John McManus's letter to CEAA excerpt form the Nov 15 John McManus letter to CEAA
"....Your email goes on to ask for an explanation of how and why Taseko was, or would have been, prevented form raising its concerns about any differences in the models used by Taseko and by NRCan through submissions to, and testimony before, the review panel itself as part of the review panel process.
Throughout the entire panel process, our company and our expert advisors Knight Piesold have been unable to understand how NRCan's estimated seepage rates could be so much higher than our experts (who are among the most respected in the world). At the panel hearings, the discussions focused on the modeling tools being used by the different parties (and which involve various technical parameters and assumptions), but there was never any reason to believe that an agency of the Government of Canada could err so fundamentally as to apply its modeling to the wrong project design...."
https://www.newprosperityproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/11_15_13__Input-to-response-to-CEAA-re-references-supporting-assertions-151113.pdf