It followed the law at this point. It was later, in 2003, that CEAA approached DFO to do an interdepartmental review, which they did. On the basis of that, in 2004 DFO's opinion was that it was unlikely to cause any noticeable increase in contamination of habitats and resources or have toxic effects on fish populations in that ecosystem or downstream in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.
Are you just basically disagreeing with that conclusion?