RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:The reason why Pobrdje is delayed... How could EV indemnify SCL from cleanup costs if EV still don't know if they will be responsible for the cleanup themselves.
The environmental concern was mentioned in one of the conference calls by Tim Daniels and it was mentioned in much greater detail in the PEA. The PEA is where this information should be reported and it was.
If I had put everything in my post last night, it would have been much too long to read. My posts are already much too long as it is.
I didn't say that Erin Ventures
was liable for the cleanup. I said that it was a potential concern and that SRK recommended that Erin Ventures do an Environmental Liabilities Assessment (ELA) and an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).
Nothing that I posted is new information. It's been out there for years and avaialble to anyone who took the time to read the reports that contained the information.
I just wanted to post it to show that it's not a simple decision to put up $3 million.
SCL wants something out of it but it doesn't want to open up a can of worms.
The ELA and EIA studies are being worked on.
Here is the relevant text from the PEA.
The industrial area currently owned by Ibarski Rudnici Coal Company has historically been used for processing and waste disposal facilities. Sources of contamination are likely to include surface disturbance and degradation from land clearance, uncontrolled disposal of waste rock and fine coal tailings, and contamination of soil and water.
It appears that Ibarski Rudnici Coal Company is not currently obligated to undertake any investigation or remediation measures; however, there is a chance this may change in the future, either through a new permit application or as a result of changes to legislation, particularly following transposition of The Environmental Liability Directive (2004/35/EC).
The Environmental Liability Directive establishes a framework of environmental liability based on the “polluter pays” principle to prevent and remedy environmental damage. The principle of liability applies to environmental damage and imminent threat of damage resulting from occupational activities, where there is a causal link between the damage and the activity in question. Transposition of the Industrial Emissions Directive is also likely to result in new obligations being imposed on existing installations to identify and remediate contamination (during operation and closure) and monitoring the risks of contamination in the future.
Redevelopment of any brownfield sites by Erin therefore presents a liability risk; if surface rights are acquired, Erin could be obligated to remediate past environmental or social damage that has occurred or there could be complicated legal negotiations regarding liability for historic environmental contamination. A robust environmental liabilities assessment prior to acquisition (or shortly afterwards) to understand the extent of existing contamination and its impacts on the surrounding environment can assist in mitigating the uncertainties around this risk.
I don't want news releases about what might not happen. It's in the relevant report and it's up to investors to read and understand the report.
The point I was making is that the potential partners are probably still at the table and they are waiting for the results of various reports and studies before committing to the project.
It sucks for us but it makes perfect sense to them.
By the way, the Feasibility Study would contain all of these studies and reports. Catch 22. You need $3 million to complete the FS and the potential partners might be waiting for the FS before putting up the funds.
However it is possible that the MRE was enough for one of the potential partners.
VB