PERMITS

BigDog

Regular
Perhaps, not that I saw it coming, MT and Team understood the potential for appeals and the restrictions that puts on progress, hence the recent cap raise. I certainly hope there is not a 10 month delay for such scallywag behavior.
I for one thought a raise would not occur until after the permit hearing, that was incorrect.
Let’s hope the NIMBYS eat the dirt they ‘perceive’ to attempt to save, unless of course they have a justifiable reason for concern not yet mitigated by Talga.
If they can find one I’m sure MT and Co can find a suitable mitigating solution.
Full disclosure: I’m looking forward to comfortably retiring from this puppy well before 2030 🍻💨 🎸
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users

JNRB

Regular
In the case of the Botnia mine, the nature conservationist association appealed it all the way to the supreme court and it took ten months from the initial court ruling to be rejected by the supreme court. Does anyone know how to get a look at the appeals that were done in that case so we can see how credible they were? If they were silly appeals that still were heard by the court, then that doesn't bode well for Talga.

I'm pretty sure we can still get started in the meantime

But -

Even if we use the example above as a worst case most-annoying-case scenario, 10 months... really not all that bad. MT has said we still have plenty of material from our trial mine. So I don't think a 'lengthy' appeals process is going to have much of an impact.

I still don't think the appeal will happen personally. Especially after having read the letter going around from the opposition group trying to get support. The letter shows they don't have the support they need currently, and the reason they gave are not anything a court is going to pay much heed to. I mean seriously, they're throwing out stupid hypothetical scenarios like "what if, at some point in the future, one of our kids wants to go camping in that exact spot out of the WHOLE NORTHERN SWEDEN WILDERNESS" - fuk off. That shit's gonna get thrown out immediately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

beserk

Regular
IMHO it all boils down to 20 to 30 summer houses within a 5 km radius of NS mainly located by the Torne river. And these cottages are not owned by the NIMBYs but have mostly been held within established Vittangi families for generations. While the NIMBYs are Johnny-come-latelys.

And that these properties in Rova suanto, in close proximity to Nunasvaara south, are tightly held are for two reasons;

1) They are close to the Cultivation Border which does mean that special restrictions apply for building permits for new houses or extensions etc

2) They are mostly within 200 m from the Torne river, a Natura 2000 protected river of National importance, which is not allowed any more for newly erected houses.

So the NIMBYs are fighting an uneven fight if they are going to raise any reaction from the fishin', shootin' and drinkin' summer cottage owners in Rova suanto within a cooe from Nunasvaara.

And it is the people that are the closest to the mine that are the ones most likely to suffer negative consequences so this is why the NIMBYs target this people as valued converts to the cause of stopping mining activity.

-beserk
 
Last edited:

Vigdorian

Regular
Email i received regarding permits and mining, in full:

Thanks for your email.

For Talga to commence graphite mining, all permits (including the environmental permit, the exploitation concession and other local approvals) must legally come into force. This includes the resolution of any permissible appeals to the environmental permit.

Following the granting of the Natura 2000 permit, the Swedish Mining Inspectorate is now assessing Talga’s exploitation concession for the Nunasvaara South mining operation.

Regards,

Alex



Alex Dook
Communications Coordinator
Does anyone know when we can expect to find out the decision of the exploitation concession application now that environmental permits have been granted ?
Opinions on likelihood of success relative to the mine permit ? Are there any contingencies in place if denied ?
 

anbuck

Regular
I still don't think the appeal will happen personally. Especially after having read the letter going around from the opposition group trying to get support. The letter shows they don't have the support they need currently, and the reason they gave are not anything a court is going to pay much heed to. I mean seriously, they're throwing out stupid hypothetical scenarios like "what if, at some point in the future, one of our kids wants to go camping in that exact spot out of the WHOLE NORTHERN SWEDEN WILDERNESS" - fuk off. That shit's gonna get thrown out immediately.
I'm not worried about the people from that Facebook group, but they aren't the only ones who might appeal. The nature conservancy, Sami, or Finnish could all appeal. In the Botnia case, it was the nature conservancy that appealed to the supreme court, so I'm most worried about them and the Sami for Talga's case. It's hard to see what argument they could appeal based on though. That's why I'm interested in reading the appeal from the Botnia case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

anbuck

Regular
IMHO it all boils down to 20 to 30 summer house within a 5 km radius of NS mainly located by the Torne river. And these cottages are not owned by the NIMBYs but have mostly been held within families for generations. And that they are tightly held are for two reasons;

1) They are close to the Cultivation Border which does mean that special restrictions apply for building permits for new houses etc

2) they are mostly within 200 m from the water which is not allowed any more for newly erected houses.

