More questions than answers at Ajax open house
LETTER — There were more questions than answers at the recent KGHM Open House information meeting. Some might even have called it a misinformation meeting. To the question “How much additional water will the newly proposed wet tailings facility require?” three different KGHM people gave three different ansers (“a bit more, “the same”, and not as much”).
Open house on Ajax included new model of mine project.
There were mapping errors. The new KGHM map does not show Petersen Creek within the City limits, nor does it show Goose Lake Road. People who live here know the prevailing winds are those from the Southwest but were informed by a KGHM employee that this is not the case.
There were no answers to basic questions related to the new mine footprint. When asked, a KGHM employee could not state the size of the new footprint. There was no information relating to the height of the impoundment wall of the proposed wet tailings facility, although one KGHM representative THOUGHT it might be somewhere around 110 metres high, but wasn’t sure. There were still no answers to queries regarding the trace metal content of the rock despite the fact that the company has been drilling and analysing core for years.
The most frequent answers I received: “I don’t know,” “We’re still studying that,” “The information will be in the application,” “I’ll get back to you on that.” These meetings are not a real attempt to communicate let alone consult with the public. They are a token box-ticking exercise that allow both the proponent and the government to claim that they have involved the public while permitting them to continue to keep the public in the dark about the things that matter most and will most affect their lives.
If there were a real desire for public input and discussion, the assessment process would include a public forum where questions and answers become part of a public record and KGHM would be accountable for the information relayed.
In light of the significant modifications to the original proposal (which raise new and serious concerns) and the appalling lack of information provided, the EAO should require a reassessment of the Application Information Requirements with a public comment period. Without this, the public is being denied its right to due process. Is anyone out there REALLY listening????
DIANNE KERR
Kamloops
ArmchairMayor.ca 
For KGHM the end justifies the means. Being forthcoming might give opponents an opening which could create a lot of negative publicity. So why should we be surprised?
Opponents ought to organize their own open houses and bring in their experts to answer questions.
LikeLike
Under Section 8.6 of the Section 11 Order that established the parameters for the Ajax environmental assessment, the BC Environmental Assessment Office has the power to demand that KGHM Ajax release all the assay data it is withholding. From assay data filed by Ajax with the Ministry of Mines in 2009, it is known that 7 drill holes contain measureable uranium. What if there is a lot more uranium in the Ajax deposit that KGHM isn’t telling us about? Is KGHM Ajax even assaying for the presence of uranium? Ajax is not 100 kilometres from the nearest town – it is 2.2 km. from Pacific Way Elementary School. Where is our Minister of Health on this issue of disclosure? What about our City Council? Why isn’t the MLA for Aberdeen, ‘Speedy’ Todd Stone, demanding disclosure? Why isn’t the media demanding answers?
Green MLA Andrew Weaver has made the same charge about Trans Mountain not providing sufficient information for hundreds of questions about TM’s proposed pipeline. Is non-disclosure the new form of corporate social responsibility these days?
LikeLike
I have stopped attending the KGHM/Ajax open houses. If there is no new information to release, there is no point in organizing (or attending) such events, in my opinion.
LikeLike
Excellent points! Please consider sending Scott Bailey at the BC EAO a copy of this letter. We should all be concerned that this process allows incomplete public education that is only countered by volunteer opposition groups with limited funds.
It was interesting to me the way the media tore into the recent release by the doctors, but there was absolutely no comment or critique when KGHM released any of their “information” booklets. We need our government to intervene and compel the company to provide information of risks as well as benefits, or better yet, provide independent experts to do this.
With regards to the DAIR, the changes associated with the tailings facility alone could prompt federal government experts to ask very different questions regarding water, ground water, evaporation/fog/haze, and possible seepage issues. Of course this should be explored.
The “process” stinks!
LikeLike