donlin gold project - alaska department of natural...

FINALScoping Report August 2013 Submitted to:

US Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District

CEPOA-RD P.O. Box 6898 JBER, AK 99506-0898 Contact: Project Manager Don Kuhle [email protected] (907) 753-2780

Prepared by:

URS Alaska, LLC 3201 C Street, Suite 200 Anchorage, AK 99503 (907) 433-6700

Donlin Gold Project Environmental Impact Statement

Thispageintentionallyleftblank.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FINAL SCOPING REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS

AUGUST 2013 P a g e | i

TABLEOFCONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................1 1.1 ScopingOverview....................................................................................................................................1 1.2 ProjectOverview......................................................................................................................................1 1.3 PurposeoftheEnvironmentalImpactStatement......................................................................2

2.0 SCOPINGMETHODS................................................................................................................................5 2.1 ScopingActivities.....................................................................................................................................5 2.2 TribalCoordinationandGovernment‐to‐GovernmentConsultation.................................5 2.3 AgencyScopingMeeting.......................................................................................................................6 2.4 PublicScopingMeetings.......................................................................................................................7

3.0 NEXTSTEPSINTHEEISPROCESS...................................................................................................13 3.1 UtilizationofScopingComments....................................................................................................13 3.2 DevelopAlternatives............................................................................................................................13 3.3 StudyoftheAffectedEnvironment................................................................................................13 3.4 AssessEnvironmentalConsequencesofAlternatives............................................................13 3.5 IssuetheDraftEIS.................................................................................................................................13 3.6 IssuetheFinalEISandRecordofDecision.................................................................................14

4.0 SUMMARYOFCOMMENTSRECEIVED............................................................................................15 4.1 IssuesIdentifiedDuringScoping.....................................................................................................15 4.2 StatementsofConcern.........................................................................................................................19

5.0 CONTACTS.............................................................................................................................................152 5.1 LeadAgency..........................................................................................................................................152 5.2 CooperatingAgenciesandCooperatingAgencyTribes......................................................152 5.3 ProjectWebsiteandProjectEmail..............................................................................................152

LISTOFTABLES

Table1:ScopingMeetings,DatesandLocations.......................................................................................................8

Table2:DonlinGoldProjectEISScopingMeetingAttendance...........................................................................9

Table3:DonlinGoldEISScopingIssueCategoryCodes......................................................................................15

LISTOFFIGURES

Figure1:DonlinGoldEISScopingMeetingLocations..........................................................................................11

Figure2:DonlinGoldEISScopingCommentsbyIssue........................................................................................18

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FINAL SCOPING REPORT APPENDICES

AUGUST 2013 P a g e | ii

APPENDICES

AppendixA:ScopingMaterials

NoticeofIntent,FederalRegister,December14,2012ScopingMailingListFebruary2013Newsletter#1December2012SampleMeetingAdsSamplePublicServiceAnnouncementSampleEmailNoticeSampleWhat’sUpListservNoticeCommentFormMeetingSign‐inSheetsMeetingPowerPointPresentationMeetingPosterswww.DonlinGoldEIS.comWebsiteScreenshots

AppendixB:TribalConsultationMaterials

SampleTribalConsultationLetterTribalCoordinationPlanTribesIdentifiedDuringScopingEmailfromDonKuhleDescribingGovernment‐to‐GovernmentActivities

AppendixC:CooperatingAgencyScopingMaterials

MeetingAgendaFebruary6,2013MeetingPowerPointPresentationAlaskaDepartmentofEnvironmentalConservationMeetingInformationMeetingNotesMeetingSign‐inSheets

AppendixD:IndexofAgencyandPublicScopingComments

AppendixE:PublicScopingComments(availableonlyindigitalformatinseparatefolder)

MeetingTranscripts(verbalcommentsgivenduringpublicmeetings)

PublicEmails,Letters,andFaxes

AlaskaBigVillageNetworkLetterandAttachments

DonlinGold,LLCLetterandAttachments

AppendixF:CooperatingAgencyScopingComments(availableonlyindigitalformatinseparatefolder)

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FINAL SCOPING REPORT

AUGUST 2013 P a g e | iii

ACRONYMSANDABBREVIATIONS

AAC AlaskaAdministrativeCode

ADEC AlaskaDepartmentofEnvironmentalConservation

ADNR AlaskaDepartmentofNaturalResources

ANCSA AlaskaNativeClaimsSettlementAct

ANILCA AlaskaNationalInterestLandsConservationAct

ATV all‐terrainvehicle

AVCP AssociationofVillageCouncilPresidents

BLM BureauofLandManagement

BMP BestManagementPractice

CEQ CouncilonEnvironmentalQuality

Corps U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers

CWA CleanWaterAct

DGWG DolinGoldWorkingGroup

EIS EnvironmentalImpactStatement

EJ EnvironmentalJustice

EPA EnvironmentalProtectionAgency

ESA EndangeredSpeciesAct

ft feet

G2G Government‐to‐Government

GHG greenhousegases

HDD horizontaldirectionaldrilling

HIA HealthImpactAssessment

INHT IditarodNationalHistoricTrail

km kilometer

m meter

NEPA NationalEnvironmentalPolicyAct

NHPA NationalHistoricPreservationAct

ORV off‐roadvehicle

POD PlanofDevelopment

ROW right‐of‐way

SHPO StateHistoricPreservationOfficer

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FINAL SCOPING REPORT

AUGUST 2013 P a g e | iv

SOC StatementofConcern

TEKW TraditionalEcologicalKnowledgeandWisdom

TSF tailingstoragefacility

USFWS UnitedStatesFishandWildlifeService

Y‐KDelta Yukon‐KuskokwimDelta


DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 1.0 INTRODUCTION FINAL SCOPING REPORT

AUGUST 2013 P a g e | 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 SCOPINGOVERVIEWTheCouncilonEnvironmentalQuality(CEQ)definesscopingasan“earlyandopenprocessfordeterminingthescopeofissuestobeaddressedandforidentifyingthesignificantissuesrelatedtoaproposedaction”(40CFR1501.7).ThescopingprocessprovidesanopportunityforpeoplepotentiallyaffectedbytheprojecttoexpresstheirviewsandconcernsandtocontributetothecompletenessoftheEnvironmentalImpactStatement(EIS).

TheScopingReportfortheDonlinGoldProjectEISsummarizestheissues,opportunities,andconcernsofthepublicandagenciesasprovidedduringtheScopingPeriodandtheScopingmeetings.TheseconcernswillthenbeintegratedintothepreparationoftheDraftEIS.TheScopingReportisapublicdocumentandwillbepostedtotheprojectwebsite.Inaddition,thesecondnewsletterwillbemailedoutaftertheScopingPeriodtoprovideanoverviewofthecommentsreceivedandtoinviteinterestedstakeholderstoreadthefullreportonthewebsite.TheScopingReportwillalsobeincludedasanappendixintheDraftEIS.

TheScopingReportincludestheresultsofthedetailedscopingcommentanalysisaswellasappendicescontainingmaterialsanddocumentssuchastheNoticeofIntent,sign‐insheets,thepresentation,andsummarizedcommentsorStatementsofConcern(SOCs).Copiesoforiginalwrittencorrespondence,telephonerecords,emails,andothercorrespondencegeneratedtosupportpublicinvolvementarepartoftheadministrativerecord.

1.2 PROJECTOVERVIEWDonlinGold,LLC(DonlinGold)isproposingthedevelopmentofanopenpit,hardrockgoldminelocated277miles(446kilometers[km])westofAnchorage,145miles(233km)northeastofBethel,and10miles(16km)northofthevillageofCrookedCreek.TheproposedDonlinGoldProjectincludeslandleasedfromtheCalistaCorporation(Calista),anAlaskaNativeClaimsSettlementAct(ANCSA)regionalcorporationthatholdsthesubsurface(mineral)estateforANCSAlandsintheregion.Inadditiontothesubsurfaceestate,Calistaownssomesurfaceestatelandsintheleasearea.ASurfaceUseAgreementwithTheKuskokwimCorporation,anANCSAvillagecorporation,grantssurfaceuserights.Bethel,thelargestcommunityinwesternAlaska,istheadministrativeandtransportationcenteroftheYukon–KuskokwimDelta(Y‐KDelta).

Theproposedmineandallrelatedfacilitieswouldhaveatotalfootprintof16,300acres.Theprojectapplicant,DonlinGold,predictsthattheminewouldmill59,000shorttons1oforeperdaytoobtain1.3millionouncesofgoldperyearovera27.5‐yearmineoperationallife(37.5yearstotalincluding5yearsofconstructiontimeandanother5yearsofreclamationtime).

TheDonlinGoldProjectEISwillexaminethreemajorprojectcomponents,including:

Mine Site

Openpit,eventually1,400acresinsize,providingaccessforminingprovenandprobablereservestotaling556.5millionshorttons(504.8milliontonnes),withanaveragegradeof0.061ounces/shortton(2.09grams/ton),andmillprocessingatarateof59,000shorttonsperday(53,500tonnesperday);

1 The term short ton refers to the English measurement of 2,000 pounds. The term tonne refers to a metric measure of 2,000 kilograms.



Wastetreatment(tailingsimpoundment)facilityeventuallycovering2,350acreswithatotalcapacityofapproximately335,000acre‐feet(ft)(413millioncubicmeters[m³])ofmilltailings,decantwater,andstormwater;

Wasterockfacility,eventuallycovering2,300acresforplacementofapproximately2,460millionshorttons(2,232milliontonnes)ofwasterock;

Watertreatmentplantwithadesigncapacityof2,188gallonsperminute(497m³perhour)fortreatmentofdewateringwatertopermittedstandards;

Powerplantwithatotalconnectedloadof227megawatts,anaveragerunningloadof153megawatts,andapeakloadof182megawatts;and

Fuelstoragefacilitywithadesigncapacityof40milliongallons(15‐tankfarmwith2.5Mgallonspertank).

Transportation and Camp Infrastructure

AnewupriverbargelandingfacilityatJungjuk(8‐milesdownriverfromCrookedCreekand177‐milesupriverfromBethel)servingastheterminusbetweenriverbargetransportandroadtransporttotheminesite,totransportapproximately37,500,000gallons(141,952,942liters)offuelandapproximately100,000tons(90,718tonnes)ofnon‐fuelsuppliesperyear;

ImprovementstotheBethelport;

Mineaccessroadprovidingaccessbetweentheportfacilityandminesiteviaa30‐mile(48km)two‐lane,gravel‐surfacedaccessroad,5,000‐ftlongby150‐ftwide(1,524mby45m)gravelairstripapproximately9roadmiles(14.5km)westoftheminesite;and

Permanentaccommodationcamplocatedalongtheaccessroadapproximately2.4miles(3.9km)fromtheminesite,forhousingupto638peopleduringoperations.

Pipeline

Naturalgaspipelinetransportingnaturalgastothepowerplantviaa313mile(503km),14inch(35.5centimeters)diameterburiedsteelpipelineoriginatingfromanexisting20inch(51centimeters)naturalgaspipelinenearBeluga,Alaska.

1.3 PURPOSEOFTHEENVIRONMENTALIMPACTSTATEMENTInJuly2012,DonlinGoldsubmittedaCleanWaterAct(CWA)Section404/10preliminarypermitapplicationtotheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers(theCorps).Thisapplication“triggered”compliancewiththeNationalEnvironmentalPolicyActof1969(NEPA),andrequirespreparationofanEIS.TheEISwillcontaintheelementsrequiredbyNEPA,includingconsiderationofissuesandsuggestionsraisedinscopingcomments,analysisofthedirectandindirectimpactsofarangeofalternativestomeetthepurposeandneedoftheproposedaction(includingaNoActionAlternative),analysisofcumulativeimpactsoftheproposedactionandotherpast,present,andreasonablyforeseeablefutureactions,andotherrelevantissues.

TheEISisintendedtofulfilltheNEPAcomplianceresponsibilitiesoftheCorps,andotherfederalpermittingagencies.ItwillalsoprovidethebasisfortheCorpstodeterminewhetherissuingtheSection404/10permitiscontraryornotcontrarytothepublicinterestandcomplieswiththeSection404(b)(1)Guidelines.



FederalagenciesarechargedwithengaginginregularandmeaningfulconsultationandcollaborationwithtribalofficialsinthedevelopmentoffederalpoliciesthatmayaffecttriballandsandresourcespursuanttoExecutiveOrder13175onConsultationandCoordinationwithIndianTribalGovernments(November6,2000)andthePresidentialMemorandumregardingTribalConsultation(November5,2009).AstheleadfederalagencyforthedevelopmentoftheDonlinGoldProjectEIS,theCorpsisresponsibleforgovernment‐to‐governmentconsultationandcoordinationwithfederallyrecognizedtribesthatmaybeaffectedbytheproposedproject(Section2.3).ThisreportmakesnoteoftheCorps’initiativeinconveningtribalconsultation.However,theinformationprovidedduringthesemeetingsisprivilegedbetweentheCorpsandthetribes.Therefore,theresultsofdiscussionsarenotdescribedinthisreport.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 2.0 SCOPING METHODS FINAL SCOPING REPORT


2.0 SCOPINGMETHODS

2.1 SCOPINGACTIVITIESTheCorpspublishedaNoticeofIntentintheFederalRegisteronDecember14,2012toannouncetheintenttoprepareanEIS,todescribethelocationsandtentativescheduleforscopingmeetings,andtoinvitesuggestionsontheissuestobeaddressedinthisEIS.TheNoticeofIntentnotedthatthepubliccommentperiodwouldconcludeonMarch29,2013.

Asamorewidespreadformofpublicnotice,thefirstprojectnewsletterwassentbytheCorpsinmid‐December2012totheprojectmailinglistofnearly7,000addresses,includingallmailboxholdersintheYukon‐KuskokwimDeltacommunities.ThenewsletterexplainedtheEISprocess,providedasummaryoftheproposedprojectandnotedhowtothepubliccouldparticipateindevelopingtheEIS(providedinAppendixA).

TheCorpscompletedtheformalscopingprocesswhenthescopingperiodclosedonMarch29,2013.CommentsreceivedorpostmarkedthroughMarch29,2013aresummarizedandpresentedinthisdocument.Totheextentpracticable,thecommentsreceivedpastthisdatewillbeconsideredduringthedevelopmentoftheEIS,butlatecommentsarenotsummarizedinthisreport.Commentsreceivedafterthescopingperiod,butbeforedistributionoftheDraftEISwillbecompiledinanAddendumandmadeavailableontheprojectwebsitewww.DonlinGoldEIS.com.

SeveraladditionaltechniqueswereusedtonotifythepublicoftheproposedEISprojectandscheduledpublicmeetings.AdvertisementsplacedintheAnchorageDailyNewsranJanuary3andJanuary8,2013;foracopyoftheadvertisement,seeAppendixA.MeetingswerealsoadvertisedintheDeltaDiscoveryandtheTundraDrums.AnannouncementfortheAnchoragescopingmeetingwasbroadcastonKSKApublicradio.PublicradioannouncementsformeetingsintheY‐KDeltaandtheUpperKuskokwimRiverareawerebroadcastonKYUKandKSKO.TheCorpsalsodistributedpublicnoticesviapressrelease,email,theprojectwebsite,flyers,andthenewsletter;samplesofthenoticesareavailableinAppendixA.Privateindividualsalsohavepostedinformationabouttheproject.Non‐governmentalorganizationswerealsoactiveinnotifyingconstituentsoftheprojectandtheEISprocess.

2.2 TRIBALCOORDINATIONANDGOVERNMENT‐TO‐GOVERNMENTCONSULTATION2TheCorps,astheleadfederalagency,hastheresponsibilitytocoordinatedirectlywithfederallyrecognizedtribalgovernmentsduringpreparationoftheDonlinGoldProjectEISincompliancewithExecutiveOrder13175,ConsultationandCoordinationwithIndianTribalGovernments,andtheCorps’TribalConsultationPolicy.Thereareseveralavenuesofparticipationopentotribes,includingthroughthepublicprocess,asstakeholders,asCooperatingAgencieswithspecialexpertise,andthroughthegovernment‐to‐governmentrelationship.Thissectiondescribesactivitiesunderthegovernment‐to‐governmentrelationshipbetweenfederalagenciesandfederallyrecognizedtribes,whichisrecognizedasaspecialrelationshipbasedontribalsovereignty.

TheCorpsidentified66tribespotentiallyaffectedbytheproject.Consistentwithitspoliciesconcerninggovernment‐to‐governmentconsultationwithtribesintheprojectareas,theCorpssent

2 The phrase "tribal coordination" refers to interactions (e.g. meetings, presentation, teleconferences, e-mails, letters, etc.) at the staff level. The phrase "Government-to-Government Consultation" refers to formal meetings between Tribal Government Leadership and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District Engineer (Colonel).



aletterofnotificationandinquirytothe66tribes,offeringtheopportunitytoparticipateinformalgovernment‐to‐governmentconsultation,toparticipateasacooperatingagency,ortosimplyreceiveinformationabouttheproject.Inthisinitialletter,theCorpsrequestedinformationfromthetribesonthefollowingtopics:subsistence,archaeologicalsites,andtraditionalculturalpropertiesaswellasinformationontribalspecialexpertiseregardinganyenvironmental,social,and/oreconomicimpacts.

ThefollowingisasequenceofeventsoutliningsomeofthetribalcoordinationeffortsbytheCorps:

TheCorpssentlettersinvitingconsultationonSeptember24,2012.ThelettersincludedaTribalCoordinationPlanforthedevelopmentoftheDonlinGoldProjectEIS.AcopyofthelettersentisincludedinAppendixB,alongwiththelistoftribalgovernmentsandaTribalCoordinationPlan.

AninitialteleconferencefortribeswasheldonOctober30,2012.Twelverepresentativesfromeighttribesparticipated.

TheCorpsmadeapresentationto30triballeadersattheBureauofIndianAffairs’Providers’ConferenceonNovember26,2012.

Anotherteleconferencewithtribeswasannouncedthroughe‐mailtoall66tribesandheldonDecember12,2012.

AsofApril12,2013,theCorpshasheldtribalcoordinationmeetingsregardingtheproposedDonlinGoldprojectwithfivetribes.

TheCorpssentremindere‐mailmessagestoallaffectedtribesonFebruary13,2013andMarch25,2013regardingthescopingperiod,encouragingthetribestosubmitcommentsbeforetheclosingdateofMarch29,2013.

Section106oftheNationalHistoricPreservationActprovidestribesanopportunitytoincludeconsiderationofculturalandhistoricpropertiesunderNEPA.AninitialmeetingtodiscussSection106washeldonMay02,2013.

DiscussionswithpotentiallyaffectedtribalgovernmentswilloccurthroughouttheEISprocess.

2.3 AGENCYSCOPINGMEETINGCooperatingagenciesarethosethathavejurisdictionbylaworspecialexpertise,includingtribeswhorequestcooperatingagencystatus.

AttheoutsetoftheEIS,theCorpsbeganinformalconsultationwithagenciesregardingthepermitsthatmayberequiredtoimplementtheproposedproject.Theseagenciesinclude:

U.S.DepartmentofInterior,BureauofLandManagement

U.S.DepartmentofInterior,FishandWildlifeService

U.S.DepartmentofTransportation,PipelineandHazardousMaterialsSafetyAdministration

U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency

AlaskaDepartmentofNaturalResources,representingtheStateofAlaska

AlaskaDepartmentofFishandGame

AlaskaDepartmentofHealthandHumanServices

AlaskaDepartmentofEnvironmentalConservation



TheCorpsreceivedrepliesfromtheNationalMarineFisheriesServiceandtheU.S.CoastGuarddecliningtoparticipateascooperatingagencies.

Tribalgovernmentsthathaverequestedparticipationascooperatingagenciesinclude:

AkiakNativeCommunity(passedaresolutionauthorizingtheKuskokwimRiverWatershedCounciltorepresentthem)

NativeVillageofChuathbaluk

VillageofCrookedCreek

VillageofLowerKalskag

KnikTribalCouncil

NativeVillageofNapaimute

AnagencyscopingmeetingwasheldonFebruary6,2013.Thepurposeofthismeetingwastoidentifyissuesrelatedtothepermittingandconsultationauthoritiesofthecooperatingagencies.Theagencyscopingmeetingmaterials,includingtheagenda,sign‐insheets,andpresentationarefoundinAppendixC.Cooperatingagencieswereaskedtoreviewandidentifyanyadditionalauthorizationsandpermitsrelevanttotheproposedprojectundertheirpermittingandconsultationresponsibilities.

Duringthemeeting,theagenciespresentedcommentsfromtheirresourcespecialists.Towardstheendofthescopingperiod,thecooperatingagenciesprovidedfollow‐upwrittenscopingstatementstomorefullyidentifyissuesrelatedtotheagencies’mandates,permittingauthorities,consultationresponsibilities,andspecialexpertise.

2.4 PUBLICSCOPINGMEETINGSTheCorpsstrategyfortheDonlinGoldProjectEISscopingmeetingsemphasizeddistributionofthemeetingsacrosstheentireprojectarea.TheAssociationofVillageCouncilPresidents(AVCP)regionisdividedinto10sub‐regions,andascopingmeetingwasplannedforeachoftheAVCPsub‐regions,alongwithameetinginCrookedCreek,thevillageclosesttotheminesite.TheHolyCrossandMcGrathareaswerealsositesformeetings,alongwithAnchorage.Thisresultedinatotalof14publicscopingmeetings.

TheCorpsrecognizedthatitisexpensiveforresidentstotravelfromaneighboringvillagetooneofthe13hostvillagemeetingsitesortotheAnchoragemeeting.Plansweremadeforeverymeetingtobebroadcastviateleconference,buttheCorpsacknowledgedthatmoreoutreachandopportunitytoprovidecommentswouldbebetter.Therefore,theCorpssoughttoprovideadditionalopportunityforresidentsthroughouttheprojectareatoparticipateinscoping,usingseveralancillarymeansofcommunication.Noneofthesewouldsubstituteforameetingineachcommunity,buttakingallofthetoolstogetherallowedforawideinvitationtoprovidecomments.

Akeytoolwasthescopingmeetingnewsletter,whichwasmailedinmid‐DecembertoeachhouseholdintheY‐KDeltaandawiderangeoforganizationsandindividualsontheprojectmailinglist.Thenewsletterprovidedtheprojectwebsiteaddressformoreinformation,andincludedaself‐mailercommentsheet.Anothermajortoolwastheprojectwebsiteatwww.DonlinGoldEIS.com.WhilemanyresidentsontheY‐KDeltadonothaveinternetaccessathome,nearlyallofthetribalcouncils,cities,andvillagecorporationofficesusethewebonadailybasis.Anothermediatoolwasacall‐inshowatKYUKradioinBethelheldinmid‐January,inwhichtheCorpsprovidedbriefremarksandthenrespondedtocomments,assistedbyatranslator,fornearlyanhour.ThisradiostationhasawideaudienceacrosstheY‐KDelta.



ThepublicscopingmeetingdatesandlocationsaredetailedinTable1.

Table1:ScopingMeetings,DatesandLocations

Location Date Time&Place

Bethel January14,2013 6:00p.m.Yup’iitPiciryaraitCulturalCenter

Aniak January15,2013 6:00p.m.,AniakHighSchool

CrookedCreek January16,2013 6:00p.m.,TribalCouncilOffice

Anchorage January22,2013 6:00p.m.,WildaMarstonTheatre

Nunapitchuk January30,2013 1:00p.m.,BingoHall

Akiak January31,2013 1:00p.m.,CommunityCenter

McGrath February15,2013 4:30p.m.,McGrathNativeVillageCouncilOffice

HooperBay February26,2013 1:00p.m.,TribalCouncilOffice

ToksookBay February27,2013 1:00p.m.,BingoHall

Quinhagak February28,2013 1:00p.m.,QanirtuuqVillageCorporationOffice

SaintMary’s March13,2013 6:00p.m.,CityHall

Emmonak March14,2013 6:00p.m.,CityComplex

HolyCross March20,2013 6:00p.m.,CommunityHall

Kipnuk March22,2013 1:30p.m.,KipnukHighSchool

Thescopingmeetingformatandtheinformationpresentedwasthesameateachpublicmeeting.InadditiontotheCorpsandEISTeamrepresentatives,acourtrecorderwaspresenttodocumentcommentsinatranscriptofthemeeting.

Duringthefirsthalfhouropen‐housesession,attendeeshadtheopportunitytoviewinformationalpostersandmaps.TheCorpsandEISTeamrepresentativeswereavailablearoundtheroomtoanswerquestions.ThemoreformalportionofthemeetingstartedapproximatelyonehalfhourlaterateachmeetingwithaPowerPointslidepresentation.Basedonpriorplanningdiscussionswithcommunityleaders,theEISTeamemployedaYup’iklanguagetranslatorforthemeetingwhereappropriate.ThepresentationdescribedtheproposedDonlinGoldProjectanditshistory,introducedtheEISprocess,andsummarizedsomepotentialareasofconcern,asabasisfordiscussion.Apublicquestionandcommentperiodfollowed.

Commentformswereavailableatthemeetingssothatattendeescouldsubmitwrittencommentsduringthemeetingormailtheminatalaterdate.Translatedcommentswerecapturedinthemeetingtranscriptions.ThetranslatormadeanefforttousespecializedvocabularythathasbeenestablishedtohelpcommunicateabouttechnicalminingissuesinYup’ik.Alinktothescopingmeetingsummariesandtranscriptscanbefoundontheprojectwebsite:http://donlingoldeis.com/GetInvolved.aspx.

Thescopingmeetingswerewellattendedwithatotalattendanceof468personsinthe14meetingsandoralcommentsofferedby134persons.TheEISTeammadeinformaloutreachcallstotribal,corporation,andcityleadersintheneighboringvillages,aswellineachhostvillage.ThepurposewastoalerttheleaderstotheEISprojectandprovideinformationaboutthescopingmeetings.



Inaddition,DonlinGoldprovidedtravelsupport(charterflightsorgasmoneyforsnowmachinetravel)torepresentativeschosenbythetribe,city,andvillagecorporationintheneighboringvillages,sotheycouldattendthescopingmeetingintheirsub‐region.Forexample,intheAniakmeeting,KalskagandRussianMissionvillageschooserepresentativeswhowereabletoattendwithsupportfromDonlinGold.InAnchorage,representativesselectedbythevillageofTyonekwereabletoattend.Inall,representativesfrom21neighboringvillageswereabletoattendthescopingmeetingsheldinthe14hostcommunitiesresultinginparticipationfrom35villages,asshowninTable2,anddisplayedinFigure1.

Inadditiontothepublicscopingmeetings,theCorpsrespondedtoaninvitationtoprovideanoverviewoftheEISattheKuskokwimAreaFisheriesManagementInteragencyMeetingonMarch19,2012.ThismeetingincludedfederalandstatefisheriesmanagersaswellastribalrepresentativesfromtheKuskokwimRiver.

Participationinthescopingprocesshasbeenwidespread,withmanyhoursofquestionsandtestimony,alongwithmanywrittensubmissions.Participantsinthescopingmeetingsincludedelderswhospokewithgreatpassionaboutthevaluesoftheland,therivers,thefishandwildlife,andtheopportunitiesfortheirchildrenandgrandchildrentocontinuetheYup’ikwayoflifeandthesubsistencetraditions.Manyvillageleadersareveryexperiencedinenvironmentalmanagementissuesandspokeindetailabouttheirconcernsregardingairemissions,mercuryandcyanidecontamination,bargetraffic,boomandbustimpactsoncommunities,andclimatechange.

Table2:DonlinGoldProjectEISScopingMeetingAttendance

HostVillage AdditionalVillages EstimatedAttendance

PersonsMakingComments

Bethel Napaimute 57 24

AniakChuathbaluk,Napaimute,Kalskag,RussianMission

41 13

CrookedCreek N/A 37 5

Anchorage Tyonek 59 15

Nunapitchuk Kasigluk,Atmautluak 21 6

Akiak Kwethluk,Tuluksak,Quinhagak

36 9

McGrath N/A 10 6

HooperBay Chevak 33 7

ToksookBay Newtok,Nightmute 50 11

Quinhagak Eek,GoodnewsBay,Platinum

45 14

St.Mary’s Andreafsky 22 10

Emmonak N/A 5 3

HolyCross Anvik 14 4

Kipnuk Tuntutuliak,Chefornak,Kongiganak

38 7

Totals 35villages 468attendees 134commenters



Figure1:DonlinGoldEISScopingMeetingLocations

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 3.0 NEXT STEPS IN THE EIS PROCESS FINAL SCOPING REPORT


3.0 NEXTSTEPSINTHEEISPROCESSThissectionisintendedtobeaverybroadoverviewofthenextstepsintheNEPAEISprocess.

3.1 UTILIZATIONOFSCOPINGCOMMENTSPubliccommentsshapetheNEPAprocessbyidentifyingproject‐relatedquestionsandissuesofconcern.Typicallyquestionsareinreferenceto:theproject,existingenvironment,extentoftemporalandspatialimpacts,orpotentialconsequencestothehumanenvironmentfromtheproposedaction.Substantivequestionsandissuesofconcernaregroupedbysubjectmatterinthisscopingreport.Thisinformationisusedinthealternativesdevelopmentprocess,thestudyoftheaffectedenvironment,andintheprocesstoanalyzeenvironmentalconsequences(orimpacts).

3.2 DEVELOPALTERNATIVESManyofthescopingcommentssuggestedalternativesinprojectdesignandoperations.TheEISwillexamineareasonablerangeofalternativesthatmeetthepurposeandneedoftheproject,includingthoseidentifiedinscopingcomments.Thisensuresthatthefullspectrumofpositionsexpressedbyparticipantsinthescopingprocesshasbeenconsidered,asrequiredbyNEPA.TheEISwillalsodescribealternativesthathavebeeneliminatedfromfurtherdetailedconsiderationandnotbroughtforwardforformalanalysis,alongwiththereasonsforelimination.

TheCorpsandtheEISTeamwilldevelopeachviablealternative,usingavailableinformationandbyidentifyingadditionalinformationthatneedstobeobtainedinordertoevaluateallofthealternativesonanequalbasis.Thealternativesdevelopmentprocessoccursafterthescopingcommentsarecompiled.Thisstepbeganinlatespring2013.

3.3 STUDYOFTHEAFFECTEDENVIRONMENTDuringscoping,thepublicidentifiedmanyissuesandconcernstobeaddressedintheEIS.WithCorpsoversight,theEISTeamwillreviewandsummarizeavailablebaselineinformationtoaddresstheseissuesandconcerns.Thesummarywillincludebaselinestudiesconductedintheprojectarea,agencydataregardingkeyresources,publishedandunpublishedscientificliterature,andTraditionalEcologicalKnowledgeandWisdom.ThisinformationwillbepresentedintheAffectedEnvironmentchapteroftheEIS.Thisstepisscheduledtobeginmid‐2013.

3.4 ASSESSENVIRONMENTALCONSEQUENCESOFALTERNATIVESTheCorpsandtheEISTeamwillevaluatepotentialenvironmentalconsequencesoftheapplicant’sproposedactionandthealternativescarriedforwardforanalysis,includingdirect,indirect,andcumulativeeffects.Wewilladdressregulatoryrequirementsassociatedwithfederal,state,andlocalagencypermitsintheanalysisofpotentialeffects.Thisstepwillbeconductedaftertherangeofalternativesandthebaselineconditionsoftheaffectedenvironmentareidentified.Scopingcommentsrelatedtopotentialprojectimpactsareconsideredinthisstage.

3.5 ISSUETHEDRAFTEISTheCorpswillreleaseaDraftEIS,whichwillbeavailableforreviewbythepublic,tribalgovernments,local,state,andfederalagencies.TheDraftEISwillbeavailablefora90‐dayreviewaftertheNoticeofAvailabilityhasbeenpublishedintheFederalRegister.TheCorpswillholdpublicmeetings,toofferanopportunityforpubliccommentontheDraftEIS.Currently,thepubliccommentperiodisestimatedtooccurfromAugusttoNovember2014.Publicmeetingsforthe

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 3.0 NEXT STEPS IN THE EIS PROCESS FINAL SCOPING REPORT


DraftEISwouldbeheldduringthatperiod.Totheextentpossible,meetingdateswillbearrangedwithconsiderationoflocalseasonalschedules.

TheDraftEISwillincludeaspecializedanalysisofpotentialimpactstosubsistenceresourcesandharvests,asrequiredunderSection810ofAlaskaNationalInterestLandsConservationAct(ANILCA).Ifthatanalysisfindsthattheproposedactionwouldsignificantlyrestrictsubsistenceuses,(asdefinedbytheAlaskaNationalInterestLandsConservationAct(ANILCA)thenSection810subsistencehearingswouldalsobeheldintheaffectedcommunities.TheSection810SubsistencehearingsaretypicallyconductedinconjunctionwiththemeetingsontheDraftEIS.

3.6 ISSUETHEFINALEISANDRECORDOFDECISIONAfteranalyzingpubliccommentsreceivedontheDraftEIS,theCorpsandtheEISTeamwillrevisethedocumenttoprepareaFinalEIS.TheFinalEISwillincludethecommentssubmittedontheDraftEIS,includingchangesmadetotheEISinresponsetocomments.Thisstepwillincludepublicnoticeofdocumentavailability,thedistributionofthedocument,anda30‐daycomment/waitingperiodonthefinalEIS.Thisstepisprojectedtotakeplaceinlate‐2015.

TheCorpswillstrivetomeettheNEPArequirementsofthefederalcooperatingagenciesinthisEISprocess.ThefederalcooperatingagenciesmayeachissueaseparateRecordofDecision.TheissuanceoftheRecord(s)ofDecisionwillconcludetheEISprocessinlate2015.EachRecordofDecisionwillidentifythepreferredalternative,aswellastheagency’srationaleforitsconclusionsregardingtheenvironmentaleffectsandappropriatemitigationmeasuresfortheproposedproject.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT ACID ROCK DISCHARGE


4.0 SUMMARYOFCOMMENTSRECEIVED

4.1 ISSUESIDENTIFIEDDURINGSCOPINGPublicscopingcommentsregardingtheDonlinGoldEISwerereceivedasoralandwrittentestimonyatthepublicscopingmeetings,andaswrittencommentsreceivedthroughtheprojectwebsite,mail,email,andfax.Commentsweresubmittedbyindividualcitizensaswellasgroupsincluding:federalagencies,tribalgovernments,stateagencies,localgovernments,businesses,specialinterestgroupsandnon‐governmentalorganizations.

Thissectionofthescopingreportsummarizestheissuesidentifiedinthescopingcomments.AppendixDprovidesanindexofagencyandpublicscopingcomments.ThecompletetextofpubliccommentsreceivedisincludedintheAdministrativeRecordfortheEISandinAppendicesEandF.

Therewereatotalof169unique“submissions”receivedbytheCorpsduringthescopingperiod.Thetermsubmissionreferstotheentiretyoforaltestimonyatapublicmeeting,aletter,ane‐mailmessage,orafaxtransmission.Ofthesesubmissions,13aretranscriptsfromthepublicscopingmeetings,duringwhichatotalof134peopleprovideprovidedtheiroralcomments.Mostsubmissionsincludemany“comments,”atermwhichreferstoeachofthediscreteconceptsconveyedinasubmission.TheEISTeamassignedissuecategorycodestoeachcomment,basedonthecontentofthecomment.TheissuecategoriesandcodesarelistedinTable3.TheEISTeamthengroupedtheissuesbygeneraltopics,includingenvironmentaleffects,purposeandneed,proposedactionandalternatives,andregulatorycompliance.

Table3:DonlinGoldEISScopingIssueCategoryCodes

Group IssueCategory IssueCode

Process:

NEPA,Permits,thisEIS,ConsultationandCoordination

LegislativeandRegulatoryProcess LEG

CooperatingAgencies CAP

PublicInvolvementandScoping PUB

Government‐to‐Government G2G

NEPAProcess NEP

PurposeandNeed PurposeandNeed P&N

ProposedAction,Alternatives,andMitigationMeasures,Monitoring

ProposedActionandAlternatives PAA

MitigationMeasures MIT

Bonding,Escrow,RestorationandReclamation BER

Monitoring MON

PlanofDevelopment POD

AffectedEnvironment:Commentsabouteachresource,and

EnvironmentalConsequences:

Potentialdirect,indirectandcumulativeimpacts

PHYSICAL

AirQuality AIQ

AcidRockDrainage ARD

BargeIssues BARG

ClimateChange CLIM

FuelSpillRisks/Release FSR



Group IssueCategory IssueCode

AffectedEnvironment:Commentsabouteachresource,and

EnvironmentalConsequences:

Potentialdirect,indirectandcumulativeimpacts

PHYSICALcontinued

Geology GEO

GroundwaterImpacts GRD

HazardousMaterials HZM

Hydrology(surfacewater) HYD

WaterQualityandQuantity WAQ

BIOLOGICAL

Birds‐Impacts BIRD

Fish‐Impacts FISH

Habitat HAB

Vegetation VEG

WetlandsandAquaticCommunities WET

WildlifeImpacts WILD

SOCIAL

Archeological/CulturalResources CUL

EnvironmentalJustice EJ

LandOwnership,ManagementandUse LAND

NaturalGasSupply GAS

PublicHealth PHL

Recreation REC

SocioeconomicImpacts SER

Subsistence SUB

TraditionalCultureandWayofLife TWL

Transportation TRAN

VisualResources VIS

WildernessCharacteristics WCR

General DataandAvailableInformation DATA

Non‐SubstantiveComment NSB

Research,Monitoring,andEvaluationNeeds RME

Amongthescopingcommentsreceived,someissueswereraisedmorefrequentlythanothers.Akeypurposeofscopingisto“determinethescopeandthesignificantissuestobeanalyzedindepthintheenvironmentalimpactstatement(40CFR1501.7).Significantissuescanberaisedbyjustafewcommentsorbymanycommenters.ItisthesignificanceoftheissueandnotthefrequencyofthecommentthatdetermineshowitshouldbeaddressedintheEIS.Figure2isabargraphthatorganizesthenumberofcommentsbycommentcategory;itisjustonetooltodemonstratetheextentofpublicconcern.



TheEISTeamreadandanalyzedallsubmissionsforsubstantivecomments.WeassignedsubstantivecommentsasingleIssueCodeintheCommentAnalysisSystemdatabase.Forexample,acommentwouldbecoded“HYD”becauseitrelatestohydrology.Eachcommententeredinthedatabasealsoreceivedanautomatictrackingnumber(CommentID)bytheCommentAnalysisSystemdatabase.Forexample,aletterfromCrookedCreekTraditionalCouncilwasSubmission21anditcontainedatotalof25individualcomments,eachofwhichreceivedaCommentIDnumber.

Thisscopingperiodgenerated2,763codedcomments,whichwerethensortedtoclusterthosecommentsmakingacommonpoint.SimilarcommentsweresummarizedintoStatementsofConcern(SOCs)andareincludedinSection4.2.ThetermSOCreferstoasummarystatementthatcapturesthecommonpointofseveralrelatedsubstantivecomments.EverysubstantivecommentwasassignedtoaSOCbasedonitscontent.Whenrelatedcommentsaresummarizedtogether,atotalof444SOCsresulted.EachSOCisrepresentedbyanissuecategorycodefollowedbyanumber(forexample,“HYD1”).TheCorpswillusetheSOCstoidentifyissues,alternatives,andmitigationmeasurestobeanalyzedintheEIS.



Figure2:DonlinGoldEISScopingCommentsbyIssue[Revised6/25/13]

Notes:CommentsreceivedonthePlanofDevelopment(POD)byBLMwerecodedbutarenotincludedintheStatementsofConcern.

AirQuality (AIQ)

AcidRockDrainage(ARD)

BargeIssues(BARG)

Bonding,EscrowRestoration&Reclamation(BER)

Bird–Impacts(BIRD)

CooperatingAgencies(CAP)

ClimateChange(CLIM)

Archeological/CulturalResources(CUL)

Data&AvailableInformation(DATA)

EnvironmentalJustice(EJ)

Fish–Impacts(FISH)

FuelSpillRisks/Release(FSR)

Government‐to‐Government(G2G)

NaturalGasSupply(GAS)

Geology(GEO)

GroundwaterImpacts(GRD)

Habitat(HAB)

Hydrology(surfacewater)(HYD)

HazardousMaterials(HZM)

LandOwnership,Management&Use(LAND)

Legislative&RegulatoryProcess(LEG)

MitigationMeasures(MIT)

Monitoring(MON)

NEPAProcess(NEP)

Non‐SubstantiveComment(NSB)

Purpose&Need(P&N)

ProposedAction&Alternatives(PAA)

PublicHealth(PHL)

PlanofDevelopment(POD)

PublicInvolvement&Scoping(PUB)

Recreation(REC)

Research,Monitoring&EvaluationNeeds(RME)

SocioeconomicImpacts(SER)

Subsistence(SUB)

Transportation(TRAN)

TraditionalCultureandWayofLife(TWL)

Vegetation(VEG)

VisualResources(VIS)

WaterQualityandQuantity(WAQ)

WildernessCharacteristics(WCR)

Wetlands&AquaticCommunities(WET)

WildlifeImpacts(WILD)



4.2 STATEMENTSOFCONCERN

ACID ROCK DRAINAGE (ARD)

Commentsregardingrisksofacidrockdrainagefrommineprojectcomponents,includingthewasterockfacility.Compositionofthecontaminants,drainage,leaching,andpathwaysforacidrockdrainage.Acidrockdrainageisapotentialsourceofimpactonmanyresources,suchaswaterquality,wetlands,fish,andsubsistencefoodresources.Additionaldiscussionisfoundundertheseresources.

Category Code Description

ARD1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzeimpactsresultingfromacidrockdrainage,wasterock,andleachingtothefollowing:

• Fishandotheraquaticlife;

• Waterquality,groundwaterandsurfacewater;

• Subsistenceresourcesandactivities;and

• Publichealth.

ARD2 TheDraftEISshoulddescribeindetailhowacidrockdrainage,thetailings,andmetalsleachingwouldbetreatedpost‐closureandinperpetuity.Specifically,howwouldwaterbepreventedfromenteringthetailings?Commenterssuggestalternativeengineeringplansthateliminatetheneedforwatertreatmentbeyondatenyearpost‐reclamationperiod."TheDraftEISshouldanalyzescenarioswheresitewaterisnottreatedpriortodischarge,modelhowfardownstreamacidminedrainageandmetalimpactswouldextend,andevaluateseverityofpotentialimpactsontheenvironment."

ARD3 TheDraftEISshoulddescribethetreatmentofwasterockandcontaminatedwater,andhowitwouldbepreventedfromleachingintonearbywaterbodies.Specifically,commentershavethefollowingquestions,concerns,andsuggestions:

• Whatistheblendingtechniqueforwasterocktoneutralizeacidgeneration?Whataretherequirementsandhowwouldtheybemetovertime?

• Howmanylinerswouldbeusedinthetailingspond,andhowlongdotheylast?

• Duringpost‐reclamation,whathappensifthetailingspondoverflowsduetoheavyprecipitation?

• Onecommentersuggeststhatacidproducingwasterockandtailingsshouldbemadeintoasolidmixedwithcementandlayeredwithclays.

• "Evaluateandmodelpotentialratesandvolumesofinfiltration/seepagefromminingfacilitiesintogroundwaterandsurfacewaters"anddescribehowthesereleaseswouldaffectsurfaceandgroundwaterquality.

ARD4 Thefollowingmonitoringplansandmitigationmeasuresaresuggested:

• Developacidrockdrainageandmetalleachingtestingplans,includingascheduleandtimeframe;theseshouldbeconductedduringtrenchingalso;

• Testopenpitminelithologiesregularlyduringthelifeofthemine,andduringclosureandreclamation;

• Consider"addingathicker,denserimpoundmentcaptothetailingspittoreduceoxygenflux,slowdownoxidationofthetailings,andreducehydraulicconductivityandwatermovementdownthroughthetailings";




• Toreducethepotentialofacidrockdrainageandmetalleaching,evaluatepossibilityofmixingamendmentstothetailings;

• Tominimizeinfiltration/seepage,considertheuseofageo‐membranelinerforthewasterockfacility;

• Considerputtinglinersontailingsstoragefacilitiesasamitigationmeasuretopreventleachingofcontaminantsintowatersystemsduringconstruction;and

• Monitoringplansshouldbeimplementedtoregularlytestgroundwaterandsurfacewatersforacidrockdrainageandmetalleaching.

ARD5 TheDraftEISshoulddescribewhatwouldbedonewithwasterockresultingfrompipelineconstruction.Also,analysisshouldbeconductedalongtheright‐of‐way(ROW)todeterminewhethertrenchingcouldresultinacidrockdrainageormetalleachingintonearbysurfaceandgroundwater.

ARD6 Commentersareconcernedaboutcontainmentofthetailingsduringearthquakes.

ARD7 CommentersrequestthattheDraftEISprovideinformationthatiseasilyaccessibletoreaderswithoutsubjectmatterexpertise,particularlysectionsregardingacidrockdrainage.

ARD8 CommentersnotetheWasteRockManagementPlanlackssufficientdetailregardingthesamplesusedtoconducttheanalysis.TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowthesesampleswereselectedandevaluatetheireffectiveness.Equalemphasisshouldbegiventoidentifyinghazardousmaterialsasprofitablematerials.Assuch,thegeologyandgeochemistryoftheminesiteshouldbefullycharacterized,aswellasthepipelineROW.TheDraftEISshouldincludeacharacterizationoftheoreandwasterockandminetailingsforpotentialacidrockdrainageandmetalleaching.Thisshouldbeconductedpriortoconstructionandoperations,throughoutthelifeofthemine,andduringmineclosureandreclamation.

ARD9 Withregardstoacidrockdrainageandmetalleaching,theDraftEISshoulddiscussregionalmineralizationandexistinggolddepositsandmineprojectsinAlaskaassiteanalogsforevaluatingandcomparingtheproposedproject.Thisincludeshistoricandpresentgoldminingprojects.Forexample,comparetheore,wasterock,andtailingscharacterizationoftheproposedprojecttootherexistinggoldminesinAlaskasuchasFortKnox,Pogo,NixonForkorKensington.

ARD10 CommentersreferencingtheWasteRockManagementPlanbelievethatcategorizingthewasterockas“PotentiallyAcidGenerating”or“NonAcidGenerating”wasdoneincorrectlyandrequestthatthistopicberevisited.Theysuggestagenciesshouldreviewthisdeterminationtoinsurethatthedeterminationbetweenthepotentially‐andnon‐acidgeneratingwasterockisconservativeandwouldnotconstituteapotentiallong‐termriskoftherockgoingacid.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT AIR QUALITY


AIR QUALITY (AIQ)

Commentsandconcernsregardingimpactstoairqualityfromconstruction,fugitivedustemissions,vehicleequipmentemissionsandminingactivities(mercurydust).Thisincludesconcernforeffectsonclimatechange.


AIQ1 Airqualityisamajorconcernamongcommenters.TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzetheimpactsfromchangesinairqualityresultingfromprojectconstruction,operations,maintenance,andreclamation/closure.Thedirect,indirect,andcumulativeimpactsontheenvironmentandhumanhealthshouldbediscussed.TheDraftEISshouldincludeanairqualityassessmentforcomparingtheexistingbaselineairqualityconditionswiththeairqualityduringtheproject,atallphases,includingallequipment,andconsideringofwinterandsummerconditions.Anypollutantsnotconsideredintheanalysisshouldbediscussed,includingthereasonfortheiromissionandwhytheyarenotexpectedtocontributetoimpacts.Morespecifically,thisanalysisshouldinclude:• Currentairqualityconditionsanddataintheproposedprojectarea;

• DiscussionofhowtheairqualitydatawouldmeettheEnvironmentalProtectionAgency’s(EPAs)PreventionofSignificantDeteriorationcollectionrequirementfornewmajorsourcesofairpollution;PreventionofSignificantDeteriorationrequiresinstallationofthebestavailablecontroltechnology,anairqualityanalysis,andadditionalimpactsanalysis,andpublicinvolvement;

• Surroundingtopography,pollutanttransportanddispersion,andsecondaryformationofairpollutants;

• Localknowledgeregardingwindpatternsthatcouldaffectairquality;

• Impactstonaturalresources,ecosystemsandhumancommunities,includingcriticalhabitats,wildliferefuges,sensitivewetlandsandwaterbodies,waterresources,archeologicalorculturalresources,andthreatenedandendangeredspecies;

• Estimatedemissionsfrombargeactivity;

• Evaluationofwhetherairqualitydatausedforbackgroundlevelsistrulyrepresentative;and

• Detailedmitigationandmonitoringplanstoreduceimpactsfromemissions.

AIQ2 TheairqualityanalysisintheDraftEISshouldincludemaps,diagramsandothervisuals.Commenterssuggestthefollowing:• Mapillustratingbaselineairqualitydata,includingalllocationsandelevationsofpastandpresentairqualitydatacollectionstations;

• Flowdiagramshowinglocationofcontroltechnologiesandwheremercurymonitoringwouldoccur,amountofmercurycaptured,andhowmuchmercurywouldbereleasedfromthemillexhauststack;

• Mapshowingthespatialorairshedboundariesoftheprojectdefinitionofambientair;

• Facilitylayoutshowingtheambientairboundary,locationofallemissionsources,buildings,andstructures;includeanortharrowandscale;

• Graphics/isoplethstodisplaylocationsofpredictedemissionsconcentrations;alsoprovidetablessummarizingdataandmodelresults;and

• Mapillustratingairqualitymodelingdomain(ambientairboundary,nearfield,farfield,sensitivereceptorlocations,etc.).




AIQ3 TheDraftEISshouldsummarizeexistingairqualityclassificationsandbackgroundconcentrations(includingthoseinCookInlet)andevaluatewhethertheproposedprojectwouldhaveadverseeffectsonClassIAreasidentifiedundertheCleanAirAct,anddevelopmitigationmeasurestominimizeimpacts.Also,theDraftEISshoulddiscusstheproposedproject’sairqualitydesignations,ifany(i.e.attainment,non‐attainmentorunclassified),anddescribetheimplicationsofthecurrentClassIIdesignationfortheprojectarea.ProximitytotheBelugaGasFieldandTuxedniWildernessAreaisaClassIArea,aswellasanysensitivefederallandsneartheconstructioncorridorforthepipeline.TheDraftEISshouldclarifythestatusofexistingpermittedsourcesofairpollution,suchasAQ0934ORL01fortheDonlinGoldproject.

AIQ4 TheDraftEISshouldincludeanairemissionsinventorytoaccountforallsourcesandquantitiesofairpollutantemissionsfromallphasesandaspectsoftheprojectincludingconstruction,operation,maintenance,andreclamation/closure.Emissionsourcesshouldincludeallsupportactivities,andspecificgeographicareasforcertaintimeframes.Schematicsanddiagramsshouldbepartoftheanalysis.Sourcesanalyzedshouldbebothstationaryandmobile(e.g.dieselengines,turbines,aircraft,marinevesselsandbarges,pipeline,andfugitiveroaddust).Sourcesofpotentialgasflaringshouldbeidentifiedandthesystemforgasflaringforthepipelineshouldbediscussed.Airemissionsassociatedwiththesourceofgasflaringshouldbeevaluated.Furthermore,thereceptorsforairemissionsshouldbeidentified(i.e.nearbyschools,hospitals,etc.)anddiscussed,includingthevariouspathwaysofexposure.AllairemissioninventorydatashouldmeettheNationalAmbientAirQualityStandardsand/orstatestandards.Applicableairqualitylaws,regulationsandpermitsshouldbediscussed,andmonitoringdatathatindicatesanyairqualityviolationshouldberecorded.

