloops Lake. Will the water level in Kamloops Lake drop because of the amount of water required for these two mines? How will this effect the salmon runs? How are the trucks that haul the ore being fuelled? Do they have a catchment area to fuel or will they be doing this on the run? There is a existing Kinder Morgan Pipeline how will the blasting and vibration affect the integrity of this pipeline?

I have several concerns;
 1) The difference in heights of land at the watershed between the Cherry Creek drainage and the Peterson Creek drainage is not that substantial at the proposed site of the tailings pond. Failure of the berm or containment on this could affect the waters in Peterson Creek and thus the central part of the City of Kamloops. It would also affect the aesthetics of the Peterson Creek trails and the water quality in the S. Thompson River, a salmon river. 
 2) The proposed East Waste Rock pile, and the rock crushers are very close to the upper developments of the Aberdeen area of Kamloops. As well as negative aesthetic effects, these   will lead to noise and dust (from blasting, mine traffic and crushing) negatively affecting further housing development in that area. The City of Kamloops already suffers from a shortage of suitable housing development land. The mine developers  suggest water trucks as a method of dust control. This will be difficult with the heat of a Kamloops summer.
 3)In addition, weathering  and oxidation of residual sulfide ore in waste pile and tailings will form sulfur oxides/sulfuric acid, with further environmental effects on the Aberdeen area and further afield. Concerns about noise from blasting and very bright lights on site. 4) The proposed tailings pond is close to both the Coquihalla Highway and Lac Le Jeune Road.

I am all for the mine going ahead, and I think I speak for the silent majority.Most of the people that I have spoken with, are all for the mine but do not wish to get involved. The ones that I have spoken to that are against the mine, seem to be the same ones that oppose everything, or have been fear mongered by others.
I feel that the direct economic benefits for the kamloops region far out way, the minor inconvenience that people will experience with the increased traffic.
The indirect benefits for all the trades and local buisness will be of great benefit  As long as all the water and dust issues have been addressed, and the local farmers issues have beem met.

The social and economic effects assessment methods identified in the Proposed Ajax Mine booklet include the processes of interviews and public consultation.  There should be some guidelines regarding the selection of persons interviewed and involved in consultation meetings.  It would be relatively easy to "stack the deck" as it were depending on who is selected for the interviews and consultation meetings.  For example, the largest population concentration in Kamloops is now the southwest sector but will it be involved in the qualitative data gathering to the extent that the concentration of their numbers warrants?  Will the Labour Council be among those consulted in the Economic assessment?  Who are the "key persons" who are apparently the only ones to be interviewed for the social assessment?  I think there should also be a requirement to do an assessment of the quality of life in the communities of Timmins, Sudbury and Val d'Or (the communities Ajax mentioned in their brochure as examples of communities with mines within their boundaries.  Apparently there are ways to do this as we see ratings of cities across the country related to their quality of life.  That assessment should be compared to the present assessment of quality of life in Kamloops at the present time.

February 8, 2012

I have significant concerns regarding the proposed Ajax Mine. These include but are not limited to:
-Health issues especially from dust
-Impact to water, run off, etc especially Peterson Creek and Jacko Lake  -Damage to sensitive grass lands and an ecosystem  -Visual impact, especially of the ten story slag heap  -Impact of Noise, vibration,light to nearby community  -Impact on highways from increased heavy trucks  -Property values, already evident that the desirable area of Kamloops has changed  -Change of the community identity/image and resulting losses to tourism and outdoor industries. 
-Difficulties attracting professionals and other business to the area  -A company with poor environmental protection history and a province with even worse control or concern of infractions by large corporations, should make anyone nervous.

Kamloops is my home by choice. Although I thought this would be my retirement home, I now am preparing for the inevitable and looking elsewhere, but this area will be changed for generations, there is no going back. 
Mines this size do not make good neigbours, plain and simple.

I attended the public comment and display at the Coast Hotel with my glossy book in hand sent out by KGHM/Ajax to Subscribers of the Kamloops Daily News ONLY .  On entering the room I see a nice big map of the mine footprint, the same one that is in my glossy book. No distant measurements or CITY BOUNDARY (if it was present not very distinct). I also have the large ringed DAIR binder with the maps in the back, the first one 2-2-1 also has the mine footprint however with the processing plant and ore stockpiles (this may change First impression though) added in a much larger scale and appears in this map even closer to Aberdeen than the glossy book map shows.  The map with the distances (glossy handbook) has one measurement from the top of the pit at 2.3 km from Aberdeen. The ore stockpiles they have drawn in come to 'very close to Aberdeen' WHY can they not put this distance in! On questioning the mine Gentlemen we find the glossy book map and the map at the entrance to the display room is what the mine will look like at the end of it's 23 year mine life. (Well, who would have guessed that.) Absolutely, no indication of this (on the first day, there was discussion they may label the display map 'with after 23 years' but obviously can not tell every newspaper subscriber)  and with the average age of the Mine Officials, Government People and the Public in attendance let's be honest MOST of them will not be here in 23 years, we really only care what KGHM mine will look like in progressive years to the capacity years.  Our children might however there were no children present. One more point on the 'Glossy book' received by 'not every City or TNRD resident' the description of location on the back inside cover is once again 'NEAR the CITY of KAMLOOPS' not within the city or 2.3 km (the closest distance they give but we know it will be closer) to Aberdeen, Pacific Way Elementary and Pine View Valley.

