Joint Summary of Issues and Engagement
Yellowhead Copper Project

PDF Version 309 KB

Document reference number: 34

Pursuant to Section 13.5 of the Environmental Assessment Act, S.B.C. 2018, c.51

Pursuant to Section 14(1) of the Impact Assessment Act, S.C. 2019, c.28, s.1

October 2, 2025

Introduction

Taseko Mines Limited (Taseko) is proposing the construction, operation, and closure of a new open-pit copper mine located about 150 kilometres northeast of Kamloops, British Columbia. The Yellowhead Copper Project has been designed with a production capacity of 90,000 tonnes of ore per day (up to 32 million tonnes per year) over a 25-year mine life. The project, which would also produce gold and silver, includes a new mill, an approximately 110 kilometre transmission line that would connect to an existing BC Hydro substation near 100 Mile House, and a rail load-out facility at an existing site at Vavenby. The production capacity of the project means that it is subject to consideration under the BC Environmental Assessment Act (BC Act) and federal Impact Assessment Act (IAA).

On July 7, 2025, the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) approved the Initial Project Description (IPD) and Engagement Plan for the project. On July 7, 2025, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) determined that the project meets the definition of a designated project under the IAA and that the IPD meets federal requirements. These actions by the EAO and IAAC marked the beginning of the Early Engagement phase and the Planning phase of the project, respectively.

The Early Engagement and Planning phases are important preparatory stages during which meaningful conversations can begin about the project prior to the EAO determining the requirements for a provincial environmental assessment, and IAAC determining whether further federal impact assessment is required.

To support the Early Engagement and Planning phases, the EAO and IAAC shared the IPD with, and sought to collect questions and understand views about the project from, potentially affected First Nations, surrounding communities, provincial and federal subject matter experts, and the public.

This Joint Summary of Issues and Engagement (the Joint Summary) has been prepared and issued by the EAO and IAAC. The Joint Summary includes:

• A summary of early engagement with First Nations;
• A summary of comments received from the public comment period and from provincial and federal authorities;
• Direction from the EAO to Taseko to consider and respond to comments received during Early Engagement; and,
• Direction from IAAC to Taseko to consider and respond to a list of key issues identified during the Planning phase.

First Nations' early engagement

As part of initiating early discussions on the project and scope of assessment, the EAO and IAAC sent letters at the beginning of the Early Engagement and Planning phases to identify First Nations' interest in the project, how potentially affected First Nations may want to be involved in the assessment, and any views on the EAO's request to substitute its provincial environmental assessment process under the BC Act in place of the federal impact assessment, should one be required.

The project is located in the territory of the Secwepemc Nation, primarily the Simpcw First Nation (Simpcw). Other divisions within the Secwepemc Nation have also indicated interests in the area.

Simpcw has identified that the project is subject to the Simpcw Assessment Process (Simpcw Process) that exercises Simpcw's inherent jurisdiction and self-government right to protect, manage and control Simpcw Territory (Simpcwúl̓ecw) by ensuring prior and informed consent is granted before any development activities proceed. The Simpcw Process is a consent-based process Simpcw uses to make decisions regarding proposed activities and ensures that project assessments appropriately consider and respect Simpcw Rights, interests, laws, values, priorities, and culture.

Through collaboration on the IPD with Taseko, Simpcw has provided initial interests and concerns with the project that have been summarized within Section 6.2.3 and Table 6-7 of the Engagement Plan. Step 3 of the Simpcw Process will further refine the interests and concerns of Simpcw and determine how they will be addressed through the assessment.

The EAO and IAAC will work closely with Simpcw to confirm how their interests and concerns will be considered and assessed and how the provincial and federal assessments will align with the Simpcw Process.

The EAO and IAAC also reached out to the following First Nations, whose consultation areas overlap with the project:

• Adams Lake Indian Band;
• Neskonlith Indian Band;
• Skwlāx te Secwepemcúl̓ecw (formerly Little Shuswap);
• Stswecem'c Xget'tem (formerly Canoe Creek/Dog Creek);
• Tsq̓éscen̓ First Nation (formerly Canim Lake); and,
• Whispering Pines / Clinton Indian Band.

