By: Nigel Bankes and Drew Yewchuk
Matters Commented On: Notice of Termination of the federal environmental assessment for the Grassy Mountain Coal Project, December 19, 2025 and Bill 14, Justice Statutes Amendment Act, and Corb Lund’s no coal citizen initiative petition.
PDF Version: A Final Lump of Coal for 2025
This is our final coal update post of the year. We don’t have a court decision to post about, but there have been two noteworthy developments on coal. First, the Notice of Termination of the federal environmental assessment for the Grassy Mountain Coal Project, and second, Corb Lund’s no coal citizen initiative petition.
Notice of Termination of the Federal Environmental Assessment for the Grassy Mountain Coal Project
On December 19, at the request of the proponent Northback Holdings Corporation (formerly known as Benga), the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change issued a notice of termination of the federal environmental assessment of the first iteration of the Grassy Mountain Coal Project. While most thought that this project had died in the months following the Joint Review Panel Report on this project in June 2021 and subsequent unsuccessful challenges to the JRP Report in the provincial superior courts (for details see previous posts here, here and here), the proponent kept the federal file open with other challenges in the Federal Courts (see above posts). While one of those challenges was still hanging by a thread, that challenge will now be withdrawn or treated as moot in light of the official termination of the federal assessment.
Unfortunately, the termination decision does not signal a reversal of Northback’s intention to mine Grassy Mountain, instead it means that Northback intends to reconfigure its project and apply again for approval. Northback’s letter to the minister requesting “termination” is revealing. It confirms that “it will not be carrying out the Project as it was proposed to the Canadian Environmental Impact Assessment Agency on November 10, 2015.” (at 1) But Northback also confirms its intention to proceed with a reconfigured project that will shrink the mine’s footprint by around 40%, reduce output to 2.5 million tonnes each year, and “incorporate a new, multi-tier water management strategy to avoid potential selenium contamination and reduce water consumption.” (at 3) (emphasis added) The letter then goes on to spin a tale that signals its hope than it can avoid further federal involvement in its project.
In the JRP report, the most significant adverse environmental effect of the Project falling within federal jurisdiction was to westslope cutthroat trout (“WSCT”) and their habitat in the Gold Creek watershed. WSCT are listed as threatened under the Species at Risk Act (“SARA“) and in May 2019, the Government of Canada published an updated Recovery Strategy and Action Plan for the Alberta Populations of Westslope Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi) in Canada 2019 (the “2019 Recovery Strategy”). The Project that was reviewed by the JRP would have resulted in impacts to 758 m2 of aquatic critical habitat in Gold Creek and 18,868 m2 of riparian critical habitat in the Gold Creek watershed. Northback has determined that because it will be relocating major infrastructure outside of the Gold Creek watershed, Northback anticipates it will no longer require a Fisheries Act authorization or SARA permit associated with WSCT and the Gold Creek watershed. Accordingly, as it pertains to matters within federal jurisdiction, the Project as previously proposed will no longer be carried out and the federal assessment should be terminated.
On October 9, 2025, Northback filed a revised project summary with the provincial regulator, and the provincial regulator has confirmed that a provincial environmental impact assessment will be required for the revised Project. The revised Project will be located on substantially the same lands as the Project that was reviewed by the JRP, although within a smaller footprint. This smaller footprint results in significantly less effects within areas of federal jurisdiction because Northback no longer requires the federal Fisheries Act authorization or SARA permit associated with WSCT and the Gold Creek watershed. (at 3-4)
The letter does not mention bull trout habitat (also a SARA-listed species) that may be affected, and the idea that the mine can be moved far enough from Gold Creek to be carried out without a SARA permit is challenging: Grassy Mountain is still in between Gold Creek and Blairmore Creek.
The federal response letter (December 19) is non-committal but it clearly contemplates possible federal involvement.
If the revised project described by Northback in its December 8 letter is described in the Physical Activities Regulations, Northback must submit an Initial Project Description to IAAC in accordance with section 10 of the of the Impact Assessment Act (IAA). In addition, the prohibitions under section 7 of the IAA may apply.
In our view this must be the case for at least three reasons. First, notwithstanding the company’s claims, it will be important to examine the reconfigured project to independently assess the implications of the project for the critical habitat of SARA listed aquatic species under federal jurisdiction. Second, the Fisheries Act, RSC 1985 c F – 14 protects all fish habitat from harmful alteration or destruction. Third, even the project as reconfigured will result in the designation of the project under section 18 of the Physical Activities Regulations, SOR/2019-285, to the Impact Assessment Act, SC 2019, c 28 as a a new coal mine with a coal production capacity of 5,000 t/day or more. Annual coal production of 2.5 million tonnes divided by 365 results in production of 6,849 t/day.
The Minister’s reference to section 7 of the IAA reminds Northback that it is prohibited from doing “any act or thing in connection with the carrying out of the designated project … if that act or thing may cause any adverse effects within federal jurisdiction”. That is the case unless the Agency decides that no impact assessment of the designated project is required, the proponent complies with the conditions included in any decision statement for the project, or the Agency permits the proponent to do work to provide the Agency with information it requires in order to prepare for a possible impact assessment of that designated project.