The Provincial and Federal Governments have to start asking some very detailed and serious questions of this Mine Group and receive straight forward answers on even the simpliest detail.  If KGHM /Ajax are afraid to disclose the above details and proper location how can we believe them on more SERIOUS details such as the Blasting, Dust control, protecting Jacko Lake and all the other MAJOR problems associated with this mine. How will we know the TRUTH?

Questions for the Environmental  Open House
1.   Most of Aberdeen is on a slide are protected by wells and pumps 24 hours a day with a back up generator system.  I f ground water is coming from higher up from Peterson Creek or Jacko Lake , what will happen when Ajax starts blasting and running heavy equipment? Will it chane the ground water direction and cause a slide not the mention the extra water from Kamloops Lake. 
2.   In Ajax’s report it says the mine will construct a barrier to protect the Kinder Morgan Pipeline and to protect Jacko Lake from debris. Since the lake is beside the pit, how is Ajax going to keep Jacko from flowing into the pit?
3.   The wind usually blows fairly strong in the summer from the south east, how is the mine going to keep the toxic dust from entering the city? I would like to know the proposed levels of dust and what chemicals would be in the dust?
4.   Ajax says there will be no cyanide or mercury used to separate the ore, and then what will they use instead?
5.   When the blasting starts how often and what times of the day will the blasting take place? 
6.   What will be done to monitor the air in Kamloops and specially areas close to the mine?
7.   What will the noise levels be in Aberdeen and other areas close to the mine?
8.   How far away will vibration be felt and who will pay for any possible damage to homes?
9.   Where will the power line come through and will there be in health issues considering it will be close to homes?  What studies have or will be conducted?
10.  What level of light can we expect in Aberdeen, Knutsford, or Pine Valley? 
11.  Will tailings piles extend past the height of the hills, and will there be lost daylight or sunlight to areas? If there is leaching from the tailings pond is there the potential for acid rain?
12.  What will be done to monitor the air quality in surrounding area? How often and where?
13.  What changes will b e made to Lac Le Jeune Road to accommodate the large haul trucks and trucks going to Vancouver? What will be the routes, and who will pay for any changes?
14.  What arrangements will be made for fire protection in case of fire with aa south west wind blowing toward the city most of the time? Who will pay the costs?
15.  Ajax has stated property values won’t be affected in areas closer to the mine, what information do you have to support this comment? 
16.  What will happen to the rock waste when its piled up and it lets off many chemicals not healthy to the general public?  Will you cover the piles as you go along because of the east winds blowing over Kamloops?
17.  The water being pumped out of Kamloops Lake will have how big of an effect on the Thompson River specifically on lowering the water levels and the risk to the fish? How much water does the mine plan on using on a daily basis?
18.  When the mine is closing up the pit will be filled with water, with the weight of the water in the pit plus waste rock in two piles and tailings pond. What affect will this have on the ground water problem in Aberdeen as there will be twice the ground pressure?
19.  Who will pay for the changes to infrastructure planning and expenditures for growth in the Aberdeen area? Growth will be changed to other areas because of the mine and therefore there will be extra costs to taxpayers.
20.  What health issues will results from this mine being so close to residential homes? What tests have been done to dispute this concern?

I am a concerned citizen that has lived in Kamloops for many years. I believe the mine is too close to the city and will affect everyone’s quality of life.  There are far too many unanswered questions and I would be very happy to see Ajax leave and go look for another area to destroy.

In relation to my last post, why wouldn't the Ajax proponent be required to fund an independent study of wind, humidity and particulate levels, to serve as a baseline, BEFORE being given the go-ahead for this project ?
For example, rows of anenometers could be installed along the ridge, near the mine site and along the tops of the hills, just South of the city. Humidity levels could also be monitored at these locations. The dust content of the air, within the city, could also be monitored and time-stamped so it could be related to the other data.
This way, scientific information would be gathered BEFORE mining activities begin. Continued monitoring, after the proposed mine begins operations, would allow the impact, on dust levels and the particle sizes, to be ascertained. A year, or more, of monitoring would probably be sufficient to see what impact the mine would have.
Then, coupled with the epidemiological study, some definitive conclusions could be made.

