Re: Métis Local 1909 Comments on CEAA Round 4 SIRs for the proposed Teck Frontier Oil Sands Mine Project.

Transcription

1 Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Attention: Carolyn Dunn, Crown Consultation Coordinator 160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor Ottawa ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: January 16, 2015 Re: Métis Local 1909 Comments on CEAA Round 4 SIRs for the proposed Teck Frontier Oil Sands Mine Project. Dear Carolyn, This letter provides comments on Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency ( CEAA ) Draft Round 4 Supplemental Information Requests ( SIRs ) in regards to the Teck Resources Limited ( Teck ) proposed Frontier Oil Sands Mine Project. Métis Local 1909 provided a letter of comment on November 21, 2014, to CEAA in response to Teck s Round 3 SIR responses. This letter found several procedural and substantive deficiencies in these responses and the environmental assessment ( EA ) process. Most of the nine legitimate concerns identified in that letter have not been included in CEAA s Round 4 SIRs nor have they been addressed through the EA process to date. Indeed, these legitimate concerns have been treated like refusable advice. For these reasons, Métis Local 1909 has provided CEAA with clear recommendations on how the draft Round 4 SIRs can be updated to pose questions that substantive answers are required from the Proponent on in order to start a consultation dialogue toward addressing many of our remaining outstanding concerns with the proposed Project. In our review, we found very little evidence of consideration of ML1909 interests in the Draft Round 4 SIRs document. As such, we have summarized these remaining concerns: 1. Capacity funding is limited to a Phase 1 traditional use and knowledge study and does not include funding for an effects assessment of use and knowledge, regulatory review, meetings with Teck, and participation in the EA process; 2. Métis Local 1909 traditional use and knowledge information has not been used to shape any of the VCs or the methodology to date and will not be used in the Project Update; ML1909 comments on CEAA Round 4 SIRs for Teck Frontier Project 1

2 3. Métis Local 1909 use and knowledge information will not inform Teck s effects assessment, estimate of significance, or to support in the development of mitigation, monitoring, or follow-up programs; and 4. Socio-economic baseline and impact assessment work specific to Métis Local 1909 membership has not been undertaken to understand potential community impacts and benefits, including capacity to take advantage and constraints against same. We hope this letter and the specific recommendations to CEAA on how to update the Round 4 SIRs, below, will be considered carefully in order to begin to address these deficiencies. 1. Capacity constraints In addition to the SIR-related recommendations below, an even more pressing concern that remains unaddressed by the Crown is capacity constraints on Métis Local As CEAA is aware, Métis Local 1909 was provided with limited capacity funding to participate in the EA process. This funding was adequate only to support early engagement in the pre-panel phase, including: - Review of existing Métis Local 1909 traditional use and knowledge studies that (while collected for proposed Projects south of Fort McMurray) happen to have collected incidental information that demonstrate use in areas overlapping with the proposed Teck Frontier Project; - A meeting and other correspondence with Teck to discuss funding a critically important Project-specific Métis Local 1909 use and knowledge study; - A focused review of Round 3 SIR responses and November 21, 2014, letter response to CEAA; and - A meeting with Teck to discuss letter response to Métis Local 1909 November 21, 2014, letter. Upon completion of this letter, without additional funding, Métis Local 1909 will be in the clearly untenable situation of being forced to fund any additional participation in the EA process out of its own finances. This is fundamentally prejudicial to our ability to protect our Aboriginal rights and interests in relation to this Crown decision-making process. It is critical that CEAA provide additional capacity funding to allow Métis Local 1909 to fully participate in the EA process, including funds to undertake a full review of the upcoming Project Update. ML1909 comments on CEAA Round 4 SIRs for Teck Frontier Project 2

