Final_ToR_4_6_09.pdf

Final Terms of Reference for the Environmental Impact Assessment for the Greenland Aluminum and Hydroelectric Development Project April 2009 Prepared by: Environmental Resources Management, Inc. 200 Harry S Truman Pkwy Suite 400 Annapolis, MD 21401 www.erm.com

3 Printed sustainably using double-sided printing and post-consumer recycled paper

ERM i FINALTERMS OF REFERENCE APRIL 2009 3 Printed sustainably using double-sided printing and post-consumer recycled paper

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 BACKGROUND 1

2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND CORPORATE REQUIREMENTS 5

2.1 NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES 5

2.2 CORPORATE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 10 Alcoa Corporate Sustainability 10 Alcoa Policies and Principles 12

3.0 THE EIA PROCESS 14

3.1 THE EIA STUDY TEAM 14

3.2 PURPOSE OF THE EIA 14

3.3 APPROACH TO THE EIA 15 Scoping Phase 15 Study Phase 16 Impact Assessment Phase 19 Disclosure Phase 25 Implementation Phase 25

3.4 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION 25

3.5 EIA SCHEDULE 32

4.0 DETAILED STUDY PLANS 33

4.1 DESKTOP RESEARCH STUDIES 34

4.2 FIELD STUDIES 34

ERM ii FINALTERMS OF REFERENCE APRIL 2009 3 Printed sustainably using double-sided printing and post-consumer recycled paper

List of Tables

Table 1. International Standards and Guidelines that are Applicable to the Project EIA 6

Table 2. International Agreements and Conventions Relevant to Environmental and Social Issues in Greenland 7

Table 3. Preliminary List of Studies to be Conducted for the EIA 17

Table 4. Severity Criteria Negative Environmental Impacts 21

Table 5. Enhancement Criteria Positive Environmental Effects 21

Table 6. Severity Criteria Negative Social or Health Impacts 22

Table 7. Enhancement Criteria Positive Social and Health Effects 23

Table 8. Summary of Project EIA Public Consultation Plan 26

Table 9. Summary of Environmental, Social, and Health Topics Introduced by Stakeholders during the ToR Consultation Process 27

Table 10. Schedule for the Project EIA 32

List of Figures

Figure 1. Project Infrastructure 3

Figure 2. Smelter and Harbor 4

Figure 3. ESMP Lifecycle From ESIA Commitment to Implementation 13

Figure 4. The Five Phases of the Project EIA 15

Box 1. Alcoa Sustainability Principals 11

ERM 1 FINAL TERMS OF REFERENCE APRIL 2009 3 Printed sustainably using double-sided printing and post-consumer recycled paper

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Alcoa and the Greenland Home Rule Government (GHR) propose to build a state-of-the-art aluminum smelter in Maniitsoq, West Greenland, with supporting facilities including hydropower stations at Tasersiaq (referred to as the North Hydropower Development) and Imarsuup Isua (referred to as the South Hydropower Development) to provide electrical power to the smelter, transmission lines to connect the smelter with the hydroelectric facility, and a harbor for importing and exporting Project-related materials. For the purposes of this document, these four facilities are collectively referred to as the Project (Figures 1 and 2).

An Environmental, Social, and Health Impact Assessment (EIA) is currently underway to document the potential effects of the Project and recommend measures to manage (maximize positive and minimize negative) and monitor those effects.

The purpose of this final Terms of Reference (ToR) is to outline the process for conducting the Project EIA. Specifically, the ToR sets objectives, defines the scope, and establishes the strategy and schedule for the EIA process. The draft ToR was initially open for public comment until March 1, 2009. The comment period was extended until March 31, 2009 to ensure adequate opportunity for the public to comment on the draft ToR.

1.1 BACKGROUND

In 2006 Alcoa initiated formal discussions with the GHR regarding the potential to construct an aluminum smelter and associated infrastructure, including a hydroelectric development, transmission lines, and a harbor, in western Greenland. Initial discussions between Alcoa and GHR prompted the GHR to commission a working group to identify the infrastructure and environmental issues related to the Project. The working group delivered a preliminary report to parliament in March 2007, which recommended that the GHR conduct a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) to compare the advantages and disadvantages of siting alternatives for the Project and to recommend additional studies to be carried forward if the Project progressed to a formal impact assessment.

The GHR issued a draft SEA in December 2007, which assessed several potential locations for the smelter and port in Sisimiut, Maniitsoq, and Nuuk based on existing information on the environment, human health,


culture, and regional development plans in each municipality and the surrounding areas. The draft SEA was available for public comment until 15 January 2008. Prior to closure of the public comment period, the GHR held a series of public meetings in the three municipalities under consideration for the smelter Project. Based on the information included in the draft SEA, other technical studies (SNC Lavelin, 2008), and input received at the public meetings, GHR subsequently recommended that the smelter and port be located at Maniitsoq. In May 2008, the Greenland Parliament endorsed the GHRs recommendation and the Greenland Home Rule Cabinet entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Alcoa to cooperate on a feasibility study and environmental studies for the Project. Alcoa and GHR, via Greenland Development, are exploring various partnership and ownership options for the Project.

Currently, Alcoa and GHR are partnering to study the potential effects of the Project. These studies will support the EIA process, which will document the potential effects of the Project and recommend measures to manage and monitor those effects. The EIA is a separate process to the SEA. The EIA will build on information gathered during the SEA and some EIA studies will be conducted in partnership with SEA studies (See Table 3).


2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND CORPORATE REQUIREMENTS

2.1 NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES

Greenland is a self-governing province of Denmark. Denmark granted home rule to Greenland in 1979. Greenland is not a part of the European Union (EU), although it retains some connections to the EU through Denmark, which is a member.

The GHR is currently developing impact assessment guidelines to define the recommended methods for conducting impact assessments in Greenland. These guidelines are expected to become available in 2009, after initiation of the Project EIA. Therefore, in lieu of formal Greenland impact assessment guidelines at this time, the Project EIA will be developed consistent with applicable international standards and guidelines (Table 1) and through consultation with GHR staff.

In addition, the Project and EIA process will be consistent with other international treaties and conventions, to which Greenland and/or Denmark is a signatory. Table 2 summarizes these treaties and conventions.


Table 1. International Standards and Guidelines that are Applicable to the Project EIA.

Standard/Guideline Description

European Union Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive

Guidelines for the Assessment of Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Impacts and Impact Interactions

Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy Finnish Ministry of the Environment

Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment in the Arctic region.

IFC Performance Standards (PS)

PS 1: Social and Environmental Assessment and Management Systems

PS 2: Labor and Working Conditions

PS 3: Pollution Prevention and Abatement

PS 4: Community Health, Safety and Security Provides

PS 5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement

PS 6: Biodiversity Conservation & Sustainable Natural Resource Management

PS 7: Indigenous Peoples

PS 8: Cultural Heritage

World Bank Guidelines Environmental Assessment Sourcebook Volumes I and III and various updates

IFC, World Bank Group Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) Guidelines for Aluminum Manufacturing

These guidelines provide industry-specific examples of Good International Industry Practice. When one or more members of the World Bank Group are involved in a project, these guidelines are applied. The guidelines contain the performance levels and measures that are generally considered to be achievable in new facilities by existing technology at reasonable costs.


Table 2. International Agreements and Conventions Relevant to Environmental and Social Issues in Greenland.

Agreement/Convention Description Status CLIMATE CHANGE/AIR QUALITY

Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, 1985

Protection of the ozone layer, came into force in 1988,

Denmark ratified for Denmark in 1985 and for Greenland in 1991

Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, 1989

Protection of the ozone layer. Denmark acceded in 1987 and subsequently ratified the amendments.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), 1994

Control of greenhouse gas emissions. Ratified by Denmark in 1993.