Winds are complex in hilly terrain but the Canadian Wind Atlas suggests that there is a high probability of winds blowing from the South-West in the Kamloops area. As those air masses are forced upward, by the hills, lying to South of Kamloops, where the proposed mine would be built, they will increase in speed -this is called Bernoulli's Principle. Hence, the ability of those winds to pick up, and transport small particles will increase. As the winds come over the hills, they will diminish in speed -again, this is Bernoulli at work. Just as the high speed winds are able to pick up particles, those same air masses, now burdened with particulate, will slow down once they get over the hills, and allow the suspended particulate to fall. Of course, this particulate matter will fall right into the populated area of Kamloops.
Kamloops is noted for its semi-desert, and very dry, climate. This means that there are fewer droplets of water vapour, in the air, to which dust particles might cling and, eventually become heavy enough to fall out of suspension in the air. Dry places have the potential to become dusty places. Add, to that, the effects of the wind, both in direction and speed, and this suggests that Kamloops will become a very dusty place, should this mine go ahead.
The phenomenon of airborne dust has occurred before in Kamloops. Once excavation removed the vegetative cover while development was occurring, both at Sun Rivers and in the South-West corner around Wall Mart and Home Depot, significant quantities of dust really altered the air in Kamloops. As a photographer, I observed this.

There will be an array of extremely small sized particles, produced at this mine, should it move ahead. The constant explosions will not only break a portion of the rock into ultra-fine particles but they will propel them upward, right into the wind stream. 
Extremely fine dust, down to 25 microns and less, produced by excavation and milling, will also be present and it will be amply available for transport by the wind. 
There will be heavy metal particles, like arsenic, cadmium and even some radioactive elements entering the wind stream because those minerals are present in the deposit. It is impossible to discriminate between what will enter the atmosphere and what will not.
Combustion products from the blasting will also enter the wind stream.

I don't pretend to be well versed in medical research. However, I have been told that particulate, called P10 and smaller -10 microns and less- can enter the lungs, lodge there and ultimately become a cause of cancer. I believe that Ajax will pose a serious health concern to the residents of Kamloops and that there is no way of mitigating this.
I have to remind myself that this project will operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week, for over twenty years. Fine dust could become a feature of living in Kamloops. I also have to remind myself that there have been open pit mines built near populated areas, elsewhere in Canada. I'm originally from Quebec. The cases of Black Lake, Thetford Mines and Asbestos come to mind. Although any epidemiological information from such areas would be interesting, I doubt that there is any case of an open pit mine, near a populated area with the unfortunate combination of prevailing wind direction and speed, topography, plus the ultra low humidity, as there is in Kamloops. 
The proposed Ajax mine would be unique, given the above factors. I would hope that, for those same reasons, it will be turned down.

February 7, 2012

I am concerned about the proposed Tailings Storage Facility. Many people use this area around inks lake road and inks lake for recreational uses. People play hockey on inks lake in the winter, paintball, motocross, run their pets not to mention the agricultural use from livestock.  The proposed process water storage and tailings storage would have a great impact on this. Since most of this area is crown land I think the mine should be required to set aside some land and develop it into a public recreation space of some kind. Since access will be affected to the existing areas. It seems like more public use land gets lost to commercial development.

Also the potential for Jocko lake to leak water into the Ajax pit seems quite high. That being said it seems like a very high price to pay to destroy a vital trophy fishing lake. Not to mention the possible effects on the water licensees. 

With the large noise factor of the machinery and the mill we have been told that we wont hear the noise from the mine operation being so close to Aberdeen.  I personally feel this mine is too close to the city and subdivision of Aberdeen.

I have been practiced as a specialist in Internal Medicine in Kamloops for 25 years. I don't forsee significant health problems from the Ajax project. The location against the south side of the hill plus the depth of the mine as it progresses should prevent much of the dust from reaching the city. We did not experience obvious dust from any of the previous mining actviity in the area. I think the effect on patients with respiraory problems will be limited but certainly support close ongoing monitoring of air quality.

