Wabagishik - 28 Sept. 2012 036

What was found in the document was encouraging, and yet at the same time very concerning. It was encouraging to see that MOE concurred with ORA and VRS, when it reported “NR’s review of the ER indicated that in several instances, the proponent has not met the requirements of the Waterpower Class EA”; however, it was disturbing that “EAB has indicated they are considering denying the Part II Order requests with conditions, noting that it may be possible to impose detailed conditions to ensure all outstanding concerns are addressed”. This referenced document goes on to express the questions, concerns and uncertainty of how to deal with this deficient ER, and whether this would “expose the Ministry to any risk (ie: other proponents seeking the same level of direction during the proponent-driven EA process, or liability issues if the approach taken leads to unforeseen negative impacts on the environment or other users)”.

2013-MOE-NR-Comments-Wabagisihik_NEW
2014-06-16-ORAtoMoe-Wabagishik
2014-07-12-MOE-Wabagishik
2014-05-12-MOE-Xeneca-Wabagishik
2014-04-22-Wabagishik-Xeneca-to-MOE