Kyoto Protocol, 1997 Greenhouse gas emissions targets. Ratified by Denmark in 2002.

CHEMICAL USE/POLLUTION/WASTE The Geneva Convention, 1979

Establishes protocols for emissions of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic hydrocarbons, ammonia, persistent organic pollutants, and heavy metals

Ratified by Denmark in 1982.

Basel Convention, 1989 Bans the export of hazardous waste from OECD countries to poor countries


Rotterdam Convention, 1998

Sets procedure for import and export of certain hazardous chemicals and pesticides


The Stockholm Convention, 2001

Prohibits the use, production, import or export of twelve hazardous substances including PCB, DDT and dioxin.


MARITIME ISSUES Convention on the International Maritime Organization, 1948

Established the International Maritime Organization.

Denmark is a member since 1959.

Convention on the High Seas, 1958

To codify the rules of international law relating to the high seas, Covers waste management, water pollution, seawater quality, territorial jurisdiction, biodiversity.

Denmark ratified in 1968.

Convention of the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (London Convention), 1972

Prevention of pollution of the sea by dumping. Covers deliberate disposal at sea of wastes or other matter from vessels, aircraft and platforms. It does not cover discharges from land-based sources such as pipes and outfalls, wastes generated incidental to normal operation of vessels, or placement of materials for purposes other than mere disposal, providing such disposal is not contrary to aims of the Convention.

Ratified by Denmark in 1997 and passed enacting legislation in 2006.


Agreement/Convention Description Status International Convention on the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), 73/78

Preservation the marine environment through the elimination of pollution by oil and other harmful substances and the minimization of accidental discharge of such substances. Annexes cover oil, noxious liquid substances carried in bulk, harmful substances carried in packaged form, sewage, garbage, and air pollution.

Denmark acceded in 1980.

International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974

Protection of safety of merchant ships (regulations regarding emergency equipment, safety procedures, etc.).

Denmark ratified in 1978.

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1982

All aspects of ocean space, e.g. delimitation, environmental control, marine scientific research, economic and commercial activities, transfer of technology and the settlement of disputes relating to ocean matters.


International Convention on Load Lines, 1966

Establishes uniform principles governing the safe loading of ships on international voyages. Includes regulations for determining the location of ships load lines.

Ratified by Denmark, unknown date.

BIODIVERSITY/PROTECTED AREAS Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention), 1971

The conservation and sustainable utilization of wetlands, i.e. to stem progressive encroachment on and loss of wetlands now and in the future, recognizing the fundamental ecological functions of wetlands and their economic, cultural, scientific, and recreational value.


Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), 1973

To ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. Accords varying degrees of protection to more than 33,000 species of animals and plants.

Entered in force in Denmark in 1977.

United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992

Promotes development of national strategies for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. Often seen as the key document regarding sustainable development.


United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, 1994

To combat desertification and mitigate the effects of drought through national action programs that incorporate long-term strategies supported by international cooperation and partnership arrangements.


Ottawa Declaration, 1996 Established the Arctic Council as an intergovernmental forum to promote coordination among Arctic States, with the involvement of the Arctic Indigenous communities and other inhabitants on common Arctic issues, in particular issues of sustainable development and environmental protection in the Arctic.

Denmark has been a member since 1996.


Agreement/Convention Description Status Strategic Plan for the Conservation of Arctic Biological Diversity, 1998

Gives effect to the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) program, through the development of a long-term plan based on five priority objectives.

Denmark has been a participant in CAFF since its establishment in 1996.

The Nordic Council Established in 1952. Promotes co-operation between the parliaments and governments of Denmark, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. Finland joined in 1955. Current priorities include indigenous communities, welfare in the Arctic and sustainable development.

Denmark is a participating country since 1952.

CULTURAL HERITAGE UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 1972 (World Heritage Convention)

Promotes cooperation among nations to protect heritage from around the world that is of such outstanding universal value that its conservation is important for current and future generations.

Ratified by Denmark in 1979. Ilulissat ice fjord in Greenland is a World Heritage Site.

LABOR/HEALTH/SAFETY Constitution of the International Labor Organization

Promotes opportunities for women and men to obtain decent and productive work, in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity.

Denmark member since 1919. All 8 Fundamental Human Rights Conventions ratified by Denmark.

OTHER The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context

Sets out the obligations to assess the environmental impact of certain activities at an early stage of planning. Also lays down the general obligation to notify and consult each other on all major projects under consideration that are likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact across boundaries.


The Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents

Promotes active international cooperation between the contracting Parties, before, during and after an industrial accident.

Entered in force in Denmark in 2000.

ERM 10 FINALTERMS OF REFERENCE APRIL 2009 3 Printed sustainably using double-sided printing and post-consumer recycled paper

2.2 CORPORATE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES

In addition to national and international requirements and guidelines, Alcoas corporate standards and management policies including the 2020 Framework for Sustainability and Alcoas Environmental Health and Safety Policies and Principles will guide the construction and operation of the Project.

Alcoa Corporate Sustainability

Alcoas Vision, Values, Principles, and control systems provide the foundation for integrating sustainability into its operations (see Box 1). Alcoas global sustainability strategy is designed to reflect societys values to ensure long-term success for the company and all its stakeholders. Alcoas sustainability objective is to:

Simultaneously achieve financial success, environmental excellence, and social responsibility through partnerships in order to deliver net long-term benefits to our shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, and the communities in which we operate

In 2000, Alcoa established a 2020 Strategic Framework for Sustainability to help achieve this sustainability objective and to measure progress towards many specific sustainability targets, including reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and water use, improved energy efficiency, and increased use of renewable energy.

Alcoa has been recognized for its leading sustainability performance in the metals and mining industry, including earning Best in Class status by Storebrand Investments (Socially Responsible Investment) and inclusion in other indices and investment funds as a leader in sustainable practices including the Dow Jones Sustainability Index and the Climate Disclosure Leadership Index.


Box 1. Alcoa Sustainability Principals

Respect for People

We listen to, and respect the views of our workforce and the communities wherever we operate and we formulate partnerships that strengthen our interdependence and improve well-being.

Building Community Experience and Well-being

Our operations contribute to improved quality of life and build skills, knowledge and experience in the communities with which we interact, while respecting the significance and diversity of their culture and heritage.

Long-term Economic Benefit

Our operations deliver economic benefits to the regions and States in which they operate, to the nation, and to society in general. Our operations foster economic growth, generate wealth for the community, provide commercial returns to our shareholders and contribute to long-term economic health.

Efficient Resource Use & Cleaner Production

We use natural resources wisely and manage our environmental impacts to the benefit of the full range of our stakeholders by employing leading technology and best practice management, and by encouraging responsible design, use, recycling and disposal of our products.

Ecological Integrity & Biodiversity

Our operations maintain or enhance biological diversity and the fabric of ecological integrity in the environments in which we operate.

Meeting the Needs of Current and Future Generations

We take a long-term approach to our activities, and work in partnership with communities and governments to meet the needs and desires of today without compromising the ability of future generations to satisfy their own needs.

Stakeholder Involvement

We work with our communities, employees, customers, shareholders and suppliers to achieve outcomes and make decisions of mutual benefit. We report regularly to all our stakeholders on the sustainability performance of our operations.

Accountability & Governance

We practice ethical business governance, are accountable for our actions, continually improve our performance and integrate environmental, social and economic considerations in our decision-making.


In line with their commitment to sustainability, Alcoa has incorporated sustainability principals into the Project in the following ways:

1) Implementing a sustainability initiative, which includes a sustainability working group composed of local, national, and International stakeholders, to ensure incorporation of sustainability issues into the EIA and the Project;

2) using renewable hydropower energy to power the smelter; 3) exploring partnerships with other industries in Greenland to share

infrastructure (e.g., access roads) to minimize development footprints;

4) minimizing impacts to significant natural and cultural resources by carefully selecting the locations for the smelter and hydropower developments; and

5) minimizing displacement of people or their regular activities by carefully selecting the locations for the smelter and hydropower developments.