I have lived in the Kamloops area for the past 30 years.  I ALMOST did not move here because I did not want to raise my family in a pulp mill town, having concerns about the air quality, other environmental issues related to pulp mills and as shallow as it may sound - the aesthetics ..........ugliniess associated with the industry. Over the years, people have made comments like "mmmm... that's the smell of money Donna, get over it". I haven't gotten over it and although the smell has improved, it still reeks on a bad day and I wish that I lived elsewhere. Many people have chosen not to live here because we are a mill town and I believe that even more will choose not to live in Kamloops if it is a mill and mining city, with the Ajax Mine being the only one in all of Canada as close to the city. Ajax Mine is making a lot of promises for further research, assessment, monitering and so on, but I attended the informational meeting the other night and it seemed that this mine is a done deal and that when it does become an ugly, loud, disruptive, polluting, energy hog of an industry, we will be left wondering why our government did not value our city and its' residents concerns enough to insist on a major environmental review of the Ajax Mine.

1 There is a covenant on my deed that my property is on unstable soil, and that I can't sue the city for any damage related to the instability. What assurance or protections do I have related to destablization of my property from the blasting vibrations, or the water management by the mine? The brochure simply states that the blast vibration in tests meets North American municipal standards. That doesn't sound good enough for Kamloops special case. 

2 Are there examples of large open pit mines within cities in similar geography and rock and climate to Kamloops. The cities mentioned in the brochure were all located in the hard rock Canadian Shield, and in less dry climate?

3 Will Inks lake bottom be sealed to prevent seapage of contaminants into ground water? 

4 How will the Cherry Creek and Peterson Creek watersheds be managed and their flora and fauna protected?

5 Will the recreation benefits of Jacko Lake be preserved?

6 Kamloops is vulnerable to temperature inversions trapping air contaminants for substantial periods of time. Dust, especially in our dry climate would cause severe problems. The brochure indicated a very early stage of planning dust control. Without absolute control of dust, our long term very successful Tournament Capital promotion would be jeopardized. That would be very damaging to the large dependancy of our motels and hotels. 

7 Our airport is vulnerable to fog during temperature inversions, especially in winter. Uncontrolled dust would seed fog indirectly jeopardizing the Sun Peaks economy with airport closures. 

8 Kamloops previous experience with a large industry within the city. I planned to move here shortly after the pulp mill was established. The air quality was so terrible that I quickly changed my mind. It was years before the air quality problem was rectified and eventually I moved here. Though the mill provided  good paying jobs, the overall effect stunted Kamloops development and the overall economy. Promoting the city as the Tournament Capital has done a lot to rectify the damage. Kamloops cannot risk the damage with another poorly researched environment review. The dust and other environment problems must be absolutely resolved before approval of the mine.

9 Is there a neutral review of the KGHM track record of other international projects outside of Poland. How good is their labour relations. I can't help thinking about Vale who took over the mines in Sudbury and have locked out employees for the last year. 

10 The mine approval must be based on the holistic good of our community. Short term money should be secondary to our health, and preserving the present economy. A project more complimentary with the Tournament  Capital promotion would be preferable.

I spent an hour (wish I had more time) speaking with several representatives of Ajax. I can't say that questions were answered very directly. Of course they all suggested all aspects will be throughly explored. However, specific questions were not answered directly. As an example, a farmer that has nearby land was asking about the effect on the water table the tailings pile will have on surrounding land. The representative could not answer the question and deflected to say someone else would know that. Personally, I think Ajax is in Kamloops to give the appearance that they will do a great job on making sure all aspects will be well researched-but according to who?
Personally, my concern is how Kamloops as a city, will be effected. I live in Kamloops for the recreational opportunities that are afforded all year round. I use the Lac Le Jeune road at least twice a month, all year round, to go fishing, kayaking, motorbiking, hiking and generally, to enjoy the beauty of the grasslands. I fear the mine will take that away, the reason I live in Kamloops. As I live at the top of Aberdeen, I am concerned how the mine will affect me personally. Unfortunately, if the mine goes through, I have lost one of the best recreational areas for me.
I will consider moving from Kamloops to find the tranquility that Kamloops now offers.
I realize Ajax will bring economic opportunities, but at my stage of life, I'm not concerned with that. I am close to retirement and am now looking for a peaceful place to call home.

I`m all for the Ajax mine project, would be the best thing to happen for Kamloops period !

1.  Is there any way to quantify or predict what academic and research studies benefitting mining, processing, material handling, eco-studies, etc. for TRU and other institutions might result from the mine operating?
2.  Could we develop a new way of fracturing rock through studies alluded to above that would be vibrationless?
3.  Are there potential economic uses for the waste rock?  IE landscaping, countertops, etc.?
4.  Can we use the resulting hole for something useful (ie landfill, etc.)?
5.  What are the possible advantages of having a mine so close to a city?  Challenges sometimes become opportunities...  Is it easier to monitor the operation because its so close?
6.  Can we do any theorhetical studies showing what might happen if we wait for a better economic cycle before mining the deposit?
7.  What are the risk/reward stats for other deposits, costs, etc.?

