RE:RE:RE:47 more daysIt seems that the government created an avenue to finally get to decision on this project. Rather than requiring completion of an SAIR (that as presented to the company by the previous government included vague information demands that essentially amounted to an entirely new environmental assessment), they seem to have offered the choice to proceed to decision with what is essentially a revisit of the 2012 decision as the supreme court said was required. The previous government, when revisiting the decision per the court order, chose to kick the project down the road by invoking the "more information required" relief valve in the Act rather than changing their previous decision. While it may have been legal under the act, it was another brazen choice to further move the goalposts that Judge Affleck chastised them for already moving repeatedly through the EA process. Under the applicable legislation, my understanding is that the Ministers would have 45 days to make a decision from the time the EA referral information was put in front of them. If that were to happen this week, (which in my opinion seems reasonable based on the timing of the last letter from the EAO requesting the company chose its way forward) the deciison would be due somewhere around the end of May. I hope that is the case. We've been waiting a long time for a fair decision. The previous government approved multiple mines that were considered to have adverse environmental effects, yet declined to approve this one that was determined not to pose adverse effects under the same regulatory framework. How much of that decision was related to the LBN statement about support for the PRGT pipeline being contingent on turning down PBM is something we'll probably never know. What we do know is that PRGT line no longer appears viable since the Pacific Northwest LNG project was cancelled in 2017. The local region and the province could certainly use the jobs and the tax revenue to assist in economic recovery. The main reasons for the past government rejecting the project seem contrived and unsupported by the orignal EA process. The EA found the project not to pose a significant risk to the aquatic life in Morrison lake and also included habitat offsets to actually improve the local salmon habitat. Maybe LYNX is right, maybe the writing is on the wall for this project. I choose to believe otherwise and think that procedural fairmess and justice will eventually prevail. Seems like we'll find out soon though. Good luck to all.