3 Teck has committed to fund a screening level or Phase 1 baseline traditional use and knowledge study, but these monies are not flagged to support involvement in reviewing the Project Update or participate in any meetings with Teck, let alone provide any meaningful input to Project-specific effects assessment on ML 1909 traditional land use, culture, and Aboriginal rights. Of relevance to the Round 4 SIRs, CEAA asks Teck to provide information on efforts made at consultation or collaboration in developing the Project Update and SIR Responses. However, Métis Local 1909 has been unable to initiate participation in this level of engagement with Teck due to capacity constraints. Lastly, the funding promised by Teck for a Métis Local 1909 Phase 1 traditional use and knowledge baseline study will result in a study that will be ready to be appended to the Project Update in May Because the Project Update will be released only a few weeks after our study is released, Teck has indicated that they will not be able to modify their effects characterizations, significance estimations, mitigation, monitoring, and follow-up commitments in their Project Update for traditional use and knowledge or any other discipline as a result of the findings of our study. Obviously, our strong preference would be for the Project Update to be inclusive of our input, and we have shared this perspective with Teck. If this cannot be the case, we urge CEAA to acknowledge this deficiency as it emerges in the Project Update and call on Teck to provide additional information that meaningfully integrates the results of our forthcoming study into an addendum to the Project Update. Topics that would require revision include (at minimum) Teck s: effects characterizations, significance determinations, follow-up, mitigation, and monitoring commitments for traditional use and knowledge, wildlife species used for hunting, and access management, among other critical VCs. 2. November 21, 2014, Métis Local 1909 Letter and Gaps in Round 4 SIRs In our review of Draft Round 4 SIRs, we have focused on the degree to which CEAA has considered Métis Local 1909 concerns identified in our November 21, 2014, letter. We have found that most of the Round 4 SIRs do not address these concerns. We do acknowledge that CEAA has managed to address two important ones; specifically Questions #8 and #9: ML1909 comments on CEAA Round 4 SIRs for Teck Frontier Project 3

4 CEAA s request that Teck provide more detailed information on their proposed access management plan and CEAA s request for more information on impacts to Aboriginal hunters of wood bison Métis Local 1909 strongly urges the Crown ensure these questions are fully addressed before the pre-panel phase is deemed complete. Nonetheless, the vast majority of the concerns raised by ML 1909 in November, 2014, remain unaddressed in the Draft Round 4 SIRs. This demonstrates a failure of the Crown to take into adequate consideration our clearly expressed concerns, and is indicative of a larger failure in Crown consultation efforts to date on this proposed Project. 3. Specific recommendations for CEAA to update Round 4 SIRs The Questions numbered below refer to the numbered sections in the draft Round 4 SIRs. Question 3: Métis Local 1909 would like to know how Teck proposes to involve Aboriginal groups, including Métis Local 1909, in designing and implementing wildlife monitoring programs and any specific recourse Aboriginal groups have when a threshold is exceeded. Please add a final bullet requesting this information. Question 4: CEAA requests information on wood bison to justify conclusions made in relation to Aboriginal people, such as loss of wood bison hunting opportunities or access to herds in relation to likely distribution changes. It is clear that work is required to ensure any access management plan is designed and implemented in a manner and mode acceptable to affected Aboriginal groups. We recommend that CEAA request Teck consult with affected Aboriginal groups on the currently proposed access management plan and disclose which Aboriginal groups consider the plan to be acceptable or not. Further, any access plan must describe not only how locations critical to Aboriginal hunting activities will continue to be accessible, but also how locations critical to trapping, food and medicinal plant harvesting, fishing, gathering and other traditional and cultural activities inextricably linked to Aboriginal cultural practices on the land will continue to be accessible. Providing access to Aboriginal hunters should also be a priority as cumulative effects of non- Aboriginal hunters is a concern. Question 5: Métis Local 1909 appreciates these additional requirements for understanding winter carrying capacity, as Project and cumulative effects on wood bison are a critical concern for our members. When considering carrying capacity, it ML1909 comments on CEAA Round 4 SIRs for Teck Frontier Project 4