So the NIMBYs are fighting an uneven fight if they are going to raise any reaction from the fishin', shootin' and drinkin' summerhouse owners in closeby Rova suanto within a cooe from Nunasvaara.

And it is the people that are the closest to the mine that are the ones most likely to suffer negative consequences so this is the NIMBY target converts to the cause.

-beserk
Do you think the people who owned those summer houses submitted opposition during the permitting hearing? If not, then why do you think they would get involved now?

Did you hear back from the court about getting a copy of the full decision? I submitted a request on their website, but haven't received a response yet.

If you call the court again, it would also be great to understand if we can get a copy of any appeals that come in and when we should expect the court to announce whether they will grant leave to appeal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

beserk

Regular
Hi anbuck

I received a portion of the massive amounts of documents kept under Case file 1573-20 by the Land and environment court registrar.

The process is as follows; in response to your request for info they send you a 60 page index of every piece of info from every source thinkable they gathered since 2020 and ask you to specify which bit you want or....they threathen you with mailing you the 850 Giga byte file on a memory stick or similar but they charge you for this service.

Fair enough.

I read through the index provided and picked out the part I believe it was item 491 or so that relates to the Court Decision at the very end....

And that is quite a few pages...and it is copy protected so can't really provide you with a quick cut and paste job.

I can try to find out which line item I picked out if you want.

-beserk
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 3 users

anbuck

Regular
Thanks, Beserk. I'm just trying to get a sense for how solid the decision is and how much room for appeal there is. For example, did they cover the potential effect on the summer houses you mentioned and how thoroughly did they do it. If it's not copiable, then don't worry about it. Hopefully I'll hear back from the court and be able to get my own copy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

Gero

Regular
This video sums up the contradictory position of the Enviromental lobby i.e Transition to Green Economy without Mining the Minerals required!

 
  • Like
  • Fire
Reactions: 6 users

JNRB

Regular
God I wish people works get over the assumption that mining = bad for environment.

Mining has been a key part of almost every human culture for literally thousands of years. Taking minerals out of the ground and transforming then into something useful is the bedrock (pardon the pun) of modern civilisation.

There was a brief period for a few decades where new technologies, energy sources, and globalisation allowed some mining companies to run rampant a bit. This is what's stuck in people's minds now, but it does NOT define what mining is.

People never here stories about the good, well functioning, well regulated mines (again, over millennia) Only the negative ones. So now people just assume mining always creates an environmental and humanitarian disaster.

It's a fallacy to believe we have to accept the 'compromise' of more damaging mines. We can also just decide to property regular or mining industries. Sweden has great examples of this already as do most countries and it's only improved with technology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12 users

cosors

👀
Hi anbuck

I received a portion of the massive amounts of documents kept under Case file 1573-20 by the Land and environment court registrar.

The process is as follows; in response to your request for info they send you a 60 page index of every piece of info from every source thinkable they gathered since 2020 and ask you to specify which bit you want or....they threathen you with mailing you the 850 Giga byte file on a memory stick or similar but they charge you for this service.

Fair enough.

I read through the index provided and picked out the part I believe it was item 491 or so that relates to the Court Decision at the very end....

And that is quite a few pages...and it is copy protected so can't really provide you with a quick cut and paste job.

I can try to find out which line item I picked out if you want.

-beserk
Hi @beserk! I would be interested in details of all the conditions that were also mentioned by Talga I mean MT.
You don't need to worry about the copy right if you do it like I did with the newspaper subscription of the local press some time ago.
I simply reproduced the content here 1:1 but in my own words. It's like you're reading it to someone. I had talked to a lawyer beforehand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

cosors

👀
"COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
Accompanying the document

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council

establishing a framework for ensuring a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials and amending Regulations (EU) 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, 2018/1724 and (EU) 2019/1020

...