Alcoa Policies and Principles

Alcoas Environmental, Health, and Safety Policy is to operate worldwide in a safe, responsible manner that respects the environment and the health of Alcoa employees, customers, and the communities where Alcoa operates. All Alcoa employees and contractors are expected to understand, promote, and assist in the implementation of this policy.

In the context of this EIA and the Project, the primary vehicle for converting the principals, polices, and plans described above into action is the Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMP). These plans will be developed as part of the EIA and will outline the potential effects of the Project and the ways in which these effects will be avoided, minimized, or managed in accordance with the above principles, policies, and plans. Figure 3 depicts how Alcoa will implement the commitments identified in the ESMPs.


Figure 3. ESMP Lifecycle - From ESIA Commitment to Implementation

EIA Commitment (e.g., to mitigate, monitor, etc as part of ESMP)

Commitments carried into contractual obligations, Contractor Management Plans

Inspection, monitoring, and reporting

Commitments implemented by Alcoa and contractors

Where appropriate, corrective action and continuous improvement


3.0 THE EIA PROCESS

As per international standards and guidelines, the Project EIA will assess all components and phases of the Project, including the smelter, hydroelectric facilities, transmission lines, and port during the construction, operation, and decommissioning phases of the Project.

3.1 THE EIA STUDY TEAM

Alcoa has commissioned Environmental Resources Management, Inc. (ERM) to prepare the EIA for the Project. ERM is an international consulting firm with 30 years of impact assessment experience and over 3,000 staff in 40 countries around the world (www.erm.com). The Project EIA team consists of environmental, social, and health specialists with impact assessment experience in aluminum smelters, hydroelectric, transmission line, and port projects. ERM will act as an independent consultant to conduct the EIA and facilitate public involvement in the EIA process.

3.2 PURPOSE OF THE EIA

The key objectives of the EIA are to:

Document the ecological and socioeconomic baseline conditions of the study area and the affected communities;

Inform and obtain input from stakeholders, (e.g., governmental authorities, the public, and indigenous communities) and capture their relevant issues and concerns;

Assess in detail the environmental, social, and health impacts that would result from the Project;

Identify environmental and social mitigation measures to address the impacts identified;

Develop the ESMPs as discussed above, based on the mitigation measures developed in the EIA;

Meet the requirements or recommendations of the applicable national and international regulations and standards;

Be guided by the policies, guidelines, and procedures of the relevant international treaties and agreements; and


Be consistent with Alcoas policies and corporate values.

3.3 APPROACH TO THE EIA

The approach to the EIA comprises five phases: Scoping, Studies, Impact Assessment, Disclosure, and Implementation (Figure 4). Stakeholder consultation forms a continuous and important part of the EIA process, occurring in each of these five phases.

Figure 4. The Five Phases of the Project EIA.

Scoping Phase

Scoping is the initial phase of the EIA process. In the Scoping Phase, key issues to be investigated and assessed during the subsequent phases of the process are identified, and the range and extent of the studies to be conducted is determined. The primary Project stakeholders are also identified during the Scoping Phase. The Scoping Phase for the Project was initiated in mid September 2008, and continued through March 2009

SCOPING/ TERMS OF REFERENCE

STUDIES

IMPLEMENTATION

IMPACT ASSESSMENT/ MANAGEMENT PLANS

Stak

ehol

der C

onsu

ltatio

n

DISCLOSURE


when the final Terms of Reference was completed. Public input was a critical component of the Scoping Phase.

During the Scoping process desktop analyses, stakeholder interviews, and public meetings were conducted to ascertain whether additional information is needed to evaluate baseline conditions and potential impacts within the Project area. The desktop evaluation included reviews of pertinent environmental and social data collected from external sources and previous studies of the Project area. The Project proponents met with stakeholder groups (e.g., local governmental agencies, district agencies, NGOs, and representatives of local population centers) to discuss the scopes of the proposed studies including alternatives and the criteria for the impact assessment and determine if additional baseline data will be required for a comprehensive analysis. The key objectives for the Scoping Phase were to:

Identify stakeholders and inform them of the Project and the EIA process;

Provide stakeholders with the opportunity to identify any issues and concerns associated with the Project;

Identify areas of likely impact and environmental issues that may require further investigation in an EIA; and

Determine the need for specialist baseline and impact assessment studies in response to initial stakeholder input.

Study Phase

The Study Phase is the second step in the EIA process. In the Study Phase, desktop and field studies are conducted to evaluate the key issues identified during the Scoping Phase. The goals of the Study Phase are to provide a detailed description of the affected area and establish the environmental and social baseline that will be used in the Impact Assessment Phase. The Study Phase for the Project was initiated in the spring of 2008 and will continue through the end of 2009. ERM is cooperating with several Government and non-government partners including the Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, Greenland National Museum, and the Danish National Environmental Research Institute to conduct these studies.

Table 3 contains the preliminary list of studies that will be conducted as part of the EIA. This list may change based on study results and stakeholder consultations. Section 4 of the ToR contains detailed study scopes for several of the key studies listed in Table 3. Studies with an


asterisk following their name have detailed study scopes in Section 4. The remainder of the studies will be scoped prior to initiation.

Table 3. Preliminary List of Studies to be Conducted for the EIA.

Reference Number

Study Title Approach Schedule

1 Caribou distribution and migration*

Radio transmitter study. 40 animals tagged by INR in May 2008. Conducted in partnership with SEA.

May 2008 September 2010

2 Location of calving grounds between Sukkertoppen Iskappe and Godthbsfjorden*

Aerial transect survey. Conducted in partnership with SEA.

May/June 2009

3 Baseline noise study* Baseline noise study at the smelter site Spring 2009 4 Arctic char study* Desktop literature review to determine

flow thresholds for char migration and spawning, supplemented by observations in field and results of consultations with fishers (see below). 2008 field surveys of Sarfartoq, Igassup Kua, and Arnagarnup Kua Rivers; and Lake Tasersiaq, Tuvssap tasia, and the un-named lake at the northern part of the southern reservoir. 2008 survey focused on the location and extent of migration routes for migratory fish, and preliminary mapping of resident fish habitat.

August-September 2008 (3 week field survey period). Winter survey 2009 possibly required, based on results of 2008 survey. Site-specific studies of important char areas in August or September 2009.

5 Consultation with fishers* Consult with local fishers in Kangaamiut and possibly Maniitsoq to determine seasonality, habitat requirements, and distribution of important species

Summer 2008, prior to char and freshwater biodiversity study

6 Aquatic biodiversity study* Desktop analysis in Summer 2008, followed by surveys to identify aquatic plants, macroinvertebrates, and fish, and describe habitat in lakes that will be affected by hydro developments. Field work conducted with char study.

Summer 2008; Summer 2009 if necessary

7 Marine resources* Site-specific marine studies in the vicinity of the port.

Spring and summer 2009

8 Aerial survey of geese moulting areas*

Aerial survey Mid-July 2009 (moulting) Late July-mid August 2009 (foraging)

9 Meteorological conditions study*

Describe existing air quality and local meteorological conditions in the airshed. Meteorological station will be located at smelter site.

2008-2009


Reference Number


10 Surface water, groundwater, and hydrographic analysis*

Detailed hydrological characterization of surface water and groundwater resources. Includes: Daily average stream flows in the

Sarfartoq and Igassup Kua Rivers for a minimum one year period (can likely get this from historical data)

Water quality data in the Sarfartoq and Igassup Kua Rivers and the Project reservoirs (including dissolved oxygen, temp, conuctivity, and turbidity at a minimum)

Pre- and post-Project reservoir boundaries (CADD or GIS format; PB has these)

Groundwater analysis: Water table elevation Transmissivity Groundwater quality

2008-2009

11 Sedimentation analysis* Characterization of sediment transport from reservoirs through hydropower developments and into tailwaters, and rate of sediment deposition in the reservoirs.

