"Agreed that much discussion has been had over the years in favour of E/W road.

!. What was causing my previously mentioned confusion was that some posts were obfuscating the installation of transmission by suggesting that it would be separate from the current winter road".---ANL's post"

2. "I also think that because the transmission line is going in, the path must have been already decided. With the decision of the transmission path they must also know that the road is also going in beside it. Ice road access is not likely to be adequate for servicing the line." --

from Edgy's post Mar 17 (this am)

My comments:

The Pickle Lake Transmition Project is NR'd as $250M (phase 1 of 2 phases; - doesnt say what phase 2 is) 300km line which will follow hwy 599 from Ignace to Pickle Lake. A combination of APUC (Algonquin Power) approved financing and the Sagatary Transmition LLP (partnership of FN communities along the route) will build the line "expeditiously' (timing) and will be funded by the $3B asset (in mostly power station assets) APUC. and connect with the ON energy grid "quickly" (timing).

Conclusion; So, the road exists; route is known; timing start is known.

-line ends at Pickle Lake (so far); Pickle lake to NOT's Eaglesnest is another apprx 60 km and is the route?? of the proposed EW road : I assume this last apprx 60 km is the NOT FS proposed EW route???- (please comment/confirm) to the eagles nest (NOT) mine site. AND/OR a CLF/KWG mine site.

The EW route already has the approval of six FN communities affecting NOT's published 43-101 bankable FS study. It is the financing of this FS plan that NOT/Paul Semple et al) are waiting for, subject to infastructure 'CERTAINTY' announcements (ie. government-Fed and/ON $ support) (per Paul Semple to me); and the EA approvals ((aug/sept'ish).

It seems that the Phase 2 of the transmition project could be EW road route to Noronts mine site meaning it would be an all reason road.

Also, as it has been pointed out by some, that this phase 2 power line route/road would lower NOT's FS costs materially and provide land transport for mine build eguipment/materials/people; and accomodate/ensure the mine build/production timeline for a end of 2016 start date.

Its (the pwer line corridor announcement) is a start for the "certainty" statements by government(s); but more "certainty" announcements will be needed (such as the commercial cost of power; CLF's contribution; FED $ contribution; EA approvals (timely); FN legislation//FN approvals. The $$ money alone will do it for sp blockers, imo.

I dont expect anything in the mar 21 fed budget re RoF specifics, but hope there will be money allocation placeholder space for FN/north-ont and RoF references- ie.(details to follow for local FN/Prvincial and Fed photo op announcements to follow the budget/sell the budget phase).

Given Clements Fednor point man roll, recent speaches/innuendos, i am optimistic for some certainty announcements. As i said prviously, the pwer lines NR was a manditory, tangible "certainty " announcement start.

The "Bridges" NR realeased a couple of days ago was a re-release of old news for the repair and maintenance of 11 bridges and some roads which have fallen into disrepair due to lack of ON maintenance funds. No new money was anounced; ie no new bridges. politicians always re-announce already committed funds as new funds/new tangible action. It was a bit interesting that a minor Fed Minister of Transportation was in attendance to assit the local MP and Ont's Gravelle make it look like that somethig tangible (ie "certainty") was actually happening. The Fed guy was there to protect/get credit for his half of the Fed funds already announced over two years ago. Provides optics of actual "certainty" action? No.

Gravelle knows a provincial election is coming soon, and he is already in re-elction mode, and his party will lose power, The competing ON parties elctioneering promises dont count as "certainty". Especially the lberals.

Peter