K,

"They would, no doubt, be called on to contribute in some way towards this route, but they would only base their contribution on the need to move Nickel concentrate."

To clarify, is your statement above regarding only a North/South access meant to say Chromite concentrate and not Nickel??

Because at this stage in the grand scheme it looks like the east/west route has the most chance of meeting the timeline for production in 2015. The North/South route will be years in permitting and constructing a 260 km x 100 meter swathe through some tough terrain, not to mention the 3 rivers/bridges for both a road and railine.

CLF has definetly chosen the wrong path, imo. But when and if they get approval and can commision a mine with rail, then Noront may be inclined to have a need to move only the chromite out in this manner.

Allot will depend on Baosteel and their directives.

The east/west route proposal has an excellent chance of being the one adopted by all participants and will serve and benefit more Northern communities than the alternative. And to date, I believe Noront has only proposed a "winter road" to access the mine site and not an all-season road from the Junction (at least until the mine is commissioned then with the major hurdles behind them, apply for the all-season surface.)

I believe it is Noront's design to be "low impact".....Underground Plan, Slurry and upgrading an already existing winter road network.. is eco-freindly and socially responsible.

I would agree with ED's statement...."time" is increasingly on the agenda for stakeholders in this new camp. And upgrading a 10 meter road 160 km is looking like where the darts are falling on the board.

Link below to Cliffs Little Book of Chromite for some casual weekend reading.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/66087132/CliffsChromite-Booklet

Thanks all for a stimulating topic and discussion. Have a great weekend.

mynot