2008-2009

12 Natural resources, livelihoods, and cultural change study*

Project-specific analysis of culture of affected communities (may include oral histories, ethnography, archival research, semi-structured interviews). Livelihood group-focused research subsistence and commercial resource use. Field methods TBD (may include focus groups, semi-structured interviews, data collection from government or associations) complementary to data collection in demographics/socioeconomics above

2008-2009 (synchronized with above)

13 Socioeconomic and planning study*

National and regional data on general socioeconomic conditions Socioeconomic baseline data (either from census or primary survey TBD) at a household level: demographics, population density, working age, gender, education levels, , income/occupation, available skills, etc including trend analysis of above In addition, data from direct consultations/discussions with local communities on baseline conditions, impacts and opportunities of the Project.

2008-2009 (fieldwork expected 2009)

14 Landscape and scenic resources assessment*

Visual and photographic surveys at specific locations within Project footprint

Summer 2008 and 2009

15 Rare and fluoride-sensitive flora*

Site-specific surveys conducted during appropriate season (timing is species-dependent)

Spring/summer 2009


Reference Number


16 Ecological and human health risk assessment*

Project-specific ecological risk assessment using standardized USEPA methodology. Project-specific Health Impact Assessment using standardized protocols.

Summer 2008 - existing data review with Ministry of Health 2009 data gaps follow-up; ecological and health risk assessments

17 Human health study* Document human health conditions in potentially affected communities, identify priorities, and determine appropriate mitigation for project-related impacts on health

Summer 2009

Topographic analysis Detailed topographic mapping via aerial photograph interpretation and ground truthing.

2008-2009

Dredging, navigation, and shipping

Surveys and desktop studies to assess: volume of sediment to be moved (if

any) sediment characteristics bathymetry salinity, temperature, and tidal

patterns biological receptors characteristics of ballast Modeling analyses to be run include dredge plume distribution and transport and fate of accidental spill.

2009

Archaeology studies Ground surveys conducted by National Museum.

2008-2009

Geotech permafrost borings Core samples in the permafrost at hydropower sites

2008

Sub-glacial survey Survey of topography and geology under the glaciers

2008

Transmission line study Assessment of the transmission line right of way for engineering and environmental constraints

2009

Freshwater birds Desktop analysis followed by field surveys, if warranted by data gaps or species of concern. Focal species will include Canada geese, white-fronted geese, red-throated diver, great northern diver, white tailed eagle and other raptors, and harlequin duck.

Summer 2009

Impact Assessment Phase

During the Impact Assessment Phase, the impacts and effects of the proposed Project are determined.

To identify and assess the magnitude of potential impacts associated with or resulting from Project activities, the EIA team will use professional judgment from specialists, fieldwork, computer models, and other


desktop analyses to identify potential impacts and their interactions. Impact assessment takes place as follows:

1. Characterize the baseline the existing conditions before the Project is undertaken and any effects are generated;

2. Identify sources of impacts and the impacts themselves that are generated by any aspect of the Project;

3. Rate impacts before any mitigation (for negative impacts) or enhancement (for positive impacts) is implemented;

4. Suggest mitigation and enhancement measures to address the impact, as appropriate; and

5. Rate impacts after mitigation to produce a residual impact rating.

Rating Impacts

It is standard practice in EIA processes to rate potential impacts:

to provide a basis for prioritization of impacts to be dealt with;

to provide a method of assessing the effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures; and

to provide a scale which shows the level of impact both before and after a proposed mitigation measure has been applied.

In order to apply analytical rigor to the impact assessment and rating process, the following system for rating impacts will be used. An impact rating is the product of two elements: (1) the severity of the potential impact and (2) the likelihood of the event occurring, as depicted in the following matrix.

Likelihood

Enhancement Low Medium High

High level of enhancement Moderate Major Major

Medium level of enhancement Minor Moderate Major

Low level of enhancement Minor Minor Moderate

Severity

Low severity Minor Minor Moderate

Medium severity Minor Moderate Major

High severity Moderate Major Major


The severity or enhancement of each impact is determined using the criteria identified in Tables 4 through 7. The likelihood of the impact occurring is categorized as follows:

Low likelihood Few or no occurrences in the Project-related industries (aluminum smelting, hydroelectric, transmission line, or port industries);

Medium likelihood Documented occurrences in the Project-related industries; and

High likelihood Documented occurrences in Greenland.


Table 4. Severity Criteria - Negative Environmental Impacts.

Low Affects environmental conditions, species, and habitats over a short period of time, is localized and reversible.

Medium

Affects environmental conditions, species and habitats in the short to medium term. Ecosystems integrity will not be adversely affected in the long term, but the effect is likely to be significant in the short or medium term to some species or receptors. The area/region may be able to recover through natural regeneration and restoration.

High

Affects environmental conditions, species and habitats for the long term (i.e., over the life of the Project) may substantially alter the local and regional ecosystem and natural resources, and may affect sustainability. Regeneration to its former state would not occur without intervention.

Affects environmental conditions or media over the long term, has local and regional affects and/or is irreversible.

Table 5. Enhancement Criteria - Positive Environmental Effects.

Duration Extent Degree of Change Focus/ Sensitivity

Low Benefits will be short term.

Benefits to a few species, habitat, and resources in the local environment only.

Minor benefits to species, habitat, and natural resources that provide minor opportunities for sustainability.

Benefits will pertain to species, habitats and natural resources that are not sensitive or rare.

Medium Benefits will be measurable in the short term and possibly longer.

Benefits to many species, habitats and natural resources in the local environment and beyond.

Moderate benefits to species, habitat, and natural resources that may provide opportunities for sustainability.

Benefits will pertain to species, habitats and natural resources that have some level of degradation, sensitivity, or rarity.

High Benefits will be sustained over the long term.

Benefits will extend beyond local environment (i.e., linkage of fragmented habitat, e.g., regional corridor)

Direct benefits to species or resources will provide significant opportunities for sustainability.

Benefits will pertain to species, habitats and natural resources that are degraded, or are sensitive, rare, or in need of protection..


Table 6. Severity Criteria - Negative Social or Health Impacts.

Duration Extent Ability to Adapt Socio-cultural Outcome Health Outcome

Low Short-term

Project construction period,

low frequency

Individual/ Household

Those affected will be able to adapt to the changes with relative ease, and maintain pre-impact livelihoods, culture, quality of life and health.

Inconvenience but with no consequence on long-term livelihoods, culture, quality of life, resources, infrastructure and services.

Event resulting in annoyance, minor injury or illness that does not require hospitalization

Medium Medium-term

Project operation period, intermittent frequency

Small number of households

Those affected will be able to adapt to change, with some difficulty, and maintain pre-impact livelihoods, culture, quality of life and health but only with support

Primary and secondary impacts on livelihoods, culture, quality of life, resources, infrastructure and services

Event resulting in moderate injuries or illness, which many require hospitalization

High Long-term/ Irreversible

Permanent, constant frequency

Large part of/ full settlement

Those affected will not be able to adapt to changes and continue to maintain pre-impact livelihood

Widespread and diverse primary and secondary impacts likely to be impossible to reverse or compensate for.

Catastrophic event resulting in loss of life, severe injuries or chronic illness requiring hospitalization.


Table 7. Enhancement Criteria - Positive Social and Health Effects.

