Spencer Anderson, Comox Valley Echo, November 18, 2011

A local group campaigning against the proposed Raven Underground Coal Mine project is calling for more time to review the project, ahead of a new public comment period beginning today.

Comox Valley CoalWatch is also calling out Compliance Coal Corporation, the mine's proponent, for what CoalWatch calls "vague," evasive" and "anything but transparent" responses to public concerns gathered earlier this year.

As part of the ongoing joint provincial and federal environmental process, Compliance Coal was asked to provide responses to public comments on the project's draft Application Information Requirements and Environmental Impact Statement (AIR and EIS) guidelines - documents that spell out exactly what information needs to be included in the environmental assessment, which has not been completed.

Roughly 3,000 public submissions were received between May 18 and June 27. Compliance Coal responded by way of general comments for some of the concerns, and comments in response to more specific issues.

The proponent's responses also include references to an accompanying document, prepared by AMEC and Environment Infrastructure of Burnaby on behalf of Compliance, which discusses in more detail how concerns will be addressed in the environmental assessment.

The B.C. Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) is giving the public from Nov. 15 (today) until Nov. 29 to submit their responses to Compliance's answers.

But all of the above falls short of what was needed, according to John Snyder, president of CoalWatch.

"The [EAO] should be encouraging inclusiveness and public participation in this environmental assessment process," said Snyder, "but here we have over 1,100 pages of documents that have been foisted onto the public that do not result in much useful - let alone new - information on this project," he said in a statement.

"Due to the sheer volume and complexity - and the fact that government is only allowing the public two weeks to respond - this is actually a huge disincentive to participate."

Cam Connor, CoalWatch's vice-president, agreed.

"The proponent [Compliance Coal] has had over four months to respond to the nearly 3,000 public comments-a task they achieved using a full-time staff. Yet the public, with volunteers who have other lives and jobs, is given only two weeks for the mammoth task of responding," he said.

Connor also said Compliance's responses are referenced to sections in the draft AIR, "so one has to bounce around thousands of pages in this literary labyrinth in an attempt to clarify anything."

But Compliance Coal CEO John Tapics disagreed.

He said the corporation "has worked hard to address every comment in a clear, concise, transparent manner."

Tapics said Compliance prepared the entire public tracking tables, plus provided the accompanying background and general comments response document.

"Many of the comments we received were general in nature, and - the responses to those have been summarized, and each individual comment has been responded to in a way directing the reader back to the background and general comments response document, because of the commonality of some of the comments that were received," Tapics said.

Specific comments have been addressed within the tracking tables, he added.

The company had to find a "clear, concise way to respond" to concerns from the public, he said.

The majority of public comments have come out against the project, according to the EAO and the B.C. Environmental Assessment Agency. Both B.C. and federal environmental agencies have rejected calls for an independent review panel on the project.

For information on how to submit a comment, visit www.eao.gov.bc.ca.

spanderson@comoxvalleyecho.com

© Comox Valley Echo 2011

Source