Driver 2.2: Unpredictable and fragmented permitting procedures
Industrial activities along the raw materials value chains, including exploration, mining, processing, refining and recycling, make use of energy-intensive processes with potentially significant impacts on the environment and local communities. Therefore, various areas of legislation, including on land use planning and nature conservation, apply to their planning and operation. Compliance with these rules is ensured through the obligation to obtain several permits before starting operations.
EU legislation determining the process and substance of permitting procedures related to CRM projects includes the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Birds, Habitats 314 , Water Framework, Industrial Emission Directives and the Seveso Directive (an overview of permitting-related EU legislation is included in Annex 8). This legislation seeks to mitigate the risk of causing significant adverse environmental effects, such as generation of contaminants deposited on land, in the air and water, with the development of exploration, mining, refining and recycling activities. Member State legislation on the process and criteria for issuing permits reflects such EU rules and adds rules in areas of national competence.
The costs and time associated with permitting procedures and the likelihood of obtaining a permit are key considerations underlying investment decisions in the CRM sector. Currently, the unpredictability of the length of national permitting processes and of the criteria for the assessments and documentation required are often reported as barriers to investment in new CRM projects. 315 Consultations with stakeholders in the context of this initiative have further underlined the degree to which this unpredictability is perceived as a barrier to building an EU CRM value chain. 316
For raw materials extraction projects, the MINLEX study showed that times to obtain a permit (related to all relevant rules, not only environmental) can vary between procedures from 3 months to 3 years. 317 More problematically, outliers can be found with timelines up to 9 years. 318 Current examples of CRM projects where permitting procedures are, for different reasons, lasting longer than was initially expected include:
  • the Sakatti project in Finland, aimed at producing platinum group metals (as well as nickel and copper), where the permitting process started in February of 2018 and where, as per December 2022, there was no decision yet (approx. 4 years later) 319 ;
  • the Mina do Barroso project in Portugal, aimed at producing lithium, where the permitting process started in 2018 with a decision initially expected within 140 working days - in line with the guidelines of the responsible authorities - and where currently the decision is expected in April 2023 (approx. 4 years later) 320 ;
  • the Talga project in Sweden, aimed at the production of natural graphite, where the EIA report was submitted in May 2020 and where, as per December 2022, there was no decision yet (approx. 2,5 years later) 321 .
..."
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52023SC0161

_______
https://single-market-economy.ec.eu...l-raw-materials/critical-raw-materials-act_en
_______
;)
Kiruna.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

cosors

👀
@beserk I found it in Finland!

part o the verdict:
24 Conditions
"General condition
1.) The business must be conducted, facilities designed and work carried out in main accordance with what the company has stated in the application documents and has otherwise stated or undertaken in the case, unless otherwise stated in this judgment.

Explosions
2.) Blasting in open pits may only be carried out on weekdays during the day between 07.00-18.00 after a predetermined time and after a clear audible warning signal. Nearby residents who wish to do so must be informed about times for blasting.

3.) Blasting in the open pits must be carried out so that vibrations in the nearest homes are minimized. Vibrations as a result of blasting in the open pits must not result in a higher oscillation speed in the vertical direction in the housing's supporting basic structure such as plinth or plinth than 5 mm/s in more than 5% of the blasting occasions per calendar year and never exceed 7 mm/s.

Control of ground vibrations must take place at each blasting occasion by measuring at a nearby residential building. Measurement must comply with SS 4604866:2011.

4.) Air shock waves resulting from the blasts in the opencast mines must not exceed 100 pascal free field value in more than 5% of the blasting occasions per calendar year and must never exceed 200 pascal. Control of air shock waves must take place at each blasting occasion by measuring at a nearby residential building. Measurement must follow SS 02 52 10.

Noise
5.) Noise from construction work other than particularly noisy construction work (such as drilling, rock knocking and piling) must not give rise to a higher equivalent noise level at homes than
Non-holiday Monday – Friday (day)At 07.00-19.0060dBA
Weekend off Monday – Friday (evening)At 19.00-22.0050 dBA
Saturday, Sunday and holiday (day)At 07.00-19.0050 dBA
Saturday, Sunday and holiday (evening)At 19.00-22.0045 dBA
At nightAt 22.00-07.0045 dBA

Particularly noisy construction work may only be carried out on weekdays at 07.00-19.00.

6.) Noise from the activity must not give rise to a higher equivalent noise level at homes
Non-holiday Monday – Friday (day) At 06.00-18.00 50 dBA
Night time At 22.00-06.00 40 dBA
Other times 45 dBA

Work steps that can typically result in instantaneous noise levels above 55 dBA in homes may not be carried out at night.

Control must take place through immission measurements or through near-field measurements and calculations. An initial check must take place within three months from when all parts of the business that may cause noise have been put into operation. Inspections must then take place as soon as there have been changes in the operation that may lead to increased noise levels, but at least once a year.

Chemicals and hazardous waste
7.) Storage of chemicals and liquid hazardous waste may only occur on an embanked and sealed surface equipped with rain protection. The embankment must contain the volume of the largest storage vessel and 10% of the total volume of other storage vessels. The storage must be protected against collision. Spills and leaks must be collected and taken care of immediately.

Dusting
8.) Measures must be taken to limit the spread of dust that may pose a nuisance to human health and the environment.

Reindeer nutrition
9.) The company must annually carry out consultations with Talma Sami village and Gabna Sami village with the aim of minimizing the negative impact of the operation on the reindeer husbandry. The company must provide information in the environmental report that consultations have been held during the year.