Duration Extent Degree of Change Focus/ Sensitivity

Low level of enhancement

Benefits will be short-term (up to a year)

Benefits to few individuals/ households either in the local area and/or further afield.

Some benefits to individuals and communities, potentially improving opportunities for furthering themselves and improving livelihoods

Benefits will not pertain to vulnerable groups and will only benefit those that would have otherwise benefited from the Project.

Medium level of enhancement

Benefits will be felt for a medium period of time (1 to 7 years) or be intermittent over the longer term

Benefits to many individuals and households in the local community and beyond

Moderate benefits to individuals and communities which will provide some opportunities for furthering themselves and improving livelihoods

Benefits will possibly pertain to vulnerable groups and those that might have been losers from the Project

High level of enhancement

Benefits will be lasting and sustained over the long term i.e.: more than 7 years

Benefits throughout the local community and beyond to State/ National level.

Direct benefits to individuals and communities will provide significant opportunities for leveraging secondary benefits and significantly improving livelihoods for themselves and others

Benefits will pertain to vulnerable groups and those that would have otherwise have been losers as a result of the Project.

Prepare Environmental and Social Management Plans

At the end of the Impact Assessment Phase, mitigation measures are developed to minimize negative impacts and/or enhance the benefits of the Project. Also, ESMPs are prepared to manage environmental and social issues during the construction, operation, and decommissioning phases of the Project. Four ESMPs will be prepared for the Project and integrated into the EIA document:

Environmental Management Plan - this plan will comprise the avoidance and mitigation measures recommended by EIA team members and other Greenland experts.

Social Management Plan - this plan will incorporate the recommendations from the social and economic baseline studies and will be used as a guide to community engagement by Alcoa.

Emergency Response Plan - this plan will be comprised an emergency response plan, a contingency plan, a landslide and seismic risk assessment, and cargo loading and unloading prevention measures.


Monitoring Plan - this plan will comprise the follow up and other monitoring measures recommended by the EIA team to be implemented during the construction and operation phases of the Project.

Disclosure Phase

During the Disclosure Phase, the results of the EIA will be submitted to the GHR Ministry of Environment and presented to the public, who will be given the opportunity for review and comment. Public access to the document will be provided through several venues. The public will be able to review the full-text of the report and full details of the analysis will be provided to the local media. Public meetings will be held during this time and will be attended by representatives of ERM and the Project proponents.

Implementation Phase

If the Project is approved after the Disclosure Phase, the Implementation Phase commences with the implementation of recommended ESMPs during the design, construction and operation phases of the Project. Monitoring activities of any potential impacts identified during scoping are initiated to verify that the EIA findings are correct and that appropriate mitigation and prevention measures are properly implemented.

3.4 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

Stakeholder consultation is an important component for any new project Alcoa undertakes anywhere in the world and it is a key aspect of the EIA process. The consultation process gives stakeholders an opportunity to learn about the Project, raise concerns, understand the potential effects, and comment on the Project as well as on the reports that are produced during each phase of the EIA.

Table 8 summarizes the key stakeholder consultation activities planned for each phase of the EIA. This plan is adaptive and subject to change based on stakeholder responses and Project requirements. A combination of various types of consultation techniques will be used including face to face meetings, focus group discussions (discussions with sub groups within communities like women, youth, and indigenous people), public meetings, and sample household socioeconomic surveys. The concerns and issues that are expressed by the stakeholders during the consultations will be recorded and disclosed in the EIA. Table 9 contains a summary of


environmental, social, and health topics that have been introduced by stakeholders during the scoping consultations and other meetings held to date. This summary will be continuously updated throughout the EIA process and included in the EIA report.

Table 8. Summary of Project EIA Public Consultation Plan.

EIA Phase Consultation Plan Estimated Timeframe

Scoping Phase Meetings with Alcoa and Greenland Development (Project proponents). Reconnaissance visit to the smelter site

September 2008

Public meetings in Maniitsoq and Sisimiut held to inform stakeholders about the Project, the EIA, and to solicit feedback and concerns on the Project. A feedback mechanism was established including response forms and key contact points so that the stakeholders could provide their feedback and comments.

September 2008

Discussions with: NERI Greenland Institute of Natural Resources National Museum Hunters and fishers Specific community representatives

identified during stakeholder mapping exercise

January 2009

Qualitative discussions/ Focus Group Discussions with communities in:

Sisimiut Nuuk Maniitsoq

January 2009

Distribution of draft ToR to key stakeholders including government ministries and community leaders.

January 2009

Notify communities and other stakeholders of public meeting to be held for the ToR consultation. Methods such as email messages to specific stakeholders, newspaper advertisements, posters, and radio announcements were be used to notify stakeholders.

January 2009

ToR consultation meetings were held in Nuuk, Sisimiut, and Maniitsoq

January 2009

Impact Assessment Phase

Specialist studies will be conducted such as terrestrial and aquatic ecology, socio-economics, hydrogeology etc. During the course of these specialized studies consultations will be held with relevant stakeholders.

January December 2009

A household survey will be conducted. The survey will be a random sample survey of representative households to provide inputs into the socio-economic baseline of the Project area. The main habitations that will be covered include those proximate to the Project areas.

May 2009


EIA Phase Consultation Plan Estimated Timeframe

Qualitative discussions/ Focus Group Discussions with communities in:

Sisimiut Nuuk Maniitsoq Kangaamiut Napasoq

May 2009

Study update meeting to be held in Maniitsoq and possibly Sisimiut, Nuuk, and Kangaamiut

October 2009

Disclosure Phase After the first draft of the EIA has been prepared another round of consultations will be held to share initial findings and solicit stakeholder feedback on the EIA. Notify communities and other stakeholders of public meeting to be held. Methods such as email messages, newspaper advertisements, posters, and radio announcements will be used to notify stakeholders.

March 2010

Distribute draft EIA for public comments April 2010 Solicit final comments from the stakeholders

(deadline for public comments) End of May 2010

Final EIA June 2010 Note: italics represent meetings/consultations already conducted.

Table 9. Summary of Environmental, Social, and Health Topics Introduced by Stakeholders during the ToR Consultation Process

Issue Sub-Issue Questions/Comments from Stakeholders

Company Performance

Previous Experience

What is the experience of other communities like Iceland and Brazil?

What are the social impacts of other smelters?

Are fish around the Iceland smelter showing pollution effects?

Are there other examples where Alcoa has partnered with a Government to build a smelter project?

Employment Availability of Jobs

What jobs will become available? Where? How many?

Will most of the jobs be tied to the hydropower development?

Nationality of Employees

Who will work at the plant? Greenlanders?

Where will the workers come from?

Will you hire local contractors from Greenland to build the Project?

Workforce Development

What incentives are in place to compel youngsters to seek jobs? Does Alcoa have funding opportunities for education?



Cumulative Impacts

Other Industrial Developments

Is Hudson Resources exploring for uranium in the same area as the hydropower project? Are there any incompatibilities? Could it damage Alcoas reputation?

Energy Transmission Capacity

What will be the hydropower plants generation capacity? How many turbines are going to be installed?

Will the energy from the hydropower development be shared with Maniitsoq?

Will the excess heat from the smelter be shared with Maniitsoq?

Health Health Impact Maniitsoq community members are concerned about how the Project could affect community health and exposure to chemicals.

What will be the smelters effect on the health and lungs of people in Manitsoq?

What will Alcoa do to ensure workers health?

Health Services There is concern that local hospital/health service providers will be overwhelmed. Will Alcoa build a hospital for its workers?

Maniitsoq Hospital is understaffed. Will there be job openings for nurses in Alcoa clinic or health center?

Information/ Communication

Contact Point There is a need for a local contact in Manitsoq to address questions that come up.

Studies/Access to Information

No studies prove that everything will be all right.

Paradise Valley can be destroyed by dams; concern that studies are not fully addressing this.

