In a rare move for the pro-mining Barnett government, environment minister Albert Jacob has sided with the Environmental Protection Authority and rejected appeals by Canadian company Cameco over its proposed Yeelirrie uranium mine in the Goldfields.
In a rare move for the pro-mining Barnett government, environment minister Albert Jacob has sided with the Environmental Protection Authority and rejected appeals by Canadian company Cameco over its proposed Yeelirrie uranium mine in the Goldfields.
The proposal by Cameco Australia was unlikely to proceed any time soon because of weak demand and very low uranium prices, but the minister’s response casts doubt on whether it will ever proceed.
The projects's fate now rests with a final decision by Mr Jacob, who said he would take account of both the EPA report as well as broader commercial and economic considerations.
The Conservation Council of WA congratulated the minister and called on him to formally block the mine proposal.
“Cameco has now exhausted every opportunity to convince the EPA and the community that their mine proposal can be made acceptable," CCWA director Piers Verstegen said.
“Minister Jacob has only one responsible choice now, and that is to formally reject the mine proposal. We look forward to that announcement in the coming weeks.”
EPA chairman Tom Hatton said in August the project failed to meet one of nine key environmental factors examined by the independent board.
“Of the nine factors assesses, one – subterranean fauna – was unable to meet the EPA’s environmental objectives,” he said.
Dr Hatton said the proposal would threaten the viability of some species of animals that lived below ground, particularly stygofauna.
“The stygofauna habitat at Yeelirrie is particularly rich, with 73 species recorded, more than anywhere else in the northern Goldfields,” he said.
In a ruling published today by the EPA's independent appeals convenor, the minister rejected Cameco’s appeal against the EPA advice.
"The EPA’s report concluded that there remained too great a chance of a loss of 12 species that may be restricted to the impact area and therefore concluded that the proposal could not meet its objectives for this factor," today’s ruling said.
"As part of its appeal, the proponent submitted that uncertainties identified through the assessment process could be addressed through further sampling and surveys, such that the EPA’s objective for subterranean fauna could be met.
"It also provided information that it claimed improved confidence that identified species would be found outside the impact area and which indicated indirect impacts to three stygofauna species could be avoided through the management of groundwater abstraction rates from the south eastern borefield.
“The new and additional information provided by the proponent suggested the level of impact to some stygofauna species may be reduced or avoided from what was considered in the EPA’s report, but is not considered sufficient to meet the EPA’s objectives for subterranean fauna.
“As such, it appears the basis for the EPA’s conclusions in respect to subterranean fauna remains valid.
"It follows that the minister determined to dismiss the proponent’s appeal in respect to subterranean fauna.”
