Kleanza Consulting Ltd.
1995 Singlehurst Rd., Terrace, BC V8G 0A7Tel.: 2509751400

www.kleanza.com 

RE:  HERITAGE CONSERVATION ACT PERMITTING SYSTEM & LICENSING CRISIS

We are a heritage consulting firm operating across British Columbia and we are bringing to your attention a dire situation regarding the Heritage Conservation Act (HCA) permitting and licensing system that is currently administered through the Archaeology Branch (the Branch) of the Ministry of Forests.

There are two issues central to this crisis and fortunately, there are solutions readily available to correct the situation.

ISSUE #1 – Permit Delays

The Situation:

Permit review and issuance is taking too long: ten months to a year or more. Improvements to the archaeological permitting system in BC are needed immediately. These excessive timelines are a significant impediment to development, housing, infrastructure and our economy. The delays are also having a negative impact on First Nations heritage preservation, the government’s commitments to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA).

Background:

Archaeological permits are required prior to development for most projects in BC: Forestry, mining, transportation and infrastructure, energy developments, just to name a few. A combination of factors have led us to the current situation: 1) prioritization of multi-unit housing has had the effect of creating significant delays for other permits, combined with; 2) an increased permit application load; 3) a resurgence of the economy following COVID; 4) a lack of qualified workforce in this sector, and 5) a lack of budget allocation to the heritage sector of government. Since 2019 timelines for processing permit applications and issuing permits have been growing where they now are typically taking between 8 and 12 months (and far too often longer) to be issued. This is having an immediate and recognizable impact on the economy, employment and heritage conservation.

The most recent statistics provided by the Branch indicate an average of 257 days to issue a permit. Our firm currently has several permit applications that were submitted last summer and have yet to proceed beyond the Initial Application Review stage. This means they have not yet been vetted to be suitable for referral to First Nations for comment. One of our applications has already languished in the in-box for 212 days. From our experience it will take at least two weeks after a Permitting Archaeologist reviews this file before it will be sent out for referral. The minimum period of time granted for First Nations’ comment is 30 days (though in some cases they respond sooner). If this application was reviewed and sent to First Nations tomorrow it would already be at 256 days. Once comments are received, they must be responded to by the Branch and/or the consultant – this can add another 2 weeks or more. Processing by the Permitting Archaeologist to present the completed package to the Statutory Decision Maker and that SDM signing off typically adds another 2 weeks. It will have taken 284 days for this permit to be issued if it started to move through the system tomorrow. This is for a small subdivision, not a prioritized high-density project, however, these are still homes which are not being built in the middle of a housing shortage. Delays to housing starts due to permitting are avoidable.

And this is not just affecting small projects. Major infrastructure projects are also at risk due to permit delays. With aging infrastructure issues in every municipality in the Province, a delayed archaeological permit is not the reason an emergency situation should arise if infrastructure (e.g sewer main or storm drain) fails before it can be replaced. Required preliminary investigations, such as geotechnical work being monitored by archaeologists, are being conducted under First Nations’ permits (which are issued in timely manners by the First Nations, taking usually less than a month) and with approvals from Nations without HCA permits because wait times for HCA permits are unmanageable. There have been rumors of changes to the HCA that would force developers to wait to complete even these preliminary investigations until they receive an HCA permit.

These kinds of timelines have pushed developers to cancel projects or risk-manage their approach to heritage. One of our clients will be forced to reduce staff and cancel the project we have sought a permit for because of the excessive timelines. The economics of carrying mortgages on properties that cannot be developed are having impacts on employers and employees. A risk-management approach (i.e. proceeding without a permit) can result in direct impacts to archaeological sites and we as consultants being called in to emergency recovery situations. This is happening more and more frequently. Issuing site alteration permits after-the-fact is not an approach that satisfies the spirit or intent of UNDRIP, DRIPA or the HCA. The government’s commitments to UNDRIP are being negatively affected by both risk-managed development practices and impacts to employment for First Nations people as they are involved in all HCA-permitted fieldwork.  Spending an inordinate amount of time on the permit review/issuance process does very little to ensure the quality of the work being completed.

Prioritizing one or two aspects of the economy (and the associated archaeology permits) without providing additional resources to the Archaeology Branch to make that shift, has had the effect of leaving the rest of the permit applications in limbo. Despite this emphasis on certain types of permits/projects, the staffing on the permitting side at the Archaeology Branch has remained the same. The number of Permitting Archaeologists and Statutory Decision Makers has remained the same. An ever-increasing volume of permit applications along with the prioritization of some sectors has left the Archaeology Branch with no effective way to manage this situation with the current resources. Even a permit application submitted in September of last year, with complete written approval of all First Nations involved, took 143 days to issue. Instead of being able to clear the easy wins off the board, these types of permits are also becoming victims of the current process.