5 is essential that it be considered to ensure preferred and/or priority Aboriginal right to harvest. We recommend that CEAA require Teck to provide evidence of desired future harvesting rates for local Aboriginal groups, including Métis Local 1909, to demonstrate that capacity can be maintained. Our members want the security to ensure access to wood bison is maintained for generations into the future to protect our Aboriginal rights. We also recommend that CEAA require Teck to provide TK information on wood bison capacity changes over time and likely Project and cumulative effects. Question 7: CEAA requests that Teck clearly describe data gaps in wildlife studies, including those identified by Aboriginal groups. It is crucial that data gaps are described for other VCs as well. We urge CEAA to review the entire Project Update with this in mind, and in light of our previous November 2014 submission. No specific changes to the Round 4 SIR are recommended. Question 9: Métis Local 1909 finds this to be a useful SIR and one that we hope CEAA will require Teck to respond to in a fulsome way. It is crucial that Aboriginal groups, including Métis Local 1909, are given the opportunity and resources to participate in all monitoring activities, especially those as crucial as habitat offsets that may affect traditional use activities. We recommend that CEAA add including participation of Aboriginal groups in the monitoring and measuring of success for habitat offsets in (f) at the bottom. Métis Local 1909 finds the many of the Round 3 SIRs have not been fully addressed and strongly recommends CEAA re-issue the following Round 3 SIRs in the Round 4 SIRs to ensure that they are fully addressed in the Project Update: Closing - Round 3 SIR Question 72 requests detailed information on pre-industrial baseline traditional use and knowledge and intergenerational impacts of the Project on the cultural and spiritual relationship with the land ; - Round 3 SIR Question 73 asks Teck to provide more substantial information on cumulative effects of exploration programs; and - Round 3 SIR Question 74 requests that Teck provide an assessment on avoidance of traditional use phenomenon when considering direct and cumulative effects on Project on traditional use and knowledge activities using indicators such as noise, perceived bad air quality, odours, perceived contamination among others. ML1909 comments on CEAA Round 4 SIRs for Teck Frontier Project 5

6 As we stated above, Teck has indicated that Métis Local 1909 traditional use and knowledge information - expected to be completed end of April is not currently proposed to be included in the Project Update. In our November 21, 2014, letter to CEAA, Métis Local 1909 suggested that Teck s timeline to submit their Project Update in mid-2015 would give sufficient time to ensure any Métis Local 1909 use and knowledge study could be integrated into the Project Update. However, we now understand that the Proponent s current plan is that Métis Local 1909 traditional use and knowledge study will be merely appended to the Project Update. As an extension of this gap, any consideration of Aboriginal use and knowledge in any SIR response for Rounds 1 through 4 will not include consideration of Métis Local 1909 for any VC. To address this concern, a specific edit to any of the SIRs would not suffice. Instead, we feel that the Crowns honour demands a requirement that the Proponent ensure the information provided by Métis Local 1909 is adequately considered to meet section 5(1)(c) requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act after the Project Update is submitted. As highlighted above, we urge CEAA to issue an additional SIR to require Teck to fully and meaningfully integrate Métis Local 1909 use and knowledge baseline study into the integrated application prior to the completion of the pre-panel phase of the EA process. We do hope that CEAA carefully considers the contents of this letter, including the specific recommendations provided herein. We look forward to reviewing the final version of CEAA s Round 4 SIRs when they are released, and to being provided the critical resources we need to consult meaningfully with the Crown on this Project with a substantial potential for adverse risks on our Aboriginal rights, cultural practices and way of life on the land. Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED Melina Scoville President, Métis Nation of Alberta, Local 1909 CC: Amanda Black, Oil Sands Authorizations, Alberta Energy Regulator CC: Corinne Kristensen, Environment and Sustainable Resource Development CC: Janais Turuk, Manager, Community Relations, Teck Resources Ltd. CC: Janice Elliott, Vice-President, The Métis Nation of Alberta, Local 1909 CC: Diane Scoville, The Métis Nation of Alberta, Region 1 1 Teck committed to funding a Project-specific preliminary, Phase 1 use and knowledge study on November 21, Teck subsequently approved a statement of work on December 20, The study is being initiated in January 2015 to ensure completion of baseline study by end of April ML1909 comments on CEAA Round 4 SIRs for Teck Frontier Project 6