Dear Upper Beaver Gold Project Team,

On behalf of the Misema–Blanche River Alliance and the Beaverhouse Lake Cottagers Association, please find attached our letter regarding the Upper Beaver Gold Project (IAAC Reference No. 82960).

The letter addresses the relocation of the operations-phase effluent outfall into Beaverhouse Lake, the undisclosed methods used to record and analyze engagement input, characterizations of public opinion in the engagement record, the processing decision, and the lack of engagement with Beaverhouse Lake landing users and rights-holders on the alternate road and landing. It asks that these matters be addressed before the Agency determines that the required information has been provided. Schedule A lists the source and page for each statement.

We ask that the letter be posted to the Canadian Impact Assessment Registry for the Project, and we would welcome a written response.

Kind regards,

Michael Chaves
Misema–Blanche River Alliance
Beaverhouse Lake Cottagers Association
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Upper Beaver Gold Project Team,

I am writing to correct a statement in my letter of October 2, 2026 on the Beaverhouse Lake effluent outfall and the engagement record.

That letter included a "correction" to my submission of August 3, 2026. It said the Boréalis addresses copied on Agnico Eagle's correspondence contain codes only, and described the labels "Opposition" and "Neutral" as an unverified interpretation. On review of the original message, that correction was itself inaccurate.

The header of Agnico Eagle's email of August 29, 2025 (subject: "Upper Beaver_Beaverhouse Lake Stakeholder Meeting_Addition of Site Tour") lists nine Boréalis logging addresses in the Cc field. Their display names include "BIS - Jutras - Opposition" and "BIS - Neutral," as well as "BIS - Good Neighbourhood Process" and "BIS - Community - Access." Many email programs show only the addresses, which is how the display names were missed. An extract of the header is attached. The names and addresses of residents and other private individuals have been redacted, and the unredacted original is available to the Agency on request.

What these records represent inside the Boréalis system is still not known to us. The disclosure requests in my earlier submissions stand, including the request that the proponent explain what these records are and how participants are categorized.

Please post this correction and its attachment to the Canadian Impact Assessment Registry with my October 2 letter.

I regret the error.

Sincerely,

Michael Chaves