AIQ5 Airqualitymodelingshouldbeconductedtodetermineiftheproposedprojectwouldhaveadverseimpactsontheenvironment.Thetypeofmodelingshouldbediscussed,alongwithassociatedcalculationmethodologiesandassumptionsofemissionrates(includingoperatinghours,fuels,heatinput,etc.).TheDraftEISshouldprovidestackparametersforpointsources(height,temperature,exitvelocity,anddiameter),andconductandprovideaGoodEngineeringPracticestackheightanalysis.Commentersalsosuggestthefollowing:

• IdentifyrepresentativemeteorologicaldatathatwouldbeusedwiththeEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)guidelineornon‐guidelinemodel;thiswouldhelpwithpredictingprojectcompliancewithairstandardsandprojectconcentrationimpactsduringallphasesoftheproject;

• ConsistentwiththeBureauofLandManagement(BLM)requirements,conductanAirQualityRelatedValueanalysis;

• AddresssecondaryformationofozoneandPM2.5(i.e.,sulfates,nitratesandvolatileorganiccompounds);and

• Discusspathwaysformercuryairemissionsfromthemine,includingmercuryspeciation;identifymitigationandmonitoringtechniques.

AIQ6 AdetailedairqualityassessmentshouldbeincludedintheDraftEIS,andmadepublicbeforethecommentperiodbeginsfortheDraftEIS.Itshouldincludethefollowing:

• AlistofprojectspecificHazardousAirPollutantsemitted,includingestimatedquantity,andthemobileandstationarysources;

• AcomparisonofprojectemissionstotheNationalEmissionsStandardsforHazardous




AirPollutants;

• NationalAmbientAirQualityStandardsandestimatesofPM2.5andPM10(particulatematter)duringallphasesoftheproposedproject;

• Fugitivedustemissionsandimpactsonhumanhealth,includingsensitivepopulationssuchaschildrenandelders;

• Emissionsresultingfrompipelineconstructionandequipment,andassociatedimpactstopeopleinlocalcommunitiesandconstructioncamps;

• Potentialforplumes;

• Separateanalysisofreleasesandemissions;

• Prevailingwindsandpotentialforemissionstospread;and

• Detailedmitigationandmonitoringplans,andclosureplansifhazardsbecometoohigh.

AIQ7 Environmentalandhumanimpactsneedtobediscussedwithregardstofugitivedust.Commenterssuggestanalyzingthefollowing:

• Impactstosubsistenceresourcesincludingfish,moose,caribou,berriesandgreens;

• Anestimateofnumberofvehiclesandmilestraveled;

• Howfardustwouldtravel;

• Impactstowaterquality,particularlythatoftheKuskokwimRiver;

• Publichealthimpacts;and

• Climatechangeandresultingeffectsonsnowpack.

AIQ8 Impactsfrommercurycontaminationareofgreatconcerntocommenters.TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzeimpactsfrommercurythroughoutthelifeoftheproject,includingconstruction,operation,maintenanceandreclamation/closure.Theamountandphysical/chemicalformofmercurycapturedshouldbediscussed.Theanalysisshouldincludeallenvironmentalandhumanimpacts.Commenterssuggestincludingthefollowing:

• Quantificationofbaselinemercuryemissionsfromnaturallandscape;

• DiscussionofhowtheproposedprojectwouldmeetNationalEmissionStandardsforHazardousAirPollutants,includingmercuryairemissionlimitsandmonitoringrequirements;

• Characterizationoftheamountofmercuryintheore;

• Descriptionofproposedmercuryabatementprocessandcontroltechnologies;includediscussionofhownewmercuryairemissionlimitswouldbemet;

• Efficiencyoftheproposedmercurycapturesystemandamountofairemissionsfromthemillexhauststack;

• Predictedtimingofmercuryemissions;

• Amountofmercuryandriskoffugitivemercuryemissionsintailingsstoragefacilities,wasterockstoragefacilities,aswellasnon‐thermalsources;

• Storageandtransportationofmercury;identifyauthorizedmercuryrecyclers;

• Assessmentbasedonidentifiedandquantifiedpointandnonpointsourcesofmercuryemissions;alsoidentifyandquantifyreceptors;

• Winderosionofmercury‐enrichedparticles;

• Evaporationandprecipitationandimpactstosurroundingresources;

• Impactstosubsistenceresourcesincludingfish,moose,caribou,berriesandgreens;




• Publichealthimpacts;

• Prevailingwinds;

• Potentialforemissionstospread;and

• Detailedmitigationandmonitoringplanstoreducemercuryreleaseandcontamination,andclosureplansifmercurylevelsbecometoohigh.

AIQ9 ConstructioncampincineratorsshouldbeusedinaccordancewithBestManagementPractices(BMPs)andaccordingtostandardoperatingprocedurestominimizeemissions.

AIQ10 TheDraftEISshoulddescribetheprocessofevaporationandcondensationwithregardstominefacilitiesandmaterials.Impactstoenvironmentalresourcesneedtobediscussed,suchasimpactstoberriesandplantliferesultingfromcontaminatedprecipitation.

AIQ11 Thepipelinewouldsignificantlyreducetoxicemissionsandprovidecleaner‐burningfuel.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT ARCHEOLOGICAL/CULTURAL RESOURCES


ARCHEOLOGICAL/CULTURAL RESOURCES (CUL)

ImpactstoarcheologicalandculturalresourcessubjecttoSection106oftheNationalHistoricPreservationActasaresultofconstruction,operation,andclosureoftheprojectcomponentsoftheminesite,transportationinfrastructure,andpipeline.


CUL1 Duringconstruction,itisimportanttobemindfulofburialgroundsorobjectsofculturalpatrimonyastheyaresignificantandofinteresttotheaffectedAlaskatribes.Thisalsoincludeshistorictrailsandaccessroutes,traditionalhuntingandfishingcampsites,andfoodcachesites.DiscoveryofarchaeologicalandculturalresourcesaretobeincludedinSection106tribalconsultationswithaffectedtribes.

CUL2 AspartoftheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISprocess,theresponsibilityofDonlinGold,LLCtoavoidadverseimpactsonculturalresourcesandlocalculturesshouldbeconsidered,includingtheirpastworkrecordduringtheexplorationandbaselinestudyphases.

CUL3 TheDraftEISshouldincludedetailedanalysisofimpactstoculturalandhistoricresourcesresultingfromthedevelopmentofmaterialsites.

CUL4 TheDraftEISshouldevaluatetheAlaskanhistoricalandtraditionalsignificanceoftheprojectarea.Assuch,theAlaskaStateHistoricPreservationOfficershouldbeconsultedregardinguseofarcheologicalandculturalresourcesintheproposedprojectarea.Thisincludesresourcesusedforsubsistencefishing,hunting,trappingandharvesting,culturalactivitiesandmigrationroutes.Direct,indirect,andcumulativeimpactstotheseresourcesshouldbeaddressed.

CUL5 Thepipelinerouteshouldavoidknownarchaeologicalandculturalresources.Forexample,theproposedpipelineroutecouldcontributetosolarthawwhichimpactshistorictrails.

CUL6 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzethepotentialimpactstoculturalsitesalongtheKuskokwimRiverduetoerosionresultingfromincreasedbargetraffic.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT BARGE ISSUES


BARGE ISSUES (BARG)

Commentsrelatedtoconcernsabouttheeffectsofincreasedbargetrafficfromallprojectcomponentsandphases.Impactsincludeerosionofriverbanksfrombargetraffic;effectsonhabitatandfishandwildlife;andimpactsonsubsistenceandcommercialfishing,asexamples.Thiscategoryincludeconcernsaboutthefeasibilityoftheproposedbargingactivity,inlightofcurrentvariationinwaterlevels,aswellasthosechangesprojectedtoresultfromclimatechange.


BARG1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldincludeoraddressthefollowingbargeissuesandconcernsraisedduringscoping:

• Provideadetailedtransportationrouteforbargeactivity;

• Includethenumberofbargetripsthatwouldoccurdaily,andhowmuchofanincreasethiswouldcausetocurrenttrafficontheriver;

• Potentialfornavigationalissuesthroughnarroworshallowpartsoftheriver;

• Dredgingthatmayoccur(includinglocations)andassociatedimpacts;adredgingplanshouldalsobedeveloped;

• DetailsabouthowbargeswouldadjusttovaryingwaterlevelsandtheneedtodredgetheKuskokwimRivertomaintainnavigability;

• Detailsaboutbargespeedandwake;

• Baselineconditionofriverbanks;

• Alternativemeansoftransportationwhentheriverwouldnotallowforbarges;

• Specifythesize,weight,anddraftlimitsforthebarges,aswellastheminimumclearancetotheriverbottomrequiredforthebarges;and

• Lengthandwidthofeachbargetow.

BARG2 Bargeimpactsshouldbemitigated(i.e.,avoidedandminimized)topreventharmtotheenvironment.Commenterssuggestusingnewornewerbarges,astherehavebeenaccidentswitholderbargesinthepastinAlaska.Also,residentsalongtheriverrequestthatbargespassontheoppositesideoftherivertopreventerosionwheretheyhavefishcamps,aswellasdamagethatcanoccurtoboatsanchoredintheriver.Commentersnotedthatitisimportanttohaveboatsanchoredintheriverincaseofemergency,andthatbargetrafficoftenpushesboatsagainsttheshoreline,causingdamage.

BARG3 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzedirect,indirect,andcumulativeeffectsonfish,wildlife,habitat,andsubsistenceasaresultofthefollowingphysicalimpactsresultingfromincreasedbargeandportactivity:

• Waterflowandturbidity,riverbankerosion,anderosionofsoilscausedbybargetrafficanddredging;

• Aquatichabitat,currents,circulationpatterns,andtidesthroughoutthefuelandcargotransportzonestodetermineareasofpotentialimpactsonotherresources;

• Impactsfromtheconstructionandoperationofthebargelanding;

• Effectsofpotentialicebreakingassociatedwithshiptrafficinwinterandspring;

• Climatechangemayincreasetherateofthawofpermafrosttherebyincreasingratesoferosion.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT BARGE ISSUES



BARG4 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzeanddiscussbiologicalimpactstothefollowingasaresultofbargeactivity(includingthepotentialforincreasedsedimentationduetodredgingandconstructionofports):

• Fishandotherwildlifehabitatandmigration,particularlysalmonandspawningbeds;

• Vegetationalongtheriver;

• Marinemammals,marinelife,resourcesanduses;and

• Migratorybirds.

BARG5 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzeanddiscusssocialimpactstothefollowingasaresultofincreasedbargeactivity:

• Subsistenceandcommercialfishing,

• Othersubsistenceresourcesandactivities;

• Visualimpactsresultingfrombargetrafficontheriver;

• Culturalandarchaeologicalsitesalongtheriver(naturalprocessesoferosionarealreadydamagingsomesites);and

• Potentialforlocalresidentsneedingtorelocateduetophysicalimpacts,andfundingofsuchscenarios.

BARG6 CommentersrequestinformationrelatedtoEmergencyResponsePlans.Specifically,localresidentswantedinformationregardingwhetherDonlinGold,LLCwouldprovidefundingtolocalcommunitiesalongtherivertohelpassistwithpotentialbargeimpacts,suchasgrounding,hullbreachesorsinkingofbarges.

BARG7AccidentsandspillsrelatedtobargeactivityshouldbeaddressedintheDraftEISincludingthepotentialharmtotheenvironmentasaresultofabargeaccidentorspillandpotentialeffectstothewayoflifeforlocalAlaskaNatives,suchassubsistenceactivities.Adetailedplantopreventtheseaccidentsandspills,andmeasurestakentocleanupsuchscenarios,shouldbeincludedintheDraftEIS.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL DRAFT SCOPING REPORT BIRDS ‐ IMPACTS


BIRDS ‐ IMPACTS (BIRD)

Commentsrelatedtopotentialimpactstomigratorybirdsandwaterfowlpopulations,abundance,diversity,migratorypatternsandpotentialfordisplacementfromprojectcomponents.Attractionofbirdstotailingponds.


BIRD1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldaddresstheeffectoftheprojectonbirdsthatareusedforsubsistence,includingptarmiganandmigratorywaterfowl.Itshoulddescribewhethercontaminantsfromtheproposedminecouldbepickedupbybirds.TheDraftEISshouldaddressimpactstonestingbirds,suchaswaterfowlpotentiallyaffectedbyriverbankerosionfromthebargetrafficandtundranestingbirdsalongtheproposedpipelineroute.TheDraftEISshoulddescribethepotentialformigratorywaterfowltodistributecontaminantsoffsitefromtheholdingpondandanyplanforpreventionofvectors.

BIRD2 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzethepotentialriskofbirdstrikeswithwindturbines,towers,transmissionlines,orotherabovegroundinfrastructure.Suchstructuresshouldbeevaluatedforpotentialbirdcollisionsduringspringandfallmigrationwhenlargernumbersofbirdsareatrisk.

BIRD3 TheDraftEISshouldidentifythepresenceofbaldorgoldeneaglesortheirnestsintheproposedprojectarea(includingthenaturalgaspipelineROW)andanalyzepotentialimpactsoftheproposedprojectonbothspecies.Determineiftheproposedprojectwouldresultinremovalofnests,lossofhabitat,ordisturbanceofbirdswhichmayrequireanEagleTakePermitundertheBaldandGoldenEagleProtectionActadministeredbytheU.S.FishandWildlifeService.

BIRD4 TheDraftEISshouldaddressthepotentialimpactsonbirdsfromthefollowingprojectelements:

• Impactsofwaterqualityinimpoundmentsonmigratorybirds;poorwaterqualitycouldnegativelyimpactmigratingwaterbirds,especiallyifimpoundmentsattractbirdsandareusedasroostingorstagingsites.

• Impactsoftheprojectonthe12birdspeciesofconservationconcernknowntousetheproposedprojectfacilityarea(minesite)(Table1[attachedtoUSFWScommentssubmittedduringscopingforthisDraftEIS]).Considerthatwhimbrelandolive‐sidedflycatcherbreedathigherdensitiesneartheminesitecomparedtootherareasinAlaskaandthattheproposedminesiteandthesurroundingareamaybeofregionalimportanceinsupportingpopulationsofthesespecies.

• Impactsoftheproposedprojectonthe26birdspeciesofconservationconcernthatarefoundintheprojectplanningarea(transportationcorridor)(Table1[attachedtoUSFWScommentssubmittedduringscopingforthisDraftEIS]).Considerthatmanybirdsbreedathighdensitiesoroccurinlargemigratoryconcentrationsdownriveroftheminefacility,ofteninconcentrationsofregionalorglobalsignificance.Thus,downstreamimpactsofcontaminationfrommineactivitiesortransportoffuelcouldhavesignificantimpactsonregionalorgloballyimportantbirdhabitat.Theseimpactshavethepotentialtoinfluencemigratorybirdsubsistenceresourcesofthearea,whichhaveanimportantroleinthecultureoftheregion.

• Impactsofblastingandexplosiveuse,particularlyduringthebreedingseason;describethemagnitudeandtimingofexplosivesuse,andanalyzeavoidanceandminimizationmeasuressuchasseasonaltimingrestrictions.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL DRAFT SCOPING REPORT BIRDS ‐ IMPACTS



• PotentialeffectsfromincreasesinmercuryandothertoxicchemicalsfrommineactivitiesconsideringthefollowinginformationfromtheUSFWS:MercurylevelsarealreadyelevatedinfishinthemiddleKuskokwimRiver(Matz2012).Northernwetlandsarehotspotsforconvertingmercuryintotoxicmethylmercury.Manybirdspeciesfoundintheareaarepronetotoxicmercuryexposuresthroughmethylationandbio‐magnificationofmercuryinwetlandsystems.Birdspeciessuchasbaldeagles,loons,swallows,andevenrustyblackbirdshavebeenfoundtobeexposedtohighlevelsofmethylmercuryinotherpartsoftheirrangeeitherfromatmosphericdepositionorpointsources(Eversetal.2005,Edmondsetal.2010).Thus,evensmalltomodestincreasesinmercuryintheareafromtheminemayincreasemercuryexposuresinbirdstolevelswhichreducesurvivalandreproductivesuccess.

• Potentialimpactsassociatedwithorganicwaste.Describehoworganicwastewouldbemanagedtoreduceattractingscavengers.

• PotentialimpactsfromshippingdisturbanceandpotentialfuelcontaminantsconsideringthattheproposedroutefromDutchHarborthroughBristolBaytotheJungjukportsitehasthepotentialforfuelspillsthatcouldhavesignificantimpactstomigratorybirds.TheDraftEISshouldreportthatlargenumbersofseaducks,particularlyblackscoters,long‐tailedducks,andcommoneiders,useKuskokwimShoals.Inthefall,mudflatsareusedbygodwitsandothershorebirds,aswellasthousandsofforagingnorthernpintails.ThecoastalareafromthemouthoftheKuskokwimRivertothesouthsideofNelsonIslandisthemostimportantareaforfallstagingshorebirdsonthewestcoastofNorthAmerica.Itsupportshundredsofthousands,ifnotmillions,ofshorebirds,includingvirtuallytheentireNorthAmerican‐breedingpopulationofbar‐tailedgodwitsthatstagetherebeforeflyingnon‐stoptoNewZealandandAustralia.

BIRD5 Incorporatevegetation‐clearingtimingwindowsintheDraftEIStominimizetheprojectandeffectsonmigratorybirds.ThiswebsiteshouldbereviewedinpreparationoftheDraftEIS:(http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/fieldoffice/anchorage/pdf/vegetationclearing.pdf)

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT BONDING, ESCROW, RESTORATION AND RECLAMATION


BONDING, ESCROW, RESTORATION AND RECLAMATION (BER)

Commentsrelatedtoreclamationactivities,bonding,andsettingupescrowfundforrestoration.Mechanismsfortreatmentinperpetuitypostclosure(i.e.,planforpermanentwatertreatment,theentitythatwouldpaypostclosurecosts–securefinancinginperpetuity).


BER1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldprovideacompletedescriptionandanalysisoffinancialassurancesforpost‐closure,reclamation,andlong‐termwatermanagement.Bondsneedtobeadequatetoensuresuccessfulreclamationandclosure,thereforedetailedcostestimatesneedtobeidentified.Thecostsassociatedwithimplementingtheclosureandreclamationneedtobefullydisclosedsothepublic,tribesanddecision‐makersareawareofthefinancialrisk.Thefollowingaresuggestionsforinclusionintheanalysis:

• Clarificationoftheentityresponsibleforpost‐closureclean‐upactivitiesandcosts;

• Listofassumptionsthatcostsarebasedon;

• Anitemizedcostestimatespreadsheet;

• Narrativedescriptionforfinancialassurancecostcategories;

• Direct,indirect,andcumulativecosts;

• Costestimatesbasedonreasonablespillorfailurescenarios;

• Variabletocalculatevalueoffutureexpenses,anddiscussionofchangesintheeconomy;

• Managementfees,taxrates,timingofpayments,andanyothermechanismsassociatedwithfinancialassurances;

• Reasonablyforeseeableoutcomes,includingchangesinclimateandprecipitationandassociatedcosts;

• Appropriateengineeringtechniquesforstabilizingcontaminatedmaterialandreclaimingfacilities,includingBestManagementPractices(BMPs);

• Goalsandcriteriafordeterminingsuccessofreclamationactivities;

• Scheduleandtimeperiodtocompletelong‐termtreatment,monitoringandmaintenance;and

• Commitmenttoreevaluatefinancialassuranceplansevery3‐5yearsorwheneveramajorchangetomineoperationshasoccurred.

BER2 Commentersrequestdetailsregardingbondingofthemine,andwhatbondswouldcover.

BER3 TheDraftEISshouldidentifywhatentitywouldberesponsibleforcleaningupfacilitiesandcontaminationaftermineclosure.OnceDonlinGoldleaves,whowouldberesponsible?Onehundredyearsaftermineclosure,whoisresponsible?TheDraftEISshouldprovidealegalreviewofliablepartiesforallscenarios,wellintothefuture.Ifthebondprovestobeinsufficient,theDraftEISshouldidentifytheentityresponsibleforcoveringcosts.




BER4 Commenterswouldliketoknowwhattheplanisforwatertreatmentinperpetuity,includingtimeframefortreatmentinperpetuityandformonitoringofwaterqualityaftermineclosure.AcidrockdrainageshouldalsobecoveredinthisanalysisintheDraftEISwhichshouldalsoprovideadetailedanalysisoflong‐termwatertreatmentcosts.SomecommentersbelievetheDraftEISshouldidentifyalternativewatertreatmentplansthatdonotrequiretreatmentbeyond10yearspost‐reclamation.

BER5 Commentersproposedthatanaccountbesetasideforenvironmentalrestoration,controlledbythetribes,thestate,andthefederalgovernment.Thefundwouldbeusedtorestoreanydamagestofisheries,wildlife,wetlands,water,andhabitats.

BER6 Theeffectsofpipelineactivitieswouldrequirefuturemaintenanceandmonitoringaftermineclosureandpipelineabandonment.Bondsneedtobeestablishedtocoverthesecosts,andtherationaleforeachcostshouldbedescribedintheDraftEIS.Specifically,commentsreceivedduringscopingnotedthattheDraftEISshouldexplain:

• Ifthepipelinewouldremaininplaceafterthelifeofthemine;

• Howthefundsgeneratedbybondingwouldbeappliedtomonitoringworkforevaluatingthelong‐termimpactstowaterbodycrossings,permafrost,vegetation,habitatanderosionwouldbemonitoredpost‐closure;

• Asystemtobeimplementedthatwillassurethatallreclamationandrestorationworkisadequatelycompleted;

• Whowillbetheresponsibleentityifeffortsofreclamationandmonitoringfail;and

• Specificcriteriaandthresholdsforsuccess.

BER7 Commentersrequestdetailedinformationforbondsthatwouldcoverdamagefrompotentialtailingsfailuresinperpetuity,andthetimeframeforwhenbondscanbeused(5,10,15yearsafterclosure?).Bondsshouldcovercappingandpreventionofpondandrainwaterintothetailings,andentitiesresponsibleformaintenanceshouldbeidentified.Iffailuresoccur,theentityresponsibleforclean‐upshouldbeidentified.Commentersareparticularlyconcernedwithimpactstofishandsubsistenceresourcesresultingfromatailingsfailure.TheDraftEISshouldincludearangeofalternativesinwhichtheminepitdoesnotbecomealakethatrequireswatertreatmentinperpetuity.Tominimizetheamountoffinancialassurance,commentersrequestremovaloftailingsmaterialoff‐site.

BER8 Inrelationtoclosureandreclamation,commentersbelieveitisunreasonabletopermitaprojectthatwouldrequireincreasinglymoreexpensivepollutioncontroltechnologybeyondclosureofthemine.TheDraftEISshoulddiscusstherealitiesofchangingenergycostsandeconomiesbeyondclosureofthemine,upto100years,andhowbondswouldadequatelycovercostsinanever‐changingeconomy.

BER9 Themineshouldonlybepermittedifitcanbebuiltwithsufficientlyeffectiveclosureandreclamationtoavoidcompromisingthelong‐termviabilityofresourcessuchasfish,waterandair,andtheenvironmentingeneral.Impactswouldbeseenbeyondthe27yearminelife.TheDraftEISshouldconductrigorousscientificresearchforallmineprocessesandmaterialsandtheassociatedpost‐closureimpactstotheenvironmentandhumanhealth.




BER10 Wasterockshouldbemanagedinperpetuity.TheprocessandmethodsformanagingwasterockandtailingstoragefacilitiesinperpetuityshouldbedescribedanddiscussedintheDraftEIS.

BER11 Costsassociatedwithlong‐term,in‐perpetuityimpactstosubsistence,wildlifeandwaterresourcesneedtobediscussedintheDraftEIS.

BER12 Theprocessforrevegetationpostclosureshouldbediscussed.Thisincludesanylandtreatments,suchasgradingorrecontouring,toreduceerosion,slopestabilityandsedimentationinsurfacewaters.ThetypeandmethodsforrevegetationshouldbeanalyzedintheDraftEIS.Allareasshouldberestoredascloselyaspossibletonaturalconditions.

BER13 Commentersrequestdetailsregardingfacilities,materialsandinfrastructurepost‐closure.Specifically,whatwouldbedonewithremainingmaterialsaftermineclosure?Wouldinfrastructurebuiltforthemineremain?

BER14 Otherminesitesshouldberesearchedandanalyzedtopredictpost‐closurescenarios.Thiswouldhelpdetermineappropriatemitigationandmonitoringplans.

BER15 TheDraftEISshouldprovidemoredetailregardingthespoilsreclamationprocessforthepipelineright‐of‐way.Specifically,whenwouldspoilsreclamationtakeplace?Commentersnotethatthespoilsidemustbewideandlowtopreventsnowfromdriftingontheright‐of‐wayorintothetrench.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT CLIMATE CHANGE


CLIMATE CHANGE (CLIM)

Commentsandconcernsabouttheimpactsofclimatechangesuchasincreasedglacialdischarges,lesssnowpack,reducedwaterlevelsintheriversystems,andthewayinwhichthesetrendsmayinteractwitheffectsoftheproposedproject.Theinteractionmayincludeclimatechangeinducedriskstotheproposedproject,oradditiveeffectsoftheprojecttostressesonresourcesduetoclimatechange.Thiscategoryalsoincludesthepotentialeffectstotheproposedprojecttoclimatechangethroughtheemissionofgreenhousegases.


CLIM1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzeclimatechangeimpactsonthefollowingasaresultof,andinconjunctionwitheffectsfromtheproposedproject(includingthenaturalgaspipelineROW):

• Vegetation,habitatandplantlife;

• Icecaps,snowpack,andpotentialforincreasedmeltingandoverflow,includingeffectsoflowersnowpackandwarmertemperature(documentsummertemperaturetrends);

• Lakesandotherbodiesofwaterintheproposedprojectarea;

• Weatherchangessuchasincreasedstormactivity,flooding,andchangingmoistureregimes;

• Impactstofish,wildlife,andtheirhabitats;

• AlaskaNativecommunitiesandtheirtraditionalwayoflife;

• Permafrostandthepipelinetrench;

• StreamflowandhydrologicregimeontheKuskokwimRiveronplannedbargetraffic;

• Needfordredging,watermanagement,andwatertreatment;

• Subsistence;

• Publichealth;

• Cumulativeimpactsandreasonablyforeseeableactivitiesfurtheraffectingclimatechange;and

• CommenterssuggestthatananalysissimilartotheChuitnaIntegratedHydrologicEffectsModelbedevelopedforthisproject.

CLIM2 TheEISshouldincludeanalysisofchangesinenvironmentalconditionsovertime,changesinsurroundinghabitatduringthereclamationandrestorationphaseoftheproject,andadaptivemanagementinresponsetochangesoftemperatureandprecipitation.

MitigationmeasuresandmonitoringtechniquesneedtobedescribedintheDraftEISandimplementedtoreduceimpactsassociatedwithclimatechange.Theseshouldbeanalyzedthroughoutthelifeoftheproject.

Iftheprojectproceeds,monitoringactivitiesshouldincludeafutureHealthImpactAssessment(HIA)toprovideadetailedanalysisofclimatechangeimpactsonhumanhealth.

CLIM3 TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowdustemissionswouldpotentiallyaffectthelocalclimate.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT CLIMATE CHANGE



CLIM4 TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzechangesingreenhousegas(GHG)emissionsasaresultoftheproposedprojectandallalternatives,disclosingthedifferencesbetweeneach.ThisincludesGHGemissionsandclimatechangeeffectsresultingfromallphasesofdevelopment,andallcomponentssuchasminefacilities,thepipeline,marineandriver,air,andgroundcargo/fueltransportation.CEQguidanceshouldbereviewedforinformationonquantifyingGHGemissions.Commentersalsosuggestedincludingthefollowing:

• GHGemissioninventorythatincludesbaselineemissions,directandindirectprojectrelatedemissions,andemissionsfromreasonablyforeseeableactivities;

• AnnualandcumulativeemissionsresultingfromtheprojectusingC02‐equivalentasametricforcomparingdifferenttypesofGHGemittedoverthelifeoftheproject,includingreclamationandclosure;

• Evaluationfutureneedsandcapacitiesoftheopenpitmine,ancillaryfacilities,andpipelinetoadapttoprojectclimatechangeeffects;

• ReasonablespatialandtemporalboundariesforGHGandclimatechangeanalysis;

• DescribethelinkbetweenGHGandclimatechange,aswellasthepotentialimpactsofclimatechangeonthestructuralintegrityoftheproposedprojectandfacilities;

• EstimatetheextentthatmeltingpermafrostassociatedwiththeproposedprojectwouldcontributetoGHGemissions;

• Changesinthecarboncycleduetomanipulationofnaturalcarbonsinksandsources;and

• Climate‐relatedbiologicalchangesovertime.

CLIM5 TheCorpsshouldkeepDonlinGold,LLCinformedofanyupdateontheissuanceofCEQfinalguidanceonhowtoevaluateclimatechangeimpacts.

CLIM6 Theproposedpipelineshouldnotbeplacedwithintundrauplandwarminghabitats.TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzealternativesthatwouldhelpreduceimpactsresultingfromclimatechange,particularlywithregardstothepipeline.MuchoftheroutebetweenMP150and194isexposedtosolarthaw.Commenterssuggestmovingtheroutetwoandahalfmileswestwhereitismuchmorespruce‐covered,withanaccompanyingground‐insulatingmatmaintainingpermafrostatlowertemperatures.

CLIM7 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzeclimatechangeimpactsontheproject,including:

• Thestructuralintegrityofimpoundmentsandcontainmentstructures;

• Changesinrequirementformaintenanceoftailingsimpoundmentsandtreatingwaterinperpetuity;and

• Pipelinestructuralandslopeintegrityinareaswithchangingpermafrost.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT COOPERATING AGENCIES


COOPERATING AGENCIES (CAP)

Whoshouldserveasacooperatingagency?Rolesandfunctionsofthecooperatingagencies.


CAP1 Concernswereexpressedregardingwhichagenciesarecooperatorsandwhicharenot.Listthecooperatingagencies,andexplainhowtheyweredeterminedandwhattheirrolesare.Specifically:

• TheU.S.Fish&WildlifeServiceshouldberepresentedbecauseofconcernswithimpactstosubsistenceresources;

• ClarifytheroleoftheBLMandtimingofthesubmittalsoftheplanforcooperation,andwildlifeavoidanceandhumanencounters/interactionplan;and

• ClarifytheroleoftheU.S.CoastGuardregardingtheirnavigationmanagementontheriveriftheproposedprojectgoesforward.

CAP2 Concernswereexpressedthattoofewvillages(fiveatthetimeofthecomment,sixatpresent)areinvolvedascooperatingtribalgovernmentsbecauseoftheamountoftimeandeffortnecessary.Clarifywhetherornotothervillagescanstillbecomeinvolvedascooperatingtribalgovernments.

CAP3 TheDraftEISshoulddescribethedistinctionbetweenacooperatingagencyandaparticipatingagency,andthedifferenceinlevelofeffortinvolved.CommentersexpressedconcernthattherearenocooperatingagenciesthatrepresentthemarineenvironmentsuchastheU.S.CoastGuardortheNationalMarineFisheriesServiceorNOAA,despitetheproposeduseoftheBeringSeaasatransportationcorridorfortheprojectandpotentialimpactstomarinewatersfromactivitiesontheriver.

CAP4 Allagenciesinvolvedinpermitting,DonlinGold,LLC,andalloftheirconsultantsshouldpooltheircontactdatabasestocreateamasterstakeholderdatabase,includingbutnotlimitedtoanyonewhowasinvolvedwiththescopingprocessorhasbeeninvolvedinotherenvironmentalorsocialcorrespondenceregardingtheproject.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT DATA AND AVAILABLE INFORMATION


DATA AND AVAILABLE INFORMATION (DATA)

Commentsabouttheadequacyofdataandrequeststoincorporatespecificstudiesintotheanalysis.[Notetoreaders:thesecommentsretaintheformattingofthesubmitter.WhenusedintheDraftEIS,allreferenceswillbecitedinaconsistentformat].


DATA1 TheCorpsshouldreviewtheseadditionalreferencesinpreparationoftheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISregardingairqualityandmercuryemissions:

ArecentpaperbyMathieuMillerandreleasedbytheAirandWasteManagementAssociationindicatedthatnon‐pointsourcesatopenpitgoldminescanbebetween14‐56percentofthetotalmercuryemissionsfromamine.[EPAreviewcommentsontheDraftScopingReportdrawadifferentconclusionfromthispaper:14‐45percentofthetotalmercuryemissionsfromamine(representingreleasesof17‐84kg/year)].

Unfortunately,EPAdoesnotregulatenon‐pointsourcesunderits2010ruling:NationalEmissionsStandardsforHazardousAirPollutantsforGoldOreProcessingandProductionFacilities.However,therulenotesthatfugitiveemissionsmaybeoccurringatthesefacilitiesfromlargenon‐pointsourcessuchastailingsponds,leachfields,andwasterockpiles.SeeMiller,etal.,Testingandmodelingtheinfluenceofreclamationandcontrolmethodsforreducingnon‐pointmercuryemissionsassociatedwithindustrialopenpitgoldmines.JournaloftheAirandWasteManagementAssociation,December2012,p.4.(6)https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2010/04/28/2010‐9363/national‐emission‐standards‐for‐hazardous‐air‐pollutants‐gold‐mine‐ore‐processing‐and‐production.

ResearchconductedbyMaeGustinattheUniversityofNevada,Renofoundthatmercuryairemissionsfromminingdisturbanceswereapproximately20percentofthetotalmercuryemittedatthetwogoldminesstudied,withtotalnonpointemissionsattheTwinCreeksMineof105kg/year(231pounds/year)and19kg/year(41pounds/year)attheCortezMine.Infugitiveemissionsalone,thesetwominescombinedproduced3.8timestheamountofknownmercuryairreleasesinallofAlaska,fromallsources,accordingtothe2010EPAToxicsReleaseInventory.Eckleyetal.,MeasurementofsurfacemercuryfluxesatactiveindustrialgoldminesinNevada(USA),ScienceoftheTotalEnvironment,409(2011)p.514‐522.[EPAreviewcommentsontheDraftScopingReportdrawadifferentconclusionfromthepaper:14‐56percentofthetotalmercuryemittedatthetwogoldminesstudied].

NevadaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtection,StakeholderMeeting,October7,2009.

NevadaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtection,NoticeofFindingsandOrderNo.2008‐13.RegardingtheJerrittCanyonminethatfailedtooperateandmaintainpollutioncontroldevicesforasignificantperiodoftime,resultinginexcessemissionsandfailuretoreportthoseexcessemissions.Thisproblemwasnotconfirmeduntiltheannualemissionstestingeventoccurredatleastafullyearlater.

OnDecember6,2010,theEPApromulgatedNationalEmissionsStandardsforHazardousAirPollutantsforgoldareprocessingandproductionfacilitiestoregulatemercuryairemissions,whichistheseventhlargestsourceofmercuryemissionsintheUnitedStates.Thefinalruleestablishesmercuryemissionlimitsforfourtypesofprocessesfoundatgoldproductionfacilities:ore‐pretreatmentprocesses(primarilyheatingprocessesusedtoprepareareforgoldextraction);carbonprocesseswithmercuryretorts;carbonprocesseswithoutmercuryretorts;andnon‐carbon




concentrateprocesses.Table1(attachedtoEPAcommentssubmittedduringscopingforthisDraftEIS)identifiesthefinalmercuryairemissionlimitsfornewsources.Thefinalrulealsoestablishesrequirementsformonitoring,whichincludeannualmercuryemissionstestsatallemissionsstacks.https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2010/04/28/2010‐9363/national‐emission‐standards‐for‐hazardous‐air‐pollutants‐gold‐mine‐ore‐processing‐and‐production

DraftEISminescenarioalternativesneedtoconsiderthatminetechnologyevolvesovertime,andallowfortheinclusionof,butnotsolerelianceon,evolvingscienceincontaminantmonitoring,watermanagement,andwastemanagement.InnovativetechnologiesincludingbutnotlimitedtothefollowingshouldbeassessedinminealternativesintheDraftEIS:

• CO2capturewithtailings.DonlinGold,LLChasshownaninterestininnovativetechnology(e.g.useoftheuntestedOctoligcolumnsforseleniumremoval;applicationofUNRreagentsforremovalofmercuryfromtailingsstream)andhasalsoshownaninterestinreducingcarbonemissionsthroughtheuseofnaturalgasandwindpowerinsteadofcoal.

• ThelatestresearchintocapturingCO2inminetailings,andparticularlythechemicalandmechanicaldetails.[Footnote:NevadaBureauofMinesandGeology,Report52:AssessmentofthePotentialforCarbonDioxideSequestrationbyReactionswithRocksinNevada,DanielM.Sturmer,DaphneD.LaPointe,JonathanG.Price,RonaldH.Hess,2007;andAcceleratedCarbonationofBruciteinMineTailingsforCarbonSequestration,AnnaL.Harrison,IanM.Power,andGregoryM.Dipple,EnvironmentalScience&Technology,2013.Downloadthisreportat:http://www.nbmg.unr.edu/dox/dox.htm

• Economicscenarios(e.g.carbontax),thatmakethetechnologypotentiallyfeasibleornotfeasibleattheDonlinorebody.Iftheideaisfeasible,DonlinGold,LLCshouldbeginlabscaletestingwithsiterock,orengageinapartnershipwithresearcherscurrentlystudyingCO2capture.Ifitisnotfeasible,adetailedexplanationofwhyitisnotshouldbeprovidedintheDraftEIS.

DATA2 TheDraftEISshouldaddresspresenceandpotentialimpactsoftheprojectonallbirdsprotectedundertheMigratoryBirdTreatyActandespeciallytobirdsofconservationconcernandbirdconcentrations.TheUSFWShasseveraldatasetsonwaterfowlthatmaybeapplicabletoevaluationoftheproposedproject.TheUSFWShasconductedaerialwaterbirdsurveysofwetlandsaroundAlaskaformanyyears.Thesesurveysprovideabundance,distribution,andtrendinformationformanywaterbirdspecies.Resultingdataareavailableingeographicinformationsystem(GIS)databasesandshouldbeexamined.Theseinclude:

• AseriesofspringaerialsurveysofbreedingwaterbirdsconductedontheYukonDeltaNationalWildlifeRefuge(PlatteandButler1993),Tanana/Kuskokwimarea(Platte2003),andKenai/Susitnaarea(Platteetal.2012),allofwhichareregionallylocatednearprojectcomponents;

• Trumpeterswancensusdatacollectedevery5yearswithpopulationsize,trend,anddistributiondata;thelastlatestoccurringin2005(Conantetal.2007)(Beginningin2010,surveydesignswerechangedtosamplehabitat.Locationsoftrumpeterswansobservedduringthe2005censusareshownonMap2providedincommentsbytheUSFWSduringthescopingperiodforthisproposedproject);and

• TheSouthwestAlaskaSpringSteller'seideraerialsurvey,conductedannually,inmid‐May,from1992‐2012(except1995,1996,1999,2006;Larned2001).Thissurveymonitorsdistributionandabundanceofwaterbirdsinthenearshoremarine




environmentfromthemouthoftheKuskokwimRivertoColdBay.

TheDraftEISshouldexaminetheattachmentstocommentsprovidedbytheUSFWSduringthescopingperiodforthisproposedprojectthatincludemapsandtables:Map2‐ServiceGeneratedDataonWaterbirds;Table1‐Non‐gamebirdsofconservationconcerndetectedwithintheplanningareaoftheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEIS;andTable2‐Averagenumberofbirdscountedpersurveystopalong8BreedingBirdSurveyroutesalongtheKuskokwimRiver,Alaska(Harwood2000,2002)forconsiderationinwildlifesectionsanalysisoftheDraftEIS.

Dataisalsoavailableatthiswebsite:htt://www.waterfowladvisories.utah.gov/

DATA3 TheCorpsshouldreviewtheseadditionalreferencesinpreparationoftheDraftEISregardingclimatechangeresources:

Inadditiontoeconomicuncertainties,therearealsoseriousquestionsregardingthefutureclimateandprecipitationtrendsatminesites,furthercomplicatingtheabilitytopredictfuturecostsandneeds:http://www.mtech.edu/mwtp/conference/2012_presentations/Dave%20Williams.pdfWilliams,DavidR.2012.ClimateChange‐ExtremeConditions:DoPlansofOperationsNeedtoIncludeanArk?20thAnnualMineDesign,Operations&ClosureConferenceApril29‐May3,2012.PowerPoint

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/endangerment/Endangerment_TSD.pdf

U.S.EPA,ClimateChangeDivision,OfficeofAtmosphericPrograms.2009.EndangermentandCauseorContributefindingsforGreenhouseGasesunderSection202(a)oftheCleanAirActhttp://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/endangerment/Endangerment_TSD.pdf

DATA4 TheCorpsshouldconsultwithAssociationofVillageCouncilPresidentsintheY‐KRegionasthisassociationhasadepartmentthatfocusesonprotectionandmitigationofimpactstoculturalsitesandmaybeabletoprovideadditionaldata.

DATA5 TheCorpsshouldconsidertheseadditionalreferencesregardingenvironmentaljustice:

ThereareanumberoftechnicalreportsandotherEnvironmentalImpactStatementsthathavebeencompletedthroughoutAlaskawhichconsiderimpactsfromresourceextractionprojectsonAlaskaNativecommunities.Theseresourcesshouldbereviewedandincluded,asappropriate,asreferencesforconsideringthefullrangeofimpactstoAlaskaNativecommunitiesandtheirwayoflife.Thesereferencesareprovidedtoassistwithevaluatingimpactsonsocio‐culturalresourcesandenvironmentaljustice:

BallardI,andBarks,C.andG.(2003).ResourceWars;TheAnthropologyofMining.AnnualReviewofAnthropology32:287:313.

Braund,StephenR.&Associates(2009).lmpactsofOilandGasDevelopmenttoBarrow,Nuiqsut,Wainwright,andAtqasukHarvesters.ReportpreparedfortheNorthSlopeBorough,DepartmentofWildlifeManagement.

Braund,S.R.andJ.Kruse(ed.)(2009).Synthesis:ThreeDecadesofResearchonSocioeconomicEffectsRelatedtoOffshorePetroleumDevelopmentinCoastalAlaska.MineralsManagementService,OuterContinentalShelfStudy2009‐006.

NationalResearchCouncil(2003).CumulativeEnvironmentalEffectsofOilandGasActivitiesonAlaska’sNorthSlope.WashingtonD.C.:TheNationalAcademiesPress.




Palinkas,L.A.,M.A.Downs,J.S.Petterson,andJ.Russell(1993).Social,Cultural,andPsychologicalImpactsoftheExxonValdezOilSpill.HumanOrganization52(1):1‐12.

Storey,K.andL.C.Hamilton(2004).PlanningfortheImpactsofMegaprojects:TwoNorthAmericanExamples.Pp.281‐302inR.O.RasmussenandN.E.Korolcva(eds.)SocialandEconomicImpactsintheNorth.Dordrecht,Netherlands:KluwerAcademicPublishers.

TetraTech(2009).RedDogMineExtensionAqqalukProjectFinalEnvironmentalImpactStatement,October2009,fortheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,Region10.

Duhaime,GerardandBernard,Nick,editors(2008).ArcticFoodSecurity.CanadianCircumpolarInstitute(CCI)Press,UniversityofAlbertaandCentreinter‐universitaired'etudesetderecherchesautochtones(CIERA),Universite'Laval.

ExecutiveOrder(EO)12898.Title3.59FR32.FederalActionstoAddressEnvironmentalJusticeinMinorityPopulationsandLow‐IncomePopulations.(Feb.16,1994).AndMemorandum.

GoodNeighborAgreementBetweenStillwaterMiningCompanyandNorthernPlainsResourceCouncil,CottonwoodResourceCouncil,StillwaterProtectiveAssociation.http://www.northernplains.org/the‐issues/good‐neighbor‐agreement/

EPAwebsite:EnvironmentalJusticeConsiderationsintheNEPAProcesshttp://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/nepaej/index.html

DATA6 TheCorpsshouldreviewtheseadditionalreferencesinpreparationoftheDraftEISregardingfishresources:

http://www.blm.gov/ak/st/en/prog/fisheries/rdm_fish.html

Mahaffey,KR.2004.Methylmercury:EpidemiologyUpdate.PresentationattheNationalForumonContaminantsinFish,SanDiego,January28.

DATA7 TheCorpsshouldreviewthisadditionalreferenceregardingenergysources:

LePain,D.L.,2012,SummaryoffossilfuelandgeothermalresourcepotentialintheLowerYukon‐Kuskokwimenergyregion,inSwenson,R.F.,Wartes,M.A.,LePain,D.L.,andClough,J.G.,FossilfuelandgeothermalenergysourcesforlocaluseinAlaska:Summaryofavailableinformation:AlaskaDivisionofGeological&GeophysicalSurveysSpecialReport66G,p.63‐72.2

DATA8 TheCorpsshouldreviewtheseadditionalreferencesinpreparationoftheDraftEISregardingmercuryandcontamination:

PastcorrespondencefromtheDonlinGoldWorkingGroup(DGWG)totheAlaskaDepartmentofEnvironmentalConservation(ADEC),theAlaskaDepartmentofNaturalResources(ADNR),andtheU.SEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)regardingmercury.ThecorrespondenceisalsoavailableontheDGWGwebsite:https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb25saW5jcmVla3dvcmtpbmdncm91cHxneDoyMjA1ODM2ZDNmYjM4OGI5,https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb25saW5jcmVla3dvcmtpbmdncm91cHxneDoxNmQ3NmFiNWI4NTliOWQw,andhttps://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb25saW5jcmVla3dvcmtpbmdncm91cHxneDoyN2JlMDVlYmFkZjZjNjU2.]

TheCorpssshouldreviewa2001draftreportpreparedforEPA,bythecontractorBooz,AllenandHamilton,Inc.,thatevaluatedtherangeofpossiblemercuryloading




andpartitioningforeachprocessinvolvedingoldoreprocessing.Thereportdemonstratedthatamassbalanceapproachisfeasible,asitidentifiedemissionsfactorsandmassbalanceevaluationsbasedonsourcetestingdata,processengineeringinformationonmercuryconcentrationsandbehaviorintheprocessesandcontroltechnologies,andestimatesderivedfrommercuryemissionsandcontrolsfromotherindustrialprocesseswithsimilaremissiontypes.Thereportalsoflaggedtheneedforsite‐specificassessments,observingthatindividualsiteevaluationsshouldincludemassbalanceevaluationsthatmeasuremercuryconcentrationsinthesolidphases(processinputandoutputstreams)andtreatmentresiduals(adsorptionmediaandscrubbersolutions).Booz,AllenandHamiltonInc.,DraftMercuryMassBalanceandEmissionsFactorEstimatesforGoldOreProcessingFacilities(2001).

U.S.EPAToxicReleaseInventory,2008.

http://www.jmc.army.mil/Images/Hawthorne/HWAD%20Mercury%20Consolidation%20Project%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

http://mercurystorageeis.com/Elementalmercurystorage%20Interim%20Guidance%20%28dated%202009‐11‐13%29.pdf

http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/sfund/r9sfdocw.nsf/7508188dd3c99a2a8825742600743735/2380a6ecf1b1731f88257007005e9424!OpenDocument

AlaskaCommunityActiononToxics&ReducingEnvironmentalDestructiononIndigenousLands,MiningandToxicMetals:AcasestudyoftheproposedDonlinCreekMine,February2009,citingAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGame,DivisionofSubsistence,2001,AlaskaSubsistenceFisheries1999AnnualReportatpage154.

http://www.blm.gov/ak/st/en/fo/ado/hazardous_materials/red_devil_mine/rdm_cercla_remedial.html

U.S.EPA.TechnicalFactsheeton:MERCURY.

Eckleyetal.,MeasurementofsurfacemercuryfluxesatactiveindustrialgoldminesinNevada(USA),ScienceoftheTotalEnvironment,409(2011)p.514‐522.

U.S.MineSafetyandHealthAdministration(MSHA).ControllingMercuryHazardsinGoldMining:ABestPracticesToolbox.Draft,September1997.

Mazt,Angela.2012.Mercury,Arsenic,andAntimonyinAquaticbiotafromtheMiddleKuskokwimRiverRegion,Alaska,2010‐2011.

U.S.DepartmentofEnergy.2009.InterimGuidanceonPackaging,Transportation,Receipt,Management,andLong‐TermStorageofElementalMercury.

DATA9 TheCorpsshouldreviewandincorporatethefindings,conclusionsandresourcedataincludedinthe1986IditarodNationalHistoricTrailmanagementplan,includinghighvaluesegmentsandsitesalongtheTrail,andthesupporting1982ResourceInventory,whichalsoprovidesacomprehensiveevaluationofthescenicqualityoftheTrail.

DATA10 TheCorpsshouldreviewtheseadditionalreferencesinpreparationoftheDraftEISregardingHealthRiskorImpactAnalysisScreeningAnalysis:

Whenconductingascreening,itwasrecommendedtouse:Bhatiaetal.MinimumElementsandPracticeStandardsforHealthImpactAssessment,Version2(NorthAmericanHIAPracticeStandardsWorkingGroup,2010),3‐4.

GuidesforconductingHIAareavailablefromvarioussources.ThefollowingreferencesareadditionalresourcesonHIA:




WorldHealthOrganization;HealthImpactAssessmentShortGuidesInternationalFinanceCorporation‐IntroductiontoHealthimpactAssessment(2009)http://who.intfhialabout/guideslen/.CDC;HealthyPlaces,HealthImpactAssessment

CentersforDiseaseControlandPrevention;HealthyPlacesHealthImpactAssessment;http:/{www.cdc.gov/healthyplaccS/hia.htm

HumanImpactPartners;HealthImpactAssessmentToolkit:AHandbookforConductingHIA;Oakland.CA(2011)

RajivBhatia;HealthImpactAssessment:AGuideforPractice.Oakland.CA(2011).http:/www.humanimpact.org

DATA11 TheCorpsshouldreviewthesebackgroundmaterialsinpreparationoftheDraftEISregardingpastsocioeconomicimpacts:

ConcernsandwrittenarticlestotheDeltaDiscoverynewspaperbyN.LeedyofNome(March3,2009)thatdescribehispersonalexperiencesintheproposedprojectareawithNovaGold.

TheNarrativeDescriptionforFinancialAssuranceCostCategoriesandFinancialAssuranceCostEstimatesprovidedincommentssubmittedbytheEPAduringthescopingprocessforthisproject.

ThedocumenttitledPlanningforyourFuture:JobswithDonlinGoldasanexampleoftheapplicant’slocaleffortsinthisarea.

DATA12 TheCorpsshouldreviewthefollowingreferenceinpreparationoftheDraftEISregardingsubsistenceresources:

ADFG.Fall,J.A.etal.AlaskaSubsistenceFisheries1999AnnualReport.TechnicalPaper300

TheDraftEISshouldconsidertheannualconsumptionquantitiesoflocallyharvestedsubsistencefoodswhenassessingriskofcontaminationforcommunitiesontheYukonandKuskokwimrivers.Lower48EPAfishconsumptionguidelinesarenotrelevanttoAlaskasubsistencefoodsconsumptionlevelsandshouldnotbeused;ratherguidancefromtheAlaskaDivisionofPublicHealthshouldbeused.Bioaccumulationinlong‐livedfishconsumedforsubsistenceisofparticularconcern.WhitefishiseatenyearroundbypeopleinallKuskokwimcommunities.Bothbroadandhumpbackwhitefisharequitelong‐livedbottomfeederswithonebroadwhitefishagedatapproximately40years.BurbotandburbotliverarealsoeatenfrequentlyontheKuskokwimandtestresultshaveindicatedelevatedlevelsofmercury.Northernpike,alsoalong‐livedresidentfish,isknowntobio‐accumulatetoxinsduetoitslocationonthefoodchain.PeopleinmanycommunitiesontheKuskokwimeatdriedpike,whichconcentratesbioaccumulativechemicalsandiseateninlargerquantitiesthanfreshfish.TheUSFWSandtheAlaskaDivisionofPublicHealthhavecollaboratedtoprovidesite‐specificpikeconsumptionguidelinestosomeKuskokwimRivervillagesbasedonhowsubsistencefoodsareeaten(freshvs.driedandtypicalquantitieseaten)(seewww.epi.alaska.gov/eh/fish).

