Canada: Court Quashes Environmental Assessment Decision On The Morrison Mine Near BC’s Skeena Watershed

Last Updated: February 19 2014
Article by Maya Stano

Until recently, only one proposed mine had ever been rejected under B.C.'s environmental assessment (EA) process. In 2012, this number doubled, with the provincial government ministers denying Pacific Booker an EA Certificate for its proposed Morrison Mine-- an open-pit copper, gold and molybdenum mine planned adjacent to Morrison Lake, at the edge of the Skeena watershed and near the historic mining centre of Smithers. This deterrmination was then challenged, leading the B.C. Supreme Court to issue a decision with a novel result —for the first time, the court has quashed a decision to deny an EA Certificate.


The first stage of the EA process resulted in an assessment report from the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) that concluded the mine would not cause any significant adverse effects. In the subsequent regulatory stage, the EAO Executive Director nevertheless recommended that the ministers refuse to issue the EA Certificate. In September 2012, the ministers took the Executive Director's advice and rejected Pacific Booker's EA Certificate Application for the Morrison Mine, thereby blocking the proposed mine's development.

Pacific Booker applied for judicial review of the ministers' decision. In its decision in Pacific Booker Minerals Inc. v. British Columbia (Environment), 2013 BCSC 2258, the Supreme Court addressed two important issues:

  1. Application of principles of procedural fairness to the EA process; and
  2. Scope of factors that the EAO Executive Director may consider in making a recommendation on an EA Certificate Application.


The case was decided on the first issue of procedural fairness,with the court finding that the EA Certificate Application process was fundamentally unfair in this instance. A brief review of the timeline of the EA process is warranted to understand the court's finding on this issue.

EA Process Timeline

In total, the EA process for the proposed Morrison Mine took ten years.

Pacific Booker began preparing for the EA process in 2002, and submitted an initial project description to the EAO in 2003. This led to the issuance of a Section 10 Order, thereby requiring an EA Certificate before the proposed mine could proceed with other permitting applications. The EAO also established a working group consisting, amongst others, of representatives of government agencies and First Nations.

A few years later, in October 2005, Pacific Booker submitted Application Information Requirements to the EAO, which specified the scope of its intended study. Negotiations between the parties ensued for three years on Pacific Booker's intended approach for its EA Certificate Application. In January 2008, the EAO issued the Section 11 Order, defining the project scope and the procedures and methods to be used in conducting the EA.

Pacific Booker then developed terms of reference (TOR) that identified the issues to be addressed and information to be provided in the EA Certificate Application. The TOR was approved by the EAO in May 2009. Four months later, Pacific Booker submitted an EA Certificate Application. This initial application was rejected as it failed to conform with the TOR. Pacific Booker revised its application and resubmitted it in May 2010. The following month, the EAO accepted this revised application for review.

Pacific Booker consulted with the EA working group and others through much of 2010 and 2011. Working group members and other First Nations raised concerns about water quality issues and adverse impacts on Aboriginal fishing rights. Although Pacific Booker responded, the EAO remained concerned and therefore commissioned an external review of some of the water issues. This third-party review concluded that further analysis and modelling was required. Pacific Booker responded and proposed to change the design of the tailings storage facility by lining it completely with a geo-membrane to reduce groundwater seepage.

Subsequently, in May 2012, the EAO circulated drafts of an EA report that concluded that – with the geo-membrane in place - the mine posed no risk of significant adverse environmental effects. The EAO circulated a further draft report with the working group in June 2012, that again concluded that with the successful implementation of mitigation measures, the mine was not likely to have significant adverse effects. At the same time, an EAO representative informed Pacific Booker's COO that the process was generally complete, with only minor editorial changes likely.

Concerns about the proposed mine, however, lingered amongst members of the working group. These concerns were conveyed in writing to Pacific Booker on August 9, 2012, with a short timeline to respond. In its response, Pacific Booker maintained that all risks had been reduced to the lowest extent possible.

EAO Recommendations

The EAO issued its final assessment report on August 21, 2012, in which it concluded that the EA process had been adequate and no significant adverse effects were predicted or expected. Concurrently, the EAO Executive Director issued recommendations. Although the Executive Director acknowledged the assessment report's findings, he recommended that the ministers consider additional factors, and adopt a risk/benefit approach when weighing the assessment report against these additional factors. The additional factors included:

  • The location of the proposed mine adjacent to a genetically unique population of salmon;
  • The long-term environmental liability and risk;
  • The requisite in-perpetuity water treatment; and
  • The strong strength of claim of the Labe Babine Nation, coupled with their ongoing concerns regarding the Morrison Mine.

As such, the EAO Executive Director recommended that an EA Certificate not be issued for the proposed mine. Notably - and key to the court's finding in this case - Pacific Booker was not aware of this recommendation, and was not provided an opportunity to comment thereon before the minister denied the EA Certificate Application on September 20, 2012. This latter lack of opportunity to respond and comment, within the broader context of the EA process carried out for the mine up to that point, was the main problem that the court found led to an unfair process.