I understand that the North Waste Rock pit will be 140 metres high and is 1.5 km from the Pineview Valley area which is 60 metres high.  My concern is, will my Pineview neighbourhood have this waste rock in plain sight?  And how will you minimize the impact of having this ugly mess in plain view?

I also understand that the Tailings Storage pit will be 150 metres high and it is adjacent to the Coquilhalla Highway, and therefre this ugly mess will also be 'in your face'.  My concern is how will you be minimizing this ugly mess from plain view?

As part of the assessment process I would like to see conceptual drawings of how the new improved views of both the North Waste Rock pit and the Tailings Storgae pit will look like after corrective action has been taken.  It would be nice if these conceptual drawings were poster size and of high quality so that we don't have to guess about these things rather than depend on the razzle dazzle of electronic presentations.

Thanks and I look for to your positive response.

I have 35 years of mining experience and have worked both hourly and staff. Highland Valley Copper rock dumps that are retired now stand in a foot of alfalfa. The tailings dams that are no longer used are full of healthy fish. The water from Kemess tailings dam was cleaner then the water running down from the mountain run off. Dust control is a lot better then Kamloops City Dump. With 400 possible jobs and then the spin off jobs would help a lot of the unemployed in Kamloops.
I realize this would stop the housing tracks from continuing to be built in that area, but theres lots of room else where.

I would like the following examined or considered and also reported on by the proponent during the EA process.

1.   What is the expected time period before the areas disturbed by rock piles, tailings ponds, etc,  are able to sustain existing native vegetation (grasslands or forests)? And what will the mining proponent do to aid the rehabilitation or restoration processes?
2.   The true economic costs and benefits (especially long-term) of having a mine that is highly visible to the Coquihalla highway and within 2 kms of Kamloops city. Such economic factors would include: effects on tourism, effects on potential retirement income, effects on fishing and its economic return.
3.   The success that all models used in the proposed evaluation process (particularly air quality and slope stability and blasting) have had in previous mining scenarios should be included. For example, if a model has been used before, how successful was it in predicting the outcomes. And if the models have not been evaluated against other real situations, how can they be trusted.
4.   A complete visual evaluation should be part of the process, using well accepted landscape models and techniques.
5.   A complete literature review should support all evaluation processes, i.e., all evaluation processes should be scientifically justified.
6.   All similar scenarios where a mine has been situated close to a city and the outcomes should be examined. For example, Butte Montana has an old mine on or within its boundaries. What have been positive and negative outcomes of that mine?

What consideration has been or will be given to developing this mine using traditional underground techniques as opposed to open pit exploitation with the accompaning negative effects on grassland, esthetics, dust polution etc.?

 Questions for the KGHM Ajax Mining Inc. 
 Submitted February 7th 2012
 
 Submitted by: Aberdeen resident, living less than 2 km from the proposed mine site.

For the purpose of being entirely clear, when I use “you” I mean KGHM Ajax Mining Inc.

1. What percentage of projects like Ajax have reached the environmental review stage and been turned down?  What are the names of these projects and what were the reasons for their refusal?

2. Though you plan to use both magnesium chloride and calcium chloride mixed with water to act as binding agents to keep dust down, there will be a certain amount of dust that you will be unable to prevent.  If you lived in Kamloops, you would know the kind of wind that runs short of a hurricane through here - and often!  It is impossible to believe that the dust from the rocks and metals that are blasted and crushed, as well as the particulates from the explosive, “ANFO” will ALWAYS be kept from the air.  How does ANFO particulates, affect lung health?  

3. Following your test blast, did you study the contents of the resulting dust particles?  If yes, what were the chemical and metal components of this dust?

4. You state that “there will be no cyanide or mercury used on the Ajax site or produced as a by-product of any part of the Ajax mining or concentrate-producing process.”  Cyanide would be a concern in gold processing, but you are claiming that this will not be used.  As for mercury, a metal that is found "where rock of high density are forced to the crust of the Earth, often in hot springs or other volcanic regions" (Wikipedia) this metal could be naturally occurring in the area of the proposed Ajax mine site.  I know this because of the way that the development of the copper and gold deposit was described to me as being created through a volcanic upsurgence  from under the earth's crust at that location.  I was told this by Brendan whom I met at the February 6th meeting in the Convention Center on Rogers Way in Kamloops.  I would like to know, is there naturally occurring mercury in the ground?  Thank you for setting our minds at ease about cyanide and mercury use, can you list all of the naturally occurring metals/chemicals that will become airborne as a result of blasting and crushing?

5. If you can answer yes to number 4, will you list all of these metals/chemicals and their possible ill effects on health, so that everyone can read about it?  