TheU.S.FishandWildlifeService,OfficeofSubsistenceManagement,hasprovidedadditionalresearchinsubmittedcommentsthatmaybeusefulintheanalysisoftheDraftEIS.Thefollowingisalistofsubsistenceusesoffishandwildliferesources.ThelistincludesvillageslocatedinKuskokwimBayandthelowerandmiddleKuskokwimRiver.ThisinformationwascollectedaspartofastrategicplanningprocessattheFisheriesResourceMonitoringProgramattheOfficeofSubsistenceManagement,USFWS,inAnchorage,Alaska.Manyofthefollowingreportsareavailableatthe




FisheriesResourceMonitoringProgramwebsitehttp://alaska.fws.gov/asm/fis.cfmlorattheADFGDivisionofSubsistencewebsitehttp://www.adfg.alaska.gov/sf/publications/

2001‐2003studyyears.Nonsalmonfishsubsistenceharvestsurveys‐Bethel.Whitefishspeciesarelumped,nouseareamapping,nolocalknowledge.

Simon,Jim,TracieKrauthoefer,DavidKoster,MichaelCoffing,andDavidCaylor;2007;Bethelsubsistencefishingharvestmonitoringreport,KuskokwimFisheriesManagementArea,Alaska,2001‐2003;ADFGDivisionofSubsistence,TechnicalPaperNo.330.OSM01‐024.

2001‐2003studyyears:Nonsalmonfishsubsistenceharvestsurveys‐AniakandChuathbaluk.Whitefishspeciesarelumped,useareasmappedbuttimeframeunknown,nolocalknowledge.

Krauthoefer,T.,T.Simon,M.Coffing,M.Kerlin,andW.Morgan;2006;TheharvestofnonsalmonfishbyresidentsofAniakandChuathbaluk,Alaska,2001‐2003;ADFGDivisionofSubsistenceTechnicalPaperNo.299;OSM01‐112,Juneau.

2005‐2006studyyears:Salmonandnonsalmonfishlocalknowledge‐Quinhagak,GoodnewsBay,andPlatinum.

LaVine,R.,M.J.LisacandP.Coiley‐Kenner;2007;Traditionalecologicalknowledgeof20thcenturyecosystemsandfishpopulationsintheKuskokwimBayRegion;U.S.FishandWildlifeService,OfficeofSubsistenceManagement,FisheriesResourceMonitoringProgram;FinalReportforOSM04‐351,Anchorage.

2005‐2009studyyears:Nonsalmonfishharvestsurveysandlocalknowledge‐Eek,Tuntutuliak,andNunapitchukWhitefishspeciesarelumped,useareamappingbuttimeframeunknown,emphasisonlocalknowledge.

Ray,L.,C.Brown,A.Russell,T.Krauthoefer,C.Wassillie,andJ.Hooper;2010;LocalknowledgeandharvestmonitoringofnonsalmonfisheriesintheLowerKuskokwimRiverRegion,Alaska2005‐2009;ADFGDivisionofSubsistenceTechnicalPaperNo.356;OSM06‐351,Juneau.

2006studyyear:Salmonandnonsalmonfishharvestsurveysandlocalknowledge.

MekoryukDrozda,R.M;2010;NunivakIslandsubsistencecod,redsalmonandgraylingfisheries‐pastandpresent;U.S.FishandWildlifeService,OfficeofSubsistenceManagement,FisheriesResourceMonitoringProgram,FinalReportforOSM05‐353;Anchorage.

2006‐2007studyyears:Localknowledgeofclimatechange‐ToksookBay,Tununak,Nightmute,andNewtok.

Fienup‐Riordan,Ann;2010;Yup'ikperspectivesonclimatechange:“Theworldisfollowingitspeople;"EtudesInuitStudies34(1):55‐70;Quebec.

Fienup‐Riordan,A.,andA.Reardon;2012;Ellavut/OurYup'ikworldandweather:continuityandchangeontheBeringSeacoast;UniversityofWashingtonPress,Seattle.

2007studyyear:Comprehensivesubsistenceharvestsurveys‐LimeVillage.Whitefishdescribedbyspecies,useareamappingfor2007studyyear,nolocalknowledge.

Holen,Davin,TerriLemons;2010;SubsistenceharvestsandusesofwildresourcesinLimeVillage,Alaska,2007;ADFGDivisionofSubsistenceTechnicalPaperNo.355.

2009studyyear:ComprehensivesubsistenceharvestsurveysDonlinProjectPhase1‐




Aniak,Chuathbaluk,CrookedCreek,LowerKalskag,RedDevil,Sleetmute,StonyRiver,andUpperKalskag.Whitefishdescribedbyspecies,useareamappingfor2009studyyearandlifetime,nolocalknowledge.

Brown,C.L.,J.S.Magdanz,D.S.Koster;2012;Subsistenceharvestsin8communitiesinthecentralKuskokwimRiverdrainage,2009;ADFGDivisionofSubsistence,TechnicalPaperNo.365,Juneau.

2011studyyear:ComprehensivesubsistenceharvestsurveysDonlinCreekMineProjectPhase2‐Akiak,Georgetown,Kwethluk,Napaimute,Oscarville,TuluksakwithGalena,Marshall,MountainVillage,Nulato,Rubybeinginvestigatedaspossibleindexesofsubsistenceharvestsfortheregion.Whitefishdescribedbyspecies,useareamappingfor2011studyyear,nolocalknowledge.

ADFGDivisionofSubsistenceReportinpreparation.

2011studyyear:Salmonharvestsurveyandlocalknowledge‐Chefornak,Kipnuk,Mekoryuk,Newtok,Nightmute,ToksookBay,andTununak.

Wolfe,R.J.,C.Stockdale,andC.Scott;2011;SalmonharvestsincoastalcommunitiesoftheKuskokwimArea,southwestAlaska;AYK‐SSI;Anchorage.

2011studyyear:ComprehensivesubsistenceharvestsurveysDonlinCreekMineProjectPhase3‐Napakiak,Napaskiak,McGrath,Takotna,Nikolai,RussianMission,Anvik,andGalena.Whitefishdescribedbyspecies,useareamappingfor2011studyyear,nolocalknowledge.

ADFGDivisionofSubsistenceReportinpreparation.

2012studyyear:Nonsalmonfishsubsistenceharvestsurveysandlocalknowledge‐LimeVillageandNikolaiADFGDivisionofSubsistenceOSM12‐352Researchunderway.

2013upcoming:DonlinCreekMineProjectComprehensivesubsistenceharvestsurvey‐Bethel.Whitefishdescribedbyspecies,useareamappingfor2012studyyear,nolocalknowledge.

ADF&GDivisionofSubsistenceResearchtobeginin2013.

DATA13 TheCorpsshouldreviewtheseadditionalreferencesinpreparationoftheDraftEISregardingwaterquality:

USEPATechnicalFactsheetonMercuryhttp://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/t‐ioc/mercury.html

ApositiononperpetualwatertreatmentwrittenbytheCenterforScienceinPublicParticipationaspartofourscopingcomments.See:DavidM.Chambers,Ph.D.,CenterforScienceinPublicParticipation,APositionPaperonPerpetualWaterTreatmentforMines(June2007).]Availableonlineat:www.csp2.org

TheCleanWaterAct§303(d)whichrequiresstatestoidentifywaterbodiesthatdonotmeetwaterqualitystandardsandtodevelopwaterqualityrestorationplanstomeetestablishedwaterqualitycriteriaandassociatedbeneficialuses.ThelistofAlaska'simpairedwaters(2010)canbeobtainedonlineat:http://www.dec.state,iak.us/water/wqsar/Docs/2010impairedwaterbodies.pdf

ImpairedwaterbodieslistedintheprojectareaincludetheKuskokwimRiverandtheRedDevilCreek(attheconfluenceofthetworivers),whicharebothCategory5andtherefore,requirethedevelopmentofaTotalMaximumDailyLoad.TheKuskokwimRiver(AKIDNo.30501‐002)andtheRedDevilCreek(AKIDNo.30501‐002)arelisted




forexceedingwaterqualitystandardsforantimony,arsenic,andmercuryassociatedwithminingactivities,includingtheRedDevilMine.

40CFR§440.104(b)(1)47Fed.Reg.54,598,54,602(Dec.3,1982)See:WaterResourcesManagementPlanatES2(thereisnodesignintenttodischargewasterockcontactwaterorprocesssolutionintowatersoftheStateofAlaska,ortheU.S)See:33CFR§328.3(a)(8).

DATA14 TheCorpsshouldreviewthemapdepictingtherangesofspeciesprotectedundertheEndangeredSpeciesActasprovidedbytheUSFWS(Map1)inscopingcommentsonproposedprojectinconsiderationofimpactstowildlifeduringdevelopmentoftheDraftEIS.

DATA15 DonlinGolddevelopedaYup’ikProjectdescriptionbookletthathasbeenprovidedatmeetingsandonthecompanywebsite.ThisdocumenthasbeenvettedbyYup’ikspeakersandeffectivelyusedintheregion.DonlinGoldrecommendstheuseofthisbookletbytheCorpssinceitiscriticalthatthedescriptionsoftheproposedprojectandactivitiesarefact‐basedandunbiased;andthatthetranslationisconsistentfromlocationtolocation(withintheregion)andthroughouttheprocessfromscopingthroughtheDraftandFinalDraftEISstages.DonlinGoldstronglybelievesthatusingaconsistentandvettedvocabularyforpresentationsinYup’ikiscriticaltoensuringaneffectivepublicparticipationprocess.

DATA16 Itisimportanttoacknowledge,up‐front,appropriatetribalprotocolsforhowTraditionalEcologicalKnowledgeandWisdom(TEKW)informationmaybeusedandhowtoensurethatsensitiveinformationisprotected.TheAlaskaNativeScienceCommissionhasprinciplesthatweredevelopedinregardstoappropriatelyworkingwithTEKW:http://nativescience.org/issues/tk.htm

DATA17 TheCorpsshouldreviewtheseadditionalreferencesandcourtcases:

CoalitionforResponsibleRegulation,Inc.v.EPA,684F.3d102(D.C.Cir.2012).

ExecutiveOrder12898andaccompanyingPresidentialMemorandum.Theorderisalsoavailableat59Fed.Reg.7,629(Feb.16,1994).

CEQ,EnvironmentalJustice:GuidanceundertheNationalEnvironmentalPolicyAct(1997)

StateDepartmentofNaturalRes.v.Greenpeace,Inc.,96P.3d1056,1064(citingBakerv.CityofFairbanks,471P.2d386,401â€“02(Alaska1970)).TheAlaskaConstitutionalsoprovidesthatnopersonshallbedeprivedoflife,libertyorpropertywithoutdueprocessoflaw.ALASKACONST.partI,(alterationadded).Statev.Greenpeace,Inc.,96P.3d1056,1062(findingtheDNRviolatedanorganization’sdueprocessrightswhenitliftedastayofatemporarywaterusepermitwithonlyaone‐daynotice).

IllinoisCent.Co.v.StateofIllinois;CityofChicagov.IllinoisCent.Co.;StateofIllinoisv.IllinoisCent.,146U.S.387,465(1892).

Owsichekv.State,GuideLicensingandControlBd.,763P.2d488,491(Alaska,1988).

MetlakatlaIndianCmty.,AnnetteIslandReservev.Egan,362P.2d901,913(Alaska1961).

http://www.alaskaminers.org/2008SocialLicense.pdfisalinktotheAlaskaMinersAssociationguidelinestosociallicensetodobusinessinAlaska.




76FederalRegister9,450,9,457‐58(Feb.17,2011).

FederalRegister,40CFRParts9and63.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency.

FederalRegister,47FR54598‐01RulesandRegulations,EnvironmentalProtectionAgency.40CFRPart440;OreMiningandDressingPointSourceCategoryEffluentLimitationsGuidelinesandNewSourcePerformanceStandards;1982.

NevadaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtection,StakeholderMeeting,October7,2009.

NevadaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtection,NoticeofFindingsandOrderNo.2008‐13.

NevadaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtection,NoticeofFindingsandOrderNo.2008‐13,March10,2008.Finding#3,page2.

ConcernsandwrittenarticlessubmittedandpublishedintheDeltaDiscoverynewspaperregardingpreviouscommentsfrom2001,2002,2003,andarticlesaboutNEPAandtheEPAregardingprotectionoflandandfood.

DATA18 TheCorpsshouldreviewtheseadditionalreferencesinpreparationoftheDraftEISregardingwatermanagement:

http://dnr.alaska.gov/mlw/water/wrfact.cfm.See,11AAC93.035(a)and(b)

AlaskaDNRCaseAbstractTWUPA2012‐024(March2,2012).http://dnr.alaska.gov/projects/las/Case_Abstract.cfm?FileType=TWUP&FileNumber=A2012‐128&LandFlag=y

DATA19 TheCorpsshouldreviewthesereferencesforexampleofotherminingoperations:

RockCreekMineProblemsreportbyCenterforScienceinPublicParticipation,April2012.

BLM,March2012;DraftRemedialInvestigationReport;RedDevilMine,Alaska;USDOI.

DATA20 TheCorpsshouldreviewtheseadditionalreferencesinpreparationoftheDraftEISregardingenvironmentaldamageduetomining:

DirtyMetals:Mining,CommunitiesandtheEnvironment;AreportbyEarthworksandOxfamAmerica,2004.

AlaskaMinersAssociationguidelinestosociallicensetodobusinessinAlaska.http://www.alaskaminers.org/2008SocialLicense.pdf

DATA21TheDraftEISshouldmakeuseoftheCalistaEldersCouncil’snewregionaldatabaseforTraditionalCulturalProperties.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE


ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (EJ)

Commentsrelatedtodisproportionate,adverseimpactstolowincomeandminoritycommunitiesasresultoftheproposedproject.


EJ1 AsperExecutiveOrder12898,theCorpsshouldanalyzeandmitigateadverseenvironmentalconsequencesforminoritiesandpopulationsoflowersocioeconomicstatus.Thisincludesimpactstothefollowing:

• Publichealth,includingpsychologicalaspects;

• Economicandsocialeffects;

• Snowfall,riverflows,permafrostdegradation,bankerosion,treeencroachment,andwildliferesponsestowarmertemperatures;

• Climatechange;

• TheKuskokwimRiver;

• Changestosubsistenceresourcesasaresultofclimatechange;and

• Culturalidentityandtraditionalpractices.

EJ2 TheCorpsshouldfollowCEQguidelinesforconsideringenvironmentaljusticeunderNEPAtoensurearigorousanalysisofrelevantpublichealthandindustrydataconcerningenvironmentalhazardsintheaffectedpopulation.Ifgeographicanddemographicdataismissingrelevanttotheprojectarea,itshouldbegathered.Thisincludesinterrelatedcultural,social,occupational,historical,oreconomicfactorsthatmayamplifythenaturalandphysicalenvironmentaleffectsoftheproposedaction.Cumulativeeffectsshouldbeincludedintheanalysis.Partofthisprocessshouldalsoincludeactivecommunityinvolvementearlyon.Whenseekingcommunityinvolvement,agenciesshouldendeavortohavecompleterepresentationofthecommunityasawhole.

EJ3 AspartoftheCEQguidanceforagenciesonhowtoaddressenvironmentaljusticeunderNEPA,theCorpsshouldseektribalrepresentationinamannerthatisconsistentwiththegovernment‐to‐governmentrelationshipbetweentheUnitedStatesandtribalgovernments,thefederalgovernment’strustresponsibilitytofederallyrecognizedtribes,andanytreatyrights.

EJ4 Measuresforavoidanceorminimizationofenvironmentaljusticeimpactsshouldbeconsideredbeforeresortingtomitigationmeasures,whereverpossible.Whenavoidanceorminimizationisnotpossible,appropriatemitigationmeasuresshouldbedevelopedthroughdirectcollaborationwithaffectedcommunities.TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldincludeanEnvironmentalJusticedeterminationexplainingwhetherimpactshavebeenappropriatelyavoided,minimized,and/ormitigated.

EJ5 TheDraftEISshouldconsideranumberoftechnicalreportsandotherEISdocumentscompletedthroughoutAlaskathatconsidertheimpactsofresourceprojectsonAlaskaNativecommunities.TheseAlaskanreports(seeDATA5)arereferencesforconsideringthefullrangeofimpactstoAlaskaNativecommunitiesandtheirwayoflife.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT FISH ‐ IMPACTS


FISH – IMPACTS (FISH)

Commentsrelatedtopotentialimpactstofish(salmon,sheefish)populations,abundance,diversity,migratorypatterns,andpotentialfordisplacementfromprojectcomponents.


FISH1 Commentersareconcernedabouttheeffectoftheprojectonsalmongiventhatnumbershavebeendeclining.TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshould:

• DescribethecurrentstateofsalmonpopulationsontheKuskokwim,Yukon,andGeorgesrivers.

• Describethepotentialcausesofrecentlowsalmonnumbers,includingwatertemperatures.

• AnalyzethepotentialeffectsoftheproposedprojectonsalmonofwesternAlaskagiventhatthekingsalmonreturnwassolowlastyeartheyhadtocloseittosubsistencefishing.

FISH2 CommentersareconcernedabouttheeffectofincreasedbargetrafficonfishintheKuskokwimRiver,includingsalmon,sheefish,humpbackwhitefish,broadwhitefish,roundwhitefish,Beringcisco,leastcisco,andsmelt.TheDraftEISshouldaddress:

• Theeffectofincreasedbargetrafficonsalmon,whitefish,lingcod,andgraylingintheKuskokwimRiver;

• Thepotentialdamagescausedbybargescollidingwithboatsornetsduetomoreconcentratedfishingbecauseoflimitedopenings/closures;

• Thepotentialforbargestocauseerosionoftheriverbanks,andtheeffectofthatonfish;

• Thepotentialdisturbanceoffishandwildlifefromincreasedbargetraffic;

• Clarifytheexactnumberofbargesplannedperday,andwhetherornottherehavebeenstudiesdonetodeterminetheimpactonsalmon;

• Thepotentialimpactofafuelspillfromabargeaccident;

• Theeffectthatpastsimilarmines/bargetraffichavehadonfish;

• Theeffectofincreaseduseofboatmotorsonsalmonspawningandrearinghabitat;

• Theeffectofincreasednoiseonsalmonproductivity;

• Theeffectofincreasedbargetrafficonsalmonmigrationandspawning;

• Thepotentialforincreasedturbidity,anditseffectonsalmon;

• Thepotentialforincreasedbargetraffictocausewaveactionthatcouldharmthefryontheirwaytotheocean;

• Thepotentialforfishtoavoidtheareaaroundthebargesandnotcomebacktothearea;

• Theeffectofincreasedbargetrafficonthemigrationofsalmon,sheefish,humpbackwhitefish,broadwhitefish,roundwhitefish,Beringcisco,leastcisco‐considertheinformationregardingtimingoftheserunsprovidedbythecommenter;

• Theeffectofthewakes/wavesfromthebargesonmigratingfishthatrestandfeedclosetotheshore‐evaluatetheimpactofthewavesontheshorelinehabitat;and

• Theriskandeffectofbargetrafficintroducinginvasivespeciesfromtheballastwater.




FISH3 Commentersareconcernedaboutthepotentialforfishtobecomecontaminatedfromminingchemicalsorfuelspills.TheDraftEISshouldaddress:

• Howbestavailabletechnologywouldbeusedtocapturethetoxinsthatinhibitfishproductionandwhetheranycontaminantswouldbereleasedintothewater;

• Thepotentialeffectofresiduecomingfromthemineonceitisconstructedandtheeffectofanycontaminantsonfish;

• Thecumulativeeffectofcontaminants,whenaddedtodischargeintotheriverfromtheRedDevilMine;

• Whethergraylingarecurrentlyabsentfromtheriverbecauseofnaturallyoccurringheavymetals;

• Theeffectofcontaminationonsalmonandsmoltsintheriveranddownstreamtotheoceanbays;

• ThepotentialimpactofcontaminationfromafuelspillonthehaulroadthattraversesintotheheadwatersoftheIditarodRiverthatleadsintotheInnokoNationalWildlifeRefuge,andtheInnokoRiverthatdrainsintotheYukonRiver.Alsothepotentialimpactofcontaminationfromairportdrainageinthesamearea;

• Thepotentialeffectofexposuretocyanideonsalmonwhichmayalreadybestressedfromadaptingtothehigherratesofmercury.Describewhethertheeffectwouldbecumulativetoapopulationalreadyindecline;

• ThepotentialriskandimpactofamercuryspillontheKuskokwimRiver.TheDraftEISshouldfullydiscloseplansformercurytransport,makeexportmanifestspubliclyavailable,andprovidedetailedinformationforemergencyresponseprocedures.TheDraftEISshouldalsoanalyzethepotentialimpactsassociatedwithamercuryspillduringtransport;and

• ThepotentialriskandimpactofafuelspillorothercontaminationoftheenvironmentonsalmonspawningtributariesalongtheKuskokwimRiver.

FISH4 Commentersareconcernedthattheprojectwouldadverselyaffectfish(andotherwildlifeincludingmicroorganisms)inthesamewaythattheNYACMinehasaffectedfishintheTuluksakRiveranditsdrainages.TheDraftEISshoulddescribethepotentialriskandconsequencesofcontaminatedwaterreleasesfromthemine.

FISH5 Commentersareconcernedabouttheimpactonsalmonhabitat.TheDraftEISshouldaddress:

• TheeffectonsalmonhabitatinthefiveheadwaterstreamsoftheKuskokwimRiver;

• TheeffectontheYukonRiverwatershed,giventheproposedroadsystemcorridorbetweentheKuskokwimandYukonrivers;

• Theeffectofturbidityandsiltinspawningareas;

• Whetherthemeltingofpermafrostiscurrentlyaffectingsalmonspawningareasbyproducingmoresedimentthatcoversspawninggravel;

• WhetherexistingplacerminingontheTakotnaRiverandNixonForkadverselyaffectedfishspawninggravel;

• Thepotentialriskandeffectofincreasederosionandturbidityonsalmonmigrationandspawninghabitat.AnalyzetheeffectondecliningChinookrunsandtheconsequencesforfutureruns;

• Thepotentialforincreasedsedimentandsiltinspawningtributariesfromerosionaswellasfromtheincreaseddustassociatedwithminingandassociatedvehicletraffic.Describetheeffectonthesurvivalofthesalmonrunshistoricallyprovidingfoodfor




localresidents;and

• Theeffectofincreasederosioninthespringonthereturningkingsalmonruninthemainriver.

FISH6 Commentersareconcernedaboutthepotentialeffectsofthestreamcrossingsfortheproposednaturalgaspipelineandroads.TheDraftEISshouldaddress:

• Themethodsusedforthepipelinestreamcrossingsandthepotentialeffectsonfishinthestreamscrossed;

• Howtheundergroundpipelinewouldaffecttheriversandfishandwildlifearoundthem;

• TheeffectsoftheroadfromtheJungjukCreekportfacilitythatcrossesnumerousfishbearingstreams,mostnotablyGetmuna,whichisthemostproductivetributaryofCrookedCreek;

• Theimpactsofeachofthestreamcrossingsandgravelpitsalongthepipeline.Describehowflooddataforeachcrossingwouldbedevelopedtoensurethattheyareproperlyengineered,andthattheriskstofisheries(andpublicsafety)arecorrectlyassessed;

• Thepotentialrisk(andimpact)ofreleasesofdrillingmuds,cuttings,andadditivesusedforhorizontaldirectionaldrillingforpipelinewaterbodycrossingsintoadjacentwetlandsandwaterbodies;

• Thedirect,indirect,andcumulativeenvironmentalimpactsassociatedwiththedischargeofhydrostatictestwaterusedtotestthepipelineintoadjacentlands,wetlands,andwaterbodiescontainingresidentand/oranadromousfish;

• Thepotentialeffectsonfishandhabitatfromtemperaturechangesrelatedtocoldpipelinecrossingsofstreams.Evaluatewhetherthecoldpipemayproduceaufeisandcreatefishpassageissues;

• Thepotentialeffectofdivertingstreamstodewatercrossingsites,includingimpactsonvegetation,waterquality,habitatdamage,lossofhabitatformacro‐invertebrates,andpossiblefishisolationandloss;

• Howthestreamcrossingmethodswereselectedanddesigned,includingtheevaluationcriteriaandthedefinitionofimportantfisheryresourcesandwhethercostisconsidered.Explainhowtheslopeandsizearedeterminedandhowimpactstofishhabitatareminimized.Commenterrecommendsusinghorizontaldirectionaldrilling(HDD)forallfish‐bearingstreams;

• ConsidertheuseofHDDonacase‐by‐casebasiswhentrenchingstreamcrossingsatallanadromousstreams.ConsiderthetimingwindowsundertheauthorityoftheAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGamethatmayberequiredfortrenchinganadromousfishstreamsinordertominimizetheimpactstoaquaticresources.Suggestionistodevelopconceptualplansforstreamcrossingsandthenapplyonasite‐specificbasis;

• Theriskandpotentialeffectofstormwaterrunoff,thawsettlement,andthermalerosion,erosionofriparianareasandturbidityinputfromthepipeline.Explainwhetherstreamswouldbemonitoredforthiseffectduringthelifeofthepipeline,andwhetherbondingforanyrestorationisincludedinthebondingcostestimates;and

• Thepotentiallong‐termimpacttostreamandfisheriesresourcesfrompipeshiftsafterabandonment.




FISH7 TheDraftEISshouldaddress:

• PotentialimpactstoBeringcisco,knowntospawn20milesupriverfromNikolai.OnecommenterwasconcernedaboutthepotentialcumulativeeffectofopeningacommercialfisheryonthisspeciesintheBeringSea;

• PotentialimpactstosheefishspawningintheTelidaRiverontheheadwatersofthenorthfork;

• PotentialimpactstoauniquestrainofchumsalmonthatmigrateuptheKuskokwimeveryyearandspawnintheupperregionsoftheWindyForkoftheMiddleForkoftheKuskokwimRiver.ConsidergravelborrowsitealternativestoavoidthefishspawninghabitatimmediatelybelowtheproposedgravelsiteontheWindyForkjustbelowRickHalford’shomesteadontheeastside,onthewestsideabout1/2milebelowtheproposedgravelsite,neartheWindyForkBLMcabin;and

• PotentialimpactstoCohosalmonandresidentfishspeciesatJungjukCreekinrelationtotheproposedJungjukPortsitethatwouldbelocatedneartheconfluenceoftheKuskokwimRiverandJungjukCreek.TheEISshouldevaluatetheeffectsofportconstructionandmaintenanceonrivermorphology,sedimentdisposition,andseasonalicemovementwithregardtoimpactstofishhabitat.

FISH8 Commentersareconcernedaboutprotectingthesalmon.TheanalysisintheDraftEISshouldkeepinmindthattheKuskokwimRiverservesasasupermarket,providingfoodtotheresidentsandthatmostcouldpeoplewouldnotliveintheareawithoutit.Adollarvaluecannotbeputonthefishandwildlifeinthearea,astheyhavekeptresidentsaliveforthousandsofyearsandtheresidentswouldliketocontinuethatlifestyle.Commentersencourageputtingasmuchprotectionforfishandwildlifeaspossibleintotheprojectplans.

FISH9 Onecommenterwasconcernedaboutsedimentationaffectingmigratingsalmon.TheDraftEISshoulddescribethetimingofeachsalmonrun,andwhichrunsaremostcriticaltoprotectfromsedimentation.TheDraftEISshoulduseinformationprovidedbylocalresidentsfromthefarthestreachesoftheUpperKuskokwimtodeterminethis,asthefarthesttributarieshavetheleastdocumentationinpublicrecordsastothetimingoftheruns.TheDraftEISshouldconsiderthatruntimingvariesfromyeartoyear.

FISH10 Commenterswereconcernedabouttheeffectofgravelpitsclosetostreams,andaboutaproposedfishhabitatenhancementprojectatmaterialsites,includingthoseassociatedwithroadconstruction.Specifically,theDraftEISshould:

• Evaluatetheeffectonthelocalhydrology,andthusfisheries,ofmultiplegravelpitsproximatetostreamsandrivers.Describethenecessityandlocationofeachproposedgravelpit,includingwhetheritisinafloodplain.

• DescribetheeffectoftheproposedfishhabitatenhancementproposedatthematerialsitesintheGetmunaCreekdrainageonfish.Evaluatewhetherthemitigationcouldreverseanynegativeimpactsfromthedisturbanceofover200acresofland,including35acresofwetlands.




FISH11 Commentersareconcernedabouttheeffectsofwaterwithdrawalsonfish.TheDraftEISshould:

• Identifyanymitigationmeasures/commitments,suchasestablishingwaterwithdrawalrates,timingforwaterwithdrawal,andscreeningtoavoidimpactstofish;and

• Identifymonitoringactivitiestoensurethatfisheriesresourcesareprotected.

FISH12 Commentersareconcernedthatallfishspeciesandhabitatsintheprojectareashouldbeidentified.TheDraftEISshould:

• EvaluatethetypesofresidentandanadromousfishresourcesinAmericanandAnacondacreeks;

• Identifystreams,lakes,andotheraquatichabitatsthatsupportanadromousorresidentfishthatmaybeaffectedbytheproposedproject;

• Identifystreamscrossedbythepipelinethatsupportanadromousorresidentfishspecies;and

• Describewhetherthekettlelakeshavebeensurveyedforfish,astheyarepotentialwatersources.

FISH13 TheDraftEISshouldfullyevaluatemine,pipeline,andtransporatationinfrastructurerelateddisturbancestohydrologythatinfluencewaterstoragecapacityandgroundwaterinfiltrationrateswouldaffectvariousspeciesoffish.Thesourcesofdisturbanceincludesurfacehardeningandsoilcompactionfromroads,constructionpads,storageareas,airstrip,overallfacilityfootprint,overburdenremoval,permafrostdisturbance.Seasonalmigrationofvariousspeciesoffishmaybedisruptedandchannel‐formingflowsmaybealteredbytheproject,whichcouldresultinindirectlossofhabitatcomplexity.BaseflowduringwinterprovidescriticalrefugiaandincubationforjuvenilesalmonandotherfishinthelowerreachesofCrookedCreek;changesinbaseflowcouldhaveadirectimpactonsurvivalofthesefish.Changesintiming,magnitude,anddurationofdischarge,aswellaschangesthatalterphysical(temperature,chemical,orgeomorphological)componentsofstreamscouldhavedetrimentaleffectsonaquaticandriparianbiologicalcommunities,andmayaffectcommunitiesfartherdownstreamintheKuskokwimRiver.SomeoftheseaffectshavebeenobservedontheTuluksakRiverasaresultofpastmining.

AsnotedbytheAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGameinscopingcomments,theproposeddamsandmovementsofwaterthroughouttheminesitewouldrelyondiversionsandpumpingsystems.TheEISshouldevaluatethesurfacewaterimpactsatCreviceCreekandAnacondaCreekintermsofincreasedanddecreasedbaseflowandtheresultingimpactstofishandfishhabitatduringallphasesoftheproposedproject.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT FUEL SPILL RISKS/RELEASE


FUEL SPILL RISKS/RELEASE (FSR)

Concernsaboutpotentialforfuelandoilspillsoraccidentalreleases,responsecapacitytocleanupspillsinvariousconditions,andpotentialimpactstoresourcesorenvironmentfromspillsorrelease.Thisisfuelspillrisk,nothazardousmaterials.


FSR1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshoulddescribehowspillsfromtheminesitewouldbeprevented,andwhatmitigationmeasureswouldbetakenandresponsemeasuresifaspilloccurred.

FSR2 Commentersareconcernedabouttheriskoffuelandoilspillsandiftherewouldbeadequateresponse,giventhepotentialforharmfuleffectsonmanyresources,includingtraditionalwaysoflife.TheDraftEISshouldaddressthefollowingquestionsraisedduringscoping:

• Whatistheemergencyresponseplanandwhowouldberesponsibleforrespondingtopipelineleaks?Wherewouldtheybelocatedandhowwouldtheyrespondinatimelymanner,iftheyarenotlocatedinthearea?Commenterssuggestanemergencyresponseteambelocatedintheproposedprojectarea;

• Whatkindoftrainingwouldtheemergencyresponseteamhave?

• Howsooncanleaksorrupturesinthepipelinebedetected?

• Whatstandardsforcleanupwouldbeinplace?

• Whatwouldbedonewiththespilledfuel,oilorgas?

• Howwouldtraditionalwaysoflifewillbeprotectedintheresponseplans?

FSR3 Withregardstospillsresultingfrombargeactivity,theDraftEISshouldincludeorevaluatethefollowingrisksoffuelspills:

• ImpactstotheKuskokwimriver,includinghabitat,fishandmarinelife,andsubsistenceactivities,asaresultofabarge‐relatedspill,andwhetherspillsmayrequireevacuationorpermanentrelocation;

• Amoredetailedemergencyresponseplanforabargespill,includingspillsattheJungjukCreekport;

• PotentialforspillsfromfueltransferandstoragepointsatDutchHarbor,BethelandJungjukportsites;and

• Amountofbargetrafficcorrespondingtoincreasedpotentialforspillrisk.

FSR4 Commentersareconcernedaboutfuelandoilspillsasaresultoftheproposedproject.Theprojectdescriptionshouldprovidedetailsonhowfuel,oilandgaswouldbeused,transported,storedandcontainedinwaysthatwouldpreventorminimizetheriskofspills.Commentersrequestdetailedemergencyresponseplans,aswellascommunityoutreachstrategiestoinformthelocalcommunityofemergencies,andaboutwhattodoifaspilloccurs.Localsshouldbetrainedinemergencyresponseskills.AdditionalrecommendationsincludethefollowingintheDraftEIS:

• ImplementationofSpillPreventionControlandCountermeasurePlansandFacilityResponsePlans;theseplansshouldbemadeavailabletothepublicandagenciesforreviewandincludediscussionsofwherefuelandfuel/watermixwouldbetemporarilystoreduntildisposal;

• Fuelingshouldbedoneatleast100ft(30m)fromwaterbodies;

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT FUEL SPILL RISKS/RELEASE



• Methaneisanexplosionhazard.HandlingofmethaneinthecaseofapipelineleakshouldbediscussedintheDraftEIS;

• AllowtheAlaskaDepartmentofEnvironmentalConservationtoreviewandexaminetankandfacilityplanstoensureregulatoryrequirementsaremet;and

• ContingencyPlansfortheproposedprojectnotedthatthebargeoperatorswouldtransportfuelfromDutchHarbortoBethelandthenfromBetheltotheproposedJungjukBargeTerminal.Commentsreceivedduringscopingnotedthatifthebargeoperatorwouldbetransitingtobothlocationsthenitwouldbenecessarytoapplytooperateinmultipleregionsofoperations.

FSR5 DetailedmitigationmeasuresneedtobedescribedintheDraftEISpertainingtofuelandoilspillsandhowtheywouldbecleanedup.Moreover,spillsneedtobeprevented,notjustmitigatedaftertheyoccur.Everyprecautionshouldbetakentoensurespillsorleaksdonotoccur.Severeimpactstolocalfoodsourcescouldoccurasaresultofaspill.

FSR6 TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowtheproposedpipelinewouldwithstandearthquakeswithoutleakingorruptures.Whatistheremainingriskofaleak?Ifaleakdoesoccur,whatmechanismswouldbeinplacetodetectit,andhowsoon?Impactstowildlife,riversandstreams,subsistenceresources,soilsandsurroundinglandresultingfromapipelineleakneedtobedescribedindetailintheDraftEIS.Inaddition,mitigationmeasuresneedtobedescribedthatreducetheseimpactstoresources.

FSR7 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzespillandleakrisksassociatedwiththeHDDtechniquesinriversandwaterbodycrossings.Specifically,theDraftEISshoulddescribetheconstructiontechniqueforthepipelinebeneathriversandstreams,andwhatprecautionswouldbeputinplacetopreventleaks.

FSR8 Ifaspillorleakoccursthatgreatlyaffectsthefoodsourceforlocals,theEISshouldincludeacontingencyplanforcompensatinglocalswhorelyonsubsistence.Manyofthelocalpeoplecannotaffordtobuyfoodasitisveryexpensive,andtherearenotenoughincome‐producingjobsinthelocalareatooffsetadisruptioninthesubsistencelifestyleandsubsistenceactivities.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT GEOLOGY


GEOLOGY (GEO)

Commentsrelatedtoseismicrisks,soilsstability,permafrost,faultlinesandearthquakes.


GEO1 Majorfaultsoccurintheproposedprojectarea.Forthisreason,theDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldincludedetailedinformationaboutseismicallyactiveareas,geologicalfaultsandtectonicactivity,includingtheDenaliFaultsystemandtheBossRiversegmentofthissystem.TheDraftEISshoulddescribethefollowingseismicrisks:

• Risksandpotentialimpactsassociatedwithearthquakesandothergeologicalactivitiesintheproposedprojectarea(especiallythetailingstoragefacilitydam,buriedpipelineandfuelstoragetanks);

• Historicalinformationregardingearthquakesintheproposedprojectarea,includingevidencethattheminecansurviveahighmagnitudeearthquakewithoutcausingsevereenvironmentalimpacts;

• Seismichazardstudyfortheproposedprojectarea;and

• Avalanchehazardanalysis,particularlyasassociatedwithseismicrisk.

GEO2 CommentersrequestedthattheDraftEISincorporatevisualdepictionstodisplayriskinformation,includingthefollowing:

• Permafrostandvegetationmappinganalysis;

• Mapdepictingseismicallyactiveareas,geologicalfaultstectonicactivity,etc.;and

• Terrainmappingusedtoidentifyareasofgeological,landslide,andavalanchehazards,glacialterrains,soilstability,erosionproblems,slopeinstability,erosion,groundfreezing,andthawingofpermafrostetc.Mappingshouldalsobeusedtoidentify,classify,andlocatesoil,rock,andgeomorphicandseismicfeatures.Thismappingshouldbeusedtoanalyzetheproposedpipelineroute.

GEO3 Regardingthenaturalgaspipeline,theDraftEISshoulddescribeandevaluatethefollowingdesignfeaturesinrelationtoseismicandothergeologicrisks:

• Howthepipelinewouldwithstandearthquakes,especiallywheretherouteintersectswithmajorfaultzones,andwhatmonitoringtechniqueswouldbeinplacetodetectpotentialleaks;

• ConstructiontechniquesthatwouldbeusedthroughmassiveicelensesbetweenMP205andMP188;and

• Handlingofequipmentcrossingsduringconstruction,especiallyinthesummer.Includeinformationaboutwhetherequipmentwouldbepermanentortemporary,andifallequipmentwouldfitintheROW.

• SlopestabilityissuesalongthepipelineroutethataresaidtooccurinfrequentlyinthePlanofDevelopment;and

• Risksofavalanches,includingpotentialthatsomepipelinefeaturesmayneedtobeburiedinavalanche‐proneareas.

GEO4 TheDenaliFaulthasnumerouscrosscuttingdikesandsmallerfaultzonesthatcarrymineralandassociatedsurfaceexposureswhichareimportanttowildlife.Severalofthesearelocatedneartheproposedprojectarea.TheDraftEISshouldanalyzeimpactstowildlifefromrestrictedaccesstoessentialmineralsasaresultoftheproject,andimplementmitigationmeasurestoensurecontinueduseoftheseareasbywildlife.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT GEOLOGY



GEO5 Permafrostandice‐richconditionsoccurintheproposedprojectarea.TheDraftEISshouldidentifyanddescribetheseareasalongthepipelineroute,andhowthepipelinewouldbebuiltandfunctioninareaswithpermafrost,erodible,andunstablesoils.Commenterssuggestincludingsoilprofilesonacorridorof0.5mile(0.8km)widthalongthepipelineroute.TheDraftEISalsoshoulddescribehowpipelineleakswouldbedetectedbelowground.

GEO6 Mitigationmeasuresneedtobeidentifiedtominimizeimpactsfromseismicactivitiesandeffectsonsoils,suchaspermafrostandimpactsfromHDDacrossstreams,riversandotherwater‐bodies.ScopingcommentsnotedthatHDDmudshavebeenknowntopropagateintoawatercourse(frac‐out)asaresultofexcessivedrillingpressuresandsitespecificgeology.ItwasrecommendedthataHDDdrillingmudmanagementplanshouldbedevelopedtominimizethepotentialofafrac‐outaswellastohaveaplaninplacetobothdetectdrillingmudsenteringwatercoursesandtotriggeranappropriatecourseofaction.ItwasalsorecommendedthatsectionsoftheproposedpipelinethatareHDDshouldundergopressure/hydrostatictestingpriortoinstallation.

Long‐termmonitoringofsoilsmaybeneeded.TheseneedtobeexplainedindetailintheDraftEIS.TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowseismicallyactiveareaswouldbemonitoredandwhatactionswouldbetakenwhenseismicactivitycausesstructuraldamagetofacilities.

GEO7 TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowtheproposedprojectmayaffectexistingpermafrost,andspecifically,howthawingpermafrostmaydestabilizethegroundthatsupportsroads,pipelines,andotherfacilitiesasaresultofremovingvegetationandplacementofgravelforpermanentandtemporaryaccessroads,pads,workareas,airstrips,minefacilities,etc.Theambienttemperaturechargedgaspipelinemayaffectaffectssoilsandpermafrost,sinceportionsoftheambienttemperaturesofthegasmaybeabovefreezingastheyenterareasofpermafrostandmaybebelowfreezingastheyexitareasofpermafrost.

GEO8 TheDraftEISshouldclearlydescribeprojectconstructionsoiluseandassociatedimpacts,includingremovalandreplacement,andimpactstosoilsfrommetalandacidreleasefromminingactivities.Impactstosoils,erosion,aquatichabitat,riversedimentationandpermafrostthawingasaresultofthepipeline,particularlynearwaterbodycrossingsshouldbefullydiscussedintheDraftEIS.Stabilizationofbackfilltrenchshouldbecontinuallymonitoredaspermafrostmaymeltinareasthatarenotadequatelyaddressed.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT GOVERNMENT TO GOVERNMENT


GOVERNMENT TO GOVERNMENT (G2G)

Consultationandcoordinationwithtribalgovernments.ThisincludescommentsonformalconsultationandcoordinationunderExecutiveOrder13175,participationascooperatingagencies,andactivitiestopromotetribalparticipationintheEIS.


G2G1 CEQGuidancerequirestheCorpstoseektribalrepresentationintheEISprocessinamannerthatisconsistentwiththegovernment‐to‐governmentrelationshipbetweentheUnitedStatesandtribalgovernments,theFederalGovernment'strustresponsibilitytofederally‐recognizedtribes,andanytreatyrights.Tribalgovernments,whosemembersortraditionalresourcesmaybeaffected,eitherdirectlyandindirectly,bythisproposedproject,shouldbeinvitedtoopenandmeaningfulconsultationonagovernment‐to‐governmentbasisconsistentwithE.O.13175.TheDraftEISshoulddocumenttheseconsultationactivities,aswellasanyactionstakentoaddresstheconcernsidentifiedbythetribalgovernments.Recommendations:

• EncouragemeaningfulengagementandparticipationbycommunicatingintheregionalnativeYup’iklanguage;

• Schedulingofmeetings,milestones,anddecisionpointsintheDraftEISprocessshouldavoidconflictswithsubsistence,cultural,religious,andothertraditionalactivities,wheneverpossible;

• Providemorefrequentopportunitiestoinvolvethetribalgovernmentsandthepublic(betweentheScopingandtheDraftEISstage);

• MaintainatransparentDraftEISandG2Gprocessfortribesandthepublictofollow,withclearinformationaboutkeydecisionpointsandmilestones;

• ConducteducationalworkshopsonvarioussubjectsthatwouldbringintheTraditionalEcologicalKnowledgeandWisdom(TEKW)andlocalknowledgeofthepeopleoftheregion(e.g.,informationtohelpshapetheNHPASection106process,theemergencyresponseplanning,characterizingimpactsfrompotentialfailurescenarios,impactstosubsistenceresources,andtimingofthesubsistencecalendarandanyspecialhabitatareasforwildlife);

• Prepareanddisseminatefactsheetsontechnicalaspectsoftheproject;

• Theconsultationandcoordinationprocessshouldbeusedasanopportunitytoprovideeducationaloutreachandtechnicalexchangeofinformationregardingtheproject.Factsheetsandworkshops(eitherinperson,teleconference,orwebinar)shouldbeprovidedtotribesthroughouttheNEPAprocess;

• ThetribalconsultationandcoordinationprocessshouldbeusedasanopportunitytogatherTEKWfromthelocaltribalmemberswhomaybeaffectedbythisproject;and

• TheDraftEISshoulddocumentthetribalconsultationandcoordinationprocessbyprovidingachronologywiththedatesandlocationsofmeetingswithtribalgovernments,andresultsofeachmeeting.

G2G2 TheEPAscopingcommentsofferedtoassisttheCorpsinfulfillingtribalconsultationandcoordinationresponsibilitiesforthisproject.TheEPA’sspecialexpertiseincludestheRegion10TribalConsultationandCoordinationProcedures,whichcanbefoundhere:http://www.epa.gov/region10/pdf/tribal/consultation/rl0_tribal_consultation_and_coordination_procedures.pdf




G2G3 TheCorpsshoulddevelopaformalTribalG2GConsultationPlanwhichwouldoutlinetheprocessforworkingeffectivelywithtribalgovernmentsduringtheDraftEISdevelopmentprocess.TheG2GPlanshould:

• Includeaschedulewithagreedupontimelinesandmilestonesforconsultation,meetings,anddecisionpoints,basedonthebesttimingforconductingtheconsultationmeetingswhichwouldavoidconflictwithAlaskaNativeVillagesubsistence,cultural,andreligiousseasons,whichvarieswithineachcommunity;

• Explaintheroleofeachparticipant(government,tribe,orinterestedparty)andwhetheritinvolvesvoting,permitting,orengagementintheDraftEIS;and

• Bedevelopedincollaborationwiththeaffectedand/orinterestedtribalgovernments.TribesshouldhavetheopportunitytoreviewandprovidecommentsandconcurrencewiththeG2GPlan.

G2G4 TheCorpsshoulddecidehowtribalgovernmentconcernsandissuesraisedduringgovernment‐to‐governmentconsultationmeetingswillberecorded.TheCorpsshoulddiscusswitheachtribe,whetherthetribewishesthatinformationtobemadepubliclyavailableandwhetherthetribewantsanopportunitytocorrectanyinformationpriortoitbeingincludedintherecord.

G2G5 TheDraftEISshoulddiscusshowtribalgovernmentcommentswereaddressedthroughchangesintheprojectdesign,evaluationofalternativesandimpacts,anddevelopmentofmitigationmeasures.Inaddressingpotentialadverseimpacts,measuresforavoidanceorminimizationofthoseimpactsshouldbeconsideredbeforeresortingtomitigationmeasures.Whereavoidanceorminimizationisnotpossible,developappropriatemitigationmeasuresandagreements.Theseshouldbedevelopedwithinputfromtheaffectedpopulationinaconsensus‐basedprocess.

G2G6 TheDraftEISshouldexplainthecoordinationprocessbetweentheCorpsandthecooperatingagencies,andtheCorpswiththetribes.TheCorpsshouldensuresuccessfulG2Gcoordinationwiththetribesregardingactivitiesnearotherfederallands.Tribeswouldlikeclarificationofinter‐agencycommunication:

• Theprojectisadjacenttotwolargerefuges,YukonDeltaandTogiak,sotheFederalSubsistenceRegionalAdvisoryCouncilsarediscussingthisproject.

• TribalresidentswouldliketounderstandwhethertheAlaskaDepartmentofNaturalResourcesandUSFWS(cooperatingagencies)arecollaboratingwiththeOfficeofSubsistenceManagementortheSubsistenceDivisionandwhichagencyiscoordinatingthetraditionalknowledgeeffort.

G2G7 TheCorpsshouldconsidertheconcernsoftribesthathavenotyetsigned‐upascooperatorsorwhohavenotyetheldcoordinationmeetings.Itshouldnotbetoolatetoparticipate.

G2G8 Thereshouldbeawidenetcastfortribalconsultationalongtheproposedpipelinecorridor.ThereweresomeerrorsinthelistoftribesinthePipelinePlanofDevelopment,includingtheomissionofAniak,Chuathbaluk,andNapaimute.LoudenTribalCouncilisnotthefederallyrecognizedtribeforGalena,butGalenaisprobablytoofarawaytobeincludedintheproposedpipelineprojectarea.




G2G9 ThetribesdesiretobefullyengagedintheDraftEISprocessandinprojectdevelopmentandlong‐termoperationsandmanagementsothattheycanassistintheenvironmentalstewardshipoftheproject.Thetribesseektoexerciseanappropriatelevelofauthorityandresourcesasagovernmentagencytoensureecologicalandnaturalresourceinformationisusedtoreviewsitingandconstructionofthepipelineinordertoavoidorminimizehabitatimpacts.

G2G10 The1992amendmentstotheNationalHistoricPreservationAct(NHPA)placedmajoremphasisonconsultationwithtribalgovernments.Consultationshouldrespecttribalsovereigntyandthegovernment‐to‐governmentrelationshipbetweentheFederalandtribalgovernments.Tribalgovernmentsmustbeconsultedaboutactionsonoraffectingtheirlandsorresourcesonthesamebasis,andinadditiontotheStateHistoricPreservationOffice(SHPO).Potentialimpactstoresourcesofconcerntothetribesmayinclude,butarenotlimitedto,impactstoculturalresourceareas,archaeologicalsites,traditionalculturalpropertiesoflandscape,sacredsites,andenvironmentswithculturalresourcesignificance.Thetribalgovernment(s)mustbespecificallyengagedandconsultedwithinaccordancewithSection106oftheNHPA.

G2G11 TheperspectivesoftribalgovernmentsshouldbeconsideredwhendeterminingwhethertheareaofpotentialeffectwouldbeeligiblefortheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces.Tribeswouldhaveinputandconsiderationsaboutsignificanteventsthatmayhavetakenplaceinthepast(historictribalwarfaresites,establishmentoftraderoutes,etc.).

G2G12 TherearepoliticalreasonsthatmayinhibittheabilityofregionaltribalorganizationsfromcommentingontheDraftEIS.Thisisonereasonthatongoingconsultationwiththetribesissoimportant.

G2G13 Aspartofgovernmenttogovernmentconsultationprocess,TheVillageofCrookedCreekhasrequestedinformationonthewaterqualitystudiesperformedtodatebyDonlinGold,LLC.ThesestudiesarerequestedbytheVillageofCrookedCreeksothattheymaydeterminemissinglinksoftheenvironmentalbaselinestudies.

AsstatedtotheCorps,“CrookedCreekTraditionalCouncilwantstounderstandallcompletedtechnicalstudiesandevaluationsoftheDonlinGoldpermittingprocess.We[CrookedCreekTraditionalCouncil]understandtherearenumerousenvironmental,hydrologicalandsocioeconomicissuesandhowtheywillbeusedtoultimatelyobtainpermits,andenvironmentalauthorizationstoinitiateoftheDonlinGoldProject.AgapanalysisofexistingwaterqualitydataintheheadwatersoftheCrookedCreekStreamwillbepresented,withinterpretationofcurrentdataandidentificationoffurtherdataneeds.Therewillberecommendationsprovidedforfuturewaterqualitymonitoringintheregionandwewanttounderstandallimpacts.ThestudyareawasdefinedastheDonlinProjectwatershedupstreamofourcommunity.TherearenumerousstudiesidentifiedwithinformationaboutDonlinGoldinthisarea.Individualstudyreliabilitywillbeassessed,andstudydatawillbecompliedtoassessconditionsincomparisontowaterqualityguidelinesanyspatialortemporaltrends.Bothwaterchemistryandbioassessmentstudieswillbeassessed.Whatarethemajorgapsinexistinginformation:

a) Arethereinsufficientbaseline/referenceinformation?

b) Aretheregapswithinsufficientinformationonimpactsfromcontaminantsotherthanmetals,insufficientcoverageofstreamsnotdirectlyimpactedbytheDonlinGoldproject?




c) Whatisthequalityandreliabilityofdata,coordination/continuitybetweenstudiesdonetodate?

d) Cyanideconcentrationwillbeusedandwewanttounderstandallimpacts.

e) Whatwillbethemetalsconcentrationswillbeelevatedthroughoutthestudyarea?