How can people with no access to email or computer read the EIA-related documents or comment on the Project?

Safety People in Nuuk have stated that the Project is dangerous.

Will the potential safety hazards from ice falling from transmission lines be considered in the EIA?

Infrastructure & Planning

Capacity of Existing Infrastructure

Will there be pressure on infrastructure (e.g., workers coming into town, increased number of flights into town)?

How will the Project affect traffic?



Access Around Planned Infrastructure

Will ships be stopped at the bridge near the smelter site because of the bridges height? Will big ships be able to reach the harbor? How does the bridge affect the emergency harbor?

Will the Port be shared-use or restricted to Alcoa-use only?

The smelter site is an area where local people go berry picking. Will locals still have access for berry picking near the smelter site?

The transmission lines for this project are much longer than in Iceland. Will the effects of the lines be more severe than in Iceland due to their length and the type of terrain?

Will the road or transmission line crossings over the Ataa Inlet affect boat access or traffic?

Transmission lines: what will be the height of the transmission lines? How will they cross rivers? Will the lines be shielded from ice calving?

Will roads be constructed from shoreline to the plant?

How high will the dams be?

What will be the length of the tunnel?

Livelihoods of Hunters and Fishers

Consultation Alcoa needs to consult the local fishermen and hunters

Potential Environmental Damage

Fear that hunting areas around Paradise Valley and the lake in Nuuk will be damaged as a result of construction of the Project.

History of Hunting Practices/ Folklore

Tasersiaq was a reliable reindeer hunting area, reached by ummiak (seal-skin boats typically used by women). Today, its mostly Manitsoq people who hunt there.

Tasersiaq means lake that is bought. Reindeer hunters used it as a point of reference in relation to another point found north, down in fjord. It was traditional to trade places. Hence the name.

Tasersiaqs Roof, the small portion of upper lake of Tasersiaq, was believed to be higher than 4m. There are falls between the Roof and the rest of the lake.

Sisimiut people do not hunt or fish south of the Eternity Fjord.

In the 1970s, Hans Holm, a radio journalist, recorded an ancient story told by an elder about Tasersiaq, - stakeholders thought it would be interesting for Alcoa to listen to it.



Resource Availability

What will be the effect of the Project on caribou/musk ox migration?

What will be the effects on fisheries arctic char spawning?

No fishing is done in char spawning rivers: these are sacred sites and there is an unwritten rule that prohibits fishing.

People from Kangaamiut fish char in Tasersiaq.

How will Arctic char, caribou, and musk ox populations be affected by the hydro projects?

Halibut fishing is common in the fjord directly east of planned transmission lines.

Are caribou collars heavy? How long will they wear them?

Where are caribou with collars?

How does caribou radio tracking work?

The area between Manitsoq and Sisimiut is rich in trout and char. What effect will the Project have on it?

What effect will construction have on caribou?

Will ship traffic affect long line fishing near the port site?

Safeguarding Fishing/ Hunting Cabins

What will happen to the various fishing/hunting cabins close to the aluminum smelter?

What will be the effects of the hydropower dams on huts/cabins in the area?

Smelter site is near the location of summer cabins; seals are hunted near the site. Crabs, cod, torsk, stenbidder, haukat are also caught there in spring.

How far away from the project facilities will no hunting or off-limit zones go?

Natural Resources

Biodiversity What will be the effects of the Project on birds?

Beluga whales might come back to Iqimut (abandoned settlement near Manitsoq).

What animals live in areas that will be inundated?

Note: The hunters and fishers livelihood section includes questions concerning availability of and impact on Arctic char, caribou, and musk ox.



Land Change How much land area will be submerged around the hydropower projects?

Water rising due to the dam can cause special places to disappear.

What will be the level of water after dams are complete?

What will be the percentage increase in lake surface area and volume?

What will be the effects on Paradise Valley?

How much land around Paradise Valley will be destroyed?

How much land do you need for the Project? How does this compare to Iceland and Brazil?

What will be the effects of the lake level increase caused by the hydro developments? How is this being studied? How will vegetation around the lakes be affected?

Will the hydropower lakes create more humidity and change the environmental conditions near the lakes?

How will the hydro facilities affect the other mining projects in the area?

Water Quality What will be the effect of the Project on the water quality of the lakes?

Pollution CO2 Emissions How many tons of carbon emissions will be generated as a result of this Project? How does this relate to the current yearly GHG emissions for Greenland?

Are emissions from airplanes, traffic, and logistics taken into account?

Is it true that CO2 Emissions will double in Greenland after the Alcoa Project becomes operational?

Waste Discharge Will the smelter have wastewater discharge to the sea? Mayapoq current could carry it to Kangaamiut.

How will wastes be managed? Will Alcoa build their own dump?

Production Capacity

Smelter Capacity

How much will the Manitsoq smelter produce as a percentage of total global aluminum production?

Project Siting Selection Is it impossible to construct a smelter plant in the United States?

Social Impacts Concern About Potential Conflict

Concern that diversity of workforce might introduce conflict, such as religious disputes.

Concern that the workforce will not be restricted to the work site, as previously indicated, and will be allowed to go into town.

Social Impact Assessment

How will the social studies be done?

What will happen to workers and communities once the Project is phased out?



Stakeholder Engagement

Future Consultations

Hold the next consultation over two days or on a Saturday so that more people can attend.

Work with hunting and tourism associations and make sure they are invited to community meetings.

More time is needed to help people understand a Project as big as this one.

3.5 EIA SCHEDULE

Table 10 summarizes the schedule for implementing the EIA for the Project. This schedule is based on the Project proponents proposal to initiate construction in late 2010 so that the Project can be operational by 2014. The EIA schedule is subject to change based on Project needs and development schedule.

Table 10. Schedule for the Project EIA.

Schedule EIA Task/Activity

May through September 2008

Conduct 2008 field and desktop baseline studies

September 2008 Hold ESHIA kick-off and scoping meetings

September through January 2009

Prepare Draft ToR

Conduct ToR consultations

Conduct ToR public meetings

February 2009 Issue Draft ToR to public

Public comment period for ToR

Review 2008 study results

Begin drafting EIA baseline

March-April 2009 Conduct 2009 EIA study planning

Issue Final ToR

June through December 2009

Conduct 2009 field and desktop impact studies

October 2009 Hold study update public meeting

January March 2010 Conduct impact assessment

Prepare Preliminary Draft EIA, conduct internal review

March 2010 Prepare Draft EIA and hold Draft EIA public disclosure meeting

April 2010 Issue Draft EIA

June 2010 Issue Final EIA


4.0 DETAILED STUDY PLANS

This section describes the proposed desktop research and field studies that will be undertaken as part of the Project EIA. At a minimum, the following subject areas will be addressed in the EIA via desktop and/or field studies. This list is dynamic and will likely change based on information gathered during the various phases of the EIA process. Environmental: Biological resources - terrestrial and aquatic (freshwater and marine)

habitat/flora/fauna, threatened and endangered flora and fauna species, biodiversity, fluoride-sensitive vegetation

Air quality, including greenhouse gases Water quality and quantity Noise (terrestrial and marine) Geology, soils, topography, permafrost Solid and liquid waste generation and disposal Visual/aesthetics Natural hazards Social: Communities size and distance from Project, demographics,

characteristics, social institutions

Economy businesses, jobs, education, access to training, worker mobility

Culture/Heritage - religion, customs, ethnicity, identity, heritage, language

Land Use and Natural Resources natural resources use and livelihoods, land ownership, land use

Health: Existing diseases and exposure to disease Health services availability, quality, capacity, location Health behaviors and perceptions Exposure to hazardous materials and air emissions


Exposure to electromagnetic fields Strain on local services (e.g., water, power) Traffic and road accidents

4.1 DESKTOP RESEARCH STUDIES

The desktop research studies will entail thorough literature reviews for all of the resource areas covered in the EIA. One of the primary purposes of the desktop review will be to further evaluate data from secondary sources, according to:

the extent to which available baseline information covers all areas potentially impacted by the Project;

whether the current existing baseline data is still valid and sufficient or should be updated and extended through primary research; and

the extent to which baseline data meets requirements to complete an EIA to the standards and guidelines outlined in Section 2 of this ToR.

