FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL CONSULTATION AND ACCOMMODATION REPORT SITE C CLEAN ...

91 Pages·2014·0.97 MB·English

FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL CONSULTATION AND ACCOMMODATION REPORT

SITE C CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT

September 7, 2014
1
Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose of the Report
1.2 Project Description
1.3 Environmental Assessment Process
1.4 Panel Report Conclusions

2.0 Engagement of Aboriginal Groups in the Environmental Assessment
2.1 Aboriginal Groups Involved
2.2 Bodies Representing Aboriginal Groups for Consultation Purposes
2.3 Ethno‐historic Information Sources Related to Aboriginal Groups
2.4 Traditional and Socio‐Economic Setting of Aboriginal Groups
2.5 Consultation with Aboriginal Groups
2.5.1 Principles Involved in Establishing Depth of Duty to Consult
2.5.2 Approach to Assessing Potential Impacts of the Project to Aboriginal
Interests
2.5.3 Contextual Factors Related to Assessing Impacts on Aboriginal Interests
2.5.4 Approach to Consultation with Treaty 8 First Nations
2.5.5 Approach to Consultation with Non‐treaty First Nations
2.5.6 Approach to Consultation with Métis Nations

3.0 Summary of Consultation Process
3.1 Proponent’s Consultation Process
3.1.1 Proponent Consultation Summaries
3.2 Federal and Provincial Government Consultation
3.2.1 Early EA Planning
3.2.2 Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines
3.2.3 Environmental Impact Statement
3.2.4 Joint Review Panel Stage including Public Hearing
3.2.5 Post Panel Stage and Decision Making Processes
3.3 Participant Funding Provided
3.4 Adjustments to EA Process and Timelines

4.0 Consideration of Aboriginal Interests and Concerns
4.1 Crown Consultation Record and Tracking of Key Issues
4.2 Addressing Key Aboriginal Interests and Concerns
4.2.1 Project Modifications
4.2.2 Potential Federal and Provincial Conditions
4.2.3 Other Accommodation Measures
4.2.4 Impacts to Hunting and Trapping
4.2.5 Impacts to Fishing
4.2.6 Impacts to Other Traditional Uses of the Land
4.2.7 Socio‐economic Concerns
4.2.8 Assessment Methodology, Process and Consultation
4.3 Key Issues Raised by Aboriginal Groups during Post‐Panel Stage Consultation

5.0 Conclusions
5.1 Adequacy of Consultation
5.2 Status of Accommodation
2
Appendix A – Crown Consideration of Specific Aboriginal Interests and Concerns

A1 ‐ Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation
A2 ‐ Beaver First Nation
A3 ‐ Blueberry River First Nations
A4 ‐ Dene Tha’ First Nation
A5 ‐ Deninu K’ue First Nation
A6 ‐ Doig River First Nation
A7 ‐ Duncan's First Nation
A8 ‐ Fort Chipewyan Métis Local #125
A9 ‐ Fort Nelson First Nation
A10 ‐ Halfway River First Nation
A11 ‐ Horse Lake First Nation
A12 ‐ Kelly Lake Métis Settlement Society
A13 ‐ Kwadacha First Nation
A14 ‐ Little Red River Cree Nation
A15 ‐ McLeod Lake Indian Band
A16 ‐ Métis Association of Alberta, Region 6
A17 ‐ Métis Nation British Columbia
A18 ‐ Mikisew Cree First Nation
A19 ‐ Northwest Territory Métis Nation
A20 ‐ Paddle Prairie Métis Settlement Society
A21 ‐ Prophet River First Nation
A22 ‐ Salt River First Nation
A23 ‐ Saulteau First Nations
A24 ‐ Smith’s Landing First Nation
A25 ‐ Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation
A26 ‐ Tallcree First Nation
A27 ‐ Tsay Keh First Nation
A28 ‐ West Moberly First Nations
A29 ‐ Woodland Cree First Nation

Appendix B – Panel Recommendations

3
1.0 Introduction

This document provides a summary of the procedural and substantive aspects of Crown‐
Aboriginal consultation integrated into the environmental assessment (EA) of the proposed
Site C Clean Energy Project (proposed Project).

The Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) and the Canadian Environmental Assessment
Agency (Agency), collectively representing “the Crown” or “the Governments” have
prepared this report to document the Aboriginal consultation conducted with respect to
the responsible provincial Ministers and the Government of Canada’s respective EA
decisions on the proposed Project including proposed accommodation for potential
impacts to asserted or established Aboriginal or treaty rights (“Aboriginal Interests”). As
such, this report is in keeping with the Crown’s constitutional duty to consult and, where
appropriate, accommodate.

1.1 Purpose of the Report

The report’s key goals are to describe for federal and provincial decision makers:

1. Aboriginal consultation in respect of the proposed Project;
2. the views of Aboriginal groups on how the proposed Project, if it proceeds, has the
potential to impact their Aboriginal Interests and other interests;
3. the measures proposed to address potential impacts on Aboriginal Interests and
other interests raised by Aboriginal groups; and
4. the conclusions of the adequacy of Crown consultation, and the status of
accommodation, as appropriate, to inform EA decisions in respect of the proposed
Project.

