[LookOutSugarLake] Latest from MOE

[handr at telus.net]

This one is not such good news, I'm afraid.

I spoke to Mike Reiner this morning, having spoken to his boss  
replacement, Ric Baker, earlier this week. Mike Reiner tells me he  
will consider our letter as well as the letter from Interior Health  
when he will make his decision. That decision can entail putting  
conditions on the discharge but not an outright prohibition of  
discharge. He said he would also meet with the developer to discuss  
the issues with hi and then would put all these considerations  
together and make a decision.

I told him that we found this unacceptable because having challenge  
the assumptions on which the EIS has based its conclusions, we would  
expect our ministry to request a corrected EIS before saying it meets  
the MSR, and that if he sees fit to meet with the developer in order  
to discuss, we feel we should also have the same privileges of  
meeting with him and give him our presentation and express all of the  
reasons why only ZERO effluents is acceptable to us. He didn't agree  
because he says our objections are very clearly expressed in our  
letters, that he understands how we feel and has all he needs to make  
a decision, after he meets with the developer. When asked what these  
conditions may be, he talked of extra monitoring ..... I suggested an  
easy way would be to ensure that the discharger drinks the discharge  
before putting it into OUR drinking water. He chuckled.

I also said we were very proud of our Regional District for having  
had the courage to make a decision that did require a change to their  
regulations, and that we expected no less from our Ministry of  
Environment.

I then called his boss in interim, Ric Baker, and left him a message  
telling him we are disappointed that our request for a corrected EIS  
will not be granted and that we will not find any level of discharge  
acceptable. If he calls back I will ask him what type of objection  
would be enough to warrant them not giving the permission - I'm  
thinking perhaps there is something in the law similar to Article 929  
that says that if a document such as the MSR is being updated,  
permits that go against the new update can be delayed? Does anybody  
have any information regarding this?

Hopefully what NORD and Transport is doing will be sufficient. If you  
have ideas on what else we can do or say, please let me know. Also if  
you want to call, here are their direct numbers;

Mike Reiner: 250-490-8206
Ric Baker: 250-387-1187