Debates of October 5, 2023 (day 167)

Date
October
5
2023
Session
19th Assembly, 2nd Session
Day
167
Members Present
Hon. Diane Archie, Hon. Frederick Blake Jr., Mr. Bonnetrouge, Hon. Paulie Chinna, Ms. Cleveland, Hon. Caroline Cochrane, Mr. Edjericon, Hon. Julie Green, Mr. Jacobson, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Martselos, Ms. Nokleby, Mr. O’Reilly, Ms. Semmler, Hon. R.J. Simpson, Mr. Rocky Simpson, Hon. Shane Thompson, Hon. Caroline Wawzonek, Ms. Weyallon Armstrong
Topics
Statements

Member’s Statement 1646-19(2): Arsenic Remediation Guidelines

Merci, Monsieur le President. I have been waiting patiently for about 20 years for GNWT to finally review its arsenic remediation guidelines. Yesterday I talked about the flawed environmental guideline for contaminated site remediation with its very short public comment period.

Buried in one of the appendices are new arsenic remediation guidelines that significantly lower the acceptable limits for arsenic in soils for various land uses. This appears to be based on new research and background studies. The research shows the background levels of arsenic are significantly lower than what was originally set and, also, that most of the arsenic contamination in the Yellowknife area is a direct result of mining activities. The background studies were only recently made public following my request on August the 7th to the Minister.

The new arsenic remediation guidelines would significantly lower the acceptable limits for all land uses from what was set in 2003. A few examples, residential land use is lowered from 160 to 120 parts per million arsenic, and industrial use has gone from 340 to 163 parts per million with no explanation. The most alarming part is that areas outside Yellowknife have much lower limits, at 47 parts per million for residential use and 90 parts per million for industrial use. It's not clear why it is okay to expose Yellowknife residents to three times more arsenic than those who live outside.

Perhaps the detail are in those documents that were only recently released. I tried to look at them last night, Mr. Speaker, but way over my head. But it is not explained in the guideline itself anywhere. I always thought that arsenic soil remediation guidelines were set far too high to protect human health. The new proposed guidelines seem to bear that out. The biggest implication may be for the Giant Mine Remediation Project that used the old 2003 arsenic soil remediation levels which may no longer be safe for human health. So of course the rhetorical question, Mr. Speaker, is will Giant Mine remediation now adopt the new lower arsenic levels? I will have questions later today for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on the new proposed arsenic soil remediation levels. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Members' statements. Member for Tu NedheWiilideh.