One of the primary sources for desktop research will be the SEA report (GHR, 2007). For some resources, desktop studies will be sufficient for the impact analysis. For most resources, field studies will be necessary, as detailed in the following section.

4.2 FIELD STUDIES

The following section provides brief summaries of the objectives, scopes, and schedules for the field studies to be conducted by ERM and their partners as part of the EIA process. Note that some 2009 field studies will not be scoped until spring 2009 so the study plans are not included in this ToR.


To locate important caribou foraging and calving habitats and migration routes. The caribou study program consists of four parts: 1) Collection and analysis of Greenland Institute of Natural Resources

(GINR) existing census data to document how caribou are distributed in the area that would be affected by the proposed hydro projects.

2) Updating existing data and acquisition of new data from areas lacking historical data.

3) A satellite-tracking study to document present use of potentially affected areas, including migration routes. The satellite tracking study is a detailed analysis and mapping of caribou distribution and migrations using satellite transmitters. Forty caribou were collared with satellite transmitters in May 2008 and satellite tracking of collared individuals is ongoing.

4) Habitat modeling using snow distribution in the fall, winter, and spring; vegetation mapping; and a digital terrain model.

Reports and maps that combine the data from satellite collars, vegetation maps, and terrain models to document the spatial and seasonal distribution of caribou and migration routes in the study area. The data will identify preferred locations of Project-related infrastructure to minimize impacts on caribou. Schedule: Field work for this study began in May 2008 and will continue through September 2010 Study Partners: GINR and NERI

Study 1. Caribou Distribution and Migration

Approach

Schedule and Study Partners

Objective

Work Products

Area of interest for the caribou studies


Caribou calf

To determine the location of important foraging and calving habitats for caribou. The caribou calving grounds study program consists of three parts:

1) An aerial transect survey to locate caribou calving grounds between Sukkertoppen Iskappe and Godhbsfjorden.

2) Analysis and preparation of maps documenting the calving grounds, including maps of calving grounds overlaid on vegetation maps. The maps will be used to identify preferred siting of proposed Project-related infrastructure to minimize impacts on caribou.

The caribou calving grounds study will produce a report indentifying the most important caribou calving areas in the study area. The report will include maps of the caribous calving areas overlaid on vegetation maps. Schedule: June 2009 Study Partners: GINR and NERI

Study 2. Location of Caribou Calving Grounds between Sukkertoppen Iskappe and Godhbsfjorden

Approach


Objective

Work Products


Typical noise logging device

To characterize the noise environment at the proposed smelter site. Desktop activities include developing an inventory of the types and magnitude of sounds that would be generated by construction and operation of the proposed Project. Field research activities consist of collecting audio recordings of the following ambient conditions at the smelter site:

1) Average sound levels at the proposed smelter site. Ambient sound will be recorded at the

smelter/port site over several hours using a stationary recording device.

2) Type and location of noise sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the proposed smelter site.

The noise study will produce a noise model that predicts the magnitude and extent of noise produced at the proposed smelter and quantifies the increase in noise energy that would occur over existing conditions. Schedule: December 2008 January 2009 Study Partners: None

Approach


Study 3. Baseline Noise Study

Objective

Work Products



1. Identify the waterbodies in the study area that support Arctic char.

2. Determine preferred char spawning, wintering, and migration habitats.

Desktop analysis consists of the following two tasks: 1) Review of topographic maps to determine likely areas for Arctic char to

occur, identify landscape-level differences in habitat, and assess likely barriers to Arctic char migration; and

2) Review of the available scientific literature concerning Arctic chars life history, habitat requirements, migration patterns, and Greenlands aquatic biodiversity and habitat conditions.

Field research consists of the following

tasks: 1) Biological surveys consisting of fish

sampling using a backpack electrofishing unit and longitudinal habitat mapping on the following rivers affected by the proposed hydro projects: a) Igassup Kua River; b) Sarfartoq River; and c) Arnagarnup Kua River.

2) Biological surveys consisting of fish sampling using stationary gillnets and visual habitat mapping of nearshore habitat on the following lakes affected by the proposed hydro projects: a) Tasersiaq; b) Tuvssp tasia; and c) additional unnamed lakes in the southern development.

The study will produce a report identifying the most important Arctic char habitats in the areas potentially affected by the proposed hydro projects.

Schedule: Field work for this study began in August-September 2008 and will continue in September 2009. Study Partners: NERI

Study 4. Arctic Char Study

Objectives

Approach

Work Products

Measuring Arctic char in Paradise Valley


1) Collect local knowledge of habitat requirements and seasonal movements of

Arctic char and other locally significant aquatic biological resources. 2) To complement three other

studies: a) The Arctic char study; b) The Aquatic Biodiversity

study; and c) The Natural Resources

Livelihoods study. Conduct semi-structured qualitative interviews with fishermen in Maniitsoq on the following topics: 1) Identifying key recreational, subsistence, and commercially fished species; 2) Locating and delineating important areas for fishing; 3) Identifying the most productive fishing seasons; and 4) Understanding historical fluctuations in the abundance of preferred

species.

The consultation with fishers study will produce a report that describes local knowledge of habitat requirements and seasonal movements of locally significant aquatic biological resources. Schedule: Field work for this study began in August 2008 and will continue in 2009. Study Partners: NERI

Study 5. Consultation with Fishers

Objectives

Approach


Work Products

Consulting with fishers in Maniitsoq


Approach

Electroshocking in Paradise Valley

Describe biodiversity in the lakes and rivers that would be affected by the proposed hydro projects.

Desktop research consists of the following tasks: 1) Review of existing scientific literature on

Greenlands aquatic macroinvertebrate, aquatic plant, and fish communities and habitats.

2) Consultation with local experts on the biological and ecological characteristics of the aquatic biological communities in the proposed Project area.

Field research will consist of the following tasks: 1) Fish sampling with electrofishing gear, and macroinvertebrate sampling

with stationary drift net samplers 2) Collection of fish and macroinvertebrates on the Igassup Kua River,

Sarfartoq River; and Arnagarnup Kua River. 3) Collection of fish and macroinvertebrates on the following lakes affected

by the proposed hydro projects: a) Tasersiaq; b) Tuvssp tasia; and c) additional unnamed lakes in the southern development.

4) Biological surveys of lakes will consist of fish sampling with gill nets, and collection of macroinvertebrates with stationary drift net samplers.

The aquatic biodiversity study will produce a report that describes the aquatic biodiversity in the lakes and rivers that would be affected by the proposed hydro projects. Schedule: Field work for this study occurred in August-September 2008 Study Partners: NERI

Study 6. Aquatic Biodiversity Study

Objective


Work Products


To describe the species of marine

resources (fish, invertebrates, mammals, and plants) that occur in the vicinity of the proposed port.

To determine seasonal differences in marine resource abundance and distribution in the vicinity of the proposed port.

Research will include a desktop component and may include a field component, depending on the availability and quality fo existing marine resources data. Desktop research will consist of the following tasks: 1) Reviews of existing scientific literature on the species composition,

distribution, and habitat requirements of the marine resources in the vicinity of the proposed port.

2) Determination of the worldwide conservation status and sensitivity to disturbance of marine resources that occur in the vicinity of the proposed port.