A Solution:

BC Energy Regulator – A Pre-Existing Real-World Example

Over 20 years ago the Oil & Gas Commission (now BC Energy Regulator) was granted the authority to establish its own internal archaeological permit management system linked to the HCA. Not only has that system been successful it has expanded beyond the oil and gas fields of northeastern BC, to include major pipelines and energy facilities throughout the Province. Affording other major industries in the Province like mining and forestry to do the same thing, would go a long way to relieving the pressures on the Archaeology Branch and these industries.

ISSUE #2 – Licensed Professional Shortage

The Situation

In parallel with the permitting crisis is a shortage of licensed professionals. Currently there are not enough to meet industry needs and this number is expected to decline while demand continues to grow. The current qualification requirements and review process for licensing archaeologists is restricting much needed growth.

Background:

The Branch is currently responsible for the review and certification of professional archaeologists in the Province, and they are not handling this responsibility well. There is no professional designation such as engineers or geologists have, and the BC Association of Professional Archaeologists (BCAPA) is not aligned with the Archaeology Branch. Under the HCA regulations (Bulletin 17), the Province has taken on a licensing authority. Again, this process falls to the Permitting Archaeologists, who are already carrying an overwhelming workload.

In addition, there are not enough permit holders in the province to manage the volume of development in a timely way. Becoming a Field Director (FD) is a requisite step in that process. Currently, for an archaeologist with an MA or BA with experience, it takes:

·      5 plus years of field experience to gain FD status in one region of the province (and there are 3 separate regions that require 40 days each of supervisory experience to qualify), and

·      Ultimately 8 plus years to get Permit holder status (again just within one of the 3 regions).

·      It is incomprehensible that skills acquired in adjacent regions are not transferable from one region to another.

·   Barriers and restrictions implemented on up-and-coming Permit Holders are being imposed based on ambiguous timelines and subjective permissions withheld by the Archaeology Branch.

The Solution:

Embracing A Licensing Process Successfully Working In Other Provinces

Another way to reduce the stresses on the Branch would be to change the approach to licensing.

In Ontario, for example, archaeologists are licensed on an annual or bi-annual basis and are able to add projects to their license without the review of the Provincial ministry every time. Certifications could be jointly reviewed and or audited by the BCAPA and the Archaeology Branch or perhaps an independent third-party committee, rather than off the corners of already overloaded desks of Permitting Archaeologists at the Archaeology Branch. A timely review process by a third-party review board would get more qualified Field Directors and Permit Holders into the field sooner, alleviating stresses put upon our clients and, again, freeing up more of the Branch’s resources to focus on permits.

Other jurisdictions in Canada, such as the Yukon should be looked at more closely as an example model of how to manage heritage and in turn, its impact on the economy in a more effective way.

IN SUMMARY: the economy, housing and meaningful support of First Nations self-determination are being directly strained by the issues outlined above. It affects development projects of all sizes, in all industries. Our small business is being directly affected and if things do not change we may be forced to reduce staff. Other archaeological consulting businesses, up and coming archaeologists, our clients and Indigenous communities are also feeling the strain. The government’s commitments to UNDRIP are being negatively affected as this impacts not only archaeological sites but employment for First Nations as they are involved in all HCA-permitted fieldwork. The recently shelved changes to the HCA did not speak to these immediate concerns, which we believe can be resolved without waiting for legislative change.

There are real world examples of solutions to this issue ready to be discussed and implemented. Please take action to help make these changes to improve the current permitting and licensing system for the benefit of all British Columbians.  

Please help by taking a critical look at these issues and implement solutions in real time! If nothing changes we will lose more valuable talent, heritage, and small businesses like ours will be forced to close.

Sincerely yours,

Amanda Marshall

Principal and Senior Archaeologist

Kleanza Consulting Ltd.

Gary Brewer, M.A. - Project Manager/Archaeologist

Manda Palmer, M.A.- Project Management Coordinator/Archaeologist

Joey LeBrun, B.A. - Archaeologist

Gwen Topacio, B.A. - Archaeologist

Lindsey Neill, B.A., RPCA - Project Manager/Archaeologist (Nupqu Resource Limited Partnership)

Margarita de Guzman, M.A., RPA, Managing Director + CEO, Circle CRM Group Inc. 

Kay Jollymore, M.A., RPCA - Senior Archaeology Manager (Kleanza Consulting Ltd) 

Kelly Steele - Creative Director, Stories & Outreach (Kleanza Consulting Ltd.)

Brett Watson, B.Sc., RPCA - Senior Archaeologist, Core Heritage Consulting Ltd.