What the Indigenous nations filed

Request to stop the clock

FromOffice of the Wet'suwet'en DatedSeptember 10, 2022 Length4 pages

The Office asks the EAO to suspend the legal time limit on its review until Telkwa Coal fills "critical information gaps" by working directly with the members of the two affected houses, Cas Yex and Kwen Bea Yex. It says the company's chapter on Wet'suwet'en title and rights "has been completed as a desktop exercise only", with "no engagement" of house members in writing it.

It names three gaps: cultural data, cumulative effects data, and socio-economic data, each specific to the two house territories. It states that title and rights are held by the houses, "have never been surrendered or extinguished", and that finishing the review without this information "would represent a total failure of the BC EAO".

Agreement to move the review under the 2018 Act

FromOffice of the Wet'suwet'en DatedOctober 20, 2022 Length3 pages

The Office calls the review under the 2002 Act "seriously flawed" and agrees to Telkwa Coal's proposal to move it under the 2018 Act in place of a suspension. It asks for "a transparent and consensus-based approach" to the move, and says it "must be directly involved" in deciding how the review continues.

It adds a condition: until funds are provided for the work plans, the Office "will not be in a position to meaningfully engage".

Confirmation as a participating nation

FromWitset First Nation DatedOctober 2022 Length2 pages, an email with names blacked out

A one-line reply to the EAO: "I can confirm that Witset First Nation intends to proceed as a participating Indigenous Nation." The registry file name gives the year as 2023; the email replies to an EAO message of October 25, 2022, and the Amendment Order dates the confirmation October 26, 2022.

Confirmation as a participating nation

FromOffice of the Wet'suwet'en DatedNovember 2, 2022 Length1 page

The Office confirms it will take part under the 2018 Act, and sets out who decides. The 13 house groups "are the governing bodies"; the Office supports the house groups with "operational and technical assistance". The letter says it "must be clearly understood that the Office of the Wet'suwet'en is not authorized to make decisions on behalf of our house groups".

Information Requests for the two houses

FromIssued by the EAO for the Office of the Wet'suwet'en DatedDecember 2022 Length1 page

Three requests, each to be met "through direct engagement with Cas Yex and Kwen Bea Yex House Groups and in collaboration with" the Office. Telkwa Coal must collect cultural data, cumulative effects data and socio-cultural data specific to the two house territories, and agree with the houses on the method for assessing cumulative effects.

Information Requests for Witset

FromIssued by the EAO for Witset First Nation DatedDecember 14, 2022 Length1 page

Five requests. The first three match those for the houses, specific to Witset First Nation. The fourth asks Telkwa Coal to commit to sharing all project information with Witset, including the company’s proposed "avoidance, mitigation, and accommodation measures". The fifth asks for an assessment of the project's effects on Witset's cultural and socio-economic values.

Confirmation as a participating nation

FromWet'suwet'en First Nation DatedJanuary 9, 2023 Length1 page

Chief Maureen Luggi confirms that Wet'suwet'en First Nation "identifies as a participating Indigenous nation" for the review under the 2018 Act. The letter raises no issues about the project.

Notice that Skin Tyee was left out

FromSkin Tyee First Nation DatedFebruary 9, 2023 Length4 pages

Chief Rosemarie Skin writes that the EAO "has excluded us" from the review: Skin Tyee was not notified of the project, of the move to the 2018 Act, or of the January 16, 2023 deadline to give notice. She asks the EAO to extend that deadline.

The letter says Skin Tyee is a member of the Office of the Wet'suwet'en, but that the Office "does not represent Skin Tyee in this matter", and that Skin Tyee’s interests "are not necessarily represented by the Wet'suwet'en Hereditary Chiefs". Skin Tyee’s stated concern is salmon: "Critical salmon harvesting sites are located in close proximity to the Project area", and it is "very concerned" about selenium reaching the fish.

Water and the Tenas Coal Project

FromAllison Oliver, Ph.D., Skeena Fisheries Commission, for the Office of the Wet'suwet'en Dated2022 Length30 pages

A review of the company's water chapters, written "to support decision-making processes by the affected House Groups".

• The baseline is thin. The company's data are "appropriate for a bare minimum assessment". Many sites have one year of monthly samples; the report recommends three to five.
• The discharge points are not located. The Application gives no coordinates for where pond water enters the creeks, and the monitoring sites sit "a substantial distance downstream".
• Guidelines are exceeded in the company's own best case. Selenium, nitrite, cadmium and sulphate are among the substances predicted above baseline and above provincial and federal guidelines, during mining and after closure.
• The company's own targets are looser than the guidelines. Its proposed site objectives are higher than the guidelines "for all parameters", and selenium, cadmium and thallium are predicted to exceed even those at low flow.
• There is no treatment. "There is no water treatment proposed other than sediment control."
• A dam failure would be permanent. A breach "would be a catastrophic event that would severely and permanently compromise" the water downstream.

The report refers to a separate plain-language summary for the two houses. We did not find that summary in the registry.

Fish and Fish Habitat and the Tenas Coal Project

FromKyla Warren, Skeena Fisheries Commission, for the Office of the Wet'suwet'en DatedMay 2022 Length28 pages

A review of the company's fish chapters. It states that it "will not contain advice on whether the project should be supported"; that decision is left to Wet'suwet'en decision makers.

• Steelhead are the main concern. The project area "is very important habitat for steelhead", and a 1997 study called Tenas and lower Goathorn creeks "the most productive steelhead tributaries in the Telkwa system". The effects "will be permanent (measured in centuries)".
• Four Creek may lose its fish. Diversions could remove the winter habitat of its Dolly Varden, and it "would become non-fish bearing".
• The company counts only what it predicts. The Application assumes every mitigation works, so a fuel spill is counted as zero effect. The report describes risks and their likelihood instead.
• Habitat offsets often fail. The Application relies on an offsetting plan with no design, location or size. The report cites a study of 16 such projects in which 12% achieved a net gain and 63% a net loss.
• The company's horizon is 50 years. Water quality effects are "expected to increase over time", "to peak in 100 years". The report says "the Wet'suwet'en cannot walk away from this area".