The Environment Centre of the Northern Territory (ECNT) has warned of legal problems for the government if the McArthur River mine expansion is approved by new Mines Minister Chris Natt.

ECNT Coordinator Peter Robertson said “It is clear to us that under Section 36 of the Mine Management Act (2001), the Minister cannot approve this expansion in anything like its currently proposed form because such approval will be in breach of the Act.

“Under S.36 of the Act, before authorising such a project, the Mines Minister must be satisfied that :

‘(a) the management system to be implemented on the site will promote the protection of the safety and health of persons and of the environment on the site; and

‘(b) the management of the mineral resources on the site will be in accordance with good mining practice.’

“The mining company is currently drafting its Mine Management Plan (MMP) for approval by the Minister. This MMP is supposed to incorporate the changes necessary to protect the environment as a result of the EPA assessment and the Environment Minister’s conditions on approval.

“The problem is, the findings of the latest EPA report, including its Appendices, are so damning of the mine expansion proposal that there is no way the Minister can satisfy himself that the environment will be protected or that the mine will operate in accordance with good mining practice.

“For example, one of the independent scientific reports carried out for the EPA by EWL Sciences Pty Ltd states in relation to the proposed tailings storage facility: ‘It is unlikely the TSF design would be approved in other states…the TSF would not be self-sustainable and therefore does not meet ANCOLD (1999) guidelines.’

“We have consulted with lawyers on this matter and we believe the Minister has no option but to require the company to start from scratch and come up with a new plan that is not based on river diversion, inadequate tailings storage facilities, ongoing contamination of groundwater and the river system, and a whole host of other environmentally, socially and economically detrimental impacts.

“Even if some alternatives would result in less ore being accessible, and hence the life of the mine is shortened, that may be the best ‘balanced’ outcome for the whole community, rather than just focusing on what the company thinks is financially most attractive.”