6.  Should you be unable to capture all the airborne particulates with the spraying of your combined water, magnesium chloride and calcium chloride, can Ajax mine guarantee that people will not become sick?

7. If people become sick, is Ajax mine prepared to pay compensations for those who are afflicted?  Note - no amount of money can ever undo the effect of ill health in the lives of people.   

8. Will you pay compensation to people for losses on their real estate in the event that they wish to move house in order to not live within 2 km of a mine?

9. Starting a mine within 2 km of peoples’ homes, is a little like asking people to sit in the “non-smoking section” of a restaurant.  Do you remember the days of “smoking sections” and “non-smoking sections” in restaurants?  Eventually, it was decided that if there was any smoking inside of a building, the second hand smoke was harmful to everyone (yes, even to the smokers!).  

Twenty years from now, it may be decided that despite all of the good practices put into place, the mine has caused illness in people.  At this time, it will be too late to reverse the ill effects on peoples’ health.  If people do not wish to be a part of the experiment, to see if the mine will or will not hurt their health, will you compensate them for having no choice about the mine arriving at their doorstep?

Let me explain what I mean:    

A smoker might feel that he/she has lost his/her right to smoke; however, sitting in a building where anyone is smoking, takes away a non-smoker’s right to fresh air.  Workmen’s Compensation decided that restaurant servers should have a right to fresh air while they work, and thus, the right to avoid the lung ailments, like cancer, that can come from breathing second hand smoke for years and years.  If KGHM gains its right to have a mine here, I lose my right to know that there will be no possible ill effects of mining on the health of my family.  When we moved here, we did not plan to live next to a mine, we have one income and two small children.  We cannot afford to move; yet, in order to NOT be a part of the experiment on peoples’ health, we will move.  
Can you help us with our moving costs?      

10. When Abacus and KGHM decided that the venture to build Ajax mine was “viable,” did they mean that by using the roadways that are already built, and by using the electrical grid, as well as the water and sewer systems that are already in place because of the city of Kamloops, it makes their job of setting up a mine really affordable (there will be enough profit vs. costs of setting up/running a mine)?

11. The infrastructure of Kamloops must make setting up a mine less costly.  Has KGHM looked for deposits of gold and copper farther away from Kamloops where they could pay to have roads, water, sewer and electricity made available to their mine?  My guess is that it would not be as affordable then, but if they are taking care of people, this is what they would do.  They would feel that it is unacceptable to use all that Kamloops has to offer, and take a risk that it could be harmful to the health of the people of Kamloops.  Can KGHM prove that there is no mining venture away from Kamloops (another mine site, say, as far away as Highland Valley Copper Mine) that they could do alternatively?

12. Will KGHM submit efforts they have made to find alternative gold and copper deposits and give their reasons for not mining farther away from Kamloops?  

13. Should the mine happen, will KGHM receive a subsidy from BC Hydro?
If yes, why?

14. Do Domtar and other industries in Kamloops also receive a Hydro subsidy? Regardless of this, shouldn’t KGHM have to pay full price for electricity?  If KGHM gets the use of our roads, our water, sewer and easy access to an established electrical grid, do they also need to have their costs cut by not having to pay full price for their electricity use?

15. KGHM has been shown to have poor environmental standards in Europe.  Recently in the Kamloops Daily News it has been written that there is less government money being put into the number of staff who continually check the standards of industries that say they plan to maintain the “highest of standards” for the environment and human health.  How can the people of Kamloops trust that KGHM will behave how they say they will, especially if the government will not have enough money to pay for staff to monitor and uphold the standards that are first promised?

16. If the profits don’t go as planned and KGHM decides to sell their interests in the mine to another company (a South American company, for example), who will make sure that the standards that have been promised will be upheld?

 The Lac Le Jeune highway is presently not a good road.  Steep,narrow potholes, icy and winding.  I understand there will be upwards of 400 to 500 employees in addition to subcontractors, delivery personnel etc accessing the mine every day.  My concern is that the secondary highway will be the likely access to the mine (unless it can be reconfigured to come off the Coquihalla).  We presently travel the road daily to and from town.  I am concerned that at certain parts of the day the risk of accidents (shift changes) will undoubtedly rise significantly.  I presume the majority of the employees will be coming from Kamloops. It seems to me that the road will have to be improved from below the Iron Mask subidivsion to at least the Inks lake overpass.  Widening and resurfacing at a minimum and some increased enforcement.  I don't see this as necessarily the domain of the mine but co-ordination with the city to ensure there is safe and secure access for everyone who will use the road.

Also, during construction I do not believe that the Lac Le Jeune road should be used to bring in heavy equipment, huge mining structures etc.  I would prefer access for these items to take place from the coquihalla.  