Adams Lake Indian Band and Neskonlith Indian Band indicated their interest in being involved in the assessment as it progresses. Adams Lake raised concerns about the sufficiency of the information in the IPD, including information about potential adverse impacts to Adams Lake's Aboriginal Title, Rights and Interests, and to water quality, fisheries, cumulative effects, cultural heritage, and the Douglas Colonial Reserve. Adams Lake also stressed that meaningful participation requires proper resourcing, technical support, and the integration of Secwepemc laws, knowledge and governance. The EAO and IAAC will continue to work with each Nation's representatives to understand how they wish to be engaged and/or consulted.

Provincial, federal and local government comments

The EAO and IAAC received comments on the IPD from the following provincial, federal, and regional government agencies:

• BC Ministry of Environment and Parks;
• BC Ministry of Forests;
• BC Ministry of Mining and Critical Minerals;
• BC Ministry of Transportation and Transit;
• BC Ministry of Water, Lands, and Resource Stewardship;
• Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada;
• Environment and Climate Change Canada;
• Employment and Social Development Canada;
• Fisheries and Oceans Canada;
• Health Canada;
• Indigenous Services Canada;
• Interior Health Authority;
• Natural Resources Canada;
• Thompson Nicola Regional District;
• Transport Canada; and,
• Women and Gender Equality Canada.

Provincial and federal agencies submitted comments related to considerations and requirements for impact assessments, provincial and federal permits and authorizations. Provincial and federal technical advisors directed the proponent to information databases to support the analysis of potential effects and mitigation measures. Technical advisors also raised questions about baseline studies, project components, mitigation plans, and requested that Taseko add additional details in some areas of the Detailed Project Description (DPD).

With respect to potential effects of the project, technical advisors' comments focused on the potential effects on water quantity and quality in downstream water bodies and associated effects to fish, potential effects to wildlife and species at risk near the mine site and along the transmission line, effects to air quality and health impacts from dust, effects to local infrastructure, potential access overlap with recreation groups, economic effects, and disproportionate effects on Indigenous peoples, particularly Indigenous women and girls.

To read the comments received from provincial and federal technical advisors, see the issues tracking table available on the EAO's Yellowhead Copper project site^Footnote 1.

Public comments and concerns

As part of the Early Engagement and Planning phase, the EAO and IAAC held a joint public comment period from August 5 to September 15, 2025. During the public comment period, the EAO and IAAC hosted an in-person open house in Clearwater, British Columbia and a virtual information session. Table 1 summarizes the comments received from the public comment period on the EAO's EPIC.engage website and IAAC's Canadian Impact Assessment Registry.

Table 1 – Summary of Public Comments

Response to the Joint Summary to meet provincial requirements

As part of preparing the DPD and to support the EAO's Readiness Decision, the EAO requires Taseko to respond to all comments submitted to the EAO and IAAC, including comments from First Nations, provincial and federal agencies, and members of the public. Responses should indicate how issues have been addressed or will be in a future phase of the assessment.

Response to the Joint Summary to meet federal requirements

Based on the comments received from First Nations, technical advisors, and the public on the IPD, IAAC has identified key issues for the project. Key issues are listed in Table 2, and are those that are factors in federal decision-making, have a pathway to an effect within federal jurisdiction, and are a major concern that is raised by a First Nation, federal authorities, provincial ministries, or the public.

IAAC requires that Taseko consider these key issues and provide a response. A high-level response is sufficient. Where relevant, Taseko is encouraged to identify if the key issues will be addressed through existing legislative and regulatory frameworks (i.e. legislation or regulation), by Taseko's commitments to best practices, policies or standards, or both.

Table 2 – Key Issues within Federal Jurisdiction

Conclusion

Taseko is now required to carry out the direction of the EAO and respond to IAAC's key issues found in the Joint Summary. If you anticipate requiring more than 20 days to respond to the key issues, please notify IAAC in writing as soon as possible to discuss time limit implications. This Joint Summary, along with the additional required materials provided by Taseko, will be used to inform the EAO and IAAC's upcoming assessment decisions.