Wewanttounderstandallwaterqualityconditionswithregardstootherparameters(e.g.dissolvedoxygen,temperature,pesticidesandbacteria)andbioassessmentdata.ExistingmonitoringintheareashouldbeexplainedtotheCrookedCreekTraditionalCouncil.”

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT GROUNDWATER IMPACTS


GROUNDWATER IMPACTS (GRD)

Impactstogroundwatersystemsandaquifersfromtailings,transportationofgroundwater,andhowitmovesunderground.


GRD1 Concernwasexpressedregardingthepotentialforcontaminationofgroundwaterresourcesbytheproposedproject.Somecommunitiesgettheirdrinkingwaterfromgroundwaterwells.TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzemeasurestosafeguardgroundwaterfromcontaminationbytheoverburdenstockpileandothercomponentsoftheproposedproject.

GRD2 TheDraftEISshoulddiscussthetreatmentofmercuryinperpetuity.Specifically,theDraftEISshoulddescribehowmercurywouldbepreventedfromreleasingintosurfaceorgroundwaterfromthewasterockstoragefacility.Effectivenessoftreatmentshouldbeincluded,aswellaswherethemercurywouldbetransported.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT HABITAT


HABITAT (HAB)

Commentsassociatedwithterrestrialhabitatrequirements,orpotentialhabitatimpactsfromprojectcomponentsandoperation.Commentfocusisecology/habitat,notanimals.


HAB1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzethepotentialdirect,indirect,andcumulativeeffectsofallcomponentsandallphases(includingreclamationandrestoration)oftheproposedprojectonterrestrial,marine,andfreshwaterecosystems.Theanalysisshouldconsiderhowchangesinhabitatquality,quantity,orcharactercouldaffecttheorganismsthatusethosehabitats(includingfish,wildlife,andsubsistenceusesoftheseresources).Sourceofcumulativeeffectsonhabitatmayincludetrendsandconsequenceofclimatechange.Concernswereexpressedthattheproposedprojectwouldcontinuetoaffecthabitatsforhundredsofyearsaftertheminecloses.

HAB2 ConcernwasexpressedduringscopingthatthisprojectwouldsetaprecedentforfutureresourcedevelopmentintheYukon‐KuskokwimRegionandelsewhereinthestatethatcouldaffecthabitats.

HAB3 TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzetheriskforinvasive(non‐native)speciesintroductionasadirectorindirectresultoftheproposedproject.Thisanalysisshouldincludethepotentialimpactsofinvasivespeciestoecosystems,nativepopulations,andhumanactivities.TheDraftEISshouldidentifythevectorsforinvasivespeciesintroductionaswellaspreventativemeasuresthatwouldreducetheriskofintroduction.

HAB4 Bargeballastwaterwassingledoutasavectorforinvasivespeciesintroduction.Bargesandtankersassociatedwiththeproposedprojecthavethepotentialtotransportandintroducenon‐indigenousspeciestotheKuskokwimRiveraswellasmarineandintertidalhabitats.TheDraftEISshould:

• Considertheriskofinvasivespeciesintroductionbymarineandriverbarges;

• IncludeaballastwatermanagementprogramasperTheNationalInvasiveSpeciesActof1966;and

• Includeacommitmenttouseonlyvesselsthatoperatewithaballastwatermanagementplanandhaveonboardballastwatertreatmentsystems.

HAB5 HabitatbetweenMP150andMP194oftheproposedpipelinerouteisreportedtobeimportantmooseandDallsheephabitat,particularlyduringperiodsofhighnutritionalstress.TheDraftEISshouldconsiderthepotentialeffectsofpipelinedevelopmentonhabitataswellashabitatutilizationandaccessinthisarea.TheDraftEISshouldalsoconsideralternativepipelineroutesthatwouldavoidthishabitat.

HAB6 TheDraftEISshouldfullyevaluatepotentialeffectsbytheproposedprojectonthelandsandwaterswithinandsurroundingtheYukonDeltaNationalWildlifeRefuge.ThefollowingpointsshouldbeinvestigatedandanalyzedintheDraftEIS:

• Theinterconnectednatureofthislow‐lyingdeltaecosystemmakesitmorevulnerabletodisturbanceandcontamination;

• Tidalinfluencesreachfartherthan100kminland;and

• Thegeographicextentofcoastalimpactshasbeenincreasingwiththefrequencyandintensityofstormsurges;

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT HABITAT



• TheYukonDeltaNationalWildlifeRefugecontainsinternationallysignificantcoastalandshallowwaterhabitatsforfish,birds,andmarinemammalsthatmaybeatahigherriskforvisualandnoisedisturbanceaswellascontaminationasaresultoftheproposedproject;

• Disturbanceandfuelspillsmayaffectcoastalresources;and

• Streamsandwetlandhabitatsusedbyfishandotheraquaticorganismsmaybeaffectedbychangesinwaterqualityandincreasedbargetrafficassociatedwiththeproposedproject.

HAB7 TheDraftEISshouldevaluatethepotentialeffectsofnaturalgas‐relatedinfrastructureandactivitiesonCookInletmarinehabitats.

HAB8 Concernwasexpressedthattheproposedprojectcouldaffecthabitatsassociatedwithriversintheprojectarea,particularlytheKuskokwimRiver.TheDraftEISshould:

• Assesstheimpactsofapotentiallarge‐scalemishaponfishmigrationandspawning,waterfowl,moose,caribou,andotheranimals;

• Analyzeanypotentiallong‐termandshort‐termeffectsonKuskokwimRiverhabitats;

• Investigatetheeffectsbarge‐relatedriverbankerosioncouldhaveonriparianhabitat;

• Considertheimpactsincreasedbargetrafficcouldhaveonhabitatutilizationbyfishandwildlife;and

• Considertheimpactconstruction,maintenance,andabandonmentoftheproposedpipelineandROWcouldhaveonriparianhabitat.Mitigationmeasuresshouldbeidentified.

HAB9 Concernwasexpressedthatthepipelinecorridorandrelatedinfrastructurecouldchangehabitataccess.Habitatfragmentationcouldoccurasaresultofthepipelinecorridor.SomespeciesmaybereluctanttocrosstheclearedpipelineROWwheretheycouldbemorevulnerabletopredation.Thepipelinecorridorcouldalsofacilitatethemovementofotherspecies,includingnon‐nativespecies.

HAB10 ThevillageofCrookedCreekrequestedthattheCorpsevaluateimpactsoftheproposedprojecttobenthicinvertebratehabitatinCrookedCreekaspartoftheDraftEIS.BenthicinvertebratecommunitiesintheriversarethebasisforthefoodchaininthisareaandtheVillageofCrookedCreekurgestheCorpstofillindatagapsonthisresource.

HAB11 TheEISshouldanalyzechangesinsurroundinghabitatduringthereclamationandrestorationphaseoftheproject,includingchangesduetoclimatechange,changesinenvironmentalconditionsovertime,andadaptivemanagementinresponsetochangesoftemperatureandprecipitation.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS


HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (HZM)

Concernsaboutthepotentialforhazardousmaterialstorage,spills,andimpactstoresourcesortheenvironment.Chemicalsassociatedwithmineprocessandstorageofmaterials(cyanide,mercury,arsenic,acids).Commentsincludereferencestomaterialsidentifiedashazardousbythecommenter,ratherthanaregulatorydefinition.


HZM1 ThetypeofgeologyfoundintheareaoftheKuskokwimRegioncontainshighconcentrationsofmercuryandhasbeenreferredtoasthe"mercurybelt."ConcernswereexpressedduringscopingthatDonlinGoldwouldclaimthatthelevelsofmercurygeneratedintheproposedminingprocessarenatural.Thereshouldbeamassbalanceanalysisformercuryandothertoxicmaterialsinthemine.Full,ongoingaccountabilityfortheflowofmercuryisafeasibleandappropriaterequirement,andshouldbeincorporatedintotheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISanalysis.

Amassbalanceapproachwouldprovidedetailedinformationonmercurythroughouttheprocessandallowmillengineers,regulators,andtheDonlinGoldenvironmentalteam,tobetterunderstandhowmercurymaygounaccountedfor‐allowingforafasterandmoreinformedmitigationresponseintheeventofunexpectedproblemswithcontamination.

Theinformationgatheredshouldbepubliclyaccessibleonline,atanytime,andindependentlyreviewedbythird‐partyinspectors.Duringthescopingperiodtherewerequestionsraisedabouthistoricminingintheregionandbaselinecontamination.TheDraftEISshouldaddressthefollowing:

• Mercuryconcentrationsintheoverburdenrockattheminesite;

• TheCentralKuskokwimareaalreadyhasonesuperfundsiteenvironmentalclean‐upanddoesnotneedasecond.HowistheleachingthatwouldoccurattheproposedDonlinGoldMinesimilartotheleachingofmercuryfromRedDevil?Thereiscontaminationoffish(mercuryandarsenic)inthefishstudiesbetweenMcGrathandCrookedCreek.DidtheRedDevilminehaveanythingtodowiththat?

• IfcyanidebindswithmercuryandtherearealreadyhigherlevelsofmercuryintheYKregion,whataboutwiththepotentialadditiveimpactonpeoplegiventheRedDevilMinecleanupandconcernsaboutchemicalsfromthatsite?Whataboutthebioaccumulationtofishandfromeatingfish?

• ADonlinGoldnewsletternotedthattherewereminesupriverthatreleasedmercuryandlead.Whatistheresultofthatnow?WhatistheeffectonfishlikepikethatmayhavehighmercurycontentintheirliversthatpeopleintheBethelareathenconsume?WouldtheDonlinProjectdoublethequantityofchemicals?

PeopleinTuluksaknotedthatoncetheNYACminestarted,fishlefttheriver.Localresidentsnotedthatcancerratescouldandmayhaveincreasedasaresult.ResidentsnotedthattheproposedDonlinGoldcouldaffecttheentireriversystem.




HZM2 Amajorissueexpressedduringscopingwiththemineproposalisthatthecyanideandmercuryreleasedintothewatershedwoulddamagetheenvironment,people,animalsandfish(particularlywildlifeconsumedforsubsistence).Itisconsiderednotaquestionof"if"pollutionwouldoccur,but"when"and"howmuch.”Seeminglysmallamountsofmercurycanresultinexponentialratesofbioaccumulation.Thesechemicalscanaffecteverythingfromcellularfunctiontooxygenlevelsinwater.Theprojectplansdonotlistallofthehazardouschemicalsthatmightbeemittedfromthesmokestacks.ItisnotunderstoodorknownyethowhazardousmaterialswouldaffectresourcesforresidentsoutsidethemineinplaceslikeQuinhagak.Canacidsfloatintheairandaffectdistantvillages?Howdoesmercurytravelandhowwoulditaffectpeople?Whatarethefateandpathwaysforhumanandwildlifeexposuretocyanide?Theseissuesconcernlocalresidentsbecausepregnantwomenintheareaarealreadytoldtoavoidsomefish.Mostofpeopleintheregionhuntandfishandinparticularforducksandgeese.

HZM3 TheDraftEISshouldincludedetailedinformationandamercuryriskassessmentabouttheuseofmercuryfromcradletograveincludingitsentiretransportationroute.Evencapturedmercuryremainsacontaminationriskasitbecomespartoftheriverbargetraffic,joiningdieselspillsasathreattoallthatdependontheKuskokwimRiver.Detailsinthisresearch/studyshouldinclude:

• Inwhatformswouldmercurybetransported?

• Howwouldeachformofmercurybetransported?

• Wheredoesitgoandhowoften?

• Howwouldmercurytransportationinfrastructurebedesignedtoaddresstheriskofspill?

• ThisdiscussionmustincludethecommunitiesatDutchHarborandwhereverelsetheymightbetransferringproduct;

• Whereisthefederallyregulatedfacilitylocatedthatwouldcontainthesolidmercury?Isitmilitaryorcivilian?

• Whatimpactsmayoccurasaresultofaspillduringstorageandtransportation?Specifically,pureelementalmercury?

TheDraftEISshouldfullydiscloseplansformercurytransport,makeexportmanifestspubliclyavailable,andprovidedetailedinformationabouttheemergencyresponseproceduresandplans.

HZM4 TheDraftEISshouldevaluatereasonablyforeseeableminefailurescenarioswithinthescopeofNEPAanalysis.Thereareinherentenvironmentalandhumanhealthrisksassociatedwiththedevelopmentofanewmineprojectthatmaynotbeanticipatedorexpectedduringtheearlyprojectplanningstages.Accidentalfuelandchemicalreleasesaswellasspillsoccurdespiteprecautionstomanageforthoserisks.Forexample,theFortKnoxGoldMinenorthofFairbankshadspillreleasesof300,000gallonsofcyanidecontainingwater(May2010)and45,000gallonsasaresultofabulldozerbreachingthesupplyline(August2012).Thereshouldbeanevaluationoftheenvironmentaleffectsresultingfromthefailureoftheminefacilities,suchasthetailingstoragefacilitydamandlinersandthetransportationofmaterialsforpermanentortemporarystorageoff‐site.

Therewasconcernexpressedduringscopingthatthetailingstoragefacilitymaynotbeareliablecontainmentstoragedeviceofthecontaminatedwaters.TheDraftEIS




shouldexplainifthelinersaretestedandreliableandthereshouldbetestingforthecontainmentfirstbeforeuseinoperations.Additionallyitwasnotedthatthisissameprincipleashowabeaverdamholdsbackwater.Itworksuntilspringwhensnowandiceproducewateroverflowbutoncethebeaverleavesthearea,thedamissubjecttoerosionandotherforcesofnatureovertimeuntilitisnolongeradam.AtpresentonemapontheprojectplanshowsseepagebelowthedamintoacontainmentpoolthatsuggeststhatseepageofcontaminatedwatersisexpectedintoCrookedCreekandthereforeintotheKuskokwimRiver.

HZM5 TheDraftEISshoulddescribethepresenceofmercuryintheDonlinGoldoreandthefateandtransportofmercurythroughmineralprocessing.ItalsowouldbeimportanttodisclosethepresenceofexistingsourcesofmercuryintheregionintermsofboththebaselinediscussionandcumulativeimpactssectionsoftheDraftEIS.Forexample,thereareexistingsourcesofmercurythatcontributetomercuryloadingintheKuskokwimRiveranditstributariesfromnaturalmercurymineraloccurrencesandfromhistoricminingpracticesthatminedorusedmercury.TheDraftEISmustclearlydifferentiatebetweenthemercuryloadingfromexistingsourcesandanticipatedcontributionsfromtheproposedproject.

HZM6 TheDraftEISshouldincludeanalysisofpotentialeffectsofcontaminantsandtoxinsintheairshedontheecosystem,drinkingwatersupply,andsubsistenceresources.Manyvillagesgettheirwaterdirectlyfromadjacentrivers.Thepotentialforaerialcontaminants,eitherallowedoraccidental,posesadditionalissuesforaquaticandterrestrialhabitats,andwouldextendthescopeofconcerntoincludemanyotherresources,suchasberryharvestareas,lichenanduplandtundra,andinlandforestresources.

TheDraftEISshouldidentifytheamountofmercuryemissionsDonlinGoldwouldbepermittedtoreleaseinordertocomparethetotalquantitiesreleasedintheentirestatetodate(examplesbulletedbelow).TheDraftEISshouldbeveryclearaboutmercurymanagementandpotentialexposurepathwaysitpresents:

• TheDonlinGoldminewouldproduce640,000oz.ofmercuryayearandtheanalysisshouldaddresswhereitwouldgo;

• ThenewEPAruleallowsfor84poundsofmercurytobereleasedtotheairperonemilliontonsofore.ThatmeansDonlinGoldwouldbelegallyallowedtoreleaseintotheair1,806poundsofmercuryperyear;

• In2010,themercurytoxicreleaseinventoryforthewholestateofAlaskawas43poundsfromallmines,powerplant,etc.intotheair;

• TheEPAruleswouldallowDonlintoreleaseintothesurroundingtundra,streams,andcountrysideaquantity42timesthewholestateofAlaska'smercuryemissionsin2010;and

• ThemostrecenttoxicreleaseinventoryfortheStateofAlaskahadlessthan100poundsofknownmercuryemissionsthroughouttheStateofAlaska,butDonlinGoldisgoingtobeabletolegallyemitabout1,100poundsofmercuryperyear,andthereisgoingtobesomethingtothetuneof300to500tonsofmercurymovingthroughthatmillduringthe30‐yearminelife.

CommentersnotedthattheybelieveitisimportanttoputthatincontextandtoprovidetransparentinformationabouthowthatissueisgoingtobedealtwithintheDraftEIS.

HZM7 Theproposedmineshouldnotbeallowedtodumpcapturedmercuryintothetailingspond;rather,itshouldexportallcapturedmercurytoafederallyapprovedpermanent




storagefacility,followingthetransportprotocolusedbytheDepartmentofDefense(DepartmentofDefense,JointMunitionsCommand,HWADMercuryConsolidationProjectInformationSheet(July29,2010))andguidelinesprovidedbytheDepartmentofEnergy(DepartmentofEnergy,InterimGuidanceonPackaging,Transportation,Receipt,Management,andLong‐TermStorageofElementalMercury(November13,2009))‐Amultiplecontainerapproachwithseveralredundantsystemsforsafety.IfDonlinGoldoperatorsintendtouseadifferentstorageandmanagementsystemthantheonetheDepartmentofDefenseuses,theDraftEISshoulddescribehowitimprovestheseDepartmentofDefensemethods.

HZM8 Entitiesunfamiliarwiththeproposedprojectcouldoverstatethepotentialforimpactsfrommercury.TheDraftEISmustdescribe,inanunderstandablemannertoresidentsoftheregion,thenatureofthepotentialimpactsthatmercuryfromtheproposedprojectcouldhaveonhumanhealthandtheenvironmentandtheeffectivenessofmercurycontroltechnologies.

HZM9 TheDraftEISshouldaddressthepotentialconsequencesandmajorpublicconcernsoveracontainmentstructurefailure.Thetailingspondwouldbealargebowlofmercuryandothermineralwastes,soareleasewouldbeanenvironmentaldisaster.TheDraftEISshoulddescribewhatwouldbethetimerequiredforthesecontaminantstodegradetoalesserdegreeofdanger.Therewouldalwaysbearisk,forsevengenerationsintothefuture.ItisimpossibletoensurethattheKuskokwimRiverwouldnotbefouled.WhenadambrokeinEurope,theywereshovelingupdeadfishwithawheelbarrow;itkilledallthefishintheriver.Mercuryissodangerousitcantakeonedroppermilliongallonstocontaminatethewater.Ifsalmonsmellthat,thentheywouldn'tgobacktothatspawningarea.

Otherthanthetypicalconcernsforpotentiallytreatingwaterleavingthepitforever,theDraftEISshouldevaluatewhathappensfarintothefutureifthepittotallyfillsupwithchemicallystablesludgeresultingfromtheHighDensitySludgeProcess.Asmuchasitrains,thepondiseventuallygoingtooverflow.TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowmercuryandotherheavymetalswouldbekeptoutofthewatershedduringthelifeofthemine,andparticularlywhenthemineisabandoned?Itisnottechnicallyfeasibleorrealistictoassumerunoffwaterfromthetailingwasteandtheopenpitwouldbetreatedorpumpedintothepitintoperpetuity.Runoffwouldbeacidicandtoxictofishanddownriverinhabitants.TheDraftEISshouldexplainhowrunoffwouldbekeptoutoftheKuskokwimRiver,andwhattheimpactstotheriverareifitisnot.




HZM10 Theimpactofmercuryonaquaticsystemsmaybedependentontheamountthatismethylated.Mercurymethylationrequiresinorganicmercuryandmethylatingbacteria.Thepredominant(thoughnotexclusive)methylatorsofmercuryaresulfate‐reducingbacteria,whichrequireanoxicconditions,sulfate,andanorganiccarbonsource.Therefore,anylandscapealterationsthataffecttheactivityofsulfate‐reducingbacteriacanhavealargeeffectonmethylmercuryconcentrationsinaquaticbiota.Assuch,inevaluatingtheimpactsoftheproposedmine,itisnotadequatetolookatjustreleasesofinorganicmercury.TheDraftEISshoulddiscusshowtheminingactivityinfluencesthemethylationpotentialofmercury.Thepathwaysforenvironmentalandhumanexposuretomethylmercuryshouldalsobedescribed.RecommendationsforanalysisintheDraftEISshouldconsiderthefollowing:

• In2007,measurementsofmethylmercurywereaddedtothemercurybaselinestudy.Thesemeasurementsfocusedonstream/riversediments.Whilemeasuringsedimentsmayhavethebenefitofbeinglesstemporallyvariablethanwater;thewatermeasurementsmaybemorerepresentativeofthemethylmercuryavailableforaccumulationinthefoodweb.Itislikelythatmercurymethylationintheareaismainlyoccurringinwetlands.Theexportofmethylmercuryfromthesewetlandsislikelyinthedissolvedphase.Therefore,itmaybethecasethatsedimentmethylmercuryconcentrationsarenotrepresentativeofwatermethylmercuryconcentrations.Theexportofmethylmercuryfromwetlandsislikelyhighlytemporallyvariableandwouldbedependentonhydrologicalconnectivitybetweenthewetlandsandstreams.Anefficientwaytoidentifythebaselinemethylationpotentialoftheecosystemistocollectmeasurementsdirectlyfromthewetlands;

• Numerousstudieshaveshownthatmethylmercuryconcentrationsinwaterhavelargeseasonalvariability—withthehighestconcentrationsinthelatesummer/earlyfall.Overthewinter,methylmercurytypicallydecreases,resultinginlowerspringtimeconcentrations.Assuch,tounderstandthemaximumamountofmethylmercurybeingproduced,measurementsshouldbemadeinthelatesummerorearlyfall;

• TheDraftEISshoulddiscussthepotentialformethylationtooccurdownstreamfromtheminesiteandtherolethatexportofdissolvedorganiccarbon,sulfate,andinorganicmercurymayhaveonfacilitatingdownstreammethylation;

• ReleasesofmercuryormethylmercuryassociatedwiththemineneedtobecontextualizedwiththereleasesfromRedDevilandotherminesupstream,andnaturallyoccurringbackgroundlevelstounderstandanycumulativeimpactsofreleases;and

• Discussthepotentialpathwaysforenvironmentalandhumanexposuretomethylmercury,andthepotentialformethylmercurytobioaccumulateinfishandothersubsistencefoodsrelieduponbythelocalcommunities.

HZM11 TheDraftEISshouldconsiderafullrangeofalternativesthatwouldprecludeplacingmercury‐contaminatedtailingssolutioninthetailingsimpoundment,wherethemercurycanbereleasedintotheenvironmentfromlinerseepage,leakageorfailure,andoff‐gassingairemissions.Thereareampleexamplesoftailingsimpoundmentsthatleachcontaminantsduetolinerfailures.




HZM12 TheDraftEISshouldalsoevaluatetheimpactsofthetailingspondcontainingpotentiallyunstableformsofmercuryintheeventofatailingsdamfailure.Theneutral‐alkalinepHofHigh‐DensitySludgewouldprecipitatemetalssuchasiron,manganese,copper,cadmium,andzinc,andisessentialintheTailingStorageFacility(TSF)tokeepcyanidefromoff‐gassingastoxichydrogencyanide.However,themetalloidsarsenic,antimony,molybdenum,andseleniumdonotprecipitate,theymobilize.Additionally,cyanideintheTSFwouldkeepmercuryandseleniumdissolved.Thescopingdocumentsaddressthecomplexmix.Ferricsulfateisaddedtoprecipitatearsenic,Octoligresincolumnsaretoassistinremovalofselenium,andUNRreagent829istoassistwithmercuryremoval.However,withregardstoselenium,ironco‐precipitationisnotsufficienttotreatittothelowlevelsrequiredfordisposalintoacreek,andtheproposedOctoligcolumnsappeartobecompletelyuntested.AdditionalinformationregardingthisisfoundinmaterialsbySandyandDiSante.2010.ReviewofavailabletechnologiesfortheremovalofseleniumfromwaterforNorthAmericanMetalsCouncil.CH2MHill.http://www.namc.org/docs/00062756.PDF.Withregardstomercury,theUNRreagentseemstohavenotperformedwellonTSFwater,althoughitperformedbetterwithfiltrate.Thereisnomentionoftreatmentforammonia.

HZM13 Theuseofexplosives,suchasdynamiteshouldbeanalyzedintheDraftEIS.

HZM14 CumulativelevelsofmercuryinbiotafromallsourcesshouldbeaddressedintheDraftEIS.BioaccumulationofmethylmercuryhasalreadyreachedalevelofpublichealthconcerninsomepredatoryfishspeciesintheKuskokwimRiverdrainage(Matz2012).Currentstatepublichealthguidelinesrecommendthatwomenofchildbearingagelimittheirconsumptionofsomefishspeciesinthisdrainage,toavoidpotentialhealthimpactstothedevelopingfetus(seewww.epi.alaska.gov/ehlfish).MercuryinputsandmethylationratesinAlaskanriversareexpectedtoincreasewithclimatechange(Schusteretal2011).Whileproject‐relatedlevelsofmercuryinputmayormaynothavesignificanteffectswhenconsideredalone,bothallowedandaccidentalinputsofadditionalmercurymustbeevaluatedinthecontextoftheexistingenvironment.Project‐relatedincreasesofmercuryinfishhavethepotentialtoaffectlocalhumanwelfare,giventhecriticalrolesubsistencefisheriesplayinthisarea.Fearorlossofconfidenceinthesafetyofsubsistencefoodscouldresultinashiftawayfromsubsistencetowardmarketfoods,resultingindecreasedstatus(Murphy1997).Thiseffectmaynotbelimitedtotheprojectarea,butcouldextenddownstreamforacurrentlyundeterminedgeographicextent.

HZM15 BarrickGold'soperationsinothercountriesshouldbestudiedandexaminedaspartoftheDraftEISprocess.TheU.S.hasstrongerenvironmentalandhealthprotectionlawsthanothercountrieswherethiscompanyoperates,buttheproposedprojectareashouldbeanareawhereresponsibleminingcouldoccur.

OnecommenternotedthattheyhadparticipatedinsuperfundcleanupsinWyoming,Nevada,Montana,andAlaskathatdidnotgothroughtheduediligenceofaDraftEISandthatmorerecentprojectsarebetterengineered,managed,andmonitored,anditisinaccurateandunfairforsomegroupstocomparethisproposedprojecttopreviousprojects.




HZM16 TheDraftEISshouldprovidedocumentationabouttheforthcomingmercurymanagementplan(aspartoftheIntegratedWasteManagementPlan)whichshouldincludedisposalplans,handling,monitoring,mercuryabatementcontrols,andallapplicableregulations.Otherwiseitisdifficulttounderstandtheramificationsanddeleteriouseffectsoftheabatementprocessandthemanagementofco‐productmercuryandmercury‐containingmaterials.Specifically:

• DiscussionofcleaningsuppliesandmopsandbroomdisposalintheIntegratedWasteManagementPlanwascoveredbutthisisnotanadequatediscussion;

• TheDraftEISshouldincludeinformationonhowcontroldevicescapturemercuryinliquidandgaseousformaswellasmercurycapturedfromthetailingsslurrypipeline;and

• TheDraftEISshouldevaluatealternativemethodsformanagingwasteliquidflowsfromthecarbon‐in‐leachtankandothermillprocessestothetailingspond.Aretherepollutioncontrolmeasuresthatcanbeusedtoreducethemercuryinthecarbon‐in‐leachtailingssolutionbeforeitgetsmixedwiththedetoxifiedtails?

HZM17 AlthoughBarrickGoldhasdevelopedcertaintechniquestoreducethemercuryemissionsgeneratedthroughthemillingprocesses,itispossiblethatfugitiveemissionswaftingoffthewasterockandtailingsmaycontributesubstantialamountstotheenvironment.Currentlythestateonlyrequiresmineoperatorstoaddressthemercuryemanatingfromthemillingoperationwhereitisreleasedfromtheautoclave,carbonkiln,goldfurnaces,andretortfacilitieswhentheoreissubjectedtohighlevelsofheat.TheDraftEISshouldanalyzehowsuchoff‐gassingofmercurycouldpotentiallywindupmilesawayintheenvironment,possiblycontaminatingsubsistenceresourcesandharmingarearesidents.Off‐gassedmercuryemissionsfromthetailingspondcouldbepreventedoratleastreducedbyusingsuperiorcontroltechnologyduringoreprocessingandthroughcertainreclamationandcontrolmethods.

HZM18 Commentsreceivedduringscopingnotedthatamineofthisscopeandthehistoryofmercurypollutioninthisarearequiresafeguardsbeyondpresentdayregulationsandbeyondthepoliticalarena.TheDraftEISshouldexaminefutureplansforthisminedetailingbetterhealth,safety,andenvironmentaltestingandmonitoring.Thereshouldbeacknowledgementofanyfederal,state,ortribalordinancesrelatedtocyanide,beyondtherecognitionandassurancethattheminewouldfollowtheinternationalstandardssetforcyanideandgoldmining.

HZM19 TheDraftEISshouldincludeananalysisofthepotentialforspillsofcontaminants.TheprojectplanstatesthattherewouldbespillresponseequipmentatBethelandJungjukports,butwhataboutinbetween?Aspillresponseplanshouldbedevelopedforeachvillagealongthebargeroutetoensurethefastestandmosteffectiveresponsetimepossible.TheDraftEISshouldincludeplausibleaccidentscenarios.Fuelstorage,equipmentrefueling,andequipmentmaintenanceoperationsshouldoccuratleast100ft(30m)fromsurfacewatersinordertopreventspills.




HZM20 Overthelifetimeoftheproposedproject,largequantitiesofhazardousandsolidwastematerialwouldbegeneratedduringconstruction,operation,maintenance,closure,andreclamation.TheDraftEISshouldaddressthepotentialdirect,indirect,andcumulativeenvironmentalimpactsofhazardousandsolidwastefromtheproposedproject.Ahazardousandsolidwastematerialhandling,storage,management,anddisposalplanshouldbedevelopedandincorporatedintotheDraftEIS.Recommendationsinclude:

• Identifythesources,types,andvolumesofhazardousandsolidwastematerial;

• Discusshowthehazardousandsolidwastematerialwouldbeproperlyhandled,stored,anddisposedatthecampand/orminesitesoratanoffsitefacility;

• Identifywhetheranon‐sitelinedsolidwastelandfillwouldbeconstructedtodisposeofsolidwastematerialfromthecampandmineactivities.Specifywhetheronsiteburningofsolidwastewouldbeproposed;

• Forcleansolidwastematerial,developandimplementarecyclingand/orcompostingprogram.Considerbackhaulingrecyclablematerialoffsiteandincorporatingthecompostingmaterialonsite;

• Forhazardouswastematerials,identifyanyfacilitieswherethematerialwouldbeproperlydisposed.Thefacilityshouldbeapprovedandcertifiedtoaccepthazardouswastematerial;

• Asanalternativetodisposingofhazardouswasteoffsite,anonsiteundergroundinjectioncontrolwellshouldbeconsideredtohandlehazardouswastematerialdisposal;and

• Identifyotherhazardousmaterialsiteswithintheadjacentprojectareaanddeterminethepotentialcumulativeimpactsfromtheproposedproject(e.g.theRedDevilMineandotherabandonedorhistoricalmines).

HZM21 TheKuskokwimRegionhasoneofthelargestChinooksalmonsubsistencefisheriesinthestate.Iftherewasaspill,therivercouldbecontaminatedforever,similartowhathashappenedattheCarsonRiverinNevadawhichiscurrentlyasuperfundsiteduetomining‐relatedimpacts.

HZM22 ThePlanofOperationsfortheproposedprojectindicatesthatmercuryprecipitationreagentswouldbeusedtoconvertsolublemercurytoastableformofmercurythatismercurysulfide(HgS)intheleachtailingsfiltrate(WaterResourcesManagementPlan,DonlinGoldProjectPlanofOperations,VolumeIIatpages4‐23[July2012]).TheDraftEISshouldprovidedataandaddresskeyquestionsonthelong‐termeffectivenessofthisapproach.Itshouldaddressiftheconvertedmercurywouldremainstable,anddeterminewhatisthelong‐termleachabilityofallformsofmercury?




HZM23 TheDraftEISshouldexaminetheshort‐andlong‐termimpactstosurfaceorgroundwaterresourcesassociatedwithleachatefromwasterock.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatehowmercurywouldbepreventedfromreleasingintosurfaceorgroundwaterfromthewasterockstoragefacility,particularlypostclosure.Inadditiontomercury,anumberofothertoxicmetalssuchasarsenic,antimony,manganese,molybdenum,lead,copper,cadmium,cobalt,chromium,iron,nickel,barium,andseleniumhavebeenidentifiedaslikelytoleachfromwasterock,theopenpit,andtailings.TheDraftEISshouldconsidertheimpactsofammoniumnitrate,cyanide,andothertoxicchemicalsusedinminingoperationsthatmayalsothreatenecosystemandhumanhealthiftheyarenotstrictlycontained.

HZM24 Arsenicisanaturallyoccurringelementintheearth'scrustandwidespreadthroughoutAlaska.Theproposedprojectactivitieswouldexposetheaquaticenvironmenttoarsenicandpotentiallyresultinsubsequentexposuretohumansbydrinkingcontaminatedwaterand/oreatingcontaminatedfoods.TheDraftEISshouldincludeanarsenicassessmentanddeterminepotentialimpactstohumanhealth.Thiswouldinclude:

• Identifyingthesourcesandtheamountsofarsenicpotentiallyreleasedfromthisproject.Identifyingthereceptorsofarsenicintheenvironment.Describingthepotentialpathwaysforhumanexposureandprovidingthetoxicexposurelimitsforarsenictohumansandwildlife.

• Anexaminationofthemobilityandtoxicityofarsenicdependingontheform(e.g.arsenite,arsenate)thatisheavilyinfluencedbyoxidation/reductionconditions.TheDraftEISshouldincludeadiscussionofpredictedarsenicspeciationinthecontextofpotentialchangingredoxconditionsandhowthisinfluencesthepotentialenvironmentaltransportandimpacts.

• Identifyinganycontroltechnologiesthatwouldbeimplementedtodetoxify,remediate,removeand/ortreatarsenicfromtheminingprocesseffluent.Foranyarsenicremoved,identifyingtheproperdisposalfacility.Providinganestimateoftheamountofarsenicinthetailingseffluentstreamandtailingstoragefacility,andincludinganarsenicmanagementplan.

HZM25 Theproposednaturalgaspipelinewouldrequirehydrostatictestingtoensurepipelineintegrityduringconstruction.Hydrostatictestingmayrequirelargevolumesofwater,whichmaybeheattreatedand/oraugmentedwithfreezedepressantsifconstructionisduringthewinterseason.TheDraftEISshouldprovideinformationtoevaluatethedirect,indirect,andcumulativeenvironmentalimpactsassociatedwiththedischargeofhydrostatictestwaterintoadjacentlands,wetlands,andwaterbodiescontainingresidentand/oranadromousfish.ApipelinehydrostatictestwaterplanshouldbedevelopedandincorporatedintotheDraftEIS.Recommendationsreceivedduringscopingincluded:

• Describethelocationofwatersources,volumeofwater,andwithdrawalratesthatwouldberequiredforhydrostatictestingofthenaturalgaspipeline;

• Identifythedischargelocationstolandand/orsurfacewaters,anddischargemethods;

• Forwinterhydrostatictesting,identifytheuseofanychemicaladditives,suchasanti‐freezeorfreezedepressants,andhowthesechemicalswouldbetreatedpriortodischarging;

• Avoiddischarginghydrostatictestwaterintosurfacewaterscontainingresidentand/oranadromousfish;and




• Describemitigationmeasures/commitmentandcontroldevicesthatwouldbeimplementedtominimizeenvironmentalimpactsassociatedwithdischarginghydrostatictestwater.

HZM26 TheDraftEISshouldexplainthecyanidedetoxificationstepoftheminingprocess,thedangersoftheprocess,andalternativestoit.Specifically,theDraftEISshouldaddress:

• Howmuchcyanidesolutiondoesittaketoprocessonetonofore?Theminelifeisgoingtobe27.5years,andthequantityofcyanidesolutionshouldbedescribed.

• Wheredoesthecyanidecomefrom?Howwoulditbemanagedand/orcontained?

• Regardingmetalinthesolutionwhatregulationswouldensurethattoxinsinsolutionaregoingtobeprecipitatedoutanddealtwithinsteadofdumpingsolutionintoapondordumpedintotheaquifer?

• Doesthisprocessuseanyotherchemicalsofconcern?

• Whathappenswhencyanidebindswithothernaturallyoccurringandintroducedelementssuchasmercury?IntheY‐KRegionthereisalreadyahigherlevelofexposuretomercurythanistypical.

• Whatcomponentsofmillingcouldbedoneoff‐sitetoreduceexposuretocontaminantsattheprojectsite?

HZM27 TheDraftEISshouldincludeacyanidemanagementplanandadiscussionoftheenvironmentalandhumanhealthimpactsassociatedwithcyanideexposureandstrategiesaimedatreducingexposuretoresidentsandmigratorywildlife.Recentstudieshaveshownthatresidualcyanideinminetailingscancausepersistentreleaseoftoxicmetals(e.g.,mercury)intogroundwaterandsurfacewaters.Potentialstepsshouldbeconsideredtodetoxify,remediate,andremovecyanidefromthetailingseffluent.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatecontroltechnologiesandadditivestodetoxify,remediateandremovecyanidefromtheminingprocesseffluent.Anycyanideremovedshouldbeproperlydisposedatanapprovedfaculty.TheDraftEISshoulddescribespillcontingenciesandpotentialimpactsifcyanidewerereleasedonlandorintotheKuskokwimRiver.

HZM28 CommentersnotedthatDonlinGold'sproposeduseofcyanideattheproposedminesiteshouldbeapproved.Itisacommonandwell‐regulatedprocessforwhichDonlinGoldwouldhavesafeguardsinplace.ThecommentstheCorpsreceivesonthistopicshouldbecarefullyconsidered,butevaluatedfromtheprospectiveoftheproposedplanofoperation.




HZM29 TheDraftEISshouldquantifytheamountofcyanidethatcouldbereleasedonlandandinwater.Thetransportation,storage,anddisposalofcyanidepresentspotentialrisksandmanyopportunitiesforaccidentalspillsandreleasesofcyanidetolandandwater.Asproposed,cyanidewouldbetransportedtotheminesiteusingmarinecargovessels,rivertug/barges,andtrucksonagravelroad.Intransit,thecyanidewouldbestoredattheBethelandJungjukports.Considerationsshouldbemadetominimizetransportationandmultipletransferpointsforcyanide.Questionsthatwererainsedinclude:

• HowwouldthecyanidebestoredandcontainedsafelyduringtransporttotheDonlinGoldmine?

• Howwouldtheyensuretherearenospillsordamagefromcyanidetransport?

• Howwouldtheyrespondtoaccidentalreleases?Thisshouldbeaccountedforintothespillcontingencyplan.

• Whatisthesafestwaytotransportit?Identifyopportunitiestominimizetransittimesandmultipletransferpoints.Analternativeshouldincludetheuseofaircargototransportcyanidedirectlytotheminesite.

• Howmuchcyanidewouldbeincludedinthetailingeffluentstreamandbestoredinthetailingstoragefacility?

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT HYDROLOGY (SURFACE WATER)


HYDROLOGY (SURFACE WATER) (HYD)

Impactstostreams,localwaterbodies,anddisruptioninlocalwaterpatterns.Thisincludesriverinesystems,waveimpactstoshorebanksandsurfacewaters,andlowerwaterlevels.


HYD1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzetheeffectsoftheproposedprojectandtheassociatedbargetrafficcouldhaveonriverbank,beach,andriverbederosionalongtheKuskokwimRiver.TheDraftEISshould:

• IncludeageomorphologystudyoftheKuskokwimRiver,containinghistoricriverbankerosionratesandaquantificationofriverbanklossbetweenBethelandtheproposedJungjukPort;

• Includeaboatwakestudyusingmodelingtechniquestoevaluatethemagnitudeinwhichboattraffic(includingvesselspeed)andwakescontributetobankerosionalongtheKuskokwimRiver;

• Considerthepotentialforincreasederosioninareaswheretheriverisshallow;

• Developmethodsforerosioncontrolandprotocolforpromptlydealingwithbreaksinerosioncontrol.Erosioncontrolshouldbeparticularlyrobustwhenitcomestoprotectingvillages;

• Analyzepotentialimpactstoculturaltraditionasaresultofthelossoflandandhomescausedbyerosion;

• Considerthecumulativeeffectsofhistoricriverineerosion,currentandprojectedweatherpatterns,currentandprojectedboattraffic,andtrafficassociatedwiththeproposedproject;

• AnalyzetheeffectsincreasederosioncouldhaveonsedimentdepositionratesandpatternsintheKuskokwimRiver.Concernwasexpressedthatincreaseddepositioncouldcreatemoresandbars,decreaseriverdepth,andinterferewithfishinginfrastructure;

• Analyzetheeffectsfromthemovementofbargesincludingchangesindissolvedoxygen,temperature,totalsuspendedsolids,totaldissolvedsolids,andpHlevels.Theseparametersareallofvitalimportancetoaquaticlife,andshouldbemonitoredallalongtheKuskokwimanditstributariesforthelifeofthemineandreclamationprocess.

• AnalyzethepotentialeffectoftheBethelterminalexpansionontherivercurrent;

• SpecificallyaddresserosionnearAkiak,whichlost200ft(61m)oflandtoerosionlastsummer;and

• SpecificallyaddresserosionnearKwethluk,acommunityontheKwethlukRiver.ErosionisalreadyaproblemintheKwethlukareaandconcernwasexpressedthatitwouldbeexacerbatedbytheproposedproject.Amile(1.6km)upstreamfromKwethlukthereisasmallshortcutthatconnectstheKuskokuakSloughportionoftheKuskokwimRivertotheKwethlukRiver.ThemouthofthisshortcutisbeingerodedbytheKuskokwimRiverandwakecreatedbyincreasedbargetrafficcouldspeedthisprocess.OvertimethiscouldincreasethevolumeofwaterthatflowsintotheKwethlukRivertherebyincreasingtherateoferosionalongthecommunityofKwethluk.ItwasnotedthatseveralhousesalongtheKwethlukRiverhadtoberelocatedlastfallforprotectionagainstlossanddamage.




HYD2 TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzethepotentialimpactsthathigh,low,orfluctuatingwaterlevelsintheKuskokwimRivercouldhaveonbargetrafficassociatedwiththeproposedproject.TheDraftEISshouldalsoconsiderthecumulativeimpactsthatbargetrafficassociatedwiththeproposedprojectandhigh,low,orfluctuatingwaterlevelscouldhaveonKuskokwimRiverhydrology,habitatsandthefishandwildlifethatdependuponthem,andsubsistenceactivities.

HYD3 Concernwasexpressedregardingpathwaysforwater‐bornepollutantsthatmaybereleasedasaresultoftheproposedproject.TheDraftEISshould:

• Determinewhichrivers,streamlines,watersheds,andwaterbodies(bothfreshandmarine)aredownslopefromandcouldbeaffectedbyanycomponentorphaseoftheproposedprojectincludingunanticipatedeventssuchasstorageponddamfailureorlinerleak;

• Specifywhichwatershedsandwaterbodiescouldbeaffectedbywhichpollutantsandanalyzetheimpactsthosepollutantscouldhaveonthosewatershedsorwaterbodies;

• SpecificallyaddresstheInnoko,Iditarod,Yukon,andKuskokwimdrainages;and

• SpecificallyaddressthepossibilityofpollutantsflowingoutoftheKuskokwimRiverandbeingcarriedbythecurrentupthecoasttotheYukonDelta.

HYD4 TheDraftEISshouldincorporatehistoricalhydrologystudiesandfullyanalyzehowextremeorseasonalfloodingeventscouldaffecttheproposedprojectandsurroundingvillages.TheDraftEISshouldspecificallyaddresshowfloodingeventsmayaffectchannelerosionandpipelinestreamcrossings.

HYD5Concernwasexpressedthattheproposednaturalgaspipelinecouldimpactstreamhydrologyandviceversa.TheDraftEISshould:

• ConsiderthepossibilitythatstreamsaslargeastheBigRivermaynotbefrozensolidduringthewinter.Sub‐iceflowandstreambedflowshouldbemanagedordivertedduringpipelineinstallation;

• ConsiderthepossibilitythatmanyofthestreamstheproposedpipelinemustcrosswouldbefrozensolidandhavenosurfaceflowduringFebruary.Surveysshouldbeconductedinadvancetoidentifythebestcrossingsite;

• Assesstheeffectsicedamsandassociatedfloodingandstreambedscourcouldhaveonproposedpipelinestreamcrossings,particularlytheKuskokwimRivercrossing;

• Analyzetheeffectsproposedpipelinestreamcrossingscouldhaveonsub‐streambedflowandcontinuity;

• Considerthepossibilitythatchanneldiversionwouldhavetotakeplaceduringconstructionofproposedpipelinestreamcrossings,especiallyonwide,braidedriverswhereheavyequipmentoperatorsmayneedmoreroomtomaneuver.

• Evaluatepotentialimpactsofchanneldiversiononhydrologyand;and

• Describeimpactsassociatedwiththeopencutmethod.MuchoftheconstructionofthepipelineonBLMlands(thewesternportionoftheproposedpipeline)wouldbeduringthesummermonthswhenthegroundisexposed,banksaresoft,andstreamflowsarehigher.Usingtheopencutmethodduringthesummerseasoncreatesmorepotentialforwatermanagementproblems,exposesthestreamchannel,andthreatenswaterqualitymuchmorethanitwouldifconstructiontookplaceduringthewinter,especiallyonbiggerstreamswithhighergradientandhigherdischarge.TheDraftEISshouldconsideranalternativeinwhichallstreamrelatedconstructioncrossingsandpipelineinstallationwouldbemadeduringthewinterwhenthereislessflowandpotentialwaterqualityissuesandtheground/bankisfrozenandstable.




HYD6 Residentsposedquestionsaboutwhetherandhowsurfacewater(creeks)wouldbedivertedneartheproposedminesite.WouldDonlinGolddamanycreeksattheheadwaters?WouldDonlinGoldcreateanymanmadecreeks?WouldanytributariestoCrookedCreekbedammed?Wouldtheprojectcreatemanmadeponds?

HYD7 AlthoughtheDonlinGoldpermitapplicationexplainsBMPsduringconstructionandoperations(e.g.siltfencesandotherprotectivedevices)tolimittheamountofsedimentrunoffintoadjacentwetlands,residentsareconcernedsedimentwouldenterGetmunaCreekandeventuallyCrookedCreek,therebydegradingthespawningandrearinghabitat(e.g.,interstitialspaces)priortoanymitigation.Thepermitapplicationstates,“withintheCrookedCreekdrainage,severalofthesmallertributariescanfreezetothestreambottomduringwinter(NorthernEcologicalServicesandHDRAlaskaInc.1999).Inaddition,theunderlyinggeologyoftheareacausessiltationintheCrookedCreekdrainage,whichleadstoahighlyarmored(orembedded)streambottom.Heavysiltloadsfilltheinterstitialspacesinthegravel,whichlimitstheavailablehabitatformacroinvertebrates(Waters1995)andexacerbatestheeffectsofwinterfreezingbylimitingtheamountofhabitatavailableforcolonization.”AdditionalsedimentwouldbeofparticularconcerninCrookedCreekconsideringtheanticipatedreductioninwatervolumementionedabove.AreductioninstreamflowwouldlessenCrookedCreek’sabilitytoflushsedimentsout.

HYD8 TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzetheeffectsofandpotentialforcreatingaufeisandseepsbyactivitiesassociatedwiththeproposedproject.Aufeisatproposedpipelineriver‐crossingscoulddamageriparianareasdownstreamandshouldbeincorporatedintobondinganddamageassessment.SeepsmayoccuronproposedgradedROWsandroadcutsthatexposegroundwatertothesurface.Seepsmayfreezeintolargemassesoficethathavethepotentialtodisruptconstruction,necessitatereroutingoftheproposedpipelinecorridor,andrequireclearingmoreacreage.SuggestionsweremadeduringscopingtocontactDenaliNationalParkandPreservetolearnaboutthechallengesthatglacialseepspresentforwinterroadoperations.

HYD9 Theproposedprojectwouldrequirelargevolumes(millionsofgallons)ofwaterforconstructionofpermanentandtemporarygravelroads,facilitypads,hydrostatictestingofthepipeline,HDD,andothermineoperations.TheDraftEISshouldincludeanevaluationofthewaterresourcesoftheprojectarea.DiscussionintheDraftEISshould:

• Identifyandmapexistingandpotentialsurfacewaterlocationswherewaterwithdrawalforprojectconstructionandoperationwouldoccur;

• Describewaterextractionmethodsandamounts;

• Characterizeeachsurfacewaterresourceandidentifyitssurfacearea,maximumdepths,availablevolumeofwater,volumeofproposedwithdrawal,andpresence/absenceofresidentand/oranadromousfishspecies;

• Identifythemaximumwaterrequirementsforprojectconstructionandoperation;

• Identifyanymitigationmeasures/commitments,suchasestablishingwaterwithdrawalrates,timingofwaterwithdrawal,andscreeningtoavoidimpactstofish;

• Identifyminimumrequiredflowneededtomaintainfishhabitat;and

• Identifymonitoringactivitiestoensurefisheriesresourcesareprotected.

Concernswereexpressedduringscopingthatpumpingsubstantialgroundwaterwouldaffectsurfacewateradverselyandalterthehydrologyenoughtoeffectivelypermanentlyimpactordestroyriversandstreamswithinthelocalwatershed.TheDraftEISshouldevaluateDonlinGold'sgroundwaterandsurfacewaterflowmodeling




predictions.Aquaticbiotashouldbemonitoredthroughoutthelifeoftheproposedminebecausetheminingoperationswouldremovesubstantialquantitiesofsurfaceandgroundwater.

HYD10 Theproposedminefacilityislocatedwithinthetwoadjacentwatersheds–theAmericanandAnacondacreeks.BothcreeksprovidesourcewatertoCrookedCreek,whichdrainsintotheKuskokwimRiver.TheproposedwasterockfacilitywouldpermanentlyimpactAmericanCreek.TheproposedtailingstoragefacilitywouldpermanentlyaffectAnacondaCreek.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatethedirect,indirect,andcumulativeimpactstoAmericanandAnacondacreeks.Thewatershedcharacteristicsofbothdrainagesshouldbeevaluatedindetail.TheDraftEISshould:

• ConductawatershedcharacterizationofAmericanandAnacondacreeks;

• Analyzethewatershedgeomorphologicalandothercharacteristics,suchasbasinshape,slope,vegetationcover,soiltypeandlanduseconditions;

• Evaluatetheseasonalwaterlevels,flowregimes,andchannelmorphology(i.e.,channelbedandbankerosionandsedimenttransportcapacity),andimpactscausedbystreamdiversions,channelization,andaltereddrainagepatterns;

• Evaluatethetypesofresidentandanadromousfishresources;

• Demonstratehowconstructionoftheproposedmineanditsassociatedfacilitiesmightalterrunoffresponsestobothaverageandextremeprecipitationevents;and

• EvaluatethedownrivereffectstoCrookedCreekandtheKuskokwimRiver,suchasreductioninseasonalandannualwaterflow,sedimentandnutrienttransport.