Noise:  Of course, I like everyone else has concerns about general mine noise such as scraping, diesel engines, grinding etc.  This would be a continuouse noise.  We moved to Lac Le Jeune to avoid the general "hum" of the city.  At Lac Le Jeune we usually hear no industrial noise other than the odd logging truck.  When I am trying to sleep at night I do not want to hear a thing.  I understand that there could be the odd noise, such as blasting that may be somewhat unavoidable but I do not want to hear any continuous noise.   I have heard that there will be a study for Kamloops (which is closer) but I would like Lac Le Jeune (which is a lot quieter) considered regarding this aspect. 

My concern is with the possibility of dust, groundwater pollution, noise, lights, road deterioration and earth tremors resulting from mine operations and the effects of these on the quality of human life, on fish habitat, and on other animal and plant life in the nearby area. I have been impressed by what I have learned about the efforts being made to avoid these problems, but would like to know of contingency plans in case some or all of these problems arise in spite of the efforts being made to avoid them. In particular, will the mine internalize the external costs, if any, of its operations or will it attempt to shift these costs onto others? For example, if it can be established in a court of law that nearby property values have been adversely affected by the operation of the mine, will the mine owners assume those costs, or will they attempt to shift them to the other property owners affected?

I am concerned about the impact the ajax mine could have on air quality as I have a child with asthma. If it impacts him in a negative way it would force us to move. Also at this time it is affecting property sales in our area because of the health concerns that have been voiced. For some this is a financial downfall that is already impacting families that cannot sell thier homes and move forward in thier lives. I do feel that you are asking the questions we all want answered and I thank you for that and it makes me feel better that there is due dilligence being taken. Thank you

I purchased my first home in the Aberdeen area at a time when KGHM/Ajax was widely advertising that the Ajax mine would be located 10km from Kamloops.  I now find that my home will be roughly 2km from the nearest waste rock pile and I have serious concerns about the effect that the mine will have on me and my family.

In this letter, rather than discussing my specific fears about the mine, I would like to identify my concerns about the approval, monitoring, and enforcement processes.

With regard to approval, I am aware that every project that has completed a comprehensive assessment review has been approved by the federal and provincial Ministers of the Environment.  This project is unprecedented and I would like to call on both the CEAA and the EAO to strongly recommend that their respective Ministers reject the Ajax project if it appears that Ajax may adversely affect the health or quality of life of Kamloops residents after mitigation measures are taken into account.

With regard to monitoring, I have read the July 2011 Auditor General’s report and I remain concerned that effective monitoring is not happening on projects that have completed environmental reviews.  I was able to speak to representatives of the CEAA and EAO at the recent open house about this issue.  I understand that the EAO is working with other departments to expand their capacity to monitor projects.  I also understand that requirements are often placed on proponents to monitor their own projects.  However, I do not like the idea of Ajax grading its own paper and I remain skeptical as to whether the EAO is able to provide adequate monitoring, given the location and description of the project.  Therefore, to supplement these measures, I would like suggest that Ajax be made to provide a large amount of money as a bond for further testing.  I would like the money to be used to hire independent experts to monitor all areas of significant concern, such as air quality, water quality, noise, slope stability in the Aberdeen area, vibration, etc.  To protect the population of Kamloops, monitoring and further testing should be done as often as is practicable.  I would also ask that the monitoring requirements be drafted in such a manner so that the obligations of the proponent are clearly identified. 

Finally, I have concerns related to the enforcement of requirements placed on Ajax, following the approval process.  I understand that typically with these projects, if the proponent begins breaching the requirements placed on it following the environmental assessment, then the EAO will enter a dialogue with the proponent.  If the proponent continues to break the rules, then it may face fines.  I would strongly suggest that if Ajax poses a health risk to the City of Kamloops or to its own workers, then a dialogue is not appropriate and it must be immediately shut down until the risk is alleviated. 

February 6, 2012

Bottom line is that we are smarter than this. We as human beings have evolved enough to understand the inherent risks and dangers we inflict upon our environment when we undertake projects such as these. There can be no comparison to mining projects of the past. 

Concerns to the Proposed Ajax Mine  1.Water licences in regards to Jocko Lake.  There a number of water users and any change in the level of the lake or flow of Peterson Creek will be very determental. ie users of water above the lake have to wait untill the level of the lake reaches a certain level,if for some reason the lake losses water from the vibration of the lasting--it leaves us in a hazardous postion.
The existing water wells both domestic and stock use in the surrounding area need to have a base line study done in case of any shift in water table or damage due to vibration.
The water quality in wells need to be tested so it can have a base line as well.
The traffic use on the Lac Le Jeune Road need to be studied in great detail for it has safty issues in both construction and weather related incidents.
RAnchers use this road to take cattle from one pasture to another, and this requires riders on horseback, pickup trucks,and generally will last 4-6 hours and the traffic is tied up, and delays do occur.  On our ranch,we pass cattle from one side of the road to the other many times through the year.  We have property on both sides,so that is a manegment tool and would be a hardship to have it hindered.

