As late as May 1999, federal responsible authorities for this project continued to raise significant concerns and asked fundamental questions about basic project design and alternatives because the available evidence suggested that other approaches to mining the identified resources were technically and economically feasible and less harmful to the environment. In response, the proponent refused or was unable to provide additional information supporting its conclusions that only one proposal was acceptable. The June 1999 CSR ignores these recent federal concerns and instead supports the proponent s preferred approach. To the contrary, compared to alternatives, the CSR endorses the alternative having the greatest impacts on the environment. These shortcomings also prevent consideration of cumulative effects on an ecosystem basis.
Similar shortcomings apply also to the consideration of downstream water effects.
In sum, the CSR does not give Canadians the information, tools, rules and guidance they need to make environmentally responsible decisions . Further assessment is required by independent experts. The Birchall Northey legal opinion is attached as Appendix A to this letter. The only conclusion that fits the approach and information provided is uncertainty . Where there is uncertainty, the CEAA imposes a duty upon you to require a review panel.