In coming to this finding, the court found that the common law rules of procedural fairness were not supplanted by the Environmental Assessment Act — in other words, the duty of procedural fairness does apply to the EA regulatory process. The court then considered the content of the duty of procedural fairness in this case and observed:

  1. The ministers' decision was less judicial, and more polycentric, thereby demanding a lower level of procedural fairness;
  2. There is no right of appeal, and although Pacific Booker could submit a revised application, future success was unlikely in light of the lengthy and expensive process already undertaken;
  3. The ministers' decision had a significant adverse impact on Pacific Booker's business;
  4. Pacific Booker reasonably expected that it would be given the opportunity to be heard when serious concerns were expressed by others about the proposed mine. This was reinforced by EAO policies, including the User Guide that advised that if a project is unlikely to receive a favourable recommendation from the EAO, the Executive Director would so advise the proponent to permit it to change its application or delay or discontinue it. Notably, up until the last couple months of the EA process, Pacific Booker had been granted this opportunity; and
  5. There was no harm in allowing Pacific Booker to provide a written response to the Executive Director's recommendations, particularly if the working group and interveners were also granted that opportunity.

Based on this review, the court concluded that Pacific Booker should have been advised of the essence of the adverse recommendations and been given an opportunity to provide a written response. As no such notice or opportunity to comment was provided, the court concluded that the process was unfair, quashed the ministers' decision, and remitted the mine's EA Certificate Application to the ministers for reconsideration.


The second issue in this case concerned the scope of factors that the Executive Director may consider in making a recommendation on an EA Certificate Application. Although not determinative, the B.C. Supreme Court did provide some guidance that will be important for other proponents to bear in mind in preparing EA Certificate Applications for projects proposed in B.C.

At the outset, the court noted the lack of any statutory guidance on the nature of the recommendations or the factors the Executive Director may, or must, consider when making recommendations on an EA Certificate Application. The court noted that a large and generous reading of the Environmental Assessment Act was required to "permit those charged with the responsibility to protect the natural environment through a process of "neutral" assessment to achieve that objective to the greatest extent reasonably possible" (para 121).

Within the context of this case, such a "neutral assessment process" demanded that those affected by the process be given a reasonable opportunity to be engaged in it, and to have their interests given transparent and thorough consideration. This, however, did not mean that the Executive Director was prohibited from departing from the EAO's assessment report, or prohibited from making recommendations that are inconsistent with that report.

The court observed that the assessment report would most likely have been prepared by the Executive Director's staff, whereas the Executive Director's recommendations would be based on his own experience and expertise, which may ultimately differ from the final conclusions in the assessment report. The court found no problem with such a result. In addition, the court found that the Act did not preclude the Executive Director from making suggestions to the ministers that added considerations not explicitly addressed in the assessment report or that did not simply adopt the report's findings.

The court also found no fault in the Executive Director relying on additional factors in his recommendation, whether they were expressly mentioned in the assessment report or not. Similarly, the court found no problem with the Executive Director's reference to a risk/benefit analysis. Instead, the court viewed the entire EA process as essentially being a risk/benefit analysis, thereby raising no concerns with the Executive Director's reliance on such an analysis.


The court's finding in this case highlights the Executive Director's independence from the assessment report and the acceptability of relying on his or her own expertise and experience in determining what factors to consider in making a recommendation to the ministers on an EA Certificate Application.

To avoid project delays from resubmissions or litigation, it is advisable that project proponents repeatedly stress to the EAO the importance of maintaining procedural fairness throughout the EA process to ensure both (1) that they are well aware of any outstanding or lingering concerns by the ultimate decision makers, and (2) that they are given adequate opportunities to address such concerns before a decision is made at the EA regulatory stage. Without an EA Certificate in hand, a proponent cannot proceed with the requisite permit applications, thereby leaving a proposed project in the proposed stage, without actual development proceeding or profits generated. This EA stage is therefore imperative to the future success of a proposed project, and must be carefully carried out, managed and implemented by all involved.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
8 Nov 2016, Seminar, Ottawa, Canada

The prospect of an internal investigation raises many thorny issues. This presentation will canvass some of the potential triggering events, and discuss how to structure an investigation, retain forensic assistance and manage the inevitable ethical issues that will arise.

22 Nov 2016, Seminar, Ottawa, Canada

From the boardroom to the shop floor, effective organizations recognize the value of having a diverse workplace. This presentation will explore effective strategies to promote diversity, defeat bias and encourage a broader community outlook.

7 Dec 2016, Seminar, Ottawa, Canada

Staying local but going global presents its challenges. Gowling WLG lawyers offer an international roundtable on doing business in the U.K., France, Germany, China and Russia. This three-hour session will videoconference in lawyers from around the world to discuss business and intellectual property hurdles.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.