February 5, 2012

Why was KGHM described as the worst of the worst carbon polluters as posted in greebiz.com and many other news sources (google them and you will find them)  on April 11, 2011.  Other publications echoed this claim due to proven instances of non-disclosure – have you changed your corporate practices ?   Much of your literature to date has proven to be untrue-  ie. the distance from residential areas, a tailings “pond” which it is not”   Please comment

You state that the dust impact will be mitigated.  What percentage increase (versus the already marginal air quality we have now) will this cause ?  Please show us your study for us to review it.   Can you guarantee  it during the major windy nights we have  ?  If it's above your projection, what will you do to compensate our livelihood in this area – economic, health (short and long term) social (can we enjoy our parks, backyards, trails).
Will children like mine, with respiratory problems like asthma be affected in any way ?  What studies do you have to prove this – and if they do experience increased problems – either playing in their back yards, running on the soccer field or on the school yard at pacific way – what will you do to stop this immediately – and compensate us   ?

February 2, 2012

January 21, 2012

I am completely opposed to the proposed Ajax Mine Project to be located within the city of Kamloops.  My objections to the Ajax Mine proposal are as follows:
- the environmental hazards (well documented by the Kamloops Area Preservation Association)
- the blasting effects on the very unstable area in the Aberdeen Hills
- the effect on property assessments of nearby homes

I do not think that the numbers of jobs at the proposed Ajax Mine will be of value - since that number of jobs in tourism and related sectors will very likely be LOST when our beautiful city's environment is damaged by the effects of the mine.

There is NOTHING that will convince me that the Ajax Mine is a viable, valuable, wise or necessary project for the City of Kamloops.

January 20, 2012

Since the Ajax Mine IS partly within the City of Kamloops boundaries and TNRD areas before any more information is released by KGHM/Abacus we would like Mr. Chris Hamilton, the Provincial Enviroment Minister Mr.Terry Lake, the Federal Government, the Working Groups, the City of Kamloops and the TNRD to review firstly ALL of the circulated location descriptions and maps. Asking the following pertinent question of KGHM/Abacus mining group and requesting the Company Executives to immediately promise to the residents of Kamloops and outlying areas a written and released truthful answer: Why in all of their literature over the past many months NOT ONCE has KGHM/Ajax Mines disclosed an accurate and complete written location description or a FEATURED map of where the outer layout boundaries of the total mine footprint will be positioned? Even the last three releases the 'Project Booklet', 'Fact Sheet' or 'Corporate Presentation' on the Abacus website the location description is still not precise or complete. In various releases East/West are confused, 'close to the City of Kamloops', 'partly within the boundary of the city of Kamloops' and '10km from the City of Kamloops' at this stage is NOT acceptable or should be allowed to be printed and released to the general public. The detailed written location and map has to include and show the South border of the East Waste Rock dump will be the Goose Lake Road and blasting storage facilities further South on the Southside of Pederson Creek. The tailings pond will be between Lac Le Jeune Road and will be next to and be seen from the Coquihalla Hwy. The North Waste Rock dump will be approximately as close as 2 Km from (a generous distance to be fair) from residential houses in Aberdeen, a little further the neighborhood of Pineview Valley, the new firehall, at least one school and even closer to the newly permitted 'Dave Taylor'development. The mining company is not misleading the people who know the mine location with these descriptions only those that have not paid attention or come from outside of the Kamloops area not knowing intimately the exact and complete mine footprint or possibly the ones who have to eventually make decisions. The information booklet KGHM/Abacus is reportedly sending to Kamloops and area residents should be by mail so everyone receives the information has to include an up to date 2012 very detailed and accurate City and TNRD (at least Goose Lake Rd.) road map with the CITY boundary and Kamplan areas very visual and defined. This question has been asked before with no apparent description changes and will be brought forward again however if the location is never accurate how can we believe anything this mining company says or will do! Please insist feet(in brackets) be included for the heights of waste rock dumps, berms and the tailing pond enclosure and miles (in brackets) for distances.

January 15, 2012

We would like to express our disapproval towards this project due to proximity to the city limits of Kamloops.  Any mining project will contribute considerable to the local environment in a negative way.
Air, water, noise, etc.  We understand the financial benefit a mining project of this size can be to any community; it just should be so close to the community. Today that community belongs to over 80,000 people….  Kamloops, BC. 

January 12, 2012

January 11, 2012