HYD11 TheEISshouldevaluateeffectsoftheroadconnectingtheJungjukminetotheport,includingtheeffectsofbridgeandculvertstreamcrossingsandcrossdrainageonstreamhydrologyand/ormorphology,includingthepotentialforaufeis.TheproposedJungjukroadthatwouldconnecttheJungjukPortsitetotheminecrossesapproximately50streamsand/ordrainagesincludingbothJungjukandGetmunacreeks,bothofwhichsupportresidentandanadromousfish.Spurroadswouldalsobeconstructedtoaccesstheairportandotherminefacilities.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT LEGISLATION AND REGULATORY PROCESS


LEGISLATION AND REGULATORY PROCESS (LEG)

CompliancewithCleanWaterAct,CleanAirAct,EndangeredSpeciesAct,andSection106oftheNationalHistoricPreservationAct.Commentsoncompliancewithotherstatues,lawsorregulationsthatshouldbeconsidered;coordinatingwithFederal,state,localagenciesororganizations;permittingrequirements.


LEG1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldconsiderthehistoryofminepermittinginAlaska,inparticulartheRedDogMine,FortKnoxMine,GreenCreekMine,andtheKensingtonMine.Thesemineshavebeenthoroughlyevaluatedthroughthepermittingprocessandhavesolidenvironmentalandeconomictrackrecords.AgenciesshouldconsiderthehistoricalcontextthatmanyminescitedbyopponentsofminingaremineswhoseoperationsbeganbeforetheadventoftheNationalEnvironmentalPolicyAct,theCleanAirAct,ortheCleanWaterAct.

ItisimportanttounderstandandacknowledgethatittookmanyyearstoestablishtheregulatoryframeworkthroughwhichtheselawswouldbeimplementedandthattheU.S.hasachievedagoodtrackrecordofenvironmentalstewardship.TheDraftEISshould:

• ExplainhowandwhenpermittingdecisionsaremadeinrelationtotheEIStimeline;

• DescribewhathappensifsignificantchangesaremadetothepermittedactivitiesfollowingtheEISprocess;

• Includealistanddescriptionofallpermitsrequiredfortheproposedactionincludinginternational,federal,state,andlocal;and

• Describetherolesandrelationshipsofallthepermittingagencies.

LEG2 TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowtheprojectwouldcomplywithSection106oftheNationalHistoricPreservationAct(NHPA).Specifically:

• ClarifythatSection106isnotpartoftheNEPAprocess,itisaseparatelaw;

• IntheanalysisofTraditionalCulturalProperties,notethedistinctionthatthesearenotlimitedtopropertiesimportanttoAlaskaNatives.ThepropertiesoftraditionalreligiousandculturalimportancetoAlaskaNativetribesmaynotbethesameasTraditionalCulturalPropertiesidentifiedonthebasisofhistoricimportancetoothercommunities.

• NotethattheCorpsistheleadfederalagencythatensurescompliancewiththislawundertheNationalHistoricPreservationAct,butthatthestatutealsorequiresconsultationwithotherpermittingagencies,tribes,SHPO,localgovernmentrepresentatives,andtheAdvisoryCouncilonHistoricPreservation(ACHP);

• EnsurethatNEPA/NHPAconsultationandscopingiscoordinatedandconcurrentwherepossibletosaveresources;

• CompletetheSection106processpriortoissuingtheRecordofDecision(ROD),whichwouldprovidefortheimplementationoftheProgrammaticAgreementterms;

• AnalyzeimpactstotheIditarodNationalHistoricTrail;and

• ClarifythatanymitigationmeasurestoimpactstotheIditarodNationalHistoricTrailwouldbeagreedtoasapartoftheSection106complianceprocessandoutlinedinaProgrammaticAgreement.




LEG3 TheDraftEISshouldexplaintheextentofinterdisciplinaryworkbetweenthestateandfederalagenciesworkingtogetherwithscientistsandwithindigenousknowledgeinordertomakecommentperiodsmoremeaningful.Onecommenterencouragedmanydepartmentstoworktogethertoaddressandanalyzecurrentproblems.

LEG4 TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowtheprojectwouldcomplywiththeCleanWaterAct.ItwassuggestedthattheCWASection404(b)(1)analysisalternativesdevelopmentbeintegratedintotheDraftEIStoensurethattheenvironmentalreviewandpermittingprocessesareconcurrent,efficient,andconsistent.

TheDraftEISshouldfullydisclosethepreciselegalmechanismbywhichtheproposeddischargestotheminepitwouldoccur,sothataffectedmembersofthepublicmaycommentonit.Specifically:

• TheDraftEISshouldaddresstheperceivedloopholesintheCleanWaterActandhowtheyaffectthetailingsimpoundmentfacilitythatdoesnothavetocomplywithdischargestandardsifconsideredawastetreatmentfacility;

• DescribehowthepotentialclosureofthetwomainCleanWaterActloopholeswouldaffectthedesignandplacementofthetailings;

• ConsiderhowlitigationwiththeCleanWaterActwouldaffectthemineengineeringplans;

• ExplainifAmericanCreekandtheotherwaterswithinthepitwouldbedeemedawastetreatmentfacility;

• DescribehowtheprojectwouldcomplywithNewSourcePerformanceStandardsregardingthedischargeofwastewaterintoAmericanCreek;

• Explainwhetherthescopeofwaterqualityanalysiswouldincludeanti‐degradationprovisionsoftheCleanWaterAct.

• DescribethelocationsofaffectedwetlandsandhowSection404requirementsandcompliancewouldbemet;and

• IncludeadraftCWA§404(b)(1)compliancedeterminationforthepreferredalternativeasanAppendixtotheDraftEIS.

LEG5 ExplainwhethertheCorpshasinitsstatutestheabilitytostoptheclocktoacquiremoreinformationanddatathatmightbeneededforareasoftheDraftEISthatareessentialfordecision‐making.

LEG6 Commentersexpressedconcernaboutthehistoryofpastminesleavingpollutionandpoisonbehindandwantinformationregardingconsequencesofpermitviolations.TheDraftEISshouldclarifywhetherornotthereareanyguaranteesfromtheCorpsorotherpermitissuingagencies.Describetheviolationprocessandpotentialpunishmentsandwhetherornottheproposedminecouldbeshutdownuntiltheviolationsareaddressed.TheDraftEISshouldexplainhowownershipandresponsibilitywouldbedeterminedanddiscloseanypastpermitviolationscommittedbytheprojectproponents.

LEG7 ExplainhowtheNorthAmericanFreeTradeAgreementwouldaffecttheabilityofthestateandfederalgovernmenttoregulatethisproposedmine.Describewhethertheanswerisalegalopinionorestablishedlawupheldbythecourts.




LEG8 OnecommenterencouragedtheCorpsandcooperatingagenciestofollowtheintegratedNEPAandpermittingapproachutilizedbyfederalandstateagenciesonpastminedevelopmentprojectsinAlaska,includingthePogoMine,theRedDogAqqalukExtension,andKensington.ItwassuggestedthattheCorpsevaluatetheCWA§404permitapplicationconcurrentlywiththeNEPAprocessandtheNationalHistoricPreservationActSection106coordinationprocess.

LEG9 ClarifywhethertheDraftEISwouldincludeafullanalysisofthecumulativeimpactsoftheproposedprojectnaturalgaspipeline,includingananalysisofgreenhousegasemissionsaspollutantsundertheCleanAirActasaresultofrecentcourtrulings.

LEG10 DescribetheANILCA810subsistenceevaluationprocessfortheproposedproject.EnsurethatDraftEISand,ifneeded,ANILCA810subsistencehearingsarecoordinatedwheneverpossible,andgiveadvancednoticesothateldersandothercommunitymemberscanparticipate.

LEG11 CommentersexpressedconcernabouttheTemporaryWaterUsePermits(TWUPs)issuedtoDonlinGoldbytheAlaskaDepartmentofNaturalResources(DNR)inMarch2012.TherewerespecificconcernsraisedduringscopingthattheissuanceofseveralpermitsiscontrarytothepublicinterestandislikelyinviolationoftheAlaskaStateWaterUseCode.TheCorpsshouldconsiderapprovalofthesepermitsintheDraftEIS.

LEG12 AlaskaDepartmentofFishandGameTitle16FishHabitatpermitswouldberequiredforwaterwithdrawalandforseveralotheraspectsoftheproposedprojectassociatedwithfishstreamsincludingpipelinecrossings(ditching,boring,streambedandstreambankrehabilitation),equipmentcrossings,materialsitesandportconstruction.

LEG13 Inaccordancewith11AAC93.17,theDraftEISshouldincludeconsiderationofthehazardpotentialofclassificationoftheproject’sseveralsubstantialwaterdamsandthelargedamforwholemilltailingsslurry.Thisshouldincludesummaryoftherequiredfeasibilitystudyandsitestudythatjustifiesthelocation,type,andconfigurationoftheproposeddamoverotheralternativelocations,types,andconfigurations.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT LAND OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND USE


LAND OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND USE (LAND)

Publicandprivatelanduse,ownership,andmanagementobjectives.Loss/degradationofwildernessvalues–butnottraditionallanduse,whichisaddresselsewhere.


LAND1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldanalyzetheIditarodNationalHistoricTrailunderNEPAproceedingsinaseparatesectionthattracksthroughoutthedocumentasaspecialdesignationorCongressionalDesignation.

LAND2 TheDraftEISshouldreviewandaddresstheKuskokwimAreaManagementPlanthatiscurrentlyinplace,intheproposedprojectarea.

LAND3 ThefollowinglandmanagementgoalsmustbeaccountedforintheDraftEIS:

• EnsureprotectionofnaturalandculturalresourcesfromOffRoadVehicle(ORV)impacts;

• ProvideORVaccessconsistentwiththeprovisionsofANILCASection811;and

• Describeandanalyzestate‐managedpublicaccessonthestate‐managedSusitnaFlatsGameRefugeandBLM‐managedaccessontheBLM‐grantedright‐of‐way(inthecontextofsubsistenceuseandneeds).

LAND4 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzepotentialimpactsonaBLMcommercial‐occupancysitenearMP168,wherealeaseholderprovidesBLM‐approvedcommercialbiggamehuntingguide‐outfittingoperations,withORVorAll‐TerrainVehicles(ATV)andfixed‐wingaircraftaccess,withinthesurroundingarea.

LAND5 TheDraftEISshouldevaluatethelossofwildlifehabitatonlandsintheproposedprojectarea.

LAND6 TheDraftEISshouldevaluateLandswithWildernessCharacteristicsalongthepipelinecorridorasrequiredunderBLMmanagementguidance.

LAND7 TheDraftEISshouldevaluateimpactstoprivateandpubliclandsresultingfromthereclamationofthenaturalgaspipeline,andensurethatadequatebondingisinplace.

LAND8 TheDraftEISshouldevaluateimpactsofincreasedpublicaccessalongthepipelinecorridorwithregardtothefollowingissuesraisedduringscoping:

• PossibleuseofthepipelineROWasarouteforsnowmachinesandotherORV/ATV’s;

• ImpactsoftheROWtoplacermineoperatorswhomovetheirequipmentduringwintermonths,wouldROWimpactthat;

• Considerthattheproposedpipelinecorridormayopenalong,newlydevelopedtrailfromAnchorage/Wasilladirectlytotheproposedprojectarea;and

• Determineiftheproposedpipelinecorridorwouldbemanagedwithanyrestrictionsonpublicaccessinrelationtoriskstotheintegrityofthepipelinesystem.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT LAND OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND USE



LAND9 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheimpactstheproposedpipelinecorridormayhavebyincreasingpublicaccessonlandsincluding:

• IncreasedaccessfromSouthcentralAlaskatotheproposedprojectarea;

• ImpactstoNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces(NRHP)sitesandtrails;

• Increasedrisksforoilspillsalongnewaccessroutesandappropriatereportingrequirements;and

• Dispositionofover‐burdenalongtheROWthatmayimpairwildlifemovementpatterns.

LAND10 TheDraftEISshouldidentifypublictrails,sectionlineeasements,17(b)easements,andRS2477trailsintheproposedprojectareaandaddresspotentialimpactstoandfromthesetrails.

LAND11 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzethelandrightsofprivatelandownersandtheeffectsoftheproposedprojectincluding:

• Traditionalusers’lossofaccesstoANCSAlandsleasedfortheproposedprojectarea;

• Publicaccesstotheproposedpipelinecorridorifaroadisbuiltwithpublicfunds;and

• RightsofANCSAlandownerstoavoidunreasonabledelays,whichmightconstituteataking.

LAND12 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheimpactstoprivatelandsandlandownersfortheproposedprojectareaincluding:

• AlaskaNativecorporationlandsreceivedpursuanttotheAlaskaNativeClaimsSettlementAct;

• RestrictedIndianlandsreceivedundertheAlaskaNativeAllotmentActof1906and,

• IncludingmapsintheEIStodepictonausefulscaletheproposedpipelineroutesthroughsubdivisionssothatpeoplecanseewheretheproposedpipelinemaycrosstheirlots.LotlinesshouldalsobedepictedonsuchmappingeffortsintheEIS.

LAND13 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheimpactsofthelossoftraditionallanduseandsubsistenceuseareasbythetribesandmembersofthecommunity.Inparticular,theDraftEISshouldexaminelandsthatarenowownedandleasedbyAlaskaNativeCorporationsandtheirrelationshiptotheproposedproject.

LAND14 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheimplicationsoftheBeringSeaWesternInteriorResourceManagementPlanforBLMmanagementrequirementsofsegmentsoftheproposedpipeline.

LAND15 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheeffectoftheBethelbargeterminalfacilityonthepublicuseofthesurroundingareawithregardstotrailsandwaterfrontusage.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT MITIGATION MEASURES


MITIGATION MEASURES (MIT)

Commentsrelatedtosuggestionsfor,orimplementationof,mitigationmeasures.


MIT1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldidentifymitigationmeasurestominimizethereleaseofacidrockdrainage/metalleaching.

MIT2 MitigationmeasuresandcontroltechnologiesshouldbeidentifiedtominimizetheemissionofHazardousAirPollutant(HAPs)andfugitivedust.Commenterssuggestthefollowing:

• Useofnaturalgastopowerheavyequipmentandvehicles;and

• Wettingsourcematerial,installingbarrierstopreventdustfromspreading,andhaltingoperationsduringhighwindevents.

MIT3 Bargetrafficisamainconcernamongcommenters.MitigationmeasuresshouldbeclearlystatedanddescribedintheDraftEIStoreduceimpactsassociatedwithbargeactivity.Commenterssuggestthefollowing:

• ReduceoreliminatebargetrafficduringChinook(king)salmonopeningsandotherkeyannualsubsistenceactivities;

• Includemitigationtoprotectmarineresourcesfrombargetraffic;

• Includemitigationfornoisecausedbybargesthatmayaffectlocalfisherman;

• Placeunusedrockfromtheminesitealongtheriverbanktoreducebankerosion;

• Establishandenforcemaximumtug/boatspeedandloadlimits;

• Reconfigurebargestominimizewakes;and

• Evaluate(monitor)annualriver‐bankloss.

MIT4 LocalresidentsdrinkwaterfromtheKuskokwimRiver,anditisthehabitatformanyspeciesoffishandaquaticlife.Mitigationmeasuresshouldprotectthewaterqualityoftheriverandincludethetreatmentofcontaminatedwater.Commenterssuggestedusingalternativetechniquestocompletelyremovechemicalsfromwaterbeforedischargingandusingdrystacksinsteadofslurries.

MIT5 TheDraftEISshouldexplainhowthenoisedisturbancefromblasting,whichresultsinwildlifedisplacement,wouldbemitigated(commenterssuggestblastinglocationsbeincludedonasummarymap).Helicopters,airplanes,andmachinenoisecoulddriveawaygamespeciesduringhuntingseason.Commenterssuggestanalternativeofseasonalrestrictionsonmineoperationssuchascessationofconstructionandnoise‐producingactivityduringhuntingseason.

MIT6 TheDraftEISshouldincludeadetailedmitigationplanforeachstageoftheproposedprojectincludingpre‐construction,construction,operations,maintenance,rehabilitationandclosure.Thisapproachwouldhelpassessmitigationneedsandidentifymitigationmeasuresandbestmanagementpracticesthatshouldbeimplemented.Thelimitations,uncertainties,effectiveness,andrisksassociatedwithimplementationofmitigationsshouldbefullydiscussedintheDraftEIS.TheDraftEISshouldaddressscenarioswithcatastrophicfailuressuchaspipelinebreaks,minefailures,ordamfailures.Itshouldincludeadiscussionofadaptivemanagementplanningtorespondtosuchunforeseenevents.Thisanalysisshouldincludethefollowing:




• Timeframesforeachmitigationmeasure,withastartandenddateanddurationforimplementation;

• Determinationofwhethermitigationmeasureswouldresultinadditionalenvironmentalimpacts;

• Descriptionofcorrectiveactionstoremedyfailedmitigation;

• Identificationofthesourceoffundingforeachmitigationandmonitoringmeasure;discloseanylackoffunding;and

• Designationoftheentitiesresponsibleforimplementingeachmitigationmeasure.

MIT7 Impactstopublichealthneedtobemitigated.MitigationstrategiesshouldbedevelopedandincludedintheDraftEIS.Commentershavethefollowingsuggestionsandconcerns:

• MitigationintheHealthImpactAssessment(HIA)shouldhelpguidemitigationintheDraftEIS;

• Use"socialdeterminantsofhealth"asdoneintheDraftEISforthe2008NortheastNationalPetroleumReserve‐Alaska;and

• Ifthereisaspillorreleaseofhazardousmaterialsthatcauselocalstorelocate,analyzewhowouldpayforthesetravelcostsandpotentialmedicalexpenses?

MIT8 TheDraftEISshouldincludeanalysisofmitigationmeasurestoavoidandminimizeimpactstofish,wildlife,publichealth,land,andsubsistenceactivities.Forimpactsthatcannotbeavoided,compensatorymitigationshouldbeincluded.

MIT9 Mitigationmeasuresshouldbedevelopedandidentifiedtoprotectfishandthelocalswhodependonthemfortheirsubsistencelifestyle.TheDraftEISshoulddescribemitigationmeasuresthatwouldbeusedtoprotectfish.Commenterssuggestthefollowing:

• Reduceorstopconstructionandminingactivitiesduringpeaktimesoffishmigrationandspawning;

• Identifymeasurestoprotectfishfromminedischargeandmercurycontamination,suchasusingdrystacktailings;and

• Conductfuelingactivityatleast100ftfromwetlandsandthebankoffishstreams;nofuelinginriparianareasorwithin500ftofactivefloodplainofanyfishbearingstreams.

MIT10 Theproposedpipelinewouldaffectmanyresources.TheDraftEISmustfullyaddresspipelineimpactsandnecessarymitigationmeasures.Commentersareconcernedaboutimpactstothefollowing,andsuggestincludingmitigationmeasuresforeach:

• Birdhabitatsaffectedbybrushing;

• Aquaticresources;

• Vegetation;commenterssuggestminimizingamountofvegetationremovedfortheROW;

• Habitatlossresultingfromtheexposedpipeline;

• HabitatalongtheROW;commenterssuggestscatteringchippedbrushandlimbsalongtheROW;

• Wetlands;and

• Impactsresultingfromgradingofhillsides;trenchingonhillsidesshouldbeconsideredtoreducevisualimpacts.




MIT11 TheIditarodNationalHistoricTrail(INHT)andotherimportanttrailsshouldbeprotected.CommenterssuggestchoosingaROWthatintersectsthetrailwheretall,thicknativevegetationcurrentlyexists,andmaintaininga500fttrailsidevegetationbuffer.Also,directionaldrillingmethodsshouldbeusedtoinsertthepipelinebelowtheundisturbedtrailcorridor.ThiswouldalsohelppreventunauthorizedORV/ATVandvehicleaccess.IfpipelinecrossingsattrailsrequireaROW,thewidthoftheclearzoneshouldbeminimized.Inareaswithexistingaccessroutes,alternateaccessshouldbeprovided.Vehiclebarrierscouldbeinstalledtopreventunauthorizedvehicleaccess,butallowforcontinueduseoftrailsforwinterusers.Permanentserviceandmaintenanceroadsshouldincludethesekindsofbarrierstructuresalso.

MIT12 MitigationmeasuresshouldbeincludedintheDraftEISforpotentialwildfires.

MIT13 Impactstowetlandsshouldbeminimized.TheDraftEISshoulddiscusswetlandlossfromdrainingandfillingforroadways,includingthemilesofroadsandtheacresofwetlandsaffected.Restorationofexistingwetlandhabitatcouldpotentiallybeusedasacompensatorymitigationcreditiftheycanberestoredtoprovidebeneficialfishandwildlifehabitat.Largesurfacearea/lowimpacttirescouldhelpreduceimpactstowetlands,aswellastheuseoftemporaryplatforms/holdingstructuresduringpipelineconstructiontoensurematerialcanberecoveredandputbackintoplaceontopofthetrench.Inareaswhereplatformsarenotanoption,theareashouldbeimmediatelyreplantedwithnativespecies.

MIT14 Reclamationshouldbeconductedimmediatelyfollowingconstruction,andmayneedtooccurmorethanjustoneseason/yearafterconstructiontoaccountforchronicerosionorstabilityissues.

MIT15 Inthepipestorageyardsandconstructioncamps,commenterssuggestusinganalternativetogravelpads,suchasnon‐permanentporouspavementpanels.Withregardstomaterialsites,followingusefortemporarypurposedgravelshouldbereturnedbacktowhereitwasquarried,andallmaterialsitesshouldbefullyreclaimed.

MIT16 Mitigationshouldbedevelopedtominimizedisturbancetosoils.CommentersnotethatthePipelinePlanofDevelopmentstatesthatorganicmatterwouldbeseparatedfrommineralsoils.TheysuggesttheadditionalseparationoftheAandBhorizonsfromtheunderlyingparentmaterial,sincesoildevelopmentisaveryslowprocess.Inroadsideditchessedimentcatchmentsshouldbeinstalledandmaintained.

MIT17 StreamandwaterbodycrossingtechniquesandassociatedmitigationmeasurestominimizeimpactsshouldbefullyanalyzedintheDraftEIS.Commenterssuggestconsideringasanalternativeanelevated,ratherthanburied,pipelineabovestreamsandwaterbodies.Duringconstructionofthepipeline,fiberopticcablesshouldbeplacedinsamelocationaspipeinstallationtoreduceimpactstofisheriesresources.Topreventscouringofstreambeds,energy‐dissipationdevicesshouldbeusedatalllocationstopreventhabitatdamageandincreasedturbidity.

MIT18 Thetraditionalwaysoflifeintheproposedprojectareashouldbeprotectedbyeffectivemitigationmeasures.Commenterssuggestthefollowing:

• Identifythemonetaryvalueoflossofhunting,fishingandgatheractivities;and

• DevelopandfundanEldersandYouthCounciltoensurecontinuanceoftraditionsandculture.




MIT19 Topreventfuelspills,yokestemvalvesshouldbeused.

MIT20 Equipmentbroughtfromoutsidetheproposedprojectareashouldbethoroughlycleanedtopreventunwantedinvasivespecies.

MIT21 Tailingspondsshouldbeenclosedtopreventharmtotheenvironment.Safetysystemsneedtobeinplaceintheeventthattailingsdamsleak.Capturedmercuryshouldnotbedumpedinthetailingspond.Itshouldbeexportedtoafederallyapprovedpermanentstoragefacility.Furthermore,theDraftEISshouldincludediscussionofimplementingthelatestresearchandtechnologyforcapturingCO2inminetailings.

MIT22 TheCorpsshouldengageDonlinGold,LLCinthedevelopmentofmitigationmeasuresearlyintheprocess.DonlinGoldcanthenapplyexperiencetopredictmitigationsuccess,asillustratedatotherminesites.Furthermore,regardingmitigationintheHealthImpactAssessment(HIA),theCorpsshouldindependentlyevaluatemitigationmeasuresproposedtoreducehealth‐relatedimpacts.

MIT23 Mitigationmeasuresfortemporaryworkcampsandpermanentfacilitiesforallphasesoftheproposedprojectwouldneedtobesurroundedbyelectricfencestominimizehumaninteractionswithfoxes,andbrownandblackbearsthatwerenotedtobecommonduringsimilarconstructionactivitiesoftheTrans‐AlaskaPipeline.Thetemporarystorageandproperdisposalofputresciblewasteswouldbeanimportantpartofminimizinghuman/carnivoreinteractions.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT MONITORING


MONITORING (MON)

Commentsrelatedtomonitoringplansforprojectandpostclosure.


MON1 Commentersrequestdetailedmonitoringplansforallphasesoftheproject,includingconstruction,maintenance,operationandreclamation/closure.Monitoringplansshouldaddressallprojectcomponentsandinclude:

• Definedgoalsandobjectives;

• Measurableperformancestandards;

• Listofmeasurementparameters,methods,andlocations;

• Scheduleandfrequencyformonitoringduringallphases;

• Entitiesresponsibleforconductingandreportingmonitoring;

• Procedureforimplementationanddocumentation;

• Newesttechnologiesandtechniques,suchasthermistors,lysimeters,andgasdetectors;

• Detailedassessmentofeffectiveness;

• Participationofpublicandtribes,anddevelopmentofaCitizensAdvisoryBoard;and

• Aplanformonitoringthemine‐siteinperpetuity,includinganalysisofneedforpermanentpowertoaccomplishmonitoring.

MON2 MonitoringoftheproposedpipelineshouldbeanalyzedindetailintheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEIS.Inparticular,commentersareconcernedaboutidentificationandmonitoringofpipelineleaks.ThefollowingissuesneedtobeanalyzedintheDraftEIS:

• Detailedmonitoringplansforthepipelineforallphasesoftheproposedproject;

• Apipelinehydrostatictestwaterplan;

• Theentityresponsibleformonitoringthepipeline;

• Continuedmonitoringoferosion,permafrost,vegetationandriparianareasalongthepipeline;

• Monitoringandanalysisofgroundwaterdrainagepatterns;

• Definedscheduleandfrequencyofmonitoring;

• Additionalpipelineinspectionsaftersignificantweathereventssuchasheavyrain;

• Monitoringfornon‐nativeinvasivespeciesbyabotanistatleastonceperyear;and

• ScheduleforSmartPiggingInspectionsatappropriateintervals.

MON3 Impactstotheenvironmentandhumanpopulationsneedtobemonitoredduringallphasesoftheproject,includingconstruction,maintenance,operationandreclamation/closure.Continuedsamplingshouldtakeplacethroughoutthelifeoftheproject,bothwithinminefacilitiesandthesurroundingprojectarea.Samplesusedformonitoringshouldbetakenfromthesamelocationsasbaselinesamples.EntitiesresponsibleformonitoringshouldbeidentifiedintheDraftEIS.Commentersrequestmonitoringofthefollowing:

• Fish,wildlifeandsubsistenceresources;

• Invasivespecies;

• Geologicalresources,includingwasterockproducedbythemine;

• Airquality;and




• Waterquality,includingimpactstogroundwaterandsurfacewaterhydrology.

MON4 Commenterssupporton‐goingmonitoringtoaddresstheirgreatconcernregardingpotentialimpactsfrombargeactivity.TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzeimpactstotheenvironmentandidentifyandimplementmonitoringplansaccordingly.Specifically,commentersareconcernedwiththefollowing:

• Entityresponsibleformonitoringbarges(wouldtheU.S.CoastGuardbeinvolved?);

• Monitoringofbargeleaks;

• Invasivespeciesintroducedthroughbargeactivity;and

• Impactstofishandothersubsistenceresources.

MON5 ThetypeandmethodofmercurymonitoringshouldbediscussedintheDraftEIS.Thisshouldincludeamassbalanceapproachtomonitorallmercuryenteringandleavingminefacilities,atallphasesoftheproject.Mercuryabatementunitsshouldbemonitoredclosely,andtheslurrypipetothetailingsimpoundmentshouldbemonitoredregularlytodeterminehowmuchmercuryentersthetailingspond.Commentersareparticularlyconcernedwithmercurytransportedbyprevailingwinds,andimpactstoair,waterandfish.Resultsofmercurymonitoringshouldbepubliclyaccessibleonline.

MON6 Fugitivedustshouldbemonitoredthroughoutthelifeoftheproject,includingconstruction,operation,maintenanceandreclamation/closuretoensureeffectivenessofmitigationmeasures.Commentersareparticularlyconcernedwithdusttransportedbyprevailingwinds,andtheimpactstoairandwaterquality.

MON7 Manycommentswerereceivedregardingwaterqualityandimpactstowaterqualityfromminingactivity,particularlytotheKuskokwimRiver.Commentersrequestdetailedmonitoringplansforalltypesofwater,includingsurfaceandgroundwater,duringallphasesoftheprojectincludingconstruction,operation,maintenanceandreclamation/closure.Thefollowingaresuggestionsforwatermonitoring:

• Conductbaselinewaterqualitystudiestohelpguidemonitoringplans;

• Avoiddischarginghydrostatictestwaterinwaterswithresidentand/oranadromousfish;

• Identifydischargelocationsanddescribemethodsofdischarge;

• Consistentsitesamplinglocations;

• Allportlocations,anddownriverfromeachlocation;

• Watermonitoringyear‐roundonamonthlybasis;

• Whole‐EffluentTestingonaquarterlybasis;

• Testwatersamplesforcyanideandcomparetocleanwater;

• Identifyentitiesresponsibleformonitoring;and

• Makewaterqualityreportingavailabletothepublicandlocalresidents.

MON8 Thereshouldbemonthlytestingofwater,sedimentandbiotadown‐gradientoftheproposedminesiteinthesamelocationsasbaselinetestingsamples.Thereshouldalsobesamplestakenoff‐sitetofacilitateinterpretationoflong‐termvariationsduetoclimatechange.




MON9 Passiveairmonitoringshouldbeconductedatleastonceamonthinvariouslocationswithinandsurroundingtheproposedminesite,bothduringandnotduringoperations.Resultsshouldbecomparedtomodeledpredictions,andamineclosureplanshouldbeimplementedifemissionsaregreaterthanpredicted.Thesemonitoringreportsshouldoccurmonthly,andresultsfrommonitoringshouldbemadeavailabletothepubliconline.

MON10 ChemicalmanagementprocessesshouldbedescribedandevaluatedintheDraftEIS.Thisshouldaddressusage,storageandtransportofalltoxicchemicals.

MON11 TheDraftEISshouldidentifyanddescribeairemissionsmonitoringduringmineoperationsandpost‐closure.Allstacksthatreleasetotheatmosphereshouldbemonitoredfrequentlytodeterminemercuryreleaseandcontamination.Thisincludesmonitoringofmercurycapturecontrols.

MON12 Year‐roundambientairmonitoringshouldbeconductedoutsidetheproposedprojectareatoidentifymercuryimpactstoairquality.

MON13 Acidrockdrainageshouldbemonitoredthroughoutthelifeoftheproject.Aslongasanywaterfromthemineistreated,aquaticlifeandgeologicalresourcesshouldbemonitoredforpotentialimpacts.Commentersrequestkinetictestthroughoutallphasesoftheproposedproject.

MON14 Monitoringofcapturedmercuryshouldincludeloggingofwhen,where,andhowitisstored.Shipmentofmercuryshouldbeclearlytracked.Nomercuryshouldbedisposedofon‐site,inlandfills,orinthetailingstoragefacility.

MON15 TheDraftEISshouldidentifyanddescribeacomprehensivemonitoringplanforworkerhealth.Mineworkersshouldreceiveperiodicmercuryscreenings,particularlythoseworkingnearautoclaves.

MON16 Noiselevelsshouldbemonitoredanddisturbanceimpactstowildlifeshouldbeanalyzedduringconstructionandoperationofthemine.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT NATURAL GAS SUPPLY


NATURAL GAS SUPPLY (GAS)

LowercostsoffuelinruralAlaskaasresultofpotentialnewgassupplyandspur/distributionsystems.ImpactstogassupplyinCookInlet.


GAS1 Concernwasexpressedregardingthesourceofthefuelsupplyfortheproposedproject.TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshould:

• Fullydisclosewherethenaturalgasboundfortheproposedprojectsitewouldbeextractedandhowmuchnaturalgaswouldbeconsumedbytheproposedproject;

• DisclosewhethernaturalgaswouldbeshippedintoCookInlet,howitwouldbetransportedtotheproposednaturalgaspipeline,whetheraliquefiednaturalgasfacilitywouldneedtobeconstructed,ifaportfacilitynearthebeginningoftheproposedpipelinewouldneedtobeconstructed,andwhatwouldbethepotentialimpactsofincreasedshippingandinfrastructureinCookInlet;

• Addresswhetherhydraulicfracturingwouldbeusedtoextractnaturalgasboundfortheproposedprojectsiteandwhatfracturingfluidswouldbeused;and

• Evaluatethepotentialenvironmentalandsocioeconomicimpactsassociatedwithnaturalgasproduction,delivery,andstorage.

GAS2 ConcernwasexpressedthatthesupplyofavailablenaturalgasinCookInletmaynotbesufficienttoprovidepowertotheproposedprojectaswellaselectricityandheattoresidentsandbusinessesinSouthcentralAlaska.TheDraftEISshould:

• FullyanalyzethefeasibilityofusingCookInletnaturalgastofueltheproposedprojectconsideringthedeclineinproductionfromexistingwellsandprojectedshortfalls;

• Assesstheimpactstopriceandavailabilityofnaturalgasandnaturalgas‐fueledelectricityforcustomersinSouthcentralAlaskaasaresultofadditionaldemandbytheproposedproject;

• EvaluatetheeffectsofCookInletnaturalgasconsumptionbytheproposedprojectonthelong‐termenergysecurityofSouthcentralAlaska;and

• AddresswhethertheCookInletnaturalgasconsumptioncouldaffecttheavailabilityandcostofenergyelsewhereinAlaska.

GAS3 ScopingcommentersrequestedthattheDraftEISdescribewhethertheproposedprojectcouldprovidecommunitiesandenterprisesintheregionwithamoreefficient,inexpensive,reliable,orenvironmentallyfriendlyalternativetocurrentlyavailableenergysources.TheDraftEISshouldexaminethefollowingissues:

• Fullyevaluatewhethercommunitiesandenterprisescouldbeallowedtotapintotheproposednaturalgaspipelineand/orelectricityproducedbytheproposedpowerplant;

• Identifytheconditions,rulesandregulationsrequiredfortappingintotheproposedpipelineorelectricityproducedbytheproposedpowerplant;

• SpecificallyaddressaccesstotheproposednaturalgaspipelinebyMcGrath,theVinasaleProject,DoyonLimited,Bethel,HooperBay,Kwethluk,Nikolai,potentialregionalenergyproducingfacilities,andenterprisesorcommunitiesthathaveproposedspurlines;

• Disclosewhethertheproposednaturalgaspipelinecouldremainin‐placepost‐closuretoprovideenergytootherenterprisesandcommunitiesintheregion;and

• Includemoreinformationonenergyusebytheproposedproject,includingthe

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT NATURAL GAS SUPPLY



amountsofexcessnaturalgasandelectricitythatmightbeproducedandcouldbeavailableforusebycommunitiesandenterprisesintheregion.

GAS4 Commentscalledforassessingcumulativeeffects,suchasthepotentialthattheproposednaturalgaspipelineROWcouldfacilitatefurtherhumandevelopmentandminingprojectsintheregion.

GAS5 ConcernswereexpressedregardingthedesignandimpactsoftheproposednaturalgaspipelineandregardingthePipelinePlanofDevelopment.TheDraftEISshould:

• Fullyassessthepotentialenvironmentalimpactsoftheproposedpipelineincludinghabitats,noiselevels,vibrationlevels,subsistenceresources,airquality,biologicalresources(includingwetlands,vegetation,wildlifeandaquaticresources,andthreatenedandendangeredspecies),culturalresources,geology,soilsandothermineralresources,historicalandarcheologicalsites,paleontologicalresources(includinggeologyandsoils,mineralresources,paleontologicalresources),hazardsandhazardousmaterials,hydrologyandwaterquality,(includinggroundwaterandsurfacewater),landuseandplanning,noise,recreation,aesthetics,socioeconomics(includingpopulationandhousing,publicservices,utilitiesandservicessystems),transportation,cumulativeimpactsincludingassociatedminedevelopmentimpacts,andenvironmentaljustice;

• Identifytheperiodoftimetheproposedprojectmayrequirenaturalgasviatheproposedpipeline;

• Disclosewhethermanualorremote‐controlledvalvesareintendedtobeusedontheproposedpipeline;

• Disclosetheheightabovegroundorthedepthbelowgroundaswellasthethicknessoftheproposedpipelineandanypotentialeffectsthismayhave;

• Clarifywhetheraroadwouldbepartoftheproposedpipelinecorridor;and

• Disclosetheexactcoordinatesforrivercrossingsalongtheproposedpipelineroute.

GAS6 TheDraftEISshouldfullyaddressusinganalternativeenergysourcesbeyondtheproposednaturalgaspipeline.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT NEPA PROCESS


NEPA PROCESS (NEP)

CompliancewithNEPA.SpecifictotheadequacyofPurposeandNeed,scoping,technicalanalysisandNEPAmilestones.


NEP1 TheNEPAprocessshouldbeexplained.Specifically:

• ClarifywhethertheNEPAprocesswouldstopifnegativeconcernsoutweighthepositivesduringtheDraftEIScumulativeeffectsanalysisprocess;

• DescribehowtheDraftEISprocessgivesstakeholdersadequatetimetoreviewdocumentsandprovideinputontheproposedplan;

• ClarifyhowtheamountofoppositiontotheprojectaffectshowtheCorpsconsidersthepermitapplication;and

• DescribehowthefollowingfourobjectivesofNEPAwouldbemet.(Section101oftheNationalEnvironmentalPolicyActof1969,42U.S.C.Â§4331):(1)assureforallAmericanssafe,healthful,productive,andaestheticallyandculturallypleasingsurroundings(2)attainthewidestrangeofbeneficialusesoftheenvironmentwithoutdegradation,risktohealthorsafety,orotherundesirableandunintendedconsequences(3)Preserveimportanthistoric,cultural,andnaturalaspectsofournationalheritage,andmaintain,whereverpossible,anenvironmentwhichsupportsdiversity,andvarietyofindividualchoice(4)Enhancethequalityofrenewableresourcesandapproachthemaximumattainablerecyclingofdepletableresources.

• Describetherigoroftheanalysisconductedbytheindependentcontractorandhowthepubliccanconfirmitsadequacy.

NEP2 CommentsduringscopingmadeveryspecificrecommendationsformakingtheNEPAprocessandDraftEISunderstandabletothegeneralpublic:

• Provideclear,easilyunderstoodinformationprovidedintheDraftEIS,throughcleardiagramsandmapsthatthegeneralpubliccaneasilyunderstand;and

• ItwasrecommendedthattheDraftEISusecommonlyunderstoodtermsand,wherenecessary,providesillustrations,tables,orinfo‐graphicstosummarizeandcommunicateterminology.Incontrast,theapplicant’sPlanofDevelopmentusesterminologythatifusedintheNEPAdocumentwouldbeconfusingforthegeneralpublic,andgenerallyobscureunderstanding.Forinstance,thetermworkpadisusedratherthanconstructionroadorconstructionaccess,ortravelway.

NEP3 CommenterswouldlikeclarificationregardingtherolesoftheStateofAlaskaandBLMintheDraftEISprocess,andhowtheCorps,astheleadagencythatmayissuepermitsallowingtheproposedprojecttomoveforward,isgoingtoaddressalltheconcernsexpressedduringscoping.

NEP4 Commentersareconcernedaboutthealternativesdevelopmentprocess.TheDraftEISshoulddescribethefollowingissuesexpressedduringscoping:

• ClarifyhowtheCorpswoulddeterminewhichalternativesarecarriedforwardforanalysisandwhichareeliminatedfromfurtherdetailedconsideration.Describehowthecooperatingagenciescanparticipateinthisprocess,andensurethattheBLM,andallcooperatingagencies,areinvolvedinthedevelopmentofareasonablerangeofalternativesforanalysisintheenvironmentalimpactstatement.

• CoordinatethealternativesdevelopmentwithDonlinGold,astheapplicantunderstandsthelogistical,technical,andeconomicfactorsconsideredinthe




determinationofwhatisreasonableandpracticable.

• TheDraftEISmustprovidealternativesthateliminateorvastlyreducetheriskposedbymercurycontamination,aciddrainage/metalsleaching,greenhousegasemissions,andthelossofwildernessvaluesalongthepipelineROW,regardlessofthecostthatthesealternativesmayultimatelyplaceupontheindustry.

• TherequiredNoActionAlternativeshouldbesubjecttothesamelevelofanalysisastheotheralternativessothatthebenefitsofexistingenvironmentconditionsinwater,subsistenceresources,andwildernessareadequatelyconsideredandeconomicallyquantified.StudiesoftheNoActionAlternativeshouldincludeanevaluation(withmeaningfullocalinvolvement)oftheculturalvaluesandcommunityhealth,andananalysisofecosystemservicessuchassalmonandtheavoidedhealthcarecostsassociatedwithpotentialprojectimpacts.

• ThepermittingagenciesshouldensurethateveryknownstakeholdertrulyunderstandstherisksandconsequencesofeveryalternativeproposedintheDraftEIS.

NEP5 Commentersnotedthatthecumulativeeffectsanalysisshouldconsiderthefollowing:

• DescribehowtheDraftEISprocessconsiderscumulativeeffects;

• Identifythegeographicscopeandtimeframeforthecumulativeeffectsanalysis;

• Describethecumulativeeffectsanalysismethodologyandexplainanyassumptionsandmodelsusedintheanalysis;

• Identifythecurrentconditionoftheresourceasameasureofpastimpacts,suchasthepercentageofspecieshabitatlosttodate;

• Identifythefutureconditionoftheresourcebasedonananalysisofthecumulativeimpactsofreasonablyforeseeableprojectsoractionsaddedtoexistingconditionsandcurrenttrends;

• Assessthecumulativeimpactscontributionoftheproposedalternativestothelong‐termhealthoftheresource,andprovideaspecificmeasurefortheprojectedimpactfromtheproposedalternatives;

• Identifyopportunitiestoavoidandminimizefuturecumulativeimpacts,includingworkingwithotherfederalandstateagencies,AlaskaNativeRegionalandVillageCorporations,regionalandhealthnon‐profitorganizations,andlocalandtribalgovernmentsandcommunities;

• Identifyandevaluatethecomparativelong‐termeffectsofexistingandabandonedminingprojectsandminingclaimsintheregion,suchastheabandonedKolmakofMine(nearNapaimute),placerminesnorthofTuluksak,andtheRedDevilMine,anabandonedmercurymine;

• DiscusstheeffortsofBLMandotheragenciestoevaluatemineimpactsandpotentialremedialactivities;

• EvaluatetheNixonForkMineandexistingoperationalminenearMcGrath,Alaska;

• Evaluatetheproposedfutureprojects,suchastheChikuminukLakeHydroelectricproject(NuvistaLightandElectric),theroadbetweentheYukonRiverandKuskokwimrivers;SusitnaWatanaHydroelectricproject;NeumontMining(explorationnearNapaimute);NYACGold(explorationnearTuluksak);HolitnaBasinnaturalgas(mid‐KuskokwimRiverexploration);

• Evaluatetheeffectofbringinginfrastructuretothearea;describewhetherthatwouldallowotherdevelopment,suchasfromKalskagovertotheYukon,andexplorationuptheAniak,theHolitna,tohappenwhenitwouldn’totherwise;

• TheDraftEISshouldconsiderthedevelopmentofadditionalreservesandother




mineraldepositsproximatetoDonlinCreekifthepresenceoftheinfrastructureitpaidformakesnearbysmallermineraldepositseconomicallyviabletodevelop.Analyzethepossibilityandeffectsofthedevelopmentofabonafideminingdistrict,withmultiplemines,inthisnowremotearea;and

• Describepast,present,andreasonablyforeseeableprojectsandactionsintheproposedprojectareaandconsidertheircumulativeimpactsintheirentirety.Wheresignificantcumulativeimpactsmayexist,theDraftEISshoulddisclosethepartiesthatwouldberesponsibleforavoiding,minimizing,andmitigatingforthoseadverseimpacts.

NEP6 Commentersaskedaboutfutureanalysisthatwouldbeconductedifadditionalorothervaluablemineraldepositsarediscoveredduringoperationofthemine.WhenwouldfutureNEPAanalysisbeconducted?WouldtheDraftEISincludeinformationabout:

• Whethermorematerialandfuelwouldbeneeded?

• Whethertherewouldbemorebargetrafficassociatedwithadditionalsuppliesandmaterials?

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT NON SUBSTANTIVE COMMENT


NON SUBSTANTIVE COMMENT (NSB)

Submissionswithoutsubstantivecomments.


NSB1 Entiresubmissiondeterminednottobesubstantive.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES


PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES (PAA)

Thecoredesigncharacteristicsandoperationalplansoftheproposedactioninthreemajorcomponents(mine,pipelineandtransportationinfrastructure).Example–whatthepublicwantstolearnabout,ortheneedforadditionalinformationintheformalprojectdescription.Alsoincludestheenvironmentallypreferredalternative,andadditionalalternativesthatshouldbeconsidered.Clarificationsinthedescriptionofmineconstruction,operations,trafficvolumes,andcostsoftheproject,includingworkforcedevelopment.


PAA1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldevaluatearangeofreasonablealternativespracticableinlightoftheoverallpurposeandneedtoidentifypotentialimpactsrelatedtoallmineactivities.ForeachalternativeanalyzedintheDraftEIS,theCorpsshoulddevelopalifecycleeconomiccostanalysis.ExistinganalysesbyDonlinGoldandagenciesthatevaluatealternativesformineralprocessing,wasterockandtailingsdisposalsitelocationsandmethods,closure,powersupply,andsiteaccesscouldbeusedtohelpidentifyalternatives.TheCorpsshoulddevelopanddescribeintheDraftEISthecriteriathatcouldbeusedtoidentifytheLeastEnvironmentallyDamagingPracticableAlternative,andtheenvironmentallypreferredalternatives.Thesecriteriashouldbedevelopedincoordinationwithcooperatingagencies,tribes,andusingthescopingcommentsandcouldbebasedontheconservationofimportantaquaticandterrestrialhabitats,maintainingwildlifeandfishpassage,maintainingsubsistenceandsocio‐culturalresources,practicability,andregulatoryrequirements.TheDraftEISshoulddescribetheprocess,therationale,andthebasisforhowthesecriteriaweredeveloped.

PAA2 TheNoActionAlternativeshouldbesubjecttothesamelevelofanalysisastheotheralternativessothatthebenefitsofexistingconditionsinwater,subsistenceresources,andwildernessareadequatelyconsideredandeconomicallyquantified.StudiesoftheNoActionAlternativeshouldincludeanevaluationoftheculturalvaluesandcommunityhealth,andananalysisofecosystemservicessuchassalmonandtheavoidedhealthcarecostsassociatedwithpotentialprojectimpactsonwaterwaysandair.

PAA3 TheDraftEISshouldincludeanagencypreferredalternative,andtheLeastEnvironmentallyDamagingPracticableAlternative.Thiswouldprovidethepublic,thetribes,andtheagencieswithanopportunitytoconductamoredetailedreviewandcommentoftheenvironmentalconsequencesassociatedwiththepreferredalternative.




PAA4 Suggestionsregardingprojectdesignalternativesforairstripsinclude:

• TheDraftEISshouldconsiderextendingandusingtheKiskaMetalsairstripinsteadofthefacilitiesslatedforRainyPass.

• Concernswereexpressedthata5,000footairstripatthecurrentPuntillastripcouldnegativelyimpactlocalbusinesses,butwouldbemoredesirablethananairstripinthemainPtarmiganValley.

• Clarifyifnewconstructedairstripswouldalsobereclaimed.TheproposedDonlinGoldairstripsiteisinopencountryabovetimberlineandwouldnotallowfortheairstriporscarringofthetopographytobereturnedtoanaturalcondition.Iftheairstripswouldnotbereclaimed,theDraftEISshoulddocumentpotentialimpactstovariousresourcesfromadditionaluseintheforeseeablefuture.

• DonlinGoldshouldimprovetheCrookedCreekairfieldtomeettheirneeds.Thiswouldmakeagoodlong‐termbenefittotheentirearea.Thecurrentplancallsforanairfieldthatwouldbeofnouseafterthemineisclosed.Allinfrastructureshouldbebuiltforthelong‐termbenefitofasmanypeopleaspossiblenotforshorttermuse.

• TheDraftEISshouldtakeintoaccountthealternativethattheStateofAlaskawouldnotrequireremovalofconstructionaccessairfields,orthattheStatemaynotrequireremovalofotherfacilities.

PAA5 Suggestionsforprojectalternativesregardingbargeissuesinclude:

• Preferenceshouldbegiventoalternativesthatdonotincreasebargetraffic.

• OriginallytherewereplanstohaveabargestationatCrowVillagedownstreamofAniak,andthenewplanistohaveastationatJungjuk[belowthevillageofCrookedCreek].TheDraftEISshouldanalyzethewaterdepthbetweenthosetwolocations.

• Evaluatealternativelocationsfortheproposedportfacilities.

• AdditionaldetailsonbargelandingsontheKuskokwimareneeded.Wherearetheylocated,whatkindofgrounddisturbanceisinvolved,lifeexpectancy,andareroadsconnectedtothem?

• AttheJungjukBargeLanding,asingleslipfortheunloadingofcargobargesisdisplayed.Itappearsasthoughthefuelbargeswoulddockinthissectionandbeexposedtotherivercurrentduringtheoffloadingprocess.Analternativewouldbeasecondslipdesignedinawaythatwouldallowboththeoffloadingofcargoandfuel.Thiswouldallowthefuelbargeoffloadtobeconductedoutoftherivercurrentandcontainmentboomtobeplacedacrosstheslipopeningsothatintheeventofafuelspilltheoiliscontainedintheslip.Thesecondslipwouldalsoprovideacargounloadingbackupforthoseoccasionswhentwobargetowsareatthelandingallowingthesecondbargetodockandnothavetowaitintheriverforthesliptoopen.

• Evaluatetheuseofwintericeroadsandsnowroadsfortransportationofcargoandfueltotheminesite,andlogisticassociatedwithconstructionactivities.

PAA6 Suggestionsforprojectalternativesregardingcamplocationsforworkersduringpipelineconstructionweresuggestedbyownersoflocalbusinessesintheareaoftheproposedpipelinerouteduringscoping.Suggestionsweremadethatonealternativecouldbetohousetheworkersatexistinglodgesinthevicinityofthepipelinerouteduringconstruction.Thiswouldeliminatethepotentialfordisruptiontoguidebusinessesintheareaduringconstruction.TheuseoftheexistinglodgeorexistingairstripatPuntillawouldbelessofanimpactasitwouldkeepdevelopmentinonearea.Anindirectbenefitofthisalternativeforhousingworkerswouldalsobethatitcoulddefraylossesfromnormalbusinessasaresultofpipelineconstruction.




PAA7 Suggestionsforprojectalternativesregardingenergysupplysourcesinclude:

• DonlinGoldshouldexploretheoptionofsecuringgasfromtheinteriorHolitnaBasin,whichwouldeliminatecompetitionwithgasusersinCookInlet.DevelopingnaturalgasenergyfromtheHolitnaBasincouldsupportseveralremotecommunitiesalongtheKuskokwimandHolitnariversinadditiontotheDonlinGoldmine.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludeanalternativetoruntheproposedpipelinetothenortheast,toFairbanks,whereitcouldconnecttoapipelinefromtheNorthSlope.

• OtherregionalpoweroptionsincludeafueloilpipelineorroaddevelopmentbetweenthemorebargeableYukonRivertotheKuskokwimRiver,naturalgasdevelopmentfromtheNenanaBasin,andcoalfromknownwesternAlaskareservesdeliveredviaaroadsystemconnectingtheYukonandKuskokwimriversandcommunities.