As noted above, Northback has also initiated an application to the province and to that end has published draft terms of reference for an environmental impact assessment. The terms of reference are open for comment until January 16, 2026.
Bill 14, Justice Statutes Amendment Act, and Corb Lund’s No Coal Petition
On November 19, 2025 Alberta country singer Corb Lund filed a legislative initiative petition with Elections Alberta seeking to launch a petition to have the Government of Alberta “prohibit by law any and all new coal mining activities, including new approvals and permits, within the Eastern Slopes of the Rocky Mountains” (the Lund petition). The legislative initiative petition was filed under the terms of the Citizen Initiative Act, SA 2021, c C-13.2 (CIA) as it stood at the time. The CIA contemplated a three step process to initiate a petition: (1) filing by the proponent, (2) review by the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) to satisfy themselves that the application requirements are met followed by publication on the CEO’s website (s. 3(2)), and (3) CEO issues the initiative petition once satisfied that the proponent has appointed a suitable chief financial officer. Step 2 was completed on December 8, 2025.
Meantime, the Legislative Assembly had given first reading to Bill 14, the Justice Statutes Amendment Act on December 4 followed rapidly by the completion of second reading and review by the Committee of the Whole on December 9, third reading on December 10, and Royal Assent and entry into force (as SA 2025, c 22) on December 11, 2025.
As its name implies, Bill 14 amended a series of statutes for which the Minister of Justice was the responsible minister, including the CIA. Bill 14 also contained a transitional provision which added a new section 71.1 to the CIA which reads as follows:
71.1(1) An application for the issuance of an initiative petition made before the coming into force of this section for which an initiative petition has not been issued under section 3(3)(a) as of the coming into force of this section is deemed to have never been made.
The reference to section 3(3)(a) is a reference to step 3 in the chronology listed above. The Lund petition had not made it step 3 by the time Bill 14 entered into force. Accordingly the Lund petition was deemed never to have been made and quashed: see the Elections Alberta press release here.
However, the same transitional provision went on to provide that if subsection (1) were triggered the proponent would be able to refile without the need to pay a new application fee if they did so within 30 days of the Act coming into force (section 71.1(2)).
The transitional provision also contained a clause (section 71.1(3)) designed to quash any ongoing judicial proceedings on questions the CEO directed to court as a special case (see section 2.1 of the CIA). The governing United Conservative Party (UCP) was likely seeking to avoid judgment being rendered in the ongoing proceedings involving a constitutional citizen initiative commenced by Mitch Sylvestre with the following question “Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada”. The CEO had referred to the Court the question of whether that petition contravened the Charter of Rights and Freedoms or Treaty rights. The UCP did not achieve its objective. Justice Colin Feasby handed down his judgment in Chief Electoral Officer of Alberta v Sylvestre, 2025 ABKB 712 (CanLII) on December 5, 2025, the day after Bill 14 received first reading. Justice Feasby concluded that the subject matter of the petition (assuming it were carried through) would breach the Charter rights of Albertans and First Nation treaty rights. Justice Feasby also added an extraordinary epilogue to his judgment in which he commented on section 71.1.(3) observing that “The legal consequence of discontinuing this proceeding prior to a decision would be to silence the Court” and “disrespects the administration of justice.” (at paras 250 and 253) Justice Feasby’s target was not the provisions quashing legislative initiative petitions (section 71.1 quoted above) but the tenor of his remarks is also applicable to any government efforts to change the rules in the middle of a process. It is extraordinary.
Mr. Lund has taken advantage of the opportunity to re-file and submitted what is now known as a “Notice of Intent” on December 17, 2025 with a slightly revised statement that reads as follows:
The Government of Alberta shall prohibit by law any and all new coal mining activities, including new approvals, within the Eastern Slopes of the Rocky Mountains. (As quoted in the CEO’s Press release of December 19, 2025)
Under the changed CIA, Mr. Lund will need to follow-up his notice of intent by requesting that the CEO actually issue the initiative petition by January 18, 2026. Mr. Lund has established a website for his petition here. Mr. Lund will need to gather signatures from 10% of the total number of votes cast in the previous general election (177, 732) in order to proceed to the next stage.
Conclusions
It seems the battle over coal in Alberta will continue into the new year. Northback seems set on reviving a version of its Grassy Mountain Project but will continue to face opposition. That opposition will have the opportunity to crystallize around Corb Lund’s petition. But it also seems that the Government of Alberta is proceeding with its coal industry modernization initiative (CIMI) which it announced last December. At that time, the UCP was promising new legislation in fall of 2025. That did not happen. Coal was not even mentioned in the speech from the throne in fall 2025, but we may see something in the opening months of the new year. That may sharpen the choice of competing visions for Albertans: one represented by Corb Lund’s citizen petition and the other represented by the UCP’s continuing commitment to coal mining corporations.
This post may be cited as: Nigel Bankes and Drew Yewchuk, “A Final Lump of Coal for 2025” (23 December 2025), online: ABlawg, http://ablawg.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/ Blog_NB&DY_CoalUpdate.pdf
To subscribe to ABlawg by email or RSS feed, please go to http://ablawg.ca
Follow us on Twitter @ABlawg