The marine resources study will produce a report that describes the species composition, distribution, and conservation status of marine resources in the vicinity of the proposed port. Schedule: Desktop study will occur from March through May 2009. If field research is required, the scope and schedule for field study will be determined in May 2009. Study Partners: To be determined.

Study 7. Marine Resources

Objectives

Approach Humpback whale flukes


Work Products


To describe the moulting and foraging areas for Greenland White-fronted and Canada geese that occur in the vicinity of the proposed Project. 1) To determine seasonal

differences in bird abundance in the vicinity of the proposed Project.

Greenland White-fronted Goose

The aerial survey of goose moulting areas consists of two parts:

1) Review of existing scientific literature on the species composition, distribution, and habitat requirements of White-fronted and Canada geese in the areas potentially affected by the proposed hydro projects.

2) An aerial transect survey using a twin-engined Partenavia Observer aircraft will identify the location of geese moulting areas in the vicinity of the proposed hydro projects.

The aerial survey of goose moulting areas will produce a report that describes the moulting and foraging areas for Greenland White-fronted and Canada geese in the vicinity of the proposed hydro projects. Schedule: Mid-July 2009 Study Partners: NERI

Study 8. Aerial Survey of Geese Moulting Areas

Objectives

Approach

Work Products



To understand the local climate and weather patterns in the vicinity of the proposed smelter site. Construct a small meteorological station on the proposed smelter site to collect the following weather data: 1) Wind speed and direction; 2) Temperature; 3) Precipitation; 4) Solar radiation; 5) Atmospheric stability (sigma

theta) and 6) Relative humidity. The data will be continuously uploaded via satellite link.

The meteorological conditions study will produce a report that describes the local climate and weather patterns in the vicinity of the smelter site. Schedule: January 2009 December 2009 Study Partners: Masanti

Study 9. Meteorological Conditions Study

Objective

Approach


Work Products

Meteorological station at the smelter site on Maniitsoq island


1) To understand the seasonal fluctuations

in water level and flow in the rivers and lakes affected by the proposed hydro projects.

2) Determine the elevation of the local water table in the areas affected by the proposed hydro projects.

3) Characterize the transmissivity of the soil and rock in the vicinity of the proposed hydro projects.

Field study will include the following tasks: 1) Measurement of river stage data over several months from the following

rivers: a) Igassup Kua River; b) Sarfartoq River; and c) Arnagarnup Kua River.

2) Measurement of lake levels at the following locations: a) Tasersiaq; b) Tuvssp tasia; and c) Additional unnamed lakes in the southern development.

The surface water, groundwater, and hydrographic analysis will describe the seasonal fluctuations in water level and flow in the rivers and lakes in the areas potentially affected by the proposed hydro projects. Schedule: Field work for this study began in 2008 and will continue in 2009. Study Leader: PB Power

Study 10. Surface Water, Groundwater, and Hydrographic Analysis

Objectives

Approach


Work Products

Sarfartoq River between the Northern Development Reservoir and Paradise Valley


1) To characterize sediment

transport from reservoirs through hydropower developments and into tailwaters.

2) To determine rate of sediment deposition in the hydro project reservoirs.

Cobbles deposited on the riverbank in Paradise Valley Research will consist primarily of field study including the following tasks: 1) Characterization of dominant sediment type(s), rate of deposition, and

transport characteristics in the following rivers: a) Igassup Kua River; b) Sarfartoq River; and c) Arnagarnup Kua River.

2) Characterization of dominant sediment type(s) and rate of deposition in the following lakes: a) Tasersiaq; b) Tuvssp tasia; and c) Additional unnamed lakes in the southern development.

The sedimentation analysis will produce a report that describes the sediment transport and deposition in the areas potentially affected by the proposed hydro projects. Schedule: Field work for this study began in 2008 and will continue in 2009. Study Leader: PB Power

Study 11. Sedimentation Analysis

Objectives

Approach


Work Products


1) To understand the use of natural

resources by local communities, their livelihood dependence on such resources, and their relationship to environmental quality.

2) To characterize any potential loss of earnings to resource users of the area, e.g., hunters, fishers and tour operators.

3) To characterize contemporary culture of local communities, including its historical and contemporary forms and its manifestations in daily choices and lifestyles of people.

Research will include desktop and field investigations and examine the following topics: 1) Use of the natural resource base, including spatial and temporal variations

and the factors that explain such variations (climatic, technological, cultural, etc. and the interplay with hunting, fishing, herding and tourism), specific user groups, belief systems concerning the environment;

2) Livelihoods, including income, adaptability/substitution, and other dimensions like food insecurity, social inferiority, exclusion, lack of physical assets, and vulnerability;

3) Socio-cultural institutions, including formal and informal social institutions: a) Ways of coping with life through economy, social systems and cultural

values; b) Social cohesion-the ways communities are organized and held together

by their social and cultural institutions and beliefs; c) Identity- ways of life that communities value as expressions of their

identity; 4) Prevalent religions, including origin, practices and diversity; 5) Aesthetics, recreation and cultural relationship to the natural

environment, including the aesthetic and cultural character of a community or neighborhood its ambience;

Study 12. Natural Resources, Livelihoods, and Cultural Change Study

Objectives

Approach

Fishing vessels in Maniitsoq


6) Conflict, including a diagnostic of any pre-existing (i.e. not caused by the proposed Project) conflict and the potential for conflict induced by the proposed Project, including current conditions and likely worker-community interface; and

7) Migration, including a history of in- and out-migration and cultural interaction.

Field research methods will include: 1) Resource mapping and focus group discussions with user groups (fishers

and hunters) and vulnerable groups (low income families or women). 2) Interviews with stakeholders in each of the settlements that are close to

proposed Project infrastructure, including the hydro projects, transmission lines and the smelter/port (Nuuk, Napasoq, Maniitsoq, Kangaamiut Sisimiut, and the settlement nearest the southern hydro project).

3) Gathering oral histories from community members. 4) Interviews with formal /informal institutions like local NGOs, academics

(including biologists, anthropologists, etc.) and government authorities. The natural resources, livelihoods, and cultural change study will produce a report that describes the indigenous culture, local livelihoods, and dependence on natural resources in the areas of Project influence. Schedule: The study is currently planned for May 2009. The fieldwork

component will include: 1) One day in Nuuk; 2) Two days in the settlement nearest to the southern hydropower site; 3) Two days in Napasoq; 4) Five days in Maniitsoq; 5) Three days in Kangaamiut; and 6) Two days in Sisimiut. Study Partners: Local researchers and experts recommended by University of Copenhagen.


Work Products


1) To gain an understanding of the socio-economic characteristics and

perceptions around employment, procurement, and planning challenges associated with the proposed Project.

2) To understand the town and land use planning in Maniitsoq.

3) To complement two other studies: a) NIRASs Macro-economic analysis

this Socio-economic & Planning Study will focus more specifically on household-level socio-economic traits and perceptions; and

b) ERMs Natural Resources & Livelihoods Study this Socio-economic & Planning Study will focus mostly on Maniitsoq and the commercial economy.

Research will include desktop and field investigations and examine the following topics: 1) Describe existing socio-economic conditions (e.g., gender, age structure,

religion, ethnicity, vulnerable groups, household composition and demography, population growth rates, migration patterns, occupations, formal and informal income sources, income levels, economic growth rates, household assets, infrastructure) in the areas where the proposed Project would be located.

2) Identify the perceptions, possible concerns and expectations of the local people vis--vis the potential employment and procurement of the proposed Project;

3) Assess the state of infrastructure and services: education, utilities, transportation, etc. and access to such infrastructure.

4) Assess the capacities of institutions to support the proposed Project, especially related to economic development and town and land use planning.

Desktop research will include reviews of the following information sources, at a minimum:

Final_ToR_4_6_09.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Final_ToR_4_6_09.pdf