• TheonlysourceofgasthatisfeasiblefortheproposedprojectissupplythroughSouthcentralAlaska.AllofthepotentialsourcesintheInteriorandfromtheNorthSloperemainspeculativeandhaveextendedtimeframessothattheyareunlikelytobeavailabletomeettheneedsoftheproposedprojectingoodtime.Therefore,thescopeoftheDraftEISshouldconsideronlySouthcentralAlaskaasagassourceforDonlinGold.

• ForpurposesoftheDraftEIS,thevariousgassupplyprojectsandtheproposedprojectareindependentfromeachother,sotheprojectisnot"connected"toanyofthevariousgassupplyprojectsbeingconsideredonparallelfronts,andthereisnoobligationonthepartoftheCorpstoanalyzetheproposedprojectandanyofthevariousgassupplyprojectsinthesameDraftEIS.

• DonlinGoldcouldemployapumpedhydrooptiontostoreenergyforbasedemands,anduseliquefiednaturalgasasasupplementalfuelsourceinsteadoftheprimarysource.

• AsystemtransmittingpowerbywirefromBetheltotheproposedDonlinGoldminecouldbelessharmfultothelandscapeandwildlifewhilepotentiallyprovidingpowertoseveralsmallcommunitiesalongtheroute.

• Thepowerplantcouldbeagoodlong‐termpowersourceforwesternAlaskaafterthemineisclosed.Asitisproposedthepowerplantisuselessaftermineclosure.

• AsacomparisonwithAlaskaenergyconsumption,asproposed,therequiredavailableandsustainableenergyfortheminetooperateonceinproductionwouldbe227megawatts.Thisisslightlygreaterthanthecurrenthighestannualpeakusageday(211.5megawatts)ofthewholeoftheFairbanks,NorthPole,DeltaJunction,Nenana,HealyandCantwellcommunities.TheDraftEISshouldclearlyallowAlaskaresidentstounderstandthisenergyrequirementfortheproposedDonlinGoldmine.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludeawindpoweroptionwhichcouldeliminatetheneedforagaspipelinefromCookInlettotheminesite.TheDraftEISshouldalsoincludeotheralternativesthatsubstantiallyreducetheneedforfossilfuelgeneration,suchassolararrays,run‐of‐riverhydroelectricgeneration,geothermalheatpumpsforspaceheating,biofuels,andefficiencymeasuressuchasLEDlightingandmotiondetectors,reducedexteriorlighting,andagoalofallbuildingstobePlatinumcertifiedbytheLeadershipinEnergyandEnvironmentalDesignProgram.

• TheDraftEISshouldexplorealternativemineplansthatmayextendtheminelifebyreducingthe57,000tonperday.Thiscouldreducetheenergydemandtolevelsthatcouldbegeneratedthroughmorelocalizedandlessimpactingoptions.




PAA8 Commentersrequestedadditionaldesigndetailsregardingblastingandmaterialsourcesintheproposedaction,includingthefollowing:

• TheDraftEISshouldidentifythelocationofproposedblastingintheprojectarea,anddescribetheblastingmethodsthatwouldbeused.

• Becauseoftheimpactsassociatedwithincreasednoiselevels,ablastingmanagementplanshouldbedevelopedandincorporatedintotheDraftEIS.Thenoiselevelsintheprojectareashouldbequantified,andthethresholdlevelsdescribedastotheeffectsofblastingtohumanhealth,birdsandwildlife.

• TheDraftEISshouldestimatethetotalvolumeofgravelmaterialthatwouldberequiredforconstruction,includingtheminefacility,accessroads,naturalgaspipeline,portfacilities,airplanerunway,andcamps.Identifythelocationofanyexistingandproposednewmaterialsourcesitesonamap,andsummarizeinatabletheinformationregardingeachmaterialsourcesite,suchasthelocation,surfaceareaimpacts,quantityofmaterialavailable,landownership,andpermitstatus.Thedevelopmentplansfortheprojectshouldconsidermaximizingthedistancebetweensitesandreducingthenumberofsitesdeveloped,therebyreducingsitereclamationrequirements.Somearelessthan1mileapart.

• [Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.8‐26,lastparagraph]“Itappearsthattheapplicantestimateof8gravelpitstotaling57acresforthe58milesegmentco‐locatedwiththeIditarodTrailisaninsufficientquantity(numberofpits)giventhescaleofproposedwork.”

• [Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.6‐4]“Materialsitesandquantitiesaswellasanybatch/processingplantwouldbeauthorizedonstateandfederallandunderseparateauthorizationsandnotundertheROW.Anyuse/enlargementofmaterialborrowsites,alongwithairstripconstruction,etc.,isaconnectedactionandshouldbeanalyzedinthisDraftEISaspartofthelargerproject.Howwouldallthissandandgravelmaterialbetransportedtothepipelinecorridor?Wouldyouneedaccessroadstodriveitfromtheborrowsites?Woulditneedtobeflown?Arethereappropriateairstripsattheborrowsitesthemselves?”

• [Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.12‐1,firstbullet]“Reinvasionofgravelpadswouldnotwork.Gravelpadsresembleglacialoutwashmaterials,andthereforewouldtakedecades,ifnotahalfcentury,tonaturallyrevegetate,andthenwithalderonly.Forthisreasonuseofgravelpadsshouldbeminimized.”

PAA9 Projectalternativessuggestedduringscopingregardingcontaminationissuesincludedthefollowing:

• TheDraftEISshouldprovidealternativesthateliminateorreducetheriskposedbymercurycontamination,aciddrainage/metalsleaching,greenhousegasemissions,andthelossofwildernessvaluesalongthepipelineright‐of‐way,regardlessofthecostthatthesealternativesmayultimatelyplaceupontheindustry.

• Cyanide,ifitisused,coulddamagetheenvironment,people,andwildlife.TheDraftEISshouldconsideralternativestosuchchemicalsattheminesite.

• TheDraftEISshouldexplorepotentialalternativestoimpoundmentlakes,includingpastetailingsanddrystacking.Thesehaveahigherinitialoperatingcost,buttheytypicallyprovidenegligibleseepagelossfromthestack,provideprogressivecoveringandreclamationofland,safer,stabletailingsmass,minimalcontainmentrequirements,andsimplewatermanagement.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludeanalternativeinwhichtailingspondleachatedoesnotreporttotheminepitoranyotherlong‐termstoragesolution,butisinsteadfullytreatedtoapplicablewaterqualitystandardsbeforedischargingintonatural




waterwaysimmediatelyafterminelife.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludearangeofalternativesinwhichtheminepitdoesnotbecomealakesubjecttoperpetualwatertreatment.Itshouldincludeanalternativeforbackfillingthepittothemaximumextentpracticablewithwasterockandoverburdenandreclaimingittoitsoriginalstate.

• Despitetheriskofleachingarsenic,thefourNon‐AcidGenerating(NAG)rocktypesaretreatedthesamethroughoutthescopingdocuments.Nomaterialwithahighpotentialtoleacharsenicshouldbeusedinconstruction.TheDraftEISalternativesneedtoprovideascenarioinwhichonlyNAG1andNAG3areusedinconstruction,andprovideinformationonthevolumeofNAG2andNAG4rockthatwouldgointothewasterockfacility.

• AdrillingmudplanshouldbedevelopedandincorporatedintotheDraftEIS.Itshoulddescribehowdrillingmudsandcuttingswouldbemanaged,stored,transported,andproperlydisposedof.Itshouldincludepotentialenvironmentalimpacts,proposedmitigationmeasures,monitoringproceduresandcontingencyplanningforaccidentalreleasesofdrillingfluids,mudsandcuttingsduringHDDconstructionactivities.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludeanalternativeinwhichtheminedoesnotdumpcapturedmercuryintothetailingspondandinsteadexportsallcapturedmercurytoafederallyapprovedpermanentstoragefacility,withamultiplecontainerapproachwithseveralredundantsystemsforsafety.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatetheeconomicandenvironmentalrisksandbenefitstobargingthewasteversusflyingthewasteout;flyingitoutcouldprovideamuchlowerrisktotheKuskokwimRiver.

• TheDraftEIS“shouldevaluatealternativemethodsformanagingwasteliquidflowsfromthecarbon‐in‐leachtankandothermillprocessestothetailingspond.Aretherepollutioncontrolmeasuresthatcanbeusedtoreducethemercuryinthecarbon‐in‐leachtailingssolutionbeforeitgetsmixedwiththedetoxifiedtails?Afullrangeofalternativesshouldbeconsideredtoprecludeplacingmercurycontaminatedtailingssolutioninthetailingsimpoundment,wherethemercurycanbereleasedintotheenvironmentfromlinerseepage,leakageorfailure,andoff‐gassingairemissions.”

• TheDraftEISshouldincludealternativesthatprovidesafetysystemsintheeventofareleaseordamfailure.

• Asanalternativetodisposingofhazardouswaste,anonsiteundergroundinjectioncontrolwellshouldbeconsideredtohandlehazardouswastematerialdisposal.

• ItwasrecommendedthattheDraftEISandtheCWASection404permitnottousetheterm"wastetreatmentfacility"sinceitcanconnoteanapproachforwastemanagementthatisnotbeingproposedandwhichhasthepotentialtoconfusethepublic.

• TheDraftEISshouldprovideadditionaldetailaboutmanaginglitterandtrashgeneratedateachproposedcampsite[Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.8‐89,2ndparagraph,3rdsentence].Allnon‐combustiblesolidwastemustbeproperlydisposedorrecycledoff‐site.

PAA10 ProjectalternativessuggestedtobeincludedintheDraftEIStoaddressairemissionissuesinclude:

• AlternativesthatrequireDonlinGoldtopurchasecarbonoffsetcreditstoreducethethreattohumanhealthposedbyclimatechangepertheEPAendangermentfinding.

• Alternativesbasedonanassessmentofthefeasibilityofenclosinganyleachingprocessesortailingsponds,toreducetheamountofmercuryemissions.Inaddition,methodsusedintheMillerMercuryEmissionsStudyshouldbeapplied.




PAA11 Commentersrequestedclarificationofprojectdesignandsuggestedprojectalternativesregardingthenaturalgaspipeline,including:

• TheDraftEISshouldincludealternativesthatreducethescopeandscaleoftheproposedpipeline,oreliminatetheneedforitaltogether.

• Theprojectshouldconsidertheconstructionofabovegroundpipelinealternatives,asopposedtoaburiedpipelinedesign.

• Concernwasexpressedoverthelossofpressurethroughthepipeline,andwhattechnologieswouldbeusedtoincreasepressurealongtheway.Ifthereisabreakageinthepipeline,thepressurecouldcreateadditionalcomplications,sothereisconcernoverstorageareastodivertpipelinecontentsifthisweretohappen.Questionswereraisedaboutthetwentyblockages[valves]forthepipeline,locatedbeforeand/oraftereachstreamcrossing.

• [Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.12‐2]Themeteringstationwouldbecutoffatgradeifwoodenpolesareplaceddirectlyintheground.Itwasrecommendedtocutoff12inchesbelowgradeastheHpilesaretopreventpotentialimpactfromsnowmachineortravelersonthisroute.

• Ithasbeenaskedthatpipelinevalvestationsbestrategicallyplacedtoavoidvisualimpactstolocalbusinessoperations.AvalvestationnearRainyPassLodgewouldbeadvantageoustoboththelodgeandKiskaMetals.

• [Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.8‐21]Concernwasexpressedoverwhetherornotallthepipestoragewouldbeabletofitwithinthe100’constructionarea.

• Questionswereraisedregardingwhetherthepipelinewassecureagainstpeopledamagingit.

• TheDraftEISshouldclearlystateifthepipelineisgoingtobecommon‐carrier.

• [Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.8‐75]“Itwouldbegoodtohaveclarificationontheequipmentcrossings,especiallyinthesummer(culverts,bridges),andwhethertheywouldbetemporaryinnatureandwhethertheywouldberemovedandtakenoutoncethepipelineconstructioncontractiscomplete.”

PAA12 Projectalternativessuggestedduringscopingregardingpipelineroutinginclude:

• Theremaybeotherviablepipelineroutesthathavenotbeenconsideredthatwouldhavelesserimpactsthanthecurrentproposal.TheDraftEISshouldevaluateallviablepipelineroutesregardlessofmonetarycoststoconstruct.

• Movingthepipelinerouteatleast2.5milesfurtherwesttowardsNikolaiandawayfromtheAlaskaRangecouldbenefitthegamepopulationsthatfrequentthetundraflatsbyreducinganypotentialproblemsthatcouldresultfromotherpeoplecomingin,followingthepipelinerouteinordertohunt.Therehasneverbeenanyoneelsehuntingthereinthepast.TheproposedroutefromtheWindytotheBigRiverappearstorundirectlythroughtherollinghillsandthroughthemiddleofmoosehabitat.IftherouteweretobelocatedclosertoNikolaiitwouldrunmorethroughthespruceandprobablyhavelesseffectonthecurrentpopulationsofmoose.Alsoitwouldopenacorridorthatlikelywouldproducewillowforaginghabitatforthemooseinthelong‐term,thusbenefitingthemooseandothergameanimals,ratherthandisturbingthemintheiralreadyestablishedhomeareas.Inaddition,arouteclosertoNikolai,couldmakeiteasierforthevillagestotapintothegasandreducedependenceonveryexpensivedieselfuel.Also,asproposed,manyofthepipelinetributarycrossingsbetweenMP150and194havemuchlongerandsteeperentryandexitgradesthanarefound2.5milesfurtherwest.

• TheDraftEISshouldanalyzeanalternativethatwouldroutethepipelinenorthwestat




OldSkwentnatotheKichatnaRiverdrainage,throughtheMooseCreekLakeandMooseCreekpass,therebyavoidingtheDenaliNationalParkboundary,andthengowesttoconnectwiththeJonesRiverAlternate,thereforebypassingthe58‐mileco‐locationofthepipelinewiththeIditarodNationalHistoricTrail.Sucharoutewouldbefivemilesshorterthanthecurrentroute,eliminatethegeo‐physicallychallengingcrossingoftheHappyRiverarea,andcutthenumberofpipelinecrossingsoftheIditarodTrailtotwo,oneatOldSkwentnaandonenearEgyptMountainonthenorthsideoftheAlaskaRange.

• TheDraftEISshouldnotethatthefirstfivemilesofthepipeline,andpotentiallyacompressorstationareproposedtobelocatedwithintheSusitnaFlatsStateGameRefuge.ScopingcommentsnotedthattheproposedroutingofthepipelinethroughtheSusitnaFlatsStateGameRefugewouldbeapotentialalternative,butnottheonlyalternativethatshouldbeconsidered.Itcouldbepossibletoconnectwithexistinggasdistributioninfrastructurewithoutcrossingthisrefugeandanoff‐refugealternativeshouldbeconsideredandevaluatedintheEIS.Ifthethrough‐refugerouteiseventuallyselectedandapproved,mitigationmeasureswouldneedtobedevelopedtomitigateimpactstotherefugeandrefugeusersandaSpecialAreaPermitfromtheAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGame’sDivisionofHabitatwouldberequired.

• AsindicatedinscopingbycommentsfromtheAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGame,theDraftEISshouldexaminehowaportionoftheproposedpipelinerouterunsdirectlyalongthefaceoftheAlaskaRangeandthroughtransitionalhabitatsbetweenlowerblackspruceforestandmountainhabitat.Thistransitionalhabitatisimportanttomanyspeciesofwildlifeincludingmooseandcaribou.ThetransitionalhabitatalongthecurrentproposedrouteiswidestneartheBigRiver.TheEISshouldidentifythesetransitionalhabitatzonesandconsiderationshouldbegiventominimizingthepipelineroutethroughthesezones.Insomecases,theroutecouldavoidthisimportanthabitatbymovingasfewasthreemilestothenorthofthecurrentproposedalignmentintoareasmoredominatedbyblackspruce.

PAA13 CommentersmadesuggestionsforprojectalternativesregardingpipelineRight‐of‐Way,including:

• TheDraftEISshouldincludeanalternativethatreducestheinitialclearingrequirementsforthemajorityoftheROW,preferablytolessthan50feet.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludeanalternativethatdoesnotrequireclearingofvegetationeverytenyears,asvegetationreclamationshouldstartassoonasthepipelineisintheground.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludealternativesthatdonotrequiresubstantialgradingofhillsidesforthepipelineROW.Instead,alternativesthatleavenopermanentsurfaceimpactsshouldbeconsidered,suchastrenchingonhillsideswiththe‘minimumtool’conceptcommonlyusedinwildernessareas.

• [Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.3‐9,pp.8‐54]“The1,000‐footstudyareashouldbenarroweddowntoaspecificROWlocationtobetterinterpretpotentialaffectstoresources.1,000feetcomparedto100feetisafairlylargedifferenceinarea.”

• [Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.10‐6]‘LowGroundPressure(LGP)vehiclesshouldbeusedtopreventmoredamagetotheROW.”

• ThereareanumberofaspectsoftheslopebreakersthatsuggestthesefeatureswouldnotadequatelydivertwaterrunningdownaROWsegmentbuiltonagradeasdepicted.Ifdesignchangesarenotmade,itisanticipatedthatthestructureswouldfail,allowingforsignificanterosiontooccurviahead‐cutting,runningaroundtheoutsideedgeofthestructure,etc.Therefore,itwasrecommendtodeletethistypeof




structureforthesingleanglewaterbars/gradedips.Itisalsorecommendedtouserockdissipatersinsituationswithsignificantflowbox.

PAA14 Commenterssuggestedprojectalternativestobarging,including:

• TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzeanalternativetobuildarailroadfromtheDonlinGoldProjecttoBethelfortransportingsuppliesandfueltherebyavoidingbargetrafficontheriver.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludeanalternativetobuildaroadfromDonlinGoldProjecttoBethelfortransportingsuppliesandfuelyear‐round,therebyavoidingbargetrafficontheriver.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludealternativesthatdonotrelysoheavilyonbargetraffic,suchaswintersnowcatroutes.ThiscouldalsohelptomitigatetheseriousregionalconcernsabouttheimpactsoffishingpracticesbeingincompatiblewiththeheavybargetrafficcurrentlyproposedbyDonlin.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludeanalternativetobuildaroadwesttotheYukonRiverwhichcouldaccommodateheavytraffic.Thiswouldalsogiveaccesstotherailroadaswellasbysea.

• TheDraftEISshoulduseexistingrelevantinformationtoevaluatethefeasibilityofbuildinganaccessroadoverlandfromabargelandingsitenearAniak.

PAA15 Projectalternativesuggestedinscopingcommentstoaddresswateruseandwaterqualityissuesinclude:

• Acomplexsystemofpipelinesisproposedtotransportfreshwater,groundwaterfromdewateringwells,wasterockfacilityleachate,tailingstoragefacilityslurry,andprocesswater.TheDraftEISshoulddiscusswhetherreducingthelengthandnumberofpipelineswouldincreasetherisk(lessredundancytoaccommodatefailures)orreducetherisk(fewerplacestofail).AnalternativethatincludesinsulatingpipesthatcarrycontaminantsshouldbeincludedintheDraftEIS.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludealternativeengineeringplansthatwouldeliminatetheneedforwatertreatmentinperpetuityorbeyondaten‐yearpost‐reclamationhorizontomeetwaterqualitystandards.

• Giventherisksthatcontaminationofairandwaterposeinthisregion,DraftEISalternativesshouldassessthetechnologiesoftheproposedactionandidentifyandassessadditionalwastewatertreatmenttechnologies.Analternativeshouldbeprovidedthatemploysredundantandbackupwatermanagementandtreatmentsystems.TheDraftEISshoulddiscussthecurrentlyproposedwatermanagementandtreatmenttechnologiesthatincluderedundantsystemsformoving,managing,andtreatingwater.Forinstance,analternativethatincludestwoWaterTreatmentPlants(WTPs)sothatonecouldbepulledonlinewhentheotherundergoesmaintenanceorfailures.

PAA16 Adequatebufferingmaterial(i.e.,limestone)tocounteracttheformationofaciddrainageisexpectedtobeavailableonsite.However,therearenoguaranteesthatsufficientlimestonedoesexist.Acontingencyplanshouldberequiredthatshowsthelikelysourcesofadditionalmaterial.IfthesourcewastheHolitnaRiverdrainage,additionalNEPAcompliance,throughasupplementalEAorDraftEISwouldberequired.

PAA17 TheDraftEISshouldidentifyhowtheprojectdesigncanbemanipulatedintheeventmajorclimaticchangesoccurduringthelifeoftheproject.Oneactionalternativecouldlookatalternativewatermanagementstrategies,alternativeoperations/maintenancestrategies.




PAA18• Projectalternativesregardingexistingroads,gravelroadstotheminesite,andairstripsduringconstructionandoperationsincludethefollowing:

• TheDraftEISshouldclarifyfromthePlanofDevelopmentreferencestoasummerconstructionplanforasectioninthemiddleoftheproposedline(MP113‐MP134)andhowequipmentandsupplieswillaccessthissection.

• PipelineconstructionbetweenMP48andMP128oftheproposedrouteisproposedtobeaccessedoffOilwellRoadinthePetersvillearea.ItwasnotedincommentsthatthereisverylittleinfrastructureintheOilwellRoadarea.Creationofnewyards,materialsources,possibleimprovementstoexistingroadsandbridges,andcrewhousingintheOilwellRoadareatofacilitateconstructionwouldhaveimpactstoarearesourcesandusers,andshouldbediscussedwithintheEIS.Usingthisaccesspointwouldrequiretheconstructionofanextensiveiceroadandwouldcrossseveralmajorriversandamyriadofsmalleranadromousstreams.Giventhetransitionalmaritimeclimateofthearea,wintertimeiceroadsmaynotalwaysbepassableduetoperiodicthawswhicharepossibleatanytimeduringthewinter.

• TheDraftEISshouldconsideranalternativewheretheaccessroadtothemineispaved,notgravel.

• TheDraftEISshouldincludealternativesthatremovegravelusedforairstripconstructionandcampfacilitiesandreturnthegravelbacktothematerialssitesfromwhichtheywerequarried,followedbyfullreclamationofallmaterialssites,airstrips,andcamps.

PAA19 ThedescriptionoftheproposedactionintheDraftEISshouldhavedetailedinformationontheminesiteandminecomponents,usingvisualguidesforeasycomprehension.[Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.4‐3]Detailsshouldincludefootprintofcomponents.[Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.8‐7]TheDraftEISshouldalsodisclosehowthefacilitycomponentswouldbeshippedtotheminesite.

PAA20 CommentersexpressedconcernthattheprojectdesignsetforthbyDonlinGolddoesnotdemonstrateanygoodlong‐termplanning,anddoesnotmeetthestandardsforagoodcleanoperation.TheDraftEISshouldcriticallyevaluatetheproposedactionandalternativesandpermitsshouldbedeniedunlessappropriateenvironmentalmanagementisdemonstrated.

PAA21 TheDraftEISshouldspecifypreciselywherethepipeline/fiberopticcableriverandstreamcrossingsare,whattechniquewouldbeusedatwhattimeofyear,thetypeofcrossings,andwhatwouldbeleftinplacepermanently.Explainwhyeachtechniquewasconsideredateachcrossing,asimpactsfordifferenttechniquesaredifferent.HDDmethodsmaybetheleastenvironmentallydisruptive,particularlyforfish.

PAA22 TheDraftEISshouldincludeinformationontheactualfootprintofthedockingfacilityasitpertainstotheKuskokwimshorelandsincludingspeciesinventory,erosion/sedimentationcomplications,impactstoriveruse,etc.Thisisinadditiontothebaselineinformationaboutassociateduplandresources.

PAA23 ThepublicrequestedadditionalinformationaboutthebargeterminalfacilityinBethel.

Dock:

• Exactlocation(latitudeandlongitude);

• Locationaboveorbelowthefloodplain;

• Sizeofthedock(length,width,height);




• Configurationofthedockinrelationship totheshorelineandtheriver.ForinstancewillitbesimilartothedockproposedforJungjukCreek?

• Constructiondesign:opencell,closedcell,orpilings;

• Beachroll‐on/roll‐offfreightandequipment;

• Docksurface;ifgravelwilltherebestepstocontrolthedust?

• Willtherebefueltransferredacrossthedock?

Uplands/FreightYard:

• Theareaneededforfreight,equipmentandbuildings;

• Thesurfacematerialoftheyard;

• UseofCFR33SubChapterH,MaritimeSecurity;

• Commoditiesandequipmentthatwillbetransferredandstoredattheyard;

• EnforcementofCFR49,Transportation,Parts100‐185;

• Willfuelandbulkpetroleumproductsbestoredonsite?Inwhatquantities?

• Whateffectswilltheterminalhaveoncityservicessuchaswater,garbagesewer,electricalutilitiesandroads?

• Maintenancefacilityforequipment;

• Boatandbargerepairson‐siteatashipyardordry‐dock;

• Facilityhours(e.g.24/7);thiswouldaffectsurroundingneighborhoodsandbusinesses;and

• WilltheTankFarmbeusedtotransferfuelto/frombarges/vessels?

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT PUBLIC HEALTH


PUBLIC HEALTH (PHL)

Impactstolocalcommunities’publichealthandinfrastructureasaresultoftheproject(disease,contaminants,lifestylechanges,behaviorhealth,physicalhealth).HealthImpactAssessmentandworkers’safety.


PHL1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzethefullimpactsfromtheproposedproject,bothpositiveandnegative,onthehealthandwell‐beingofthelocalvillagesandmineworkers.AHealthImpactAssessment(HIA)shouldbewrittentoevaluatethepotentialhealthimpactsonindividualsandcommunitiesintheregion,andincludedasanappendixtotheDraftEIS.TheHIAshouldincludeaprofileofexistinghealthconditionsoftheregionandidentifythesourcesofthisinformation,considerhistoricalimpactstohealth,andgiveparticularattentiontovulnerablepopulations,suchastheelderly,youngchildren,andpregnantwomen.Itshouldinvolvelocalcommunitiesandbepublishedinaformatthatlocalresidentscaneasilyreview.

PHL2 TheDraftEISshouldfullydiscussthepotentialthatproposedminingoperationscanbeassociatedwithbehavioralhealthimpacts,suchasincreaseduseofdrugsandalcohol.Moredisposableincomeincommunitiesmayincreasetheuseofalcoholanddrugs.Itwouldbebeneficialifthelocallawenforcementweregivenoutsidesupporttoaidvillagesinaddressingthispotentialproblem.Increasedincomecanalsoresultinincreasedownershipofmotorizedvehicles,whichoftenresultsinlessphysicalactivity.

PHL3 TheareaoftheproposedDonlinMine,partiallybecauseofitsremoteness,hasahighsuiciderate,especiallyamongtheyouth.TheDraftEISshouldaddressthepotentialbeneficialimpactthathavingagoodjobhasontheself‐worthandprideofthepeoplethatgetsuchjobsandmaytendtoreducesomeofthesocialdisruptionsuchassuicide,alcoholabuse,andsexualandphysicalassault.TheDonlinGoldprojecthasalreadybeguntochangeattitudesandlifestyles.Peoplethatworkatthesiteknowthattheymustbesoberinordertoretaintheiremployment.ManypeoplewhohaveworkedattheDonlinGoldsiteremarkedduringscopingthatthecampcultureisoneofuniversalrespect,teamwork,safety,andbalance.

PHL4 Thebenefitsshouldbedocumentedthatmorefundingandlocaldemandcouldmeanthatthelocalhealthcaresystemwouldbeimprovedtomeettheneedanddemand.Alsothisprojectcouldemployhundredsofpeoplewhowouldreceiveadvancedhealthandsafetytrainingandhealthinsurancethroughtheiremployment.

PHL5 TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzethehumanhealtheffectsofmercury,cyanideandothercontaminatesandexposurepathways,bothinpeopleandtheirsubsistenceresources.Contaminationisaparticularconcernforchildren,elders,newborns,pregnantwomen,andthosewithdiseasesorsubstanceabuse.EPAfishconsumptionguidelinesforotherstatesarenotrelevanttoAlaskasubsistencefoodsconsumptionlevelsandshouldnotbeused;ratherguidancefromtheAlaskaDivisionofPublicHealthshouldbeused.TheDraftEISshouldalsodiscussthepotentialimpacttotraditionswiththeperceptionthatsubsistenceresourcesmaycontainmercury.However,theCorpsshouldbecautiousintheDraftEISinevaluatingthepotentialforfar‐reachinghealtheffectsthatcannotbedirectlytiedtotheproposedprojectorwhicharenotmeaningfulfortheevaluationofalternatives.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT PUBLIC HEALTH



PHL6Theproposedproject,whenoperational,shouldincludebaselineandyearlytestingofallonsiteemployees,particularlythoseworkingnearautoclaves,forheavymetalsandotherhealthhazardsrelatedtothistypeofmining.Thereshouldbeaplandevelopedtohaltmineoperationsuntilpotentialproblemsarecorrected.TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowemployeeswouldbetrainedintheuseofcyanideandtheproposedsafeguardsthatwouldbeinplace.

PHL7SafedrinkingwaterisanongoingprobleminruralAlaska.Therefore,theDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzetheimpacttheprojectcouldhaveonwaterqualityandtheeffectstothewatersupplyforresidents.Contaminationcouldcomefromboatingtraffic,environmentaldegradation,orminingoperationmishaps.

PHL8TheDraftEISshoulddiscusstheimpactstodietwhenasubsistenceresourceislostorbecomesunavailable.Increasedconsumptionofprocessedfood,forinstance,canleadtoadversechronichealthconditionslikediabetes.Lifestylechangescouldalsoresultinincreasedratesofsubstanceabuseandmentalhealthproblems,possiblyincludingsuicide,forpeopleintheregionoverthelong‐term.

PHL9Aninfluxofpeoplecouldbringdiseasestoanareawithminimalhealthcareavailablethatmaynotbeabletohandlelargecapacitiesofpatients.

PHL10TheDraftEISshouldlookatothercommunitieswherelargeminesarelocatedtoevaluateandcompareimpactstopublichealth.

PHL11TheDraftEISshoulddescribethewatersafetyissuestopublichealththatmayarisefromincreasedbargetraffic.Analyzethesafetyimpactstoriverusersandboatersespeciallytolocallyusedstandardriverskiffs.BargingandbargetrafficwasnotedasastrongconcernoftheNativeVillageofChuathbalukasbargetrafficcreatesdangerouswavesintheriverthatcantipriverskiffs.Thewavescreatedbyapassingbargecanlastforseveralhoursafterabargehaspassedasthewavescontinuetohittheriverbanks.

PHL12Inordertoappropriatelyevaluatehumanhealth,specifichealthdataarerequiredthatmaynotberoutinelycollectedaspartoftheDraftEISscopingprocess.Inordertoensurethatthenecessarydataareavailableforthisevaluation,itisimportanttoinvolvepublichealthprofessionalsearlyintheNEPAprocess.Publichealthdataandexpertiseforprospectivehealthimpactanalysisorforprovidinginputonhealthissuesmaybeavailablefromlocalandstatehealthdepartments,tribalagencies,orfederalpublichealthagencies,suchastheU.S.CentersforDiseaseControlandPrevention'sNationalCenterforEnvironmentalHealth,U.S.AgencyforToxicSubstancesandDiseaseRegistry,orIndianHealthService.

TheHIAframeworkisacombinationofprocedures,methodsandtoolsthatenablessystematicanalysisofthepotentialpositiveornegativeeffectsofapolicy,plan,programorprojectonthehealthofapopulationandthedistributionofthoseeffectswithinthepopulation.HIAidentifiesappropriateactionstomanageormitigatenegativeeffects.HIAiscurrentlytheonlywidelyacceptedmethodologyorframeworkusedtoprovidedecision‐makerswithinformationabouthowaspecificpolicy,project,orprogrammayaffecthumanhealth.TheWorldHealthOrganizationandtheU.S.CentersforDiseaseControlandPreventionsupporttheuseofHIAasatooltoaddresshealthimpactswhenpolicies,programs,orprojectsarebeingdeveloped.ManyothercountrieshavesuccessfullyusedHIAforthesepurposes.TheInternationalFinanceCorporation,amemberoftheWorldBankGroup,hasadoptedHIAasthestandardforevaluatinghealthandrequiresitofanyprojectsforwhichitprovidesfunding.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND SCOPING


PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND SCOPING (PUB)

Informationpresentedtopublicandscoping,outreachprocesstocommunities.


PUB1 Thereisaneedforagenciestoaddresslinguistic,cultural,institutional,geographic,andotherbarrierstomeaningfulparticipation.TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISprocessshouldincorporateactiveoutreachtoaffectedgroups.Inparticular:

• Agenciesshouldbeawareofthediverseconstituencieswithinanyparticularcommunitywhentheyseekcommunityrepresentationandshouldendeavortoinvitecompleterepresentationofthecommunityasawhole.

• Agenciesalsoshouldbeawarethatcommunityparticipationmustoccurasearlyaspossibleifitistobemeaningful.

• DuetothecomplexityofboththeprojectandDraftEISprocess,residentsexpressedtheneedforatranslatortoassistcommunicationintheYup'iklanguageduringallpublicinvolvementactivities.

• Itwassuggestedthatsometechnicalaspectscannotbetranslatedduetolackofappropriatevocabulary.

• Itwasrequestedthatphotosofthetailingspondsbeprovidedtoeldersbecausesomeelderscannotread.

• Itwassuggestedthatastakeholderdatabasebeestablishedandthatallstakeholdersbekeptinformedofkeydevelopmentsintheprocess.Severalcommentersaskedtobekeptinformedandprovidedtheircontactinformation.ThedevelopmentofacontactdatabaseshouldbedescribedintheDraftEIS.

PUB2 Commentersexpressedconcernthattherehasnotbeenenoughinvolvementwiththelocalvillages.TheDraftEISshoulddescribethepublicinvolvementprocessandhowthepeoplemostaffectedbytheprojectarebeinginformedaboutthepotentialimpactsitwouldhaveontheircommunities,whatinputwasreceivedfromthecommunities,andhowthatinputwasutilizedinthedecisionsthatweremaderegardingtheproject.Becausethescopingprocessistakingplaceinhubcommunitiesthereisconcernthatsmallerremotetribesareunabletoparticipateinthisprocess.SpecificareasmentionedincludedLimeVillagetoBethel,StonyRiver,Sleetmute,RedDevil,Georgetown,andtheareaaroundthemouthoftheYukonRiver.Manyresidentsexpressedfrustrationthattheywerenotinformed;thereweremeetingsinonly13villagesintheprojectarea.TheDraftEISprocessshould:

• Clarifywhetherthereiswaytopayforpeopletotraveltothemeetings.

• ReviewsuggestionsthattherebemorefrequentopportunitiestoinvolvethetribalgovernmentsandthepublicbetweentheScopingandtheDraftEISstage.

• ConducteducationalworkshopsonvarioussubjectstosolicitTraditionalEcologicalKnowledgeandWisdomandlocalknowledgeofthepeopleoftheregion.




PUB3 ResidentsareconcernedaboutalackofinformationthatiscausingdistrustintheDraftEISprocess.Oneconcernisthatthereisinformationmissingfromthecurrentreportsaboutthedevelopmentprocess.Specifically,financialassuranceinformationshouldbeprovidedforpublicreviewandcomment.Itwasnotedthatthereisaneedfortransparencyduringallphasesoftheproposedproject,includingoperationsofthemine,ifitgoesforward.AsuggestiontobuildtrustwasthattheDraftEISshouldestablishaframeworkforcitizenengagementaftermineconstructiontoensureadequateaccesstodecision‐makersatDonlinGold,LLC,BarrickGold,andNovaGold,aswellasregulatorycomplianceofficersonalllevelsofgovernment.Commenterssuggesteda"goodneighboragreement",suchashastheoneattheStillwaterMineinMontana,forexample.Thistypeofagreementwouldallowforanyprivatecitizentocollectwater,soil,andairsamplesfromtheminesitefortheiranalysisattheirdiscretion,andshouldallowforperiodicmeetingswithminemanagement.TheDraftEISshouldmaketheestablishmentofanagreementatoppriority,andhelpensurethatitreceivesadequatefundingforitscreationandoperation.TheDraftEISshouldstipulatethattheagreementisnotwrittenbythosewithanytiestotheminingcompanies,butratherindependentgroupswithexpertisewithsimilaragreementsandenvironmentaljusticeingeneral.Monitoringdatashouldbepublishedinsupportoftheagreementbyshowingtransparencyintheaspectsoftheminingoperationsmostcriticaltoprotectinghumanandecosystemhealth.

PUB4 Thereshouldbemorecooperationbetweenprojectproponentsandlocalresidents.ResidentsexpressedfrustrationthatTheKuskokwimCorporationandCalistaCorporationhavenotdiscussedtheirconcernswiththeminperson.Moremeetingsweresuggested,specificallythefirstweekofJunetoAugust,Septemberwhentherewouldbemorepeopleinthecommunities.ThereisalsofrustrationregardingdiscussionswithDonlinGoldandthelackofinformationgiventoresidents.ItwassuggestedthatabetterdialoguewithDonlinGoldgeochemistsandmineengineersisnecessarytobetterexplainthemercuryissue.

PUB5 CommentersexpressedconcernaboutresidentsbeingabletounderstandtheNEPAprocess,potentialimpacts,andtechnicalreportswithoutspecializedexpertise.Itwassuggestedduringscopingthatfactsheetsbeavailabletoassistinexplainingkeypointstothepublic.Throughastrongpublicprocess,thepermittingagenciesshouldensurethatstakeholdersunderstandeveryalternativeproposedintheDraftEIS.

PUB6 Commentersexpressedconcernabouthowtheircommentsaretakenintoconsideration.Specifically,concernsaboutthetailingsholdingfacilityandpublicmeetingcommentsregardingsubsistenceandjobs.TheDraftEISshouldclarifythecommentreviewprocess.

PUB7 Commentersexpressedconcernsaboutfollow‐throughonpromisesmade,andwantthepublicprocessforthisDraftEIStoprovideanswerstotheirconcernsandtodocumenttheseconcernsfortherecord,notjustverballyatthepublicmeetings.ItwassuggestedthatBarrickGoldvisittheareatoworkdirectlywithresidentsregardingtheproposedproject.




PUB8 Suggestionsweremaderegardingthepublicmeetings.

• Thereshouldbepeopleatthemeetingswhocananswerthepublic’squestions.

• Clarifytheaffiliationandroleofeachofthepresentersatthemeeting.

• Concernswereexpressedaboutspecificdevelopmentinformationregardingthepipelineandgravelpits,pipestoragesites,largecamps,andrunways,beingleftoutofmeetingshostedbyDonlinCreekatNikolai[outsideofthescopingmeetingprocess].

PUB9 Onecommenterexpressedtheneedformorecommunicationbetweenvillagesregardingtheproposedproject,andmoreinformationabouttheprojectbeforesubmittingcomments.ThecommentercomparedhisperspectivetosimilaractionastheAlaskaNativeClaimsSettlementActwhenpeoplearenotadvisedofwhat'sgoingonthroughtheplanandnotedthatnativepeoplewerehurtafterthelawwaspassedandrightstolandhadbeenabolished.ThecommenternotedthatthetimeframeforlearningabouttheproposedDolinGoldProjectwaslimitedandthatlocalresidentscannotcommentwithoutanyknowledgeofthemineoperations.

PUB10 TheDraftEISshoulddescribepublicoutreachactivitiesbyDonlinGoldpresentinginformationoutsideoftheNEPAandDraftEISprocessonvariousactivitiesregardingenvironmentalimpacts,miningprocedures,andothermattersrelatedtoresponsibleminingactivitiestoresidentsoftheYukon‐KuskokwimDeltaduringvariouscommunitydiscussions.Thediscussionintheseoutreachmeetingsincludedconcernsregarding:

• Impactstothewatershedandtheimmediateenvironmentaroundthemine;

• Impactstosalmonstocksandresidentfishspecies;

• Impactstovariouswildgamespecies;and

• Airqualityintheimmediatevicinityoftheproposedmineaswellastheregion.

PUB11 LocalguidesexpressedfrustrationthatDonlinGolddidnotcontactthemdirectlyregardingthepotentialimpactoftheproposedprojectontheircommercialguidingcampsandcustomarysubsistencewayoflife,andtheseguidesareconcernedabouttheDonlinGoldProjectresultinginproject‐relatedaircraftdisruptingtheirhuntingactivities.Specificissuesraisedduringscopingincluded:

• Mostflightscouldberightovertheimportantwildlifeandwildlifehabitatsthatwearedependentupon.

• Struggleanddisruptionhasoccurredeachyearsincewithmanyinstancesofconflict,primarilywithaircraftassociatedwiththeproposedmineanditscontractors.

• Professionalguidesexpressedconcernthatthereisanunderlyinglackofrespectandunderstandingbytheapplicantofhowtheproposedprojectwouldimpactthelands,waterswildlife,wildlandexperience,andviewshedresourcesimportantforguidebusinesses.

• TheDraftEISshouldworktoallowconcernsandknowledgeofprofessionalguidestobeconsidered.

• TheAlaskaProfessionalHuntersAssociationexpressedconcernthatitwasnotnotifiedofthescopingperiodfortheDraftEISandquestionedtheadequacyofstakeholderoutreachandfornotificationoftheDraftEISprocess.

• Professionalguidesnotedthattheybelievedtherewasinadequatetimetofullyaddressthemanypartsoftheprojectthatcouldimpactthem.TheDraftEISshouldtakeintoconsiderationthatimportantstakeholderswereleftoutofthescopingnotificationprocess.




• Thereshouldbeoutreach tolocalguidesaboutupcomingstepsintheEISprocess toensuretheycanparticipateintheproject.

PUB12 Commentsreceivedduringthescopingperiodnotedthatthetribesandthepublicshouldbeinvolvedinthemitigationplanning,andmonitoringoftheproposedproject.

.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT PURPOSE AND NEED


PURPOSE AND NEED (P&N)

PurposeandNeedoftheAction;CorpsofEngineerspermits,LEDPA,PrematuretoengageNEPA.


P&N1 DescribehowagencieswillrespondtocommentsfromBarrickGoldthattheproposedprojectdoesnotmeettheircriteriaforinvestment.Clarifywhetherthatchangesthepermittingprocess.ExplainhowanEISprocesscanproceedwithoutmorecommitmentfromfinancialbackers.

P&N2 ClarifythattheCorpspermitapplicationfromDonlinGoldisthetriggerfortheNEPAEISprocess.

P&N3 CommenterssuggestedthattheCorpsacceptthePurposeandNeedstatementcontainedinthepermitapplicationfromDonlinGold.

ThepurposeofDonlinGold’sproposedprojectistoprofitablyproducegoldfromorereservesownedbyCalistaCorporation,anANCSAcorporation,utilizingopen‐pitminingmethodsandconventional,provenmillingprocessessuitableforthecharacteristicsoftheorereservesandforapplicationinremotewesternAlaska.

TheneedfortheproposedprojectistoenableCalistaCorporationandTheKuskokwimCorporationtomaximizeeconomicbenefitsfortheirNativeshareholders,fromlandsselectedunderANCSAfortheirmineralpotential,byproducinggoldtomeetworld‐widedemand.Goldisanestablishedcommoditywithinternationalmarkets.

P&N4 CommentersareconcernedthatthepurposeandneedstatementcomplywithNEPA.Specifically:

• TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldpresentaclearandconcisestatementoftheunderlyingpurposeandneedfortheproposedprojectconsistentwiththeimplementingregulationsforNEPA(40CFR1502.13).Thisstatementshouldbeframedbroadlyenoughastoallowfortheanalysisofarangeofreasonablealternatives;

• TheDraftEISshouldreflectnotonlythepurposeandneedoftheprojectproponent,andtheCorps,butalsothebroaderpublicinterestandneedbasedonthescopingcomments;and

• ThepurposeandneedstatementfortheDraftEISshouldbedevelopedincoordinationwiththecooperatingtribesandagencies.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT RECREATION


RECREATION (REC)

Impactsonrecreationandtourism,recreationalhunting,usagenearmine,alongriversystemsandinpipelinecorridorduringconstructionandoperation.DisruptionofrecreationalexperiencesoftheIditarodtrails.


REC1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldfullyaddressthepotentialforincreasedrecreationopportunitiesiftheproposedairstripsarenotreclaimedasthismayincreasepublicaccesstoremoteareas.

REC2 TheDraftEISshouldclarifywhetherrecreationalaccessintheROWoftheproposedpipelinecorridororatprivateairstripsfortheproposedprojectwouldberestricted.Thiswouldaddressthestatementsbytheapplicantthattheprojectwouldnotcreatenewpublicaccess.

REC3 TheDraftEISshouldaddresstheeffectofprojectcomponentsonrecreationalhuntingandexistingguidedhuntingoperations.Someconcernsexpressedinclude:

• Guidedhuntingintheareaiswell‐managedandsustainable.Increasedaccessalongtheproposedpipelinecorridorcouldincreasethenumberofsuccessfulhunters,decreasingwildlifetounsustainablenumbers.

• Placementoffacilitiesalongtheproposedpipelineroute,airstripoperations,andgeneralactivityoftheprojectcouldhavenegativeimpactonguideoperationsandservices;manyofthesearefamilybusinessesthathavebeenoperatingintheprojectareaformanyyears.

• ExplainhowDonlinGoldwouldcommunicatewithBLMSpecialRecreationPermitholdersandBLM‐authorizedhuntingguide‐outfitters,withinthevicinityoftheproposedpipeline,whomayhavebaseorspikecampswithlocationsthatmaychangeannually.Thereshouldbeaprocessformakingsurethatpermitholdershavebeeninformedoftheproposedproject,andiftheyanticipateeffectstotheirbusinesses,transporterswhoservethem,lodgeownerswhohousethem,andvillagesfromwhichtheyflyclients.

• TheDraftEISshouldconsiderthattheproposedprojectcouldspoilthenaturalbeautyofAlaskathatprovideshuntersauniquerecreationalexperience.

• CommentersnotedthattheyhaveexperienceddisruptionsbyDonlinGoldaffiliatedhelicoptersthathavedisruptedwildlifeandguidedhunting,intheregularAugustandSeptemberseasons,butalsolateSeptembergrizzlybearhunts.

REC4 TheproposedprojectwouldbringaninfluxofthenumberofpeopleintheCrookedCreekareathatwouldwanttorecreate,sportfishandhunt,includingmineemployeesandsupportindustrypersonnel.Thiscouldresultinimpactsonsomeofthestreams,particularlyHolokuk,OskawalikandtheGeorgerivers,andtheHolitnaRiverwhichisnottoofarawayfromthe“breadbasket”ofsalmonproductionintheKuskokwimRiver.

REC5 Whenplanningfortheproposedminedevelopment,theDraftEISmustnotethatrecreationalcampingintheprojectconstructionareaonBLM‐managedlandisprohibitedwithoutauthorizationfromtheBLM.




REC6 ItislikelythatwinteruseandsummerORVuseoftheproposedpipelineROWwouldbeestablishedwherenoneexisted,withrecreationistsusingriverandairstripstoaccesstheareaforhunting,recreationalcabins,andgeneralrecreation.TheseimpactsshouldbeanalyzedintheDraftEIS.

REC7 ApproximatelyonehundredmilesoftheproposedpipelineroutewouldroughlyfollowtheIditarodNationalHistoricTrail(INHT).TheDraftEISshouldanalyzethefollowing:thediversityofclimate,terrain,scenery,wildlifeandrecreation,relativetotheentiretrailsystembetweenSewardandNome;levelsofmodernhumanmodificationtothelandscape;thedegreeofconnectivitytomoderninfrastructureandpopulations;andtheabilitytoduplicatetheexperienceandchallengeofhistoricIditarodTrailusers.

SpecificconcernstobeaddressedintheDraftEISinclude:

• TheDraftEISshouldconsidertheeffecton“vicarioususers”ofthatINHTbecausethetrailcouldbeco‐locatedwithportionsoftheproposedpipelinecorridor.INHThasprominenceamongavarietyofenthusiastsoutsideofAlaska(vicarioususers)becauseoftheannuallong‐distanceoverlandwintereventsthatmakeuseoftheTrail.Theexperienceofvideoviewerscouldbeimpactedbythepipelineconstructionandoperation.ExamplesincludetheannualvideohighlightsbytheIditarodSledDogRaceandNationalGeographic’s“AerialAmerica”seriesonthe50statesthatwillincludeasectionofTrailthatwouldbeimpactedbytheproject.

• Theproposedpipelinemaybecomeasourceofcontroversyintheregionfromtheperspectiveoflandowners,lodgeowners,casualusers,andIditarodmushersandInvitationaleventathletes.TheDraftEISshouldincludealternativesthatdonotdegradetheessentialprimitivecharacteristicsofthetrailintermsofwidening,clearingvegetation,buryingpipeunderneaththetrailandsitingmaintenancefacilitiesorcheckvalvesnearthetrail.TheDraftEISshouldconsideralternativesthatensurethetrailremainsfullyunchangedandunimprovedafterconstruction,byusingpipelineroutingoptionsandspecialtrenchingandlogisticaltechniquesnearthetrail.

• TheDraftEISprocessshouldincludeconsultationwithpermittedannualeventsthatoperatealongtheINHT,includingtheIronDogSnowmachineRace,theIditarodTrailSledDogRace,andtheIditarodTrailInvitational.

• TheDraftEISshouldevaluatetheimpactsoftheprojectinrelationstotheINHTResourceInventory(1982)geographicsubunitsandratingsforeachaccordingtocriteriaforscenicquality.FourunitswereidentifiedthatwouldbeeffectedbytheproposedpipelineROW;ofthoseunits,approximatelytwo‐thirdsofthelineardistanceoftheunitswereidentifiedashavingAlevelscenicquality,andone‐thirdofthedistancehavingaBlevelofscenicquality.Forthisreason,theDraftEISshouldincludeavisualanalysiswithscaleviewsheddigitalmodelingduringthewintermonthsandtakeintoaccountthelocalizedsnowfallpatternsthatmayaccentuateorhidetheclearedpipelinecorridor.

TheDraftEISanalysisshouldrecognizethattherearemultiplealignmentsoftheINHTtrailwithvariouslegaldesignationsandrequirementswithintheproposedprojectarea.Forexample,therouteoftheIditarodTrailbetweenOldSkwentnaandHappyRiveriscloselyparalleledbytheactualalignmentofthehistoricIditarodTrail,establishedbyColonelGoodwinoftheAlaskaRoadCommission,andismaintainedbytheAlaskaRoadCommissionastheSusitna‐RainyPassroute.

• GiventhechangestooverlandaccessthatmaybecreatedbypipelineconstructionroadseitherintersectingorcollocatedontheIditarodTrail,plusthelackofspatialseparationbetweenthetwolinearfeatures,andthetendencyofwintertrailuserstochoosea“pathofleastresistance,”itislikelythatwinteruseoftheIditarodTrail




wouldmigratefromthecurrentlyusedalignmentstothepipelinecorridor.

OnepotentialimpactcouldbethatthecurrentalignmentoftheIditarodTrailbetweenOldSkwentnaandPuntillaLakeisabandonedonsomesegments,andeliminatedbythepipelineROWonothers.Also,giventhatoverlandsummeruseinAlaskatypicallyfollowswinterusepatterns,itislikelythatsummerORVuseoftheroutewouldbecomeestablishedwherenoneexisted,withrecreationistsusingriverandairstripstoaccessthepipelineROW.

• TheDraftEISshouldconsiderthevaluesrelatedtothenatureandpurposeforwhichtheINHTwasestablishedandtheeffectoftheproposedactionsonhighvaluesegmentsofthetrailwhichiseligibleforlistingontheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces.

REC8 TheanalysisofImpactstoresourcesaffectingtheIditarodNationalHistoricTrailintheDraftEISshouldbebasedoncomparativeexamplesofimpactstosimilarresourcesseenaroundAlaska.Examplesinclude:

• TheTrans‐AlaskaPipeline,whichdemonstratestheeffectsofaprojectofthemagnitudeoftheproposedDonlinGoldpipeline.

