Port Metro Vancouver should rescind its decision to allow North Vancouver-based Neptune Bulk Terminals to double its coal capacity because it misrepresented both the public support for the expansion and the opposition to it, an environmental group says.
Voters Taking Action on Climate Change, described as a group of apolitical volunteers opposed to coal expansion, noted the port said it had received 640 emails and letters from people concerned about possible environmental and health impacts of coal, but that the vast majority of those were sent in “form letters.”
In fact, VTACC said, 378 of the 640 submissions were sent in form letters, and there were five separate letters.
At the same time, VTACC said, the port failed to note that all but 15 of the 375 comments in favour of the project were on identical form letters, and were sent on a single day, Jan. 16 – a week before the port made its decision on Neptune’s $200-million expansion.
As a result, the volunteer organization, which obtained copies of the public comments submitted to Port Metro Vancouver before it made the Neptune decision, claims the port authority “misrepresented the nature of comments both for and against” the proposal.
“There’s a fundamental issue of fairness,” said VTACC director Kevin Washbrook. “The port didn’t make any effort to inform the public. We have this huge unaccountable organization in our midst.”
The group has also asked West Coast Environmental Law to conduct a review of the port’s decision-making process and the Neptune Bulk Terminal’s coal export approval to determine if there is any basis for a legal challenge of the decision.
- Canadian man dies during Texas Ironman event. His widow wants answers as to why
- ‘Shock and disbelief’ after Manitoba school trustee’s Indigenous comments
- Several baby products have been recalled by Health Canada. Here’s the list
- ‘Sciatica was gone’: hospital performs robot-assisted spinal surgery in Canadian first
Washbrook said if the port authority wants to be a good neighbour to Metro Vancouver communities, it should “hit rewind” on the coal export proposal and do a full and transparent public review.
He noted most people were not even aware of the proposal until November, two months before the decision.
But Greg Yeomans, manager of planning for Port Metro, dismissed the call, saying the process had been thorough and complete with many opportunities for public input.
He acknowledged much of the information had been received in form letters, but said it was immaterial to the Neptune proposal, which the port evaluated on its merits as well as on potential environmental impacts and technical reviews.
“Obviously there’s no intent to misrepresent anything. If they’re concerned that we emphasized one side or the other, that’s fair … they’re entitled to their opinion,” Yeomans said, adding he was travelling and couldn’t recall the exact number of the form letters on both sides of the debate.
“We ran a thorough process over many months on that project. I do know there was an intent to make it clear we got form letters on both sides of the equation.
“We certainly made an effort to be fair and accurate. The nature of the input, whether it’s in a form letter or not, is information we take but we don’t decide these things by poll.”
Neptune, which exports metallurgical coal used in steelmaking, had applied to replace one of its two ship loaders and to build a second dumper to handle more coal. The move would more than double its capacity to 18.5 million tonnes a year from 8.5 million tonnes.
The port is also considering a Fraser Surrey Docks proposal to establish a terminal on the Fraser River for exporting thermal coal mined in the Western U.S. to produce electricity in Asia.
Both Lower Mainland projects would see an increase in train traffic of one train a day and, coupled with Westshore Terminal’s coal exporting capacity, would push total coal exports from the region to more than 50 million tonnes a year.
Meanwhile, New Westminster Mayor Wayne Wright, who along with mayors in Vancouver and Delta has spoken out against coal expansion, said his city is still looking for more information on the Surrey Fraser Docks proposal.
“We were very clear with them that we didn’t have any heads up or clear discussion on this,” Wright said. “We wanted to find out what was going on because it could be a detriment to our city.”
Wright noted the port said it had issued a report on the proposal but that he hadn’t received a copy. When he asked why, the port said it worked in a “different manner.”
“From our city’s point of view it would have been smarter to work with us,” he said. “They are going to be answerable … one thing we’ve learned in our city, you’ve got to have consultation with the people before you do anything.”
Port Metro Vancouver has also come under fire from Metro Vancouver for amassing agricultural land in the region for potential port expansion.
Comments