Fundamental differences with Montana over proposed coal mine may erupt again
By Don Whiteley
Vancouver Sun
01-Mar-2006
Last week's announcement that officials from Montana will participate in the environmental assessment process for a proposed coal mine near the Flathead Valley in southeastern B.C. appears to have defused a nasty cross-border spat.
But only for the time being. A careful study of the language in the announcement shows that fundamental differences between Montana and B.C. remain close to the surface, and could soon bubble up again.
Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer and B.C. Intergovernmental Affairs Minister John Van Dongen both expressed commitment to the collaborative approach (nine Montana representatives will participate in the review), but the devil is in the details.
"In this case we have the governor and the premier both committed," Van Dongen said in an interview. "I suppose if all else fails we could still end up at the IJC [International Joint Commission]."
The issue is baseline environmental data. An assessment of the potential impacts of a project is impossible without a good understanding of existing conditions, particularly around water quality. Montana has argued that there isn't enough, and B.C. has argued that there is.
The two sides have agreed only to conduct a thorough review of existing baseline data, and to then establish a process to determine what more information, if any, is required.
"At this point, we're focused on two things -- inventory, and a conversation about the scope of whatever data we think is relevant to this exercise," Van Dongen said. "There's still a lot of work to do there. We've asked our staff to work on a process and timeline with people in Montana."
Hal Harper, policy adviser to Gove. Schweitzer, described this process as a "useful first step. When the gaps are identified, we anticipate that other data will be needed and we need to find some money." Notice Harper says when, not if.
And then he dropped a tiny bombshell. Asked what he estimates the cost would be of collecting additional baseline data, Harper said: "Brace yourself -- I was not braced when I asked. The estimate at one point was $10 million [US]. The latest estimate was about $12 million. Without question, to do the collection and analysis correctly, it's going to cost a substantial amount of money."
Harper said his numbers are based on work done by University of Montana ecologist Dr. Jack Stanford, whose Flathead Lake Biological Station has coordinated environmental studies. The scope involves work on both sides of the border, not just in Canada.
Montana has offered to find some money for these studies (it's on the front burner, says Harper), but Van Dongen says any talk about funding new studies is premature: "We think there is quite a lot of data on both sides of the border that everybody may not be aware of."
Meanwhile, Cline Mining Corp. has released a feasibility study for the Lodgepole Mine project that sees two million tonnes of low-volatile bituminous pulverized coal injection ("PCI") coal produced over 20 years.
Cline CEO Ken Bates said in an interview the permitting process is now underway, and "we don't see [Montana's participation] slowing it down. We'll proceed in a proper manner in the Canadian process."
Further complicating the issue is a second coal proposal nearby from Western Canadian Coal, which has been granted exploration permits. Harper said this latest project is being viewed in Montana with "some urgency."
It's clear that this will all come to a head over the generation of additional baseline data, and there are divergent views about what the latest collaborative process will actually accomplish.
Victoria believes that by inviting Montana to participate in the environmental review, it will give the Americans confidence in the provincial-federal environmental review process. But Van Dongen is very clear that the decision will be made in B.C.
Montana expects that its participation will lead to an agreement by B.C. to conduct the additional baseline data collection believed essential before any assessment can be made of a coal mine proposal. Will Montana accept anything short of the $12 million Harper outlined?
Cline is going full-speed ahead with its permitting work.
An agreement to collaborate is better than no agreement to collaborate.
But if this is going to unravel, it will probably happen sooner rather than later. The camel's nose is now in the tent, for better or worse.
Posted by Arthur Caldicott on 01 Mar 2006