This report was developed based on consideration of information brought forward to the
Governments by Aboriginal groups during the EA process, including submissions made by
Aboriginal groups to the Joint Review Panel (Panel) and comments made directly to the
Governments during the course of consultation on the proposed Project.

1.2 Project Description

BC Hydro and Power Authority (Proponent) proposes to develop and operate a dam and
hydroelectric generating station on the Peace River approximately seven kilometres
southwest of City of Fort St. John, British Columbia (Figure 1.1). The scope of the proposed
Project would include the following major components: an earthfill dam 1,050 metres long
and 60 metres high, an up to 1,100 megawatt generating station and associated structures,
an 83 kilometre long reservoir, two 500 kV ‐ 77 kilometre transmission lines connecting
the Project to the Peace Canyon Dam, re‐alignment of four sections of Highway 29, access
roads and other proposed Project components and activities.

4
Preliminary design work was first conducted in the late 1970s, resulting in a project
proposal in 1981. Further engineering activities took place between 1989 and 1991. In
2009, the Proponent concluded that the original project design required optimization to
meet current seismic, safety and environmental guidelines. This design optimization work
was completed in late 2010, and the final proposed Project description received by the
Governments on July 20, 2011 reflects the updated design.

Figure 1.1 Location of the Proposed Project

Information provided by the Proponent in the form of its Project Description,
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and supplementary material provided during the
EA process, can be found on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry
(http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/details‐eng.cfm?evaluation=63919) and at the Electronic
Project Information Centre of British Columbia’s EAO
(http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/html/deploy/epic_project_home_371.html).

5
1.3 Environmental Assessment Process

This section presents an overview of the key steps of the EA process as they pertain to
Aboriginal consultation. For a more detailed procedural summary of consultation
conducted with Aboriginal groups throughout the EA, please see Section 3.

Preliminary Project Planning and Engagement
In 2007, the BC Energy Plan identified the proposed Project as a potential resource option
to meet BC’s future electricity needs and directed the Proponent to begin discussions with
the public and Aboriginal groups. This was before a decision had been made by the
Government of BC on whether to advance the proposed Project. Further details of the
Proponent’s early proposed Project planning and engagement activities from 2007 to the
commencement of the EA, are presented in Section 3.

The Governments are responsible for the EA process, including ensuring that consultation
and accommodation, where required, with Aboriginal groups, conducted by the Proponent
and/or the Governments, is adequate. As part of discharging this responsibility, direction
was provided to the Proponent through the EIS Guidelines, to engage and consult with
Aboriginal groups potentially affected by the proposed Project, including seeking to find
appropriate accommodation for the potential impacts of the proposed Project with
potentially affected Aboriginal groups.

EA Commencement
The Proponent’s preliminary project description was received by the Governments on
May 18, 2011. During initial review of the Project Description, the Governments worked
closely to plan how to coordinate their respective EA responsibilities. As part of this early
EA planning, the Governments identified and sought the engagement of Aboriginal groups
that could potentially be affected by the proposed Project. Further details of early
Aboriginal engagement efforts are provided in Section 3 of this report.

On July 20, 2011, the Agency received an acceptable project description under the former
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (the former Act) and undertook to determine
whether and by what form, an EA would be required. On August 2, 2011, EAO referred the
proposed Project to the BC Minister of Environment under section 10(1)(a) of the
Environmental Assessment Act (Act) for Ministerial determination of the scope, procedures
and methods for conducting the EA.

On September 30, 2011, the federal Minister of the Environment referred the EA to an
independent review panel under the former Act and posted a Notice of Commencement. At
the same time, the federal and provincial governments announced that the proposed
Project would be subject to a cooperative EA process that would include the Panel, and
commenced a 30‐day public consultation period on the draft Agreement to Conduct a
Cooperative Environmental Assessment Including the Establishment of a Joint Review Panel,
of the Site C Clean Energy Project between the Minister of Environment, Canada and the
Minister of Environment, British Columbia (Agreement) and appended Joint Review Panel
Terms of Reference (Panel Terms of Reference).
6
On October 5, 2011, EAO and the Agency hosted an introductory meeting of
representatives of the federal, provincial, territorial, and local government and Aboriginal
groups to discuss the process for the EA of the proposed Project.

7
Early EA Planning
Early on during the EA planning stage, potentially affected Aboriginal groups were engaged
in discussion on a proposed approach to Crown‐Aboriginal consultation for the EA, and
were invited to apply for participant funding as described in Section 3.

Comments received on the draft Agreement including the Panel Terms of Reference, were
considered by the Governments. On February 13, 2012, the final Agreement was
announced by the federal Minister of the Environment and the provincial Minister of
Environment. The Agreement established the scope, procedures and methods for
conducting the EA process including the Pre‐Panel Stage, the Panel Stage and Post‐Panel
Stage; the establishment of a Working Group consisting of federal, provincial, local
government and Aboriginal groups; and the Panel Terms of Reference. The Panel was
governed by the Agreement and the Panel Terms of Reference.

Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines
On January 26, 2012 the Proponent submitted the first draft of the EIS Guidelines to EAO
and the Agency. On January 30, 2012 the Governments, provided preliminary draft EIS
Guidelines for review and comment to 50 Aboriginal groups who were thought at the time
to be potentially affected by the proposed Project. Aboriginal groups were invited to
participate in a Project Working Group meeting on March 1, 2012. The draft EIS Guidelines
were further developed by the Governments during the spring of 2012 based on Aboriginal
group comments received, a formal review by the Working Group and a 45 day public
comment period between April 17 and June 1, 2012. Six open houses were held in central
and northern BC and Alberta in early May 2012.

The draft EIS Guidelines were further amended by the Governments following advice from
the Working Group on the Proponent’s responses to all comments received.

On July 6, 2012, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012) came into
force. Section 126 of CEAA 2012 provides that an assessment by a review panel
commenced under the former Act is to be continued under the process established in CEAA
2012. As a result of the coming‐into‐force of CEAA 2012, the Agreement was amended on
August 3, 2012 to reflect federal timelines and requirements for the federal Minister’s
decision statement.

Additional amendments were made to the draft EIS Guidelines to reflect changes resulting
from CEAA 2012, and after consideration of all comments received, the EIS Guidelines were
finalized by the federal Minister of the Environment and EAO’s Executive Director and
issued to the Proponent on September 7, 2012. The final EIS Guidelines identified 29
Aboriginal Groups that were potentially affected by the proposed Project and were to be
consulted by the Proponent. Section 2 lists these groups and the determination of depth of
consultation.

8
Environmental Impact Statement
On January 25, 2013, the Proponent submitted its EIS to the Governments for review and
comment. The Governments released the EIS to the public and the Working Group on
January 28, 2013 and provided an opportunity for the EIS to be reviewed by Aboriginal
groups, government agencies, and the public during a 60 day comment period from
February 3 – April 4, 2013. EAO and the Agency held a Working Group meeting to discuss
the EIS and update the EA process on February 19, 2013. Six open houses were held in the
last two weeks of February in central and northern BC and Alberta. The Proponent
responded to Aboriginal group comments on May 8, 2013, and the Working Group,
including Aboriginal groups, provided advice by May 29, 2013. Three technical sub‐
Working Group meetings (terrestrial, aquatic and downstream effects) on the EIS were
held in Dawson Creek, Fort St John and Peace River Alberta on June 4, 5, and 6, 2013 to
identify further effects and specific mitigation and follow‐up measures on key valued
components that were assessed by the Proponent. The Working Group provided a forum
for Aboriginal groups to discuss their concerns with federal, provincial and local
government representatives in round‐table discussions. The views of Aboriginal groups
were also sought during Crown‐Aboriginal group consultation meetings and exchange of
correspondence on the information, methodologies and approach taken by the Proponent
in its EIS.

Direction to the Proponent to amend the EIS was issued during July 2013 and on August 1,
2013 the amended EIS was deemed satisfactory by the Agency and EAO to proceed to the
Panel Stage, based on a review and consideration of all comments received in the context of
whether the EIS met the requirements established in the EIS guidelines and was technically
adequate. On August 2, 2013, the Proponent forwarded the amended EIS to the Panel
concluding the Pre‐Panel Stage.

Joint Review Panel
Appointed Panel members were announced on August 2, 2013. The Panel issued three sets
of Information Requests to the Proponent from August through November 2013 as it
conducted a technical review of the amended EIS and on November 7, 2013, the Panel
announced that it had sufficient information to proceed to the public hearing phase of the
review.

The Panel held a public hearing from December 9 to 19, 2013 and from January 6 to 23,
2014, during which interested parties, including many Aboriginal groups, presented
information to the Panel relating to the potential effects of the proposed Project. The
Panel’s hearing record closed on February 3, 2014 and the Panel issued its report to the
federal Minister of the Environment and the Executive Director of EAO on May 1, 2014.

Post‐Panel Report Consultation
On May 8, 2014, the Governments released the Panel Report and sent copies to Aboriginal
groups to initiate a written comment period from May 8 to June 9, 2014.

9
Consultation with Aboriginal groups in the Post‐Panel Stage included seeking feedback and
discussing comments on the Panel Report and “draft Crown Consultation Report” which
was distributed to Aboriginal groups on June 10, 2014 for initial comment. A revised
“Consultation and Accommodation Report” was shared August 5, 2014 for final comments
to be submitted by August 19, 2014. In addition, on June 10, 2014, the Governments also
initiated consultation on potential conditions to be proposed for inclusion in the federal
Minister of the Environment’s EA decision statement under CEAA 2012, and in the
provincial EA certificate, should the proposed Project proceed.

10