• Militarymaneuverswithheavyequipmentdocumenttheeffectsofoperationsonawidevarietyoflandscapes.TheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineershasasoilssuitabilityclassificationsystemwhichcouldbeusedasareferencetoguidepipelinesiting,orpredictionofimpactstodifferentsoilsclassificationsfoundalongtheroute.

• TheFarewellAirstrip,whichwasbuilt(two5,000footrunwaysnearFarewellLake),andwhichbecameanaccesspointforORVuseonthenorthsideofRainyPass.TheoverlandORVtrailsradiatingfromthatfacilityareanexampleoftheimpactsthatcouldoccurafterairfieldsareconstructedalongtheIditarodTrailandtheproposedpipelinecorridor.

REC9 TheprojectdescriptionfortheproposedactionshouldbeclarifiedtheDraftEISinregardtospecificdesignelementsthatwouldaffecttheundevelopedareaoftheIditarodNationalHistoricTrail,includingthefollowing:

• 58milesofpipelinewouldco‐locateon,parallelorintersecttheTrailsystem.A100ftconstructionROWwouldbeclearedandarmoredwitheitheraniceroadorgravel,andmostconstructionmaterialsandequipmentforthe40milesofthepipelinetothewestwouldbetransportedbyheavyequipmentoverthis58milesection.

• TheclearedpipelineROWwouldintersecttheTrail25times.

• 15milesoftheTrailwouldbedisruptedandoverlainwith15milespipelineconstructionandoperatingROW.

• Twonewairfieldswith5,000‐footrunwayseachwouldbeconstructedonexistingsegmentsoftheTrail,andathird,existingairstripwouldbeupgraded.

• Threeconstructioncampsserving300personseachwouldbedevelopedinproximitytothenewairfields.Eachcampisplannedtohaveparkingfor60vehicles,withpotentialtraveldistancesfromeachcampofupto31miles.Mobile,sledgemountedcampswouldalsobehauledalongtheconstructionROW,witheachserving30persons.

• Eightgravel/materialsitestotaling57acreswouldbeexcavatedandmovedoverlandtoneededconstructionareas.

• 13pipestorageyardsranginginsizefrom1to2.5acres.

• The50‐footwideoperatingROWwouldbeclearedevery10years,withatrailrouteontheROWformaintenance.




• Atintervalsofapproximatelyeverymile,apipewouldprotrudeabovegroundaspartofacorrosion‐protectionteststation.

• Ateverymileanaerialmileagemarkerwouldbeinstalledonan8‐footpipeand8‐footpipemountedpipelinemarkerswouldbeinstalledatmorefrequentintervals.

• Threeblockvalveyards,fencedwithina25‐footby25‐footenclosurewouldbeinstalledinthreelocationsonthe58‐milesectionco‐locatedwiththeIditarodTrail.

• Theproposedprojectcouldlikelyresultindisqualificationof58milesofthetrailcurrentlyeligibleforlistingundertheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT RESEARCH, MONITORING, EVALUATION NEEDS


RESEARCH, MONITORING, AND EVALUATION NEEDS (RME)

Commentsonbaselineresearch,monitoring,andevaluationneedsordatagaps.


RME1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldpresentathoroughanalysisoftheconservationimpactthattheproposedprojectanditscomponentswouldhaveonthewildlands,wildlifeandthepeoplewhoaredependentupontheseresources.Itwassuggestedthatatouroftheland,waterandthepeoplethatliveand/oroperatebusinesseswithinthestudyareabeconductedbythereviewersoftheDraftEIS.

RME2 Allbaselinedata(includingaquaticdatasuchasfish,waterquantityandquality,andbenthicinvertebrates)andmonitoringupdatesshouldbepubliclyaccessibleinauser‐friendlyformatonline.Largefilescanbebrokendownintopartsifnecessary.Informationaboutwhereandhowtoaccessesthedatashouldbedistributedwidely[Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.3‐2].AquestionwasraisedduringscopingaboutwhetherGISdatawasavailabletoagencies,partners,and/orthepublic.

RME3 TheDraftEISanalysisshouldincludesufficientbaselinedatatoevaluatetheimpactsofbargetraffic,includingcomparingotherriversthathaveexperiencedcomparablegrowth,datarelatingtobankconditionsanderosionsimulations,waterlevelsandseasonalchanges,andremediationoptions.

RME4 AdequatebaselinedatashouldbecollectedandusedintheDraftEIStoanalyzethegeotechnicalissuesintheKuskokwimRegion,includingthepotentialforerosionandavalanchehazardanalysis.AFirstOrdersoilsurveyshouldbedonealongtheentirepipelinealignment[Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.10‐1],andaStabilization,Rehabilitation,andReclamationPlanshouldbedeveloped.

RME5 TheDraftEISshouldincludesufficientbaselinedataonmercuryandheavymetalsconcentrationsinwildlifetissue(fish,game,andwaterfowl),air,water,andsedimentanddetailhowtheseresourceswouldbemonitoredyearlywhilethemineisoperationalandpostclosure.Thecrushedandpulverizedmillfeedstockshouldbeanalyzedaswelltoobtainaccuratenumbersonthevolumeofmercuryenteringthemill.Amercuryriskassessmentshouldbeconducted,particularlyforsubsistenceresources.Itwasrequestedduringscopingthatthestateandfederalgovernmentsexaminepotentialmercuryexposurepathwaysandconsiderrequiringair,waterandtissuesamplingtobeconductedaspartofthepermitprocess.

RME6 AsabaselinefortheDraftEIS,avisualinventoryandinterimmanagementclassdesignationmustbecompletedandGISlayerscreatedforalllandswithintheproposedpipelinealignmentandprojectarea.

RME7 TobeadequateortheDraftEIS,baselinedatashouldincludelongitudinalanalysisofsocial,culturalandenvironmentalimpactsoftheprojectinacomparativeanalysiswithotherlargescaleminesofsimilarmagnitude.Thereshouldbeananalysisofthesocialimpactsofminesonsubsistencefoodsandindigenousculturesandcommunitiesusingpeer‐reviewedliterature.Thisanalysisshouldalsoincludeevaluationoftheimpactofamineonhealthmarkerssuchassubstanceabuseandsuicideinboththeshort‐termandlong‐term,andpostclosure.ConsiderlookingattheRedDevilMineduringtheyearsitwasoperatingandafteritsclosure.




RME8 AsabaselinefortheDraftEISanalysis,anecosystemservicesvaluationshouldbeconductedtoaccuratelyassessthevalueoftheenvironmentunderaNoActionAlternative.ThisvaluationwouldsupportanEnvironmentalAccountingtodeterminingtheecosystembenefitsprovidedduringthelifeoftheminecomparedtotheeconomicdamage.Valuationassessmentsshouldalsoincludescenarioswithrealisticcarbontaxes,toprovideabettersenseoftheboundariesoftheprofitabilityofthemine.Theseeconomicassessmentsshouldincludethescenarioinwhichtheminegoesthroughaninterimclosureperiodduetolowmetalpricesand/orhightransport/energyprices.Bondingshouldsimilarlybeassessedwithandwithoutaninterimclosurescenario,withagoalofmaintainingcontaminanttreatmentoperations.

RME9 ConductausestudyontheKuskokwimRivertoidentifythemultipleusergroupsandestimatethenumber,type,frequency,andequipmentuseofeachusergroup.Identifyexistingandhistoriccabins,fishcampsandculturalsites.Suchinformationmaybeproprietaryandsensitive,soprecautionsshouldbemadetoensuretheconfidentialityoftheinformation.

RME10 Thereshouldbeabaselinesurveyforthepresenceofinvasivespeciesalongthepipelinealignment,waterbodies,airstrips,lodges,andproposedprojectarea.Iffound,theseareasshouldbeproperlytreatedwithherbicides/pesticidesorothermeansofcontroltobestpreventthespreadbeforeprojectmobilization.

RME11 IntensivestudiesmustbeconductedintothebaselinewaterqualitydataandamonitoringprogrammustbeestablishedtoensurethattheproposedminedoesnotinflictirreversibledamagetotheresidentsoftheKuskokwimregion.WaterqualitysamplingshouldbetakenatallpointswherethepipelinewouldcrosstheGeorgeRiver,aswellasdownriverwheretheGeorgeRivermeetstheKuskokwim.Waterqualitystandardsneedtobeestablishedforthearea[Re:PipelinePlanofDevelopment,pp.9‐13].AMitigationSedimentationControlPlanandaStormwaterPollutionPreventionPlanforthepipelineshouldbedeveloped.

RME12 Baselinedatashouldbegatheredforallwildlife,including:

• Awatershedassessmentoffisheries,wildlife,andculture;

• Surveysofpipelinecrossingsofwaterbodiesforanadromousfish,spawningareas,andover‐winteringareas;

• Surveysandcurrentstateofhealthforthesensitivefreshwatertrout;

• StudiesduringthespawningperiodofhumpbackwhitefishtoconfirmpresenceinthemainstemoftheKuskokwimRiver;

• MainchannelspawningdataforsalmonandanadromouswhitefishspawningshouldbecollectedintheKuskokwimRiverinordertoconductanevaluationontheeffectsofdredging(potentiallyneededforbargemovement)onfishandfishhabitatintheKuskokwimRiver.

• Informationonstreamsinthevicinityoftheprojectthatprovidesuitablebreedinghabitatforharlequinducks;

• Surveystoassessraptoruseoftheprojectarea;

• Informationontrumpeterswansandnestinghabitatnearpipelineconstruction;and

• PresenceandpotentialimpactoftheprojectonallbirdsprotectedundertheMigratoryBirdTreatyAct.




RME13 AccordingtothePipelinePlanofDevelopment,[pp.8‐84],adetailedPressureTestPlancouldbedevelopedduringfinaldesign.However,thismaybeneededpriortoconstructiontoallowthepublicopportunitytomakecommentsonpipelinedesignandoperationalprocedures.

RME14 BaselinedatafortheDraftEISshouldincludecurrentinformationavailablefrompreviousEISdocumentsanddatabasesregardingsubsistenceresources.TraditionalEcologicalKnowledgeandWisdom(TEKW)datagapsshouldbeidentifiedandTEKWstudiesshouldbeconductedasnecessarytoclearlyidentifyconcernsandpotentialimpactsfromtheproposedproject.

RME15 TheapplicantshoulddevelopandprovidethefollowingdataandplansforuseindevelopingtheEISandforon‐goingmonitoring:

• PreandPost‐ConstructionGoogleStreetviewPhotographyofIditarodNationalHistoricTrailPlan(betweenPipelineMiles48‐108);includinggeo‐referencedstreetviewphotographyfromaGooglecameramountedonthebackofsnowmachine,takenbeforeandafterconstruction,inordertodocumentchangestoTrail.

• Pipeline–TrailCrossingConstructionPlanandBMP’s;acompilationofstandardconstructiondrawings,methods,BMP’sandplansforimplementingandmonitoringduringandafterconstruction.

• WinterTrailInterruptionTemporaryRe‐RoutePlan;alltrailintersectionsshouldbeinventoried,andfeasiblealternativeroutesmappedusingGPSandcataloguedina‘WinterTrailInterruptionTemporaryRe‐RoutePlan’,approvedbylandmanagementagencyinadvanceoflandclearingoperations.

RME16 ConcernwasexpressedbytheAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGamethatinadditiontotheknownanadromousstreamsthatareproposedtobecrossedbytheproposedpipeline,therearelikelynumerousadditionalstreamsthatsupportanadromousfishspeciesthathavenotyetbeenidentified.Inadditiontherearealsolikelynumerousstreamsthatsupportnon‐anadromousfishthatwouldbecrossedbytheproposedpipeline.ItwasnotedthatanAquaticsStudyPlanwasdevelopedin2010toidentifythesestreamsaswellascollectotheraquaticresourceinformationandrequestedthattheresultsofthesestudiesshouldbesubmittedtotheAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGameandotherinterestedresourceagenciesforreviewandincorporatedintotheEIS.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS


SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS (SER)

Commentsoneconomicimpactstolocalcommunities,regionaleconomy,andnationaleconomy.Thismayincludechangesinthesocialoreconomicenvironments.Analyzeregionalbenefitofmine,economicdevelopment.Influxofconstructionandoperationalworkers,employment,income,andneedsforhousing.Potentialforoutmigrationfromcommunities.Boomandbustcycles.


SER1 ThefollowingpotentialbenefitsoftheproposedprojectshouldbeconsideredandincludedintheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEIS:

• Overalleconomicbenefittotheregion,thestate,andthecountry;

• Theregionhasoneofthehighestunemploymentratesinthecountry,andtheopportunitytogainemploymentintheregioncouldhelpbegintoprovideasolutiontothatproblem;

• Theproposedprojectwouldbringeconomicopportunitiesandwell‐paidjobstotheregionbycreatingsustainablecommunities;

• Asubsistencelifestyleishardtomaintain,andjobsarenecessary;

• Employmentcouldbringabetterqualityoflifetoresidents;and

• Havingemploymentcanencouragepeopletocontinuegettinganeducation.

SER2 Theproposedprojectshouldbedevelopedinsuchawaythatitprotectsthenaturalenvironment,culturaltraditionsandsubsistenceresourceswhilestillprovidinganeconomicbenefittotheregion.Ifthiscannotbedone,itmaynotbeworththecosttotheresidentsoftheregion.

SER3 TheDraftEISshouldfullydiscusstheissuesfacingcommunitiesandtheenvironmentattheendofthemineoperations.Subsistenceresourcescouldchange,jobsmightnolongerbeavailable,andthetraditionalwayoflifecouldbelost.Generalimpactstothesocioculturalresourcesshouldbeevaluated.Concernwasexpressedforwhatwouldbeleftforfuturegenerationsaftermineclosure.

SER4 TheDonlinGoldminecouldcreateopportunitiesfortraining,education,andjobsfortheyoungpeopleandfuturegenerations.Theyouthneedthesejobsbecauseitisharderandhardertoliveasubsistencelifestyle,andeconomicopportunityisneededtolivetheWesternlifestyle.Thiscouldbeginintheclassroom,lettingstudentsknowwhatisrequiredtodevelopanenvironmentallyresponsiblemine,andcommunicatingtheiroptionsforeducationthatwouldprovidelateremployment.

SER5 ItmaybebeneficialtolocalresidentsifDonlinGoldprovidedtrainingandeducationsothathigh‐payingpositionscouldbefilledwithpeoplefromtheKuskokwimandYukonareas.ThiscouldallowruralAlaskanstolive,work,andprosperwithoutleavingtheregion.Moreinformationontrainingandeducationopportunitieswouldbeusefultoachievethispotentialbenefit.

SER6 CommentersraisedquestionsandconcernsregardinglocalhirefortheproposedprojectthatshouldbeaddressedintheDraftEIS,including:

• Concernsaboutwhetherlocal,ruralAlaskanswouldbehiredforavailablejobsatallstagesoftheproposedproject;




• Concernsabouttheamountoftheworkforcethatwouldhiredfromoutsideoftheregion;

• SinceahighpercentageofAlaskaNativeshavecriminalrecords,wouldtheybeconsideredforemploymentasreadilyasthosewithoutrecordsfromotherstates?

• QuestionsaboutwhethertherewouldbeanAlaskaNativeHireAgreement;

• Concernsthattherewouldbealargeamountoflocalhireatfirstandthengraduallythecommitmenttolocalhirewoulddecline,andtheworkforcewouldbecomemorenon‐local;

• Localhirecanencouragefamiliestostaytogetherwithoutdispersingtolookforwork;and

• Shiftworkschedulingishardonfamilylife.Consideralternativeworkschedules.

SER7 ResidentsexpressedconcernthattheprojectwouldnotbenefitruralAlaskansintheregionsocioeconomically.Somecommentersnotedthatotherminedevelopmentprojectsinthestatehaveshownthatthecreationofjobsinremoteeconomicallydepressedareasmaycontributetopeopleleavingruralcommunities.WithanewincomepeopleemployedattheminemaymovetoFairbanks,AnchorageandWasilla,andcommutetotheminesite,withairtransportationprovidedbytheminingcompany.Thesejobsmayleadpeopletoleavetheareatoliveinareastheycouldthenafford.Thiscouldcauseattritioninthesmallercommunitiesandleakageofeconomicbenefitstolargercommunities.OnealternativecouldbetoencourageDonlinGoldtonotpayforpeopletoflytoandfromlargeurbancitiestoworkinthemine,butprovideflightstovillageresidentstothemineinordertodiscourageout‐migration.

Commentersalsosuggestedplanningwithinthevillagesforhousingandsewerandwaterthatwouldencourageworkstostaywithintheregion.

SER8 CurrentlytheStateofAlaskaprovidesaschoolforavillageifithasaminimumof10students.TheDraftEISshouldaccountforthepossibilitythathiringlocalpeoplecouldreducetheoutmigrationofresidentstourbanareasofthestateandhelpmaintainsufficientfundingforruralschools.

SER9 Theprojectcouldpotentiallybringaninfluxofpeopletoworkatthemine,whichcoulddamagethelifestyleofthecurrentresidentsandtheenvironment.Anin‐migrationofpeoplecouldcauseastrainonsubsistenceresourcesaswellasbringnewideasthatthreatenthecurrentwayoflife.

SER10 Theprojectcouldcreatespin‐offbusinessesthatsupporttheoperation,suchasequipmentandrepairshopsandretailservicesthatmaycreateyetmoreemploymentandeconomicbenefitslocallyandstate‐wide.Thereisthepotentialforincreasedtaxrevenuenotjustfromtheminingoperation,butfromallofthespin‐offbusinesscreatedtosupportit.

SER11 Theproposedprojectcouldprovideinfrastructureimprovementssuchasports,roads,airports,electricalinfrastructure,andpotentiallyanaturalgaspipelinetothepopulaceofthearea.Itwasquestionedwhetherthefiberopticcablewouldbeavailableforoutsidecommunication.Thedevelopmentofsuchmine‐relatedinfrastructurecouldhelpspurtheeconomyandbenefittheresidentsoftheremotearea.Theinfrastructurecouldcontinuetobenefitthepeopleofthatarealongpasttheclosureofthemine.Theimpactscouldbefarreachingandencompasstheregion,andpossiblythestate,notsolelytheimmediatearea.




SER12 Apotentialpublicbenefitisexcisetaxrevenuesfromtheproposedpipelineoperation.ItwouldbehelpfulfortheDraftEIStodescribethetaxingjurisdictionsintheprojectarea,andshowtheestimatedrangeofexpectedtaxrevenuesandtheeconomicbenefitsthatwouldaccruelocally.

SER13 ThelanduponwhichtheminewouldpotentiallybebuiltisownedbyCalistaNativeCorporationandTheKuskokwimCorporation.Royaltiespaidtothesecorporationswouldinpartberedistributedtootherregionalandvillagecorporations,pursuanttoANCSA,Section7i.RedDogMineisanexampleofhowthishasprovidedeconomicbenefitbeyondthehomeregion.

SER14 TheDraftEISshouldfullydiscussthepotentialthatthedevelopmentoftheproposedprojectcouldresultinlowercostenergyforlocalvillagesbyprovidinginfrastructurelikegaspipelines,powerplants,andelectricalinfrastructure.EnergycostsarecurrentlyamajorlimitingfactorforruralAlaskanstohavebusinessesandparticipateinsubsistenceactivities,andareaneconomicstrainonhouseholdlivingexpenses.

SER15 DonlinGoldhasalreadypositivelyaffectedlocalcommunitiesduringtheexploratorystagesbyprovidingemployment,showingastrongcommitmenttolocalhire,supportingculture,andunderstandingenvironmentalconcerns.

SER16 SomeexamplesofotherminesthattheDraftEISshouldusetohelpdeterminethepotentialsocio‐economicandenvironmentaleffectsoftheprojectinclude:

• RedDogmineintheNANARegion;

• UsibelliCoalmineintheInterior;

• TheminenearElko,Nevada;

• FortKnoxmine;

• PogoMine;and

• MinesinWyoming,Utah,Nevada,andotherpartsofAlaska.

SER17 Theprojectcouldhaveanegativeimpactonlocalfamily‐ownedlodgesandbusinesses,byaffectingthewildlife,viewshed,andtheoverallqualityofexperienceprovidedtovisitors.Anumberofguide‐outfittercampscouldbeimpactedinthesameway.Itwassuggestedthatbusinessesbecompensatedforlossoftourismduringconstructionifconstructionwasdoneinthesummer.Opencommunicationwithlocaloperationsregardingthescheduleofconstructionwouldhelpthebusinessestoplanahead.

SER18 Bargetrafficcouldaffectanycommercialandsubsistencefishingperiodsheldthroughouttheupperandlowerriversections,andtheseimpactsaffectakeycomponentoftheregionaleconomy.

TheconstructionoftheJungjukportfacilitycouldleadtoanincreaseinbargetrafficthatisregionwide.TheEISshouldconsiderthattheproposedportcouldbeaneconomicbenefittotheregionandotherlocalmines.Itcouldbecomearegionalshippinghub.BoththepositiveandnegativeimpactsofincreasedbargetrafficasaresultoftheportconstructionandoperationshouldbeanalyzedintheEIS.

SER19 Questionswereraisedaboutwheretheinvestmentfundingforthemine,pipeline,andotherprojectcomponentswouldcomefrom.WoulditcomefromtheStateofAlaska,thefederalgovernment,DonlinGold,LLC,NovaGold,Calista,oranycombinationofthose?




SER20 TheDraftEISshouldidentifywhat,ifany,excessmaterials,equipment,fuel,etc.,maybetransferred(givenorsold)toanyhomesites,homesteads,orlodgeslocatedalongtheproposedpipelineroute,andwhatbeneficialeconomicimpactsmightresult.

SER21 TheDraftEISshouldfullyanalyzealloftheeconomicandsocialimpactsoftheproposedprojectontheaffectedcommunities.ItwasrecommendedthataneconomicsconsultingfirmwithAlaskanexperiencebecontractedtoaidinthiseffort.Suchananalysisshouldinclude:

• Theeffectsofchangesintheoperations,suchaslossesofjobsifthepriceofgolddips.

• Thepositiveandnegativeimpactsofmultipleoperationsonaffectedcommunitiesshouldbeassessed.

• Thepositiveimpactstodateshouldbeinformativeastothedepthandvalueoftheimpactsonecanexpectinthefuture,consideringthesizeandscopeofthefutureactivity.

• Whatisthepayrollfromtheprojectandtheexpecteddistributionofthatmoneythroughouttheregion?Onewaytomeasurethiswouldbetoassumeasimilardistributionofworkerstothedistributionofworkersemployedduringtheexplorationphase.Atonepointtherewerepersonsworkingontheprojectthatlivedin35oftheover50villagesintheregion.

• HowtosecuremaximumbenefitforAlaskafromtheproject.

• TheproposedDonlinGoldminecouldprovideeconomicbenefitacrosstheStateofAlaska,andtherebydiminishtherelianceonoilrevenues.

• Development‐relatedchangesinpopulationordemandsforpublictransportation,education,orhealthcareservices.

• Possiblechangesinthecultural,religious,orrecreationaltraditionsofaffectedcommunities.

• Theminingoperationcouldpotentiallybringneworexpandedcellphone,internetservice,andoptionsforheatingandelectricitytothearea.

• Thecumulativeeffectsanalysisshouldalsoevaluatethedynamicofjobprogressionthatiscreatedwhenveryskilled,high‐qualityjobsarecreated.Theseincludethelowskillentryleveljobsinservice,tourism,etc.,aswellastotallyunskilledpositions.Forexample,whenanequipmentoperatororaplantoperatorstepsuptoahighskilljobinamine,itleavesanopeningforsomeoneelsetoimprovetheirlifeandfillthejobthatequipmentoperatorleftatpossiblyaconstructioncompanyorpowerplant.

• TheDraftEISanalysisshouldrecognizethechallengeofadequatelyassessingandcapturingthecomplexityofthesubsistenceeconomy,includingtheinterrelationshipamongwagesandcostoflivingattheindividualvillagelevelcombinedwiththeANCSA‐driveneconomicsoftheCalistaandTheKuskokwimCorporationorganizationsandtheirresponsibilitiestotheotherANCSAcorporations.Theseregionalfactorsalsoneedtobecombinedwithbroadereconomicconditionssuchasthemoretraditionalassessmentofincreasedrevenuesatthestatelevel.

• Economicopportunitieswouldexistinthisregionifthisprojectdoesnotgoforward,andtheNoActionAlternativeischosen.

• Socioeconomicimpactsofanew30‐mileroadfromtheproposedminetothebargelandingthatwouldbebuiltontheKuskokwimRiver.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT SUBSISTENCE


SUBSISTENCE (SUB)

Commentsrelatedtopotentialimpactstosubsistenceresource(harvest,sharing,andtraditionaluseareas).Commentsonneedtoprotectsubsistenceresourcesandpotentialimpactstotheseresources.Perceivedcontaminationand/oravoidanceofsubsistenceresources.


SUB1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldanalyzeimpactsonsubsistenceresourcesandpracticesfromtheproposedmineincluding:

• Cumulativeeffectsofhistoric,current,andproposedminesintheregionincludingtheNYACandRedDevilmines;

• Contaminants(mercury)intowatershedandairandimpactstosubsistenceresources;

• Wildlifemigrations,e.g.cariboumigration;

• Salmonmigration,restrictionsforsubsistencesalmon;

• Subsistencegathering,e.g.berrypicking,andotheredibleplants;

• Impactstotraditionsandculture;

• Impacttopeoplewillnotbenefitfromthisprojectbutwhomuststillrelyonfoodthatisavailableinthearea;

• Possiblelossofhabitatforgrowingfood;

• Disruptiontoothersubsistenceresources;

• Historicandtraditionaland/orcustomarysubsistencehunting,fishing,andtrappingareasandtraditionallanduseareas;and

• Endangeredorthreatenedspecies,includingpotentialeffectsofafederaldecisiononendangeredstatustobeardedandringseals.

SUB2 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzeimpactsofpotentialcontaminantsenteringintotheairorwaterandaffectingsubsistenceresources,including:

• Effectsonsubsistenceresourcesofpotentialaccidentalspillsofmercury,gas,oil,andothertoxicmaterialsintotheKuskokwimRiver;

• FishconsumptionadvisoryineffectalongthemiddleKuskokwimRiverbecauseofthemethyl‐mercurycontentofsomespecies;

• ImpactofadditionalmercuryloadingontheKuskokwimRiver;

• Accumulationoftoxinsinduckandgooseeggsusedforsubsistence;and

• Effectsresultingfromcontaminantsupriverthatmayaffectcoastalcommunitiesandhabitat,criticaleelhabitat,herringspawninghabitat,clams,andmusselsusedforsubsistencefoods.

SUB3 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzethepotentialimpactonsubsistenceactivitiesofincreasedbargetrafficontheKuskokwimRiverincluding:

• Erodingriverbanks;e.g.inthevillages,atfishcamps,stagingareas,anddocks;

• Effectsofincreasedbargetrafficalongsiderestrictionsandclosuresalreadyinplaceforsubsistence,andcommercialfishing;

• Theshortspanoftime,110days,forbargetravelwillcoincidewithsubsistenceandcommercialfishingactivities;

• Possibleproject‐inducedchangesinthewatershedandhydrologythatwillaffectsubsistenceharvestpractices;

• Potentialproject‐relateddredgingtodeepenchannels;




• Possiblebargegroundingandaccidentalspills;

• Risksofspillsfromhaulingtoxicorhazardousmaterialstoandfromtheminesite;

• Affectsbargingmayhaveonhuntingontheriverasthemainsourceoftransportationisbyboat;

• Emissionsfrombargesthatcouldaffectandpollutetheair,water,andplantsusedasfoodbyjuvenilefishofallspecies;

• Effectsonsalmongoinguprivertotheirspawninggrounds;

• Wildlifebeingfrightenedofftheriverbybargetravelandnoise;

• Potentialimpacttocariboumigratoryroutes;

• Effectonwaterfowlthatlandontheriver;

• Bargewavesthatcouldaffecttheabilityoflocalstohuntofftheriver;

• Wavesfrombargewakesmaydisruptfishermenusingsetnetsforsubsistencefishing;

• DecliningofChinook(king)salmonontheKuskokwimRiverusedforsubsistence;

• ImpactstoBeringcisco,animportantsubsistencefishtotheYukonDeltacoastandsubsequentimpactstotheirspawninggroundsisnotyetknown;

• Thedestructionofsalmonhabitat;

• Spawninglocationsofrainbowsmeltusedforsubsistence;

• Potentialdamagetosubsistenceusers’lives,livelihood,property,vessels,nets,camps,orotherequipmentusedforsubsistenceactivities;

• Suretybondorsimilarbondingshouldincludeassessmentofpotentialimpactstotheexistingsubsistenceusers,andimpactstotheirlivelihood;and

• Impactonsubsistencefishingduetochangesincommercialfishing.

SUB4 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzethepotentialimpacttheproposedconstructionandinstallationofthenaturalgaspipelinemayhaveincluding:

• Potentialleaksorbreaksandtheeffectitmayhaveonwildlife,people,plantsandvegetation,includingapotentialbreakduetoearthquakes;

• Effectsofproposedgravelsitesusedforconstruction;

• Effectstocommercialhuntingguidesandlodgesduringconstruction;

• Effectstoaquaticresources,andsubsistenceresourcesandusersoftheregion;

• Alistofaffectedcommunities,descriptionsofthecommunities,theirsubsistenceharvestpatterns,andseasonalroundofusesusingchartsandmapsasappropriate;

• Possibleeffectstosubsistenceharvestmanagement,useraccess,andhuntingpractices;

• Removalofallaccesscorridorsandprovisionsneededfordevelopmentofthegaspipeline,includinglargeairfields;and

• Thepotentialofairfieldstoattractadditionalhunterswhowillbecompetingforthesameresources.



SUB5 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzeimpactstosubsistenceresourcesfromairbornemercuryemissionsandothercontaminatesreleasedintotheairorwaterincluding:

• Potentialimpactsofmercuryemissionstonon‐fishspecies,andwaterfowlparticularlythoseconsumedforsubsistence.WaterfowlconsumptionadvisorieshavebeenissuedinUtahduetoelevatedmercuryconcentrationsinnorthernshovelers,cinnamonteal,andcommongoldeneyes.Inadditiontomercury,baselinedatashouldbecollectedforwaterfowlintheregionforseleniumlevels,whichcouldincreaseovertime;

• UsingHIAevaluatethepotentialhealthriskstosubsistenceusersassociatedwithincreasedmercuryconcentrationsinfishpopulations,andotherexposurepathways;and

• Thepotentialculturalandhealthimpactstosubsistenceusersassociatedwiththeperceptionthatsubsistenceresourcesmaycontainmercury,andhowtraditionsmaychangeasaresult.

SUB6 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzeimpactstosubsistenceactivitiesintheproposedprojectregionincluding:

• IncreaseinairfieldsmaybringinmoretransportersfromAnchorageandotherareasforrecreationalhunting;

• Increasedcompletionforresourceswithlocalresidentswhoharvestmooseandothergameforwintermeat;

• Increasedpresenceoftrappersarrivingbyair;

• WiththepotentialformanynewjobsbeingcreatedinBethel(justforthevastportfacilityalone)thatwillbringresidentsfromsurroundingvillagesaswellasacertainamountofoutsiders,concernthatBethelwouldloseitsruralpreferencestatusinregardstosubsistencehuntingandfishing;

• Disturbanceofsubsistencespeciessuchascaribouandmoosefromair,barge,andvehiculartraffic,andincreasedhumanaccess;

• Increasedaccessalongtheroad,pipeline,andunofficialroutes,andincreasesinhumanpopulationmayalsoresultinincreasedhuntingpressure,bothfromlocalsandoutsiders;

• TheKuskokwimisaroadlessriverandthenatureoftherivercouldbedisturbed;

• Interruptionsofcariboumovementfromtheproposedroadandpipeline;and

• Aninfluxofthousandsofworkersfromoutsidethearea,someproportionofwhommaychoosetolivelocally,theincreaseinhumanpopulationwillputincreasedpressureonmoose,salmonandothersubsistenceresourcesmakingitthatmuchmoredifficultforlocalresidentstoharvestsomeofthealreadydwindlingresources.

SUB7 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzethePollockfisheriesbecauseofthewasteofimmaturekingsalmonthatareneededbysubsistenceusers.

SUB8 TheDraftEISshouldclarifyanerrorintheVesselOperationsOilDischargePreventionandContingencyPlaninregardstothescenarioofaspilloccurringinAugust.TheDraftEISshouldnotethattherearestillsilversalmoncommercialandsubsistencefisheriesoccurringinJulyandAugustandrevisetheVesselOperationsOilDischargePreventionandContingencyPlanaccordingly.



SUB9 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheimpactsoftheacidrockdrainagetosubsistenceresources.Commentersexpressedconcernduringscopingaboutthereleaseofacidrockminedrainageandmetalleachingofpollutants,suchasmercury,arsenic,andcyanideintoadjacentwetlandsandwaterbodiescouldaffecttraditionalculturalpracticesincludinghunting;fishingandgatheringofsubsistencefoodsanddrinkingwatersourcesrelieduponbythelocalnativecommunities.TheDraftEISshouldidentifymeasurestoreduceand/orcapturerunoffofacidrockandmetalsleachingintoadjacentsurfaceandgroundwater.

Onecommenternotedconcernaboutthewastetailingspondandthechemicalsthatitwouldcontain.Thepondwouldbeapermanentdangerafterthemineisclosed.Ifsomethinghappenedtothewastetailingspond,theentireKuskokwimRivercouldbeaffected.Salmonareamajorsubsistencefoodsourceformorethan15,000residentsintheareasandthattherisktosalmonwouldoutweightheeconomicimpactoftheproposedmine.

SUB10 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzepotentialbeneficialimpactstosubsistenceascashincomeearnedfromjobscreatedbytheproposedminecouldinturncontributetomoreproductivesubsistenceactivitiesandsuccessrates.Cashincomecouldbeavailabletofundtheboats,motors,fuel,andnetsnecessarytomaintainsubsistenceactivities.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatethepotentialeconomicbenefitsfortheregioninregardstoprotectingsubsistencelifestylesandresultingimprovementstoqualityoflife.

SUB11 TheDraftEISshouldevaluateconcernsthat:

• Theproposedprojectmaydestroycriticalhabitatthatisnecessarytosustainlocalresidents’abilitytohuntandfeedthemselves;

• Thepotentialtodriveawayanimalsandresourcesthatareneededtosurvive;

• Contaminationofsubsistenceresourcesbyairbornemercury;

• Accesstotheregionwillbeeasierandcompetitionforresourceswithoutsiderswillincrease;and

• Potentialtobedetrimentalanddisruptivetothesubsistencelifestyle.

SUB12 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzepotentialincreasedmarinetrafficalongthecoastandintheKuskokwimRiver.Impactstomarinemammals,waterfowl,andfishthataresubsistenceresourcesharvestatcoastalvillagesshouldbeanalyzedintheDraftEIS.

SUB13 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzedirectandindirecteffectsoftheproposedactionandalternatives.TheDraftEISshouldalsoconsiderotherrelevantconnectedactionsandensuretheyareanalyzedinregardstoimpactstosubsistence.

SUB14 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzeindirectprojecteffectsonYukonDeltaNationalWildlifeRefugesubsistenceresourcesanduses.SubsistencehuntersthatresidewithintheRefugeboundaryhaveCustomaryandTraditionalUseDeterminationstatusundertheFederalhuntingregulationsfortheminingarea,soeffectsintheprojectareamayalsoaffectthesesubsistencehunters.Berrypickingandotherplantharvestisalsoacriticalpartofsubsistenceuseinthisregion.AdecreaseinhuntingandgatheringopportunitiesintheproposedprojectareamayresultinacompensatoryincreaseinhuntingandothersubsistenceactivitieswithintheRefuge.



SUB15 CommentersnotedthatAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGamehasaccumulatedabroadrangeofsubsistence‐relateddatathatshouldbeusedinthesubsistenceanalysisoftheDraftEIS.DonlinGoldnotedthatthatduringexplorationactivitiesthatextendbackto1995,theywereunawareofconflictswithsubsistenceusesoruserswithintheproposedminingareaandthatberrypicking,moosehunting,andtrappingareknowntooccuroutsidetheproposedminearea.

SUB16 TheDraftEISshouldallowadequatetimeandinvolvementfortheBLMSubsistenceCoordinatortoconducthearingsintheaffectedcommunities,andtowritetheDraftEISandFinalEISversionsoftheANILCA§810analysis.

SUB17 ItwasnotedduringscopingthatDonlinGoldhasproposeddevelopmentofaSubsistenceUsersPlanofCooperationbetweenDonlinGoldandlocalsubsistenceusers.Thisplanshoulddescribesubsistenceharvestanduses,workschedules,andmitigationmeasures.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT TRADITIONAL CULTURE AND WAY OF LIFE


TRADITIONAL CULTURE AND WAY OF LIFE (TWL)

Commentsrelatedtopotentialculturalimpacts(andvalues)ordesiretomaintaintraditionalpractices.Languages,traditionallanduseareas(culturalcontinuity),andTraditionalEcologicalKnowledgeandWisdom(TEKW).


TWL1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldfullydisclosethepotentialdirect,indirect,andcumulativeimpactsofproject‐relatedactivitiesonlocalAlaskaNativetraditionalwaysoflife.Residentsexpressedconcernfortheircultureandenvironment,whichhavealreadychangedfromwhattheywerehistorically,andthismayaffecttheabilitytopassvaluesontofuturegenerations.Stronglocalknowledgeoftheenvironmentintheareacouldpotentiallybelostaswell.Itisdifficulttoplaceavalueonsuchlosses.TheDraftEISshouldanalyzehowtheprojectcouldgoforwardwhileprotectingtheenvironmentandtradition.Residentsexpressedsentimentthatthedamagestotheenvironmentandtraditionalwayoflifeoutweighanyfinancialbenefitsthecorporationwouldincurfromthemine.

TWL2 TheDraftEISshouldidentifyhowtheprojectwouldlimitaccesstotraditionaluseareas.Thereshouldbeanalysisonthoseimpactstolocalcommunities.

TWL3 TheDraftEISshouldidentifywherethetraditionaluseareasareforsubsistenceactivities,cabins,andcampsanddiscusshowvariousprojectcomponentswouldaffectthem.

TWL4 AlaskaNativeleadersandcommunitiesmusthaveadequatenoticeandtimetoformulateresponsestothisproposedproject,becauseitcouldpresentachangeandchallengeawayoflifethathasalreadybeenthreatenedbyoutsideinfluencessuchasthechangingclimate.

TWL5 TheDraftEISshouldconsiderthattheterm“conservation”hasdifferentmeaningsamongdifferentusergroupswhichcausemisunderstanding.Forexample,mineraldevelopmentcompaniesmayworkhardtounderstandandconducttheirworkwithrespecttowildthingsandwildplaces,buttheirviewisdifferentfromthosewhoselifestylesandlivelihoodsaredependentupongathering,huntingandfishing.Minedevelopmentandexplorationworkers’education,jobresponsibilityandfocuswilldifferfrompeoplewhosebasisofconservationis“closertotheearth”.

TWL6 TheDraftEISshouldprovideabigpicture(orlong‐termperspective)ofculturechange.Whogetstodecidewhethertheviewsofeldersareanelementoftheproject?Whatiftheirviewsareleftbehind?

TWL7 TEKWshouldbestudiedandincorporatedintotheDraftEIS.Thereareover60AlaskaNativecommunitieswhomaybeaffectedbythisproposedproject.Individualtribalmembersengageintraditionalsubsistenceactivitiesandhaveknowledgeandexperiencewiththeirland,wildlife,wetlands,fish,birds,plants,andotherresourcesoftheregion.TEKW,incoordinationwithempiricalscientificdata,shouldbeusedtodevelopandevaluatealternatives,assessenvironmentalandhumanhealthimpacts,andidentifymitigationmeasures.Theidentification,inclusion,andintegrationofTEKWintotheDraftEISanalysiswouldresultinamorerobustagencydecisionmakingdocument.Thecooperatingagencies,includingtheEPA,theStateofAlaska(DepartmentofFishandGame,SubsistenceDivision),thecooperatingtribalgovernments,andthe

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT TRADITIONAL CULTURE AND WAY OF LIFE


KuskokwimRiverWatershedCouncilcouldpotentiallyprovide expertisefordevelopingtheTEKWstudies.Additionally,throughgovernment‐to‐governmentconsultation,tribescanhelpdesignanappropriatestudy.

RecommendationsforTEKWstudiesproposedduringscopingincludedcoordinatingwiththecommunitiesintheregiontoidentify:

• Specialhabitatareas;

• Migrationcorridorsandseasonalpatterns;

• Currentandhistoricaltraditionalandculturaluses;

• Timelinesandschedulesforsubsistence,hunting,fishing,harvesting,trapping,recreation,etc.;

• Localwayoflife;and

• WorkingwiththecommunitiestodocumentandincorporateTEKWintotheDraftEIS.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT TRANSPORTATION


TRANSPORTATION (TRAN)

Impactstotransportationsystems,includingairports,roads,rivers,andtrails,asaresultoftheproject.ImpactstoexistingbargetrafficontheKuskokwimRiver.Impactsofproject‐relatedbargetrafficonotherresourcesarenotedundermanyissuecategories,includingCulturalResources(CUL),Hydrology(HYD),Fish(FISH),andWildlife(WILD).


TRAN1 Theproposedwidthofthepathforthepipelinerouteforconstruction,operation,andmaintenancewouldcreateawideROWandpotentiallyincreasetrailtrafficinthearea.TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldevaluateifthisnewROWcouldleadtoanincreaseinORVtraffic(e.g.four‐wheelers,Argos,snowmachines)throughareasthatarecurrentlyusedforsubsistence,recreationalhunting,trapping,andguiding.

TRAN2 TheDraftEISshouldevaluateanddeterminetheimpactstoexistingairports.SpecificallytheDraftEISshould:

• DeterminetheimpactofincreasedairtrafficthatmayoccuratAkiakAirport;and

• ConsidertheuseoftheexistingpublicairstripatPuntillaLakeinsteadofconstructingtheproposedairstripatMP106‐107alongtheproposedpipelineroute.TheMP106airstripcouldimpacttheIditarodTrailatbothUpperHappyRiverandthroughRainyPass.

TRAN3 TheproposedprojectuseoftugandbargetransportationforcargoandfuelontheKuskokwimRivermayresultinnavigationchallenges,increasedboattraffic,anduserconflictswithexistingtransportationandactivitiesofmultipleusergroups.SubsistenceandcommercialfishingactivitiesontheKuskokwimRiverincludestheuseofboats,setanddriftgillnets,seines,fishwheels,longlines,anddipnets,whichmayresultinconflictswithtugandbargetransportation.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatethepotentialimpactsresultingfromnavigationalchallenges,traffic,anduserconflictsontheKuskokwimRiver.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatetherealityofthetransportationplan;howtheincreaseofbargetrafficcoulddisruptschedules,localaccessandlocalboaters.

TRAN4 TheDraftEISshoulddescribethelongrangeplansfortheproposedprojectairstripsinregardstohowtheywouldbemaintainedaspartoftheregionaltransportationinfrastructure,particularlyforuseforemergencyaccess.TheDraftEISshoulddescribereclamationplansofanyofthenewairstripsconstructedforpipelineconstructionpurposes.Inaddition,theDraftEISshouldexplainandjustifythenon‐useofexistingairports,particularlyatSkwentna.

TRAN5 Amarinevesselandtransportationplanshouldbedevelopedtoaddressbargetrafficanddeliveryofmaterials.ThedeliveryofpipeandotherheavyconstructionmaterialstothePortofAnchoragewouldtemporarilyincreasemarinetrafficatthatportduringtheconstructionphaseofthepipeline.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT VEGETATION


VEGETATION (VEG)

Commentsrelatedtoconcernsaboutvegetationandpotentialfordisturbancefromprojectcomponents.Includesconcernsaboutinvasiveplantspecies.


VEG1 Commentersexpressedconcernduringscopingabouttheeffectofinvasivespeciesonvegetation.Commenterssuggestthataninvasivenon‐indigenousplantstudybeconductedbothpre‐andpost‐projectconstruction.TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldaddress:

• Theriskandpotentialeffectofintroducinginvasiveplantsfromthebargeballastwater,suchasbacteria,Elodea.spthatchokesuprivers,algaethatcausesredtide,snailsandcrabsthateatsalmoneggs,anddidymo(Didymospheniageminata)thatsticksonthebottomoftheriversandpreventssalmonfromlayingtheireggsonit.TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowtheballastwaterinthebargeswouldberegulated.

• Howthepotentialriskofinvasivespecieswouldbemanagedwithaninvasivespeciesmanagementplan.Theplanshouldbeexplainedandevaluated.Theremainingpotentialeffectsonvegetationshouldbedescribed.

VEG2 Commentersareconcernedabouttheeffectofremovingvegetationprimarilyduringconstruction.TheDraftEISshouldaddress:

• Thetypeofequipmentthatwouldbeusedtobuildthepipeline;

• Theeffectofremovingvegetationonsoilandsurroundingvegetation;

• Theeffectsofremovingwoody(spruce)vegetationcomparedtoremovingopentundra,describewhichwouldhavelongerlastingeffects;

• Theestimatedtimeframefordisturbedvegetationtogrowback,andthemethodsusedforthatdetermination,especiallywithclimatechange;

• ThepurposeforclearingtheproposedpermanentROWofshrubsapproximatelyevery10yearsorasrequired.Commenterrecommendsavoidingvegetationremovalinordertominimizevisualimpacts;

• Thedefinitionofwhatisconsideredtemporaryclearing;and

• Thedepthofanyplannedscarification.Commenterrecommendsanyscarificationbeveryshallowtoavoidbringingparentmaterialuptothesurface.

VEG3 TheDraftEISshouldaddresshowfugitivedustwouldaffectlocalvegetation.Analyzetheeffectofwindblowndustfromtrenchingandbackfillworkonthevegetationbeneathiceroadsandpads.Describeanywinderosionanddustcontrolmeasures.

VEG4 TheDraftEISshouldaddresstheeffectonvegetationintheentireprojectarea,notjustattheminesiteandpipelinecorridor,especiallyimpactstoberrieslocatedintheprevailingwindpath,sincetheyareanimportantsubsistencefood.

VEG5 Commentersexpressedconcernduringscopingandmaderecommendationsabouttherestorationandreclamationofdisturbedareasafterprojectconstructionandduringmineclosureactivities.TheDraftEISshouldaddressthefollowingquestionsandrecommendations:

• HowthepipelineROWwouldbereclaimed;

• TheapprovingagencyfortheStabilization,RehabilitationandReclamationPlanandtheErosionandSedimentationControlPlan;

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT VEGETATION



• Howthepipestorageyards/materialstockpilingsiteswouldbereclaimed;

• Howthebanksatstreamcrossingsiteswouldbereclaimed;

• Usenativeplantsandgrassesforrestorationandreclamation;

• AllvegetationrestorationactivitiesshouldincorporateAlaskaStateCertifiedWeedFreeproductssuchasseedmix,revegetationplants,mulchproducts,etc.Monitoringandmitigationfornon‐nativeinvasivespeciesshouldbeongoingforthelifeoftheproject.RevegetationshouldalsoincorporateseedsourcesfromtheBLMSeedsofSuccessprogram(contactEricGeisleratBLMAlaskaStateOffice,[email protected],271‐1985);

• Naturalrevegetation(notre‐invasion)isthebestoptionwhereverthereisnotastrongreasonforassistedrevegetationbecauseitdoesnotinterferewithnaturalprocessesandplantcommunitiesanddoesnotriskalteringthegenepool.Twoeffectivewaystopromotenaturalrevegetationaretosalvageandreplacetopsoilandtoripcompactedsitestoadepthof20‐50cm;

• TheNativePlantRevegetationManualforDenaliNationalParkandPreserveshouldbeusedasarevegetationreferenceaswell;

• BMPsrelativetoinvasivespeciesmanagementshouldbeincorporatedintoallofthereclamationasnon‐nativeinvasivespeciestendtoshowupatareasofdisturbanceanderosion;

• Stockpileoverburdenforspreadingonthereclaimedareastoimprovesoilandfacilitatenaturalvegetationproduction;and

• Forthestreambankrestoration,keepingtheriparianvegetationintactwouldaidintherestorationsignificantly.Usinganexcavatortograbentireriparianvegetationforstockpiling,keepingitintactasmuchaspossible,andusingitagaininthesameareatorestoretheseareaswouldsignificantlyimprovetherestorationprocessandtimeneededtorepairtheseriparianareas.

VEG6 OnecommenterrecommendedthattheCorpsconsultwiththeU.S.ForestServiceandtheAlaskaRegionStateandPrivateForestryProgramaboutbarkbeetlethreats/causes/infestations,andhandlingoftimber.Informationcanbeobtainedfrom:www.fs.usda.gov/detail/r10/forest‐grasslandhealthBarkBeetlesandbycallingtheAKS&PFat907‐743‐9455inAnchorage.TrishWurtz,907‐451‐[email protected];LoriWinton743‐[email protected],andJohnLundquist743‐[email protected].

VEG7 TheDraftEISshouldconsiderthatorganicsoilsorhotbogscreateheatfromorganicdecompositionandtakelongertofreezemaychangetheorganicdecompositionrateinthefuture.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT VISUAL RESOURCES


VISUAL RESOURCES (VIS)

Impactstovisualresourcesfromtheminesite,alongriversystems,andinthepipelinecorridorfromprojectcomponentsandphases.


VIS1 Fortheprojectarea,includingtheproposedprojectminesiteandpipelineroute,theDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldevaluatetheimpactstovisualresourceswiththepotentialtodiminishthevisualexperienceofvisitorsandlocalresidents.Theprojectwouldresultinavisiblefootprintanddisrupttheviewshedinalargelyundevelopedarea.Impactstovisualresourcescouldresultfromtheprojectfeatures,includingthevisualpresenceofanopenpitminesite,lightpollutionfrommineinfrastructureandfacilities,andtheclearedROWpathofthepipeline.

VIS2 TheDraftEISshouldconsidervisualimpactsandalternativestotheproposedpipelineroute,plannedairstrips,gravelpitsources,storageareas,andmancamps.Alternativesitesthatcouldminimizevisualimpactstotheviewshed,especiallynearestablishedguidecamps,shouldbeexamined.Thecurrentproposedpipelinerouteandareasselectedforstaginganddevelopmentwouldbeproximatetoseveralcampsandcouldhaveadversevisualeffectsontheviewshedforvisitorsandclientsofprofessionalguides.ItwasreportedduringthescopingperiodthattheSilvertipCamp,whichhasoperatedalongKhuchaynikCreekneartheWindyForkoftheKuskokwimRiverforoverthirtyyears,provideshuntingguideswithanunspoiledviewshed,visitorservices,andisasourceofemploymenttolocalresidentsofnearbyNikolai.

VIS3 TheproposedpipelineshouldbeanalyzedforimpactsonvisualresourcesbyusingtheVisualContrastRatingSystemasdescribedinBLMManual8431‐VisualResourceContrastRating.Thisanalysiswoulddetermineifthepotentialvisualimpactsfromtheproposedsurface‐disturbingactivitiesordevelopmentwouldmeetVisualResourceManagement(VRM)InventoryClassmanagementobjectivesassignedforthearea,orwhetherdesignadjustmentswouldberequired.EnvironmentalfactorstobeconsideredfortheproposedpipelineprojectareaVRMclassesinclude:viewingdistance,angleofobservation,lengthoftimeinview,relativesizeorscale,seasonofuse,lightconditions,recoverytime,spatialrelationships,atmosphericconditions,andmotion.Thisanalysiswouldenhancefuturedesigntechniques,minimizeimpactsuponvisualresourcesandhelptomeetVRMclassobjectives.

InparticularviewshedimpactanalysisshouldincludedigitalphotomodelingofimpactstotheINHTbothfromtheairandtheground.ScopingcommentsnotedthattheAnchoragetoRainyPassflightcorridorreceivesfrequentdailyusebothbyscheduledcommercialaircarriers,andspecialchartersforhunters,fishers,flightseers,andIditarodTraileventfollowers.Viewshedmodelingshouldincludescalemodelingofviewshedsduringwintermonthswhenthelinearcorridorclearingisespeciallynoticeable,andalsotakeintoaccountlocalizedsnowfallpatternsthatmayaccentuateorhidetheclearedpipelinecorridor.




VIS4 VRMBestManagementPractices(BMPs)mustbedisclosedanddiscussed.BMPsarenecessaryandappropriatetorecommendwherefuturelandandresourceuseanddevelopmentoccurs,inordertopreventunnecessarydegradationofvisualresourcesandtomeetVRMclassobjectives.BMPstobeconsideredfortheeventualBeringSea‐WesternInteriorResourceManagementPlanincludethefollowingtotheextentpracticable:

• Allpermanentfacilitieswouldbelocatedawayfromroadsides,rivers,ortrails,therebyusingdistancetoreducethefacilities’visualimpact;

• Accessroadsandpermanentfacilitieswouldbedesignedtominimizevegetationclearinganduselandformstoscreenroadsandfacilities;

• Permanentfacilitieswouldbedesignedtobescreenedbehindtreesorlandformsiffeasiblesotheywouldblendwiththenaturalsurroundings;

• Modificationordisturbanceoflandformsandvegetativecoverwouldbeminimized;

• Permanentfacilitieswouldbedesignedsotheirshapes,sizes,andcolorsharmonizewiththescaleandcharacterofthesurroundinglandscape;and

• Inopen,exposedlandscapes,developmentwouldbelocatedintheoppositedirectionfromtheprimaryscenicviews,iffeasible.

VIS5 TheDraftEISshouldconsiderusingthefollowingBMPsforearthwork,vegetation,andstructures:

• Avoidhaulingexcessearthcutorfill,utilizecurvilinearortopographicalsloping,retainexistingrockandvegetationformationswheneverpossible,irregularrockcuttechniques,andprohibitdumpingorsloughingofmaterialdownslope.

• Retainasmuchexistingvegetationaspossible,usevegetationtoscreendevelopmentfromview,scallopedandirregularedgingversusstraightlines,andfeatherandthinedgesofclearedareas.

• Repeatline,form,color,andtexture.Minimizethenumberofstructures,useearth‐tonecolors,useself‐weatheringmaterials,usenaturalstone,buryallorpartofthestructure,usepaintfinisheswithlowreflectivity,employnativebuildingmaterials,andusenaturally‐appearingformstocomplementlandscapecharacter.

• Avoidcolorsthatcausethemostcontrast,choosecolorstwotothreeshadesdarkerthanbackgroundcolors,achievebestblendingwithsurroundinglandscapeinallseasons,galvanizedsteelonutilitystructuresshouldbedarkenedtopreventglare,andcolor(hue)ismosteffectivewithin1,000feet.

VIS6 CommentsreceivedfromBLMduringthescopingperiodindicatedthatinconjunctionwiththeBeringSeaWesternInteriorResourceManagementPlan,BLMwillbeginformalVRMinventoriesinsummer2013,whichwouldincludetheproposedpipelinearea.Theagencynotedthatcurrently,noBLMvisualresourcemanagementinventorieshavebeencompletedfortheplanningarea.SpecificallyinregardtotheproposedprojectBLMrequestedthatBLMstaffbegivenaccesstotheGPS‐linkedvideographicimageryoftheproposedpipelineroutefromalowaltitudethatisidentifiedwithinthecurrentPlanofDevelopment.Thisdatawouldhelptobetterevaluateanddefinegeneralvisualmanagementclassesandassociatedmanagementprescriptionsoftheareainvolvingtheproposedpipelineroute.




VIS7 BLMsuggestsminimizingvisualimpactsbyincorporatingthroughmitigationintheDraftEISthefollowing:Exposed(aboveground)facilitiesshouldbecoloredwithmatte‐finish(lowlevelsofreflectivity)earth‐tonepaintsthatblendintothenaturallandscapeateachlocationduringthemonthsofJune,July,andAugust(summercolors);andattheabovegroundsectionsofthepipeline,appurtenances,ancillaryequipment,andassociatedvalvesatthe15remotemainlineblockvalvelocations(abovegroundblockvalves).BLMrecommendsthatDonlinGoldworkwithcontractorsandsubcontractorsearlyintheplanningprocessinordertocommunicatepreferredfinishcolorsofallabovegroundfacilities,especiallywhenconstructedoff‐site.BLMalsonotedthatproposedfencingandslidinggatesatfacilitiesandvalvesitesshouldbethesamecolorofthenaturallandscape(e.g.,brownorgreenplasticcoatedchainlink).

VIS8 BLMsuggeststhattheDraftEISconsiderthatonalong‐termbasis,disturbancecausedbyconstructionwouldbevisibleforvaryinglengthsoftime.TheDraftEISshouldprovideestimatesofthislengthoftimeandidentifytheareaswherelong‐termdisturbanceissuchasinwetlandsandpermafrostareas.InparticulartheDraftEISshoulddefinelong‐termas100yearsto1000yearsinconsiderationthatIditarodTrailscarsareevidentinareas100yearsafteruse.Itislikelythattheproposedprojectcoulddegradethevisualexperienceforatleasttheoperationalphaseofthepipeline,duetoROWclearingevery10yearsandsummerORVuse.AfterdecommissioninganotheronetotwodecadeswouldbenecessaryforaldertorevegetatetheoperationalROW,whichwouldthenbevisiblefortheremainderofthe21stcenturyasevidencedbyalder‐chokedcorridorsthatwerecreatedbytheU.S.ArmyduringoverlandmilitarymaneuversinChugachMountainsubalpineecosystems.Thevegetationinthesemilitaryoperatingareasisverysimilartothatoftherouteoftheproposedpipeline,andthetravelwaysoftheheavyequipmentarestillveryevidenttoday,even50yearsaftertheywerecreated.

VIS9 TheDraftEISshouldidentifyallpossiblealternativealignmentsfirst,andthenselectthemostfeasiblefortheproposedproject.Thiscouldbeaccomplishedby:

• Usingtopographytohidemanmadechanges;

• Analyzingsoilstability;

• Determiningare‐vegetationplan;

• Evaluatinghydrologicconditionanderosionpotential;

• Usingcurvilinearlandscaperouteselection;

• Avoidingfall‐linecutsandbisectionridgetops;avoidingvalleybottoms;and

• Byhuggingvegetationlines.

Designfeaturesshouldconsiderfollowingnaturaltopographyinordertohidethemanmadefeatures.Inparticularthisshouldhappenwithrespecttotheproposedlinear(straight)alignmentsofthepipeline,onornearprominenttopographicfeaturesviewedbyoverheadaircraft(e.g.,EgyptMountain).

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY


WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY (WAQ)

Commentsandconcernsregardingimpactstowaterqualityandquantityfromconstructionandoperation.Pitwaterandtailingdammanagement.Waterbudgetforthemineduringoperations.Erosion,turbidity,temperaturechanges,bargetrafficconcernscausingchangesinrivererosionandturbidity.


WAQ1 Thepredictionofwaterqualityimpactsatminesitesisnotanexactscienceandvariesfromminetomine.Ithasbeenpracticedforover30yearsandyetmanymethodsandmodelsusedtopredictwaterqualityathardrockminesiteshavetheirlimitations.Concernswereexpressedduringscopingregardingpotentialwaterqualityimpactstohumanhealthasaconsequenceoftailingsrunoffduetounpredictedsnowmeltandrain;heapanddumpleachmaterialrunoffduetounpredictedsnowmeltandrain;aciddrainagerunoffinfiltrationthroughsoilovertime;lowgradeorstockpilesandwasterockrunoffinfiltrationthroughtime;contaminatedsurfacewaterdischarge;andpitlakerunoff.

WAQ2 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldanalyzethepotentialeffectsonwaterqualityfromprojectdischargesinlightofpredictedlowerlevelsofwaterintheKuskokwimRiverandthechangingwatercyclesthatwouldoccuroverthelifeofthemine.AgoodshareofthedischargeintotheKuskokwimRiverisderivedfromglaciermeltandrunoffintheheadwaters.Therehavebeenlowwaterlevelsinrecentyears.Localresidentsnotedduringscopingthattheybelievethisisduetoglaciersdrying‐upandthatwaterispercolatingthroughthetundra.Overthelifeoftheproject,localresidentsareconcernedthatthattheymayseeabigchangeinglaciersandglacialdischargetotheriver.

WAQ3 Theminesitewaterbalanceshouldbeestimatedforeachphaseoftheminedevelopment(e.g.,pre‐operation/pre‐production,construction,operations,closure,reclamationperiods,andpost‐closure).Commentersexpressedconcernthatthereisatendencyinminingtounderestimatewateruseandwasteduringthepre‐operationandpre‐productionphase.

TheDraftEISshouldtakeintoconsiderationtherecordsofminesinAlaskaandperhapselsewhereonwhetherproposedminesareunderestimatingoroverestimatingwhatisneededformineoperationsinordertogetabetterestimateoftheaccuracyofwhatisproposedduringplanninganddevelopmentstages.Theminesitewaterbalanceshouldcoverarangeofhydrologicalconditions(extremeandaverage)andpotentialvariationsordisruptionsinprocessflow(e.g.,temporarysuspensionofoperationsaswellasclosure).TheminesitewaterbalanceshouldbedescribedindetailintheDraftEIS,andshould:

• Identifythelocationofmeteorologicalstationsandwatermonitoringstations(includingrainwatercollection),lengthofmonitoringanddatacollection;

• Estimatepeakfloodflows,precipitation,anddurationandintensityofstormeventsonaseasonalbasis;

• Characterizeallpotentialwatersources(e.g.,surfacewater,groundwater,snow,precipitation,runoff).Ithasbeenobservedthatwaterquantityinthe[project]regionisalreadygoingdown[andbycomparisonthecommentersaidthat:];abouthalfofthepondsintheArcticnowarenotpondsanymore.Thereshouldbeanunderstandingofcurrentwaterlevelstobettercharacterizewhatcouldoccurinthelong‐term;




• Estimatetheamountofwaterneededfromeachsource;

• Specifythevolumeofwaterneededforconstructionandoperationoftheminefacility;

• Estimatechangesinwaterflowpatternsforsurfacedrainagemodifications,groundwateraquiferdewatering,surfacewaterdewatering,wateruse,waterstorageanddischarge,andfordifferentseasons;

• Provideadetailedwaterbalanceevaluationattheproposedminefacilitiesduringthefulllifecycle–waterflowpatternsforsurfacewater,wateruse,landapplicationanddischargesystems,pondstorageanddischarge,seasonalchangesduringsteadystateandpeakflowconditions;

• Provideadetailedschematicdiagramdepictingthewaterbalancechangesthroughouttheminelifecycle‐construction,startup,operations,closure,reclamationandpost‐closureandmonitoring;and

• Ifwaterwouldberecycled,theDraftEISshouldevaluatethequantityanddeterminewheretheunusablewaterwouldbestored.

WAQ4 WaterisessentialtotheeverydaysurvivaloftheAthabascanandYup’ikpeople.Waterprovidesandsustainslife.Waterisavaluableresourcethatcancostmorethanoilinsomeplaces.Localresidentsdrinkwaterfromthecreeksandusewaterfromthecreeksforwashingandcleaning.Thefollowingareconcernsregardingreducedwaterquantityraisedduringscoping:

• HowdoestheVillageofCrookedCreekmakesureithasenoughwateravailableforitsneeds?WhatifthereisnotenoughforCrookedCreektouse?Howcanwemakesurewehaveenoughwaterforourcommunity?

• SupposedlythewaterisownedbytheStateofAlaska,notprivatelyowned.Commenterssuggestedachargebeappliedforallwaterdivertedfromtheriver.

• ReducingwaterflowcouldnegativelyaffectwatertemperaturesthroughoutvariousstretchesofCrookedCreek(i.e.warmerinsummerandcolderinwinter)whichwouldaffectaquaticresources.

WAQ5 TheDraftEISshouldaddressthequantityandimpactsofnewbargetrafficwaterandsewagedumping.Therearethreeorfourbargelinesintheriveralreadythatdumpwastewaterandsewagedirectlyintotheriver.Theproposedminingcampshouldhaveseptictanksandthebargesshouldtransferwastetoproper,land‐basedfacilities.ThereshouldbenonewdischargesintotheKuskokwimRiver.

WAQ6 Therewouldbebothshort‐andlong‐termimpactstowaterqualityresultingfromtheminesitewaterimpoundmentsandopenpitminingactivities.Waterchemistry,quality,andpossiblyquantitywouldbeaffectedbytheuseofcyanide,multiplepetroleumproducts,anderosionfromheavyequipmentoperation.Thereisapotentialformetalreleaseandacidgenerationfromwasterock,tailings,andpitwalls.Alargeopenpitanddewateringwouldhaveimpactstonearbystreamsandlakes.TheproposedprojectshouldhaveaMineWasteManagementPlan,monitoredbythefederalagencies,thatincludeschangesingroundwaterchemistryfromdewateringandminingrelatedcauses.Thereshouldbedetailedhydrogeochemicalmodelsformanagingwaterquality.




WAQ7 TheDraftEISshouldexaminethepotentialrisksandimpactsofthesubstantialvolumesofwastewaterproducedbytheproposedmine.Duringtherainyseason(whenfallrainscanlastanentiremonth)orhighprecipitationyears(includingsnowmelt),localresidentsareconcernedthatthewastetailingspitwouldfillup.TheDraftEISshouldaddresstheneedforaback‐uppittopumpwaterinto.Residentswereconcernedaboutthehighriskofeventualleaksoroverflowsintocreeksandwaterways.Concernwasexpressedduringscopingthatthiscontaminationwouldnotstaylocalizedandwouldmigrateandcontaminatefish‐producingstreamsandnearbywetlands.

WAQ8 Residentsexpressedconcernduringscopingthattheyfeltthattheproposedmineshouldstopoperationifitcannotpasswaterandairqualitystandards.Twoofthestate'slarge‐scalemineshaveexceededtheirEPAwaterqualitystandardsnumeroustimesandstillcontinuedtooperatebypayingfines.

WAQ9 TheKuskokwimRegionalreadysuffersfromdegradedwaterqualityduetomultiplecausesincludingwastewaterremovalandtheabandonedRedDevilMine.TheCleanWaterAct§303(d)requiresstatestoidentifywaterbodiesthatdonotmeetwaterqualitystandardsandtodevelopwaterqualityrestorationplanstomeetestablishedwaterqualitycriteriaandassociatedbeneficialuses.ThelistofAlaska’simpairedwaters(2010)canbeobtainedonlineat:http://www.dec.state.ak.us/water/wqsar/Docs/2010impairedwaters.pdf.

ImpairedwaterbodieslistedintheprojectareaincludetheKuskokwimRiverandtheRedDevilCreek(attheconfluenceofthetworivers),whicharebothCategory5andtherefore,requirethedevelopmentofaTotalMaximumDailyLoad.TheKuskokwimRiver(AKIDNo.30501‐002)andtheRedDevilCreek(AKIDNo.30501‐002)arelistedforexceedingwaterqualitystandardsforantimony,arsenic,andmercuryassociatedwithminingactivities,includingtheRedDevilMine.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatethedirect,indirect,andcumulativeimpactsonanyimpairedwaterbodiesintheprojectarea.

Recommendationsprovidedinscopingcommentsincluded:

• IdentifyandevaluateimpactstoanylistedimpairedwaterbodiesinandadjacenttotheprojectareathatareonthecurrentEPAapproved§303(d)list.Specifythepollutant(s),source(s)andthewaterqualitystandard(s)exceededthatwasthebasisforitslisting.Identifywhetherawaterbodyrecoveryplanand/oraTotalMaximumDailyLoadhasbeendevelopedand/orimplemented;

• Describeanyenhancementeffortsforthoseimpairedwaters,andhowtheproposedprojectwouldcoordinatewithon‐goingprotectionefforts,ifany;

• Identifymitigationmeasurestominimizefurtherdegradationofimpairedwatersintheprojectarea;and

• Identifythemonitoringeffortstoensurethatmitigationmeasuresareeffectiveinachievingwaterqualitystandards.




WAQ10 ResidentsexpressedconcernduringscopingthattheremotenessoftheKuskokwimRiverandthelackofbaselinewaterqualitydatashouldnotserveasthegreenlighttofurtherimpactthesecommunities.TheproposedDonlinGoldProjectwouldprovidenumerousemploymentopportunitiesneededintheKuskokwim,butlocalresidentsremarkedduringscopingthattheymustaskthemselveswhatcosttheyarewillingtopayforthisbenefit.Thebenefitsforthisprojectwouldbefeltintheshorttermbutthecostsofsignificantlydegradedwaterqualitycouldbeenduredformanyyearstocome.Wastewaterpollutioncouldcontributetoecosystemandwildlifedamageandhumanhealthimpacts.ThecreationofanaturalgaspipelinethroughtheproposedareawouldcutthroughthelandthatthesestreamscrosstofeedtheKuskokwimRiverandcouldaffectdrinkingwater.

WAQ11 Theproposedprojectmaycontributeadversedirect,indirect,andcumulativeimpactstowaterqualityintheregion.Waterqualityimpactstowetlands,rivers,streams,lakesandothersurfacewaterscouldresultfromstormwaterdischargesfromconstruction,operation,andreclamationandclosureofthemineandcampfacilities,theaccessroad,thepipeline,andothersupportfacilities.Accidentalreleasesoffuelandchemicalsintoadjacentwaterbodiescouldalsobeasourceofwaterqualitypollution.TheDraftEISshouldincludeaframeworkforcomparingthebaselinewaterqualitytothewaterqualitymonitoredduringconstructionandoperationsoftheproposedproject.Recommendationsforbaselinewaterqualityinformationinclude:

Collectbaselinewaterqualityinformationintheprojectarea.Identifytheperiodofrecordofthecollectedwaterqualitydata.Listthewaterqualityparametersforwhichdatahasbeencollected(ifcertainparametershavebeendropped,specifythebasis);

• ScopingdocumentscategorizesurfacewatersasdrainingBackground1(undisturbed,unmineralized),Background2(undisturbed,mineralized),orBaseline(disturbedormineralized)areas.Thiswasnotedtobehelpfulbutthenprovidesonlyaveragesforwaterqualityparameters.Mineralizedandnon‐mineralizedsitesareexpectedtohavedifferentwaterquality,andwaterqualitychangesseasonally.TheDraftEISshouldprovideasectionorappendixthatlistsallthesurfacewaterandgroundwaterqualitydataforeverysite,byeverydateforthereadertounderstandtherangeofwaterquality,changesbyseason,andthenumberofsamplesateachsite;

• QualityAssuranceandQualityControlsshouldbemaintainedatadequatelylowdetectionlevels;

• Includemapsshowingthelocationsandterrainelevationofallpastandpresentdatacollectionstations(explainanythathavebeendroppedorlocationchanged);

• Identifyanddiscussapplicablenationalandstatewaterqualityregulations,standards,andguidance;

• Identifyanddiscussrequiredwastewaterpermits;

• Includeaplotplan/facilitylayoutshowingaffectedwatershedboundarieswithlocationofalldischargepoints,buildings,structures,northarrowandscale;

• Describeproposedwatertreatmentoptionsandalternatives;

• Provideestimatesofthemineeffluentwaterquality–typeofpollutantsandquantities,etc.;

• AdraftAlaskaPollutantDischargeEliminationSystempermitshouldbeincludedasanappendixtotheDraftEIS.Thiswouldbebeneficialforthepublic,localandtribalgovernments,andagencydecision‐makers;and

• Thereshouldbeareferencesectionforthesourcesofassumptions,informationanddata.




WAQ12 Theproposedprojectmayimpactpotabledrinkingwatersourcesand/ortheirsourceareasutilizedbythecommunities.Constructionoftheburiednaturalgaspipelinewouldrequiretrenching,excavation,andwaterwithdrawal.Mineconstructionandoperationscouldresultinotherimpactstosourcewaterareas.TheDraftEISshoulddescribepotentialdirect,indirect,andcumulativeimpactstosourcewaterprotectionareasassociatedwiththisproposedproject.RecommendationsfortheDraftEISanalysisinclude:

• Identifyandmapthelocationofknownpublicdrinkingwatersuppliesandtheirsources,surfaceandgroundwater,aquifers,rechargezones,naturalsprings,etc.withintheprojectarea;

• Identifythelocaltraditionaldrinkingwatersources,whichmayincluderainbarrels,meltingiceinthewinter,etc.Discussimpactstothesesourcesfromdustandothercontaminants;

• Identifythelocationofknownwatersupplywellsintheprojectarea.TheAlaskaDepartmentofNaturalResourcesmaintainsawell‐logtrackingsystemdatabasethatprovidesinformationonreportedsourcesofdrinkingwater;

• Identifyprojectconstructionand/oroperationalactivitiesthatcouldpotentiallyimpactknownsourcewaterareas;

• Identifypotentialcontaminantsthatmayaffectknownsourcewatersthroughinfiltration/seepage;

• Distinguishtheeffectsthatanycurrentorhistoricactivities,includingminingactivities,havehadonsourcewatersoftheprojectarea;and

• Identifymitigationmeasuresandmonitoringactivitiestoprotectknownsourcewaterareas.

WAQ13 Numerousrivers,streams,lakes,andwetlandswouldbecrossedfortheconstructionoftheproposednaturalgaspipeline,thegravelaccessroad,andothermine‐relatedfacilities.Differenttypesofwaterbodycrossingconstructionmethodsandtechniqueswouldbeimplemented,includingculverting,bridging,andHDD,andshouldbeconsideredforallwaterbodycrossings.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatetheimpactsassociatedwiththeseconstructionmethods.Otherconsiderationsofwaterbodycrossingsinclude:

• Characterizeallproposedthewaterbodycrossings,andsummarizetheinformationforwidth,depth,streamflow,presence/absenceoffish,fishspecies,etc.;

• Foreachwaterbodycrossing,identifythetypeofconstructionmethods(e.g.opencut–dryorwet,trenching,HDD)and/orstructures(e.g.bridges,culverts)thatwouldbeimplemented;

• Identifymitigationmeasures,suchasmaintainingnodisturbancebuffers,inwatertimingrestrictionsforfishmigrationandspawning,etc.;

• Identifymonitoringprovisionstoensureeffectivenessofmitigationmeasures;

• Siltmitigationtechniquesaroundfishstreams;nephelometricturbidityunitsforstreamsmaynotexceedthestatewaterqualitystandardof5nephelometricturbidityunitsabovebackground;and

• Bothshort‐andlong‐termimpactstowaterqualityresultingfrompipelineinstallationsatwatercrossings.Trenchingbanksandstreambeds,divertingchannels,damming,compactinganddisruptingfloodplains,wouldresultinerosionandincreasedsedimentloads.




• TheDraftEISshouldincludewhereculvertsandbridgesassociatedwiththepipelinewouldbeinstalledpermanently,orremovedafterconstruction.Ingeneraluseofculvertsandplacementoffillactivitiesinflowingwaterwaysshouldbeavoided.

WAQ14 Theproposedminefacilityislocatedwithinthetwoadjacentwatersheds–theAmericanandAnacondacreeks.BothcreeksprovidesourcewatertoCrookedCreek,whichdrainsintotheKuskokwimRiver.TheproposedwasterockfacilitywouldpermanentlyaffectAmericanCreek.TheproposedtailingstoragefacilitycouldpermanentlyaffectAnacondaCreek.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatethedirect,indirect,andcumulativeimpactstoAmericanandAnacondacreeks.Thewatershedcharacteristicsofbothdrainagesshouldbeevaluatedindetail.TheDraftEISshouldevaluatetheeffectsofsurfacewaterdischarge,andimpactstoadjacentwetlandsorstreamreachesfromminedewateringactivities.

WAQ15 TheproposedwatermanagementobjectivesfortheproposedDonlinGoldmineshouldbenodischargeofprocesswaterduringoperations;ensuresufficientsupplyofwaterduringoperations;andminimizetheamountofwaterthathastobetreated.TheDraftEISshouldevaluateplans,contingencies,andoptionstoensurethatthesewatermanagementobjectivesareachievedthroughoutthe27yearminelife,aswellasduringmineclosure,reclamation,andlong‐termsitemanagement.

WAQ16 TheDraftEISshouldprovidedetailedinformationregardingtheproposedminesitewatertreatment,andlong‐termtreatmentandmonitoringfortheproposedminefacility.Aneffectivewatertreatmentsystemwouldensurethatimpactstowaterqualityoftheadjacentsurfacewaterandgroundwaterareminimized.TheDraftEISshould:

• Describeindetailthewatertreatmentsystems,typeoffiltrationandremovalsystem–activeorpassive,typeofpollutantstoberemoved.Evaluatetheeffectivenessofthewastewatertreatmentmeasures;

• Provideadetailedschematicdiagramdepictingtreatmentschemesthroughmineconstruction,startup,operations,closure,reclamation,andpost‐closureandmonitoring;

• Discusseffectivenessofthewatertreatmentsystemsduringseasonalandhighflowevents,andduringpitdewatering;

• Identifybackupoptions,asneededtoaddresswatermanagementconcernsthroughouttheminelifecycle.Forexample,duringhighwaterperiods,cantheexcesswaterbemanagedorstoredbeyondthecapacityoftheproposedtreatmentsystem.Inpredictingthewatertreatmentcapacityneeds,doesthisaccountforclimatechangeeffects;

• Provideestimatesofthequantitiesandcompositionofprocesssolutions,tailingswater,runoffwaters,minedrainage,andtreatedeffluentattheproposedoperation;and

• Identifythespecificprotocolsthatwouldbefollowedwithrespecttotreatingand/ordisposingofsewageandgraywatergeneratedbyeachproposedworkcamp.

WAQ17 TheKuskokwimRiverhasa50‐60yearhistoryofminingandcontaminationofmercuryandacidsasnotedbyonecommenter.TheDraftEISshoulddeterminewhethertheYukonRiverregionwouldbeaffectedbytheproposedmineastheYukonRiverhasadifferentmininghistory.

WAQ18 DegradationofthewaterqualityintheKuskokwimRiverisalmostacertaintyduetotheproposedsteadystreamofbargetrafficcarryingmillionsofgallonsoffuelandother




developmentmaterials(e.g.,massfuelstorageatJungjukCreek).SeveralvillagesbetweenLowerKalskagandBethelgettheirdrinkingwaterdirectlyfromtheriver.TheDraftEISshouldlookdecadesaheadatwhatassurancesthereareforvillagesafedrinkingwater;actualandperceivedsafetyconcerns.

WAQ19 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzethepotentialforwastewatertoenterCrookedCreekandtheKuskokwimRiveraswellasthepreventativemeasures.Residentsexpressedtheirviewthatanythingproducedattheproposedmineshouldnotbedischargedintofreshwater,andcontaminationbywastewatershouldbetheresponsibilityofthemineownersandoperators.

WAQ20 Asanewsource,theproposedDonlinMinewouldbeprohibitedfromdischarginganyprocesswastewatertonavigablewaters,i.e.,watersoftheUnitedStates(40CFR§440.104(b)(1)).EPAadoptedthisNewSourcePerformanceStandardin1982afterstudyingtheminingindustrynationwideanddeterminingthatitwastechnicallyandeconomicallyfeasibletorecycleprocesswastewatercompletely,withnodischargetowateroftheU.S.(47Fed.Reg.54,598,54,602(Dec.3,1982).DonlinGold’sapplicationmaterialsassertthatthemineintendstocomplywiththisrequirement.However,DonlinGold’sWaterResourcesManagementPlanshowsthattheminewouldactuallydischargevastquantitiesofprocesswastewaterintoAmericanCreekaftermineclosure,inviolationofthezero‐dischargeNewSourcePerformanceStandard.Undertheplan,AmericanCreek–indisputablyawateroftheU.S.–wouldflowintothepitafterclosure,andDonlinwouldfillitupwithwasterockrunoff,wateremptiedfromthetailingspond,andseepagethatwouldcontinuetobecollectedfromthetailingstoragefacility.Presumably,thepitwouldalsoincludemanywetlands,springs,andseepsthat,likeAmericanCreek,arealsowatersoftheU.S.Thewaterandseepagefromthetailingspondis,ofcourse,processwastewater,andtheproposaltodumpituntreatedintoAmericanCreekandotherwatersoftheU.S.withinthepitwouldviolatetheNewSourcePerformanceStandard.Thoughunexplainedintheminingplan,itispossiblethatDonlinwouldseektohaveAmericanCreekandtheotherwaterswithinthepitdeemeda“wastetreatmentsystem”nolongersubjecttotheCleanWaterAct(33CFR§328.3(a)(8)).Thoughusedelsewhere,thisregulatoryloopholeunderminestheAct’sgoalofstoppingpollutersfromusingthenation’swatersasdisposalsitesforindustrialwastes.TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheeffectsofthisloopholeattheDonlinMineandencouragetheCorpsandEPAtorevisetheirregulationstoclosethisloophole.TheDraftEISshouldfullydisclosethepreciselegalmechanismbywhichtheproposeddischargestotheminepitwouldoccur,sothataffectedmembersofthepublicmaycomment.

WAQ21 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheimpactsofthepipeline(especiallyrelatingtoconstruction)onwaterquality,quantity,groundwater,andaquatichabitats.Componentsofthepipelineprojectastheyrelatetowaterqualityinclude:

• TherequirementsoftheStormwaterPollutionPreventionPlanshouldbefollowedtoensureimpactstowaterresourcesarelimitedduringconstruction;

• SewageandgraywatergeneratedbyeachcampshouldbetreatedasrequiredanddisposedofinaccordancewithAlaskaDepartmentofEnvironmentalConservationregulations;

• Thereshouldbeagraywaterdisposalplanon‐andoff‐constructionsitesthatcomplieswithregulationsandrequirements.TheDraftEISshouldclarifywhethertherewouldtherebeasepticsystemoramixingzoneintheriver;and

• Whendewateringthetrench,theeffluentshouldbedischargedintoadewateringfilterbagorgeotextilebagtocollectsediments.Thewatercouldbeallowedtosurface




dischargeandthecollectedsedimentcouldbeusedinthereclamationoftheROW.

WAQ22 TheDraftEISshouldanalyzewaterusethroughallcomponentsoftheproposedprojectandpotentialwatersourcesforroadconstructionandmaintenance,pipelineconstructionanddustcontrol.Iflocalsourcesareinadequate,thereshouldbeadiscussionofpipingortruckingwaterandthefootprintinvolvedinthisactivityinordertodeterminepotentialresourceimpacts.Waterwithdrawalfromlocalstandingwatersourcesisexpectedtobelimitedtothetraditional15percentofthefreewateriffisharepresentbutwouldalwaysbesubjecttospecificpermitconditionsforeachsite.Waterwithdrawalfromlakesmaybeauthorizedonasite‐specificbasisdependingonsize,watervolume,depth,fishpopulation,andspeciesdiversification.

WAQ23 Waterwithdrawalfromlakesandstreamsforpipelineconstruction,includingiceroadconstructionandhydrostatictestingshouldbeplannedandexecutedinaccordancewiththerequirementsoftheappropriatepermitsandauthorizations.Methodsofretrievalaswellaspotentialdisposalmethodsandsitesshouldbeevaluated.Minimumwaterrequirementsforanadromouswatersshouldbemaintainedtoprohibitspawninglocationsfrombeingdewatered.Allfishresourcestreams(anadromousandresident)shouldhaveminimumflowsestablishedinordertopreventwinterfreezeandtopreventwithdrawalfromoraffectstoadjacentstreamwatertables.TheDraftEIScouldlookatrequirementsfromNorthSlopeiceroads,forexampleandcomparison.

WAQ24 Residentsareconcernedaboutcontaminationlevelsalreadypresentintheriversystembecausetheydescribedtheirdependenceonthisfragileecosystem.Baselinedataonslimysculpintakenattheminesitehasdemonstratedthattherearecontaminantlevelsalreadypresentinthewatersystemandthisisconsideredunacceptablebylocalresidents.Itisassumedthesehighlevelsaretheresidualeffectofhistoricmininginthearea.Withcontaminantsalreadyinthesystem,thereisaconcernoverevenapotentiallyslightincreaseofcontaminantsinthewatershed.

WAQ25 GeorgetownTribalCouncilhasbeenmonitoringwaterqualityforthepastsixyearsandhasdevelopedbaselinedatafortheGeorgetownarea.Itwouldbeimportanttocontinuemonitoringtoensureandverifythelong‐termsustainabilityofourecosystemhealth.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT WETLANDS & AQUATIC COMMUNITIES


WETLANDS & AQUATIC COMMUNITIES (WET)

Fillingofwetlandsandalternationsofwetlandshabitat,fragmentation,andlossofwetlandhabitatasaresultofprojectcomponents.


WET1 Concernwasexpressedthattheproposedprojectcouldpermanentlyortemporarilyaffectwetlands,riparianareas,andaquaticresourcesduringconstruction,operation,andfarintothefuture.Potentialdirect,indirect,andcumulativewetlandimpactsshouldbequantifiedandincludedintheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEIS.

WET2 TheDraftEISshouldincludedelineationofallwetlandsthatcouldbeaffectedbytheproposedproject.Wetlandsandaquaticresourceswithintheproposedprojectareashouldbecharacterizedandquantifiedonaerialphotographmaps.Alongtheproposednaturalgaspipeline,thejurisdictionalWatersoftheUnitedStatesshouldbemappedviaaerialphotointerpretationwithinacorridorofatleast1,000ft(305m).Fielddelineationofwetlandsshouldoccurwithinacorridorofatleast300ft(91m)alongtheproposednaturalgaspipeline.

WET3 Thefunctionandconditionofwetlands,drainages,riparianareas,andaquaticresourceswithintheproposedprojectareashouldbeevaluated.TheDraftEISshould:

• Includeafunctionalassessmentofwetlandsintheproposedprojectarea,particularlyintheAnacondaCreekandAmericanCreekwatersheds;

• Identifythemethodologythatshouldbeusedforconditionandfunctionalassessment;and

• Providetheresultsoftheconditionandfunctionalassessmentonamapandincludearea,habitat,vegetationtype,percentcover,andotherrelevantinformation.

WET4 TheDraftEISshouldincludecommitmentstopracticalandappropriatemeasurestoavoidandminimizewetlandsimpactsbytheproposedproject.Optionsforavoidingandminimizingwetlandsimpactsshouldbeconsideredinthealternatives.Tocompensateforunavoidablewetlandsimpacts,theDraftEISshould:

• Basecompensatorymitigationonthewetlandsfunctionalassessmentandreplacementofthosefunctionslostaccordingtoanecologicallyappropriatemitigationratio;

• Identifytheappropriatetypeofcompensatorymitigation(permittee‐responsiblemitigation,mitigationbanking,orin‐lieufeemitigation);

• Evaluatetheuseofacombinationofcompensatorymitigationoptions;and

• Considerrestoringwetlandstotheirnaturalstates.

WET5 Toensuretheimplementationofmitigationmeasures,theDraftEISshoulddevelopaplanformonitoringwetlands,riparianareas,andaquaticresources.Correctivemeasuresshouldalsobespecifiedintheplan.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT WETLANDS & AQUATIC COMMUNITIES



WET6 Concernswereexpressedaboutwetlandsalongtheproposedpipelinecorridor.Specificconcernsinclude:

• Priortoclearingtheproposedpipelinecorridor,theROWshouldbestakedandflaggedtoidentifywetlandsduringthesummerwhenthegroundisfreeofsnow;

• Mileageofproposedgravelroadstobebuiltonwetlandsshouldbeidentified.Proposedgravelroadsshouldnotbebuiltonwetlands;

• Slopebreakersandtrenchbreakersshouldbeinstalledatwetlandboundariestopreventthepipelinetrenchfromdrainingthewetland;and

• Theriskthatthepipelinetrench(ditch)couldinterceptoverlandwaterflowanderodebackfillmaterialandbecomeacanalthatcarrieswaterwithhighsedimentloadstonearbystreamsandwetlands.TheEISshouldaddresswherepipelinetrenchingwouldinterceptstreamflowandchangestowetlandcrossdrainageatareasofcontinuousanddiscontinuouspermafrostinrollingormountainousterrain.Concernswhereexpressedthatrehabilitationinareasofice‐richsoilscouldrequirerepeatedtrenchmaintenanceandlong‐termthermalstabilizationactivitiesbeforethehabitatwouldreturntoitsformerstabilityandproductivity.Itwasnotedthatthiscouldbedifficultasthereisnotanaccessroadcurrentlyplannedalongtheproposedpipelineroute.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS


WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS (WCR)

Commentsrelatedtowildernesscharacteristicsandvalues.ThisincludesformallydesignatedWildernessunits,BLM‐specificLandswithWildernessCharacteristics,andotherunderdeveloped,wildlandscapes.


WCR1Theproposedmineandpipelinecorridorwouldbedevelopmentinanareathathaswildernesscharacteristicsanduniquefeatures.TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldevaluatetheimpactofalargemineinapreviouslyundisturbedareawithregardtoimpactsonwildlifeandwildernessvaluesoftheproposedprojectarea.ScopingcommentersnotedthattheKuskokwimandYukonriversneedtobeprotectedfrompotentialprojectimpacts.Specifically,neartheareasofWindyFork,KhuychanikCreek,theMiddleFork,andtheBigRiverFork,commentersnotedthatneverbeforeinhistoryhasmankindproposedtomakesuchafootprintupontheselands.CommentersnotedthattheKhuchaynikCreekandseveralsmallerstreamstowardsMiddleForkareareasthatprovideuniquewildernesshabitatcharacteristicsforastrainofArcticchar.Commentersexpressedconcernthatsomegroundimpactscanstillbeseentodayfromconstructioninthe1960sthatnegativelyaffectthewildernessexperience.

WCR2 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshouldevaluateimpactsonthesurroundingwildernessareasandvaluesthatcouldbeaffectedasaresultoftheproposedproject,includingconstructionandmaintenanceofthepipeline,newairstrips,increaseduseofORV/ATVsalongthepipelineROW,andemissionsofpollutantsduringoperation.TherearenodesignatedWildernessareasonBLMlands,however,muchoftheproposedpipelineroutelikelycrossesLandswithWildernessCharacteristics.Everyeffortshouldbemadetoprotecttheselandsandtheircharacteristics,andthewildlifethatoccursintheseareas.BMPsneedtobeappliedtoprotectwildernesscharacteristicsandvaluesateachcomponentandphaseoftheproposedproject.

WCR3 Thewildlifepopulationsandhabitatsintheproposedprojectareaprovidewildernesscharacteristicsandvaluesthatareinturnabenefittosubsistencehunters,recreationalhunters,trappers,professionalguides,photographers,eco‐tourism,andlocalcommunities.TheDraftEISshoulddescribehowthesenaturalattributesandwildernesscharacteristicswouldbeprotected.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 4.2 STATEMENTS OF CONCERN FINAL SCOPING REPORT WILDLIFE IMPACTS


WILDLIFE IMPACTS (WILD)

Generalcommentsrelatedtopotentialimpactstowildlife(mammals).Includesthepotentialforimpactstothreatenedandendangeredspecies.


WILD1 TheDonlinGoldProjectDraftEISshoulddescribetheeffectofproject‐relateddisturbanceonwildlife.Analysisofpotentialshortandlong‐termeffectsonfishandwildlifeshouldincludeallcomponentsandphasesoftheproposedproject.InparticularcommentsreceivedduringscopingrecommendedevaluationoftheroadbetweentheproposedJungjukPortandminesite,constructionoftheJungjukPort,expansionplansfortheBethelPort,theminesiteandminingoperations,impactsfromwatermanagement,accesstotheminesite,andclosure.Commentersareconcernedthattheproposedprojectwouldadverselyaffectwildlifeincluding:fishandaquaticbiota,waterfowl,Dallsheep,caribou,moose,brownandblackbear,wolf,wolverine,smallgame,furbearers,geese,andducks.Specifically,theDraftEISshouldevaluate:

• Howtheprojectconstruction,operation,andclosurewouldchangewildlifepatternsandbehavior;

• TheEISshouldexaminetheeffectsofblastingonaquaticandterrestrialbiologicalresources.Blastingduringsensitivelifestagesofwildlife(e.g.,Dallsheeplambing,raptornesting,beardenning)canimpactreproductionorsurvival.Blastingofthepipelinetrenchinornearstreamscouldcausemortalityofadultandjuvenilefishaswellasdevelopingeggs;

• Theeffectofincreasedpresenceofhumansandmachinery;

• Measuresplannedtoensurethatwildlife,subsistence,andrecreationarenotaffectedbytheincreaseinnoisecreatedbythemovementof2‐mancrewsinhelicoptersalongthepipelineROWroute;

• Implementingapolicytoavoidgeneratingloudnoiselevelthatmayaffectlocalresidentsand/orwildlife,includingavoidingoverflightsofseasonalhuntingandsubsistenceuseareastoavoiddisturbinggame;

• Theimpactofemployees,employeehousing,equipmentshops,fueltransport,storageandrisk,largeequipment,pipelinestorageyardsstoringfourteeninchsteelpipeeveryfivemiles,largegravelpits,waterextractionactivities,risksfuelspills,theoveralllargescaleofworkandtherecreationalactivitiesoftheseemployeesonthecriticalsummerandwinterwildlifehabitatsandthewildlifeitself;

• Huntingandfishingimpactstolocalresourcepopulationsinoraroundthemineasaresultofmineworkers’recreationalorsubsistenceuses.Consideraprojectdesignalternativethatprohibitsmineworkersfromengaginginrecreationalhuntingandfishingduringdutyshiftsduringconstruction,operation,andremediationphasesofthepipeline;

• Clarifywhether,inadditiontothecurrentpolicyofprohibitingemployeesandcontractorsfromhunting,fishing,trapping,shooting,andcampingwithintheROWorusingprojectequipmentforthesepurposes,thereareanycomparablecompanypoliciesregardingtheseusesoutsidetheROW.Describehowimpactsonnearbyresourcesfrom300‐personconstructioncamps(plussmallercamps)wouldbeaddressed;

• Theeffectofincreasedhuntingpressureduetopresenceofairfield;and

• TheeffectofincreasedhumanuseofthepipelineroutefortravelbyORV/ATVsandsnowmachinesinpreviouslyinaccessibleareas.




WILD2 Commentersexpressedconcernduringscopingthatwildlifemaybehitorkilledbytrafficontheroads.TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheriskandprovideanestimatednumberofanimalsthatmaybeaffectedbycollisionswithvehicles.

WILD3 Commentersareconcernedabouttheeffectoftheproposedprojectonriverineandmarinespecies.Specifically,theDraftEISshouldaddress:

• TheeffectofincreasedmarinetrafficontheKuskokwimRiveronmigratorymarinemammals,waterfowl,andfishthatmigratealongthecoast;and

• ThepotentialeffectonPacificwalrusandmigratorybirds(suchasbuffleheadsandcommonandspectacledeiders)fromafuelspillfromtheshippingbargesgoingupanddownfromtheAleutianIslands.TheAleutianIslandshosttheseandotherspeciesduringthewinter.

WILD4 Commentersexpressedconcernduringscopingabouttheeffectoftheproposedprojectonwildliferesourcesthatareharvestedforsubsistence.TheDraftEISshouldaddresshabitatlossintheprojectareaandthepotentialforcontaminationoffish,moose,waterfowl,bears,andcaribou.TheDraftEISshoulddescribetheeffectofroadconstruction,increasedtrafficandhuntingpressurealongthepreviouslyinaccessiblepipelinecorridoronwildlifepopulationsimportanttosubsistencehunters.Specifically,theDraftEISshouldanalyzethepotentialeffectsofincreaseddisturbancetosubsistenceresourcessuchascaribouandmoose.AnalysisintheDraftEISshouldincludetheimpactsofprojectrelatedincreasesinair,barge,andvehiculartraffic,increasedhumanaccess,andhowthephysicalpresenceoftheroadandpipelinecouldresultinbothlong‐andshort‐termdisturbanceoftheMulchatnaCaribouHerdandinterruptingcariboumigrationpatterns.

ScopingcommentsnotedthattheEISshouldevaluatethepotentialinteractionsbetweenwildlifeandthetailingsimpoundmentsattheminesiteandincludemitigationmeasurestodiscouragewildlifeinteractionintheseareas.TheEISshouldalsoevaluatethepotentialformetalsleachingtowaterandthesubsequentimpactstowildlife.WatersthatarewithintheproposedminesitecouldbetoxicandanevaluationofmitigationmeasurestoensurewildlifecontactisminimalwiththesewatersshouldbeincludedintheEIS.

WILD5 Issueswereraisedduringscopingconcerninghowthepipelinewouldaffectwildlife,throughhabitatfragmentation,disturbancefromhumanpresence,disruptionofwildlifemovementandmigrationpatterns,andresultantimpactstosubsistenceresources.Specifically,theDraftEISshouldaddress:

• Placementoftheproposedpipelineabove‐groundandbelowground.Duringconstructionandpipeinstallationpipelayingactivitiescoulddeflectorformabarriertowildlifemovement(moosemigrationbetweensummerandwinterranges;caribouseasonalmigration).Anopentrenchcouldentrapananimal.

• Theimpactsoftheproposedpipelineonfish,wildlifeandtheirhabitatsincludinghabitatlossandfragmentationatstreamcrossings,bisectedwildlifemigratoryroutes,anddisturbancetofishandwildlifefrompipelineinspectionandmaintenanceactivities.

• TheimpactsofthepipelinedowntheSouthForkoftheKuskokwimRiveronthePlainsbisonherdthatwasintroducednearFarewellandisoneofonlyafewfreerangingPlainsbisonherdsinthecountry.OnecommenternotedobservationsofmultiplesmallherdswithyoungcalvesalongtheSouthForkinthespring.TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheimpactofincreasedhumanpresenceontheSouthForkonthe




calvingactivity.

• TheAlaskaDepartmentofFishandGamenotedinscopingcommentsthatthereisasaltlickapproximately2‐3mileswestofEgyptMountain.Thecoordinatesforthecenterofsaltlickareapproximately62.475433333°N,‐153.71645°W.Theyreportedthatthissaltlickisfrequentlyusedbybisonandmostlikelyotherlargemammalssuchasmoose,caribou,andsheep.Theproposedpipelineroutewouldintersectwiththissaltlickanditwassuggestedthatconsiderationshouldbegiventoeitherre‐routethepipelinetoavoidthesaltlickorconductastudytodeterminetheextent,compositionanduseofthesaltlicktoensureitsintegrityandcontinuedusebywildlifeismaintained.

• Theeffectsoftransportationcorridorsonfish,wildlife,andsubsistenceresourcesincludingthepotentialimpactsassociatedwithaccessroadsandpotentialpublicuse.

• WhetherthepipelineROWwouldbefencedandifso,describetheeffectonwildlifemigration.

• Theeffectonexistingwildlifetrailsthatoccurintheareaoftheproposedpipelinerouteandexpectedchangesinusepatternsafterconstruction.

WILD6 TheDraftEISshouldidentifyandanalyzetheimpactstoendangered,threatened,andcandidatespeciesunderEndangeredSpeciesAct(ESA)ortheMarineMammalProtectionAct,aswellasBLMandtheStateofAlaskasensitivespecieslistswithintheprojectarea.TheDraftEISshouldsummarizeBiologicalAssessmentsanddescribetheoutcomesofESASection7Consultationwiththefederalagencies.ClarifywhethertheCookInletbelugawhaleorthisspecies’designatedcriticalhabitatcouldbeaffectedbyaportdevelopedonthewestsideofCookInletduringpipelineconstructionorbybargingthroughoutKuskokwimBayandKuskokwimRiver.

TheDraftEISshouldaddressimpactstothreatenedorendangeredbirdspecies.Potentiallyaffectedspeciesincludespectacledeiders,Steller'seidersandcriticalhabitatforSteller'seider,andpossiblyKittlitz'smurrelet.TheanalysisshouldconsiderthefollowinginformationfromtheUSFWS.Atotalof2,830milesintheKuskokwimShoalsisdesignatedascriticalhabitatforthethreatenedSteller'sEider(http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/endangered/spst_FinalDesignation.htm).TheKuskokwimShoalsunitincludesanareawherelargeconcentrationsofSteller'seidersandotherAlaska‐breedingeiderspeciesoccur.

Inaddition,KuskokwimBayisanimportantfallstagingareaforkingeidersbasedonbirdsimplantedwithsatellitetransmitters(Oppeletal.2008).KingeidersundergoingwingmoltwerealsolocatedinKuskokwimBay(Phillipsetal.2006).TheDraftEISshouldanalyzetheeffectofincreasedvesseltrafficandfuelorothertoxicspillsfromvesseltrafficonstagingbirds.ThecentralcoastoftheYukon‐KuskokwimDeltaalsoservesasabreedinggroundforabout80%oftheworld'spopulationofemperorgeese(EisenhowerandKirkpatrick1977).Inaddition,virtuallytheentirePacificpopulationofSteller'seiders(i.e.,70‐100‐thousandbirds)stageontheKuskokwimShoalsinthespringandlowthousands(includinganapparentlydisproportionatenumberofAlaskabreedingbirds)moltinthewatersjustoffthisshorelineinthefall.Duetotheirlowpopulationsizeandrestrictedbreedinglocations,spectacledeiders,Steller'seiders,andemperorgeeseareespeciallyvulnerabletocatastrophicevents,suchasoilspills.ItispossiblethatKittlitz'smurrelet,acandidateforlistingundertheEndangeredSpeciesAct,maynestonNunivakIsland.




WILD7 TheDraftEISshouldfullyevaluatethecumulativeeffectsoftheproposedprojectcomponentsandphases(construction,operation,andclosure)tofish,wildlife,andtheirhabitatintheprojectarea.Cumulativeeffectsincludethelong‐termimplicationsforthe30‐yearoperationlifeofthemine.TheDraftEISshouldspecificallyaddress:

• Potentialeffectsofallaspectsoftheprojectonmarinemammals,residentandanadromousfish,andotherspecieslistedundertheESA,aswellasmigratorybirdsprotectedundertheMigratoryBirdTreatyActandbaldandgoldeneagles.

• Potentialeffectstofishandwildlifehabitatsandpopulations.

• ThegeographicscopeofanalysisintheDraftEISshouldincludeallareasofpotentialcontamination,includingtheKuskokwimRiverDeltaandtheshallowwatersoftheBeringSea.

• TheDraftEISshoulddescribethepotentialeffectsofprojectrelatedcontaminationonKuskokwimRiverfisheries,YukonRiverfisheries,Pacificwalruspopulations,andallfourPacificwaterbirdandshorebirdflyways.Considerintheanalysistheinformationprovidedbythecommentersregardingthemovementofcontaminants.

DONLIN GOLD PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 5.0 CONTACTS FINAL SCOPING REPORT


5.0 CONTACTS

5.1 LEADAGENCYTheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersistheleadfederalagencyfortheEIS.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CEPOA-RD P.O. Box 6898 JBER, AK 99506-0898 Contact: Project Manager Don Kuhle Email: [email protected] (907) 753-2780

5.2 COOPERATINGAGENCIESANDCOOPERATINGAGENCYTRIBESThe formal cooperating agencies include the following federal and state agencies and tribal governments:

U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service

U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

State of Alaska

o Alaska Department of Natural Resources

o Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation

o Alaska Department of Fish and Game

Native Village of Chuathbaluk

Village of Crooked Creek

Knik Tribal Council

Village of Lower Kalskag

Kuskokwim River Watershed Council (on behalf of Akiak Native Community)

Native Village of Napaimute

5.3 PROJECTWEBSITEANDPROJECTEMAILProjectwebsiteaddresshttp://www.DonlinGoldEIS.com/Projectemailaddress:[email protected]

donlin gold project - alaska department of natural...

Documents