10.) During the period from 1 December to 31 May inclusive, the company may not carry out blasting or drilling for production in the open pits, primary crushing of mined ore or transport of ore or waste rock from the open pits.

Release to water
11.) County retention water, contact water and potentially contaminated water must undergo purification before it is allowed to overflow into Hosiojärvi (county retention water from open pits, runoff from industrial areas, ore stockpiles and non-final-covered parts of sand and waste rock reservoirs, leachate from the sand and waste rock reservoir, water from cells for sludge and process water from the concentrator).

Facility
12) Ditches, pump pits, basins and other plant parts that handle the water that is intended to undergo purification must be tight. Relationship drawings must be submitted to the supervisory authority at a time determined in consultation with the supervisory authority.

13) Breakaway masses of moraine and peat and such masses that are otherwise taken out of the business must be used in the business or stored to the extent required for the post-processing of the business and used for this purpose. The company must report to the supervisory authority the planned design of moraine storage before the construction of such moraine storage begins, and must then annually report to the supervisory authority a balance of the amount of moraine stored and consumed.

14) The sand and gravel reservoir must, with the exception of parts of the gravel embankment, be constructed with a foundation consisting of a liner, which is connected to a collecting ditch. Drainage systems must be installed under the respective upper liner and with separation of the respective drainage water. Construction of the sand and gray rock reservoir can take place in stages.

Inspection of completed construction works (complete and in stages) must be carried out by an independent inspector, who is appointed by the company after consultation with the supervisory authority. The inspection report and relationship drawings must be submitted to the supervisory authority at a time determined in consultation with the supervisory authority.​

Finishing
15) The waste in the sand and waste rock storage must be covered with a qualified cover. Covering must begin within one year from when the surface, or part of it, is completed to its final form.

16) Backfilling in open pits that are above the equilibrium level for groundwater in the respective open pits must be covered with qualified coverage. Coverage must begin within one year of the completion of backfilling of an open pit.

17) The qualified cover must be designed and carried out with criteria to ensure that the oxygen transport rate through the cover in a normal year is limited to a maximum of 0.5 mol/m 2 and year. The cover must be designed with a 0.5 m thick sealing layer of moraine mixed with bentonite, a 2 m thick protective layer of moraine and a 0.1 meter thick plant establishment layer that is vegetated, or another design that provides an equivalent oxygen transport rate.

18) An implementation description for final post-processing must be submitted to the supervisory authority no later than one year before the operation is planned to finally cease.

Ecological compensation
19) The company must carry out measures to compensate for the loss of natural values that arise through the operation. The compensation measures must correspond to at least 115% of the impact value, calculated according to the CLImB calculation model or a similar calculation model. The compensation area must be located within Kiruna municipality or, alternatively within Norrbotten county. The compensation plan
must be drawn up in consultation with the supervisory authority and submitted to the supervisory authority no later than one year from when the permit has gained legal force and has been used or later if the supervisory authority so allows. The supervisory authority may then decide on compensatory measures.

Species protection
20.) Felling within the area of operation may not take place during the period from May 1 to July 31 inclusive.

Financial security (SEK 1 ≅ € 0.09 ≅ AUD 0.14)
21.) The company must provide financial security for costs for carrying out the restoration measures that the business may cause as follows

a) Basic security must be provided with SEK 140 million (140,000,000). The security must be submitted to the Land and Environmental Court for review no later than three months after the legally binding permit judgment.

b) Security for post-treatment of the sand and gray rock reservoir must be set up in stages so that it finally covers a total of SEK 85 million (85,000,000) as follows
- a security of SEK 30 million (30,000,000) must be submitted to the Land and Environmental Court for review no later than two years after the permit has been claimed,
- security of SEK 25 million (25,000,000) must be submitted to the Land and Environmental Court for review no later than five years after the permit has been claimed, and
- security of SEK 30 million (30,000,000) must be submitted to the Land and Environmental Court for review no later than seven years after the permit has been claimed.

When the basic security according to point a) is to be provided, the amount must be calculated using the consumer price index. When the staged security according to point b) is to be provided, both the basic security and the staged amount/s must be calculated using the consumer price index. January 2020

shall constitute the base month and calculation shall take place against the latest valid consumer price index as of the day the security is submitted to the court.


Control

22.) The company must draw up a special control program regarding conditions 15-17 that ensures and documents that the coverage meets the requirements in condition 17. The control program and relevant relationship drawings must be submitted to the supervisory authority before coverage begins.

23.) A program for self-control regarding the construction phase of planned facilities must be drawn up and reported to the supervisory authority no later than one month before construction work is intended to begin. The control program must specify measurement methods, measurement frequency and evaluation method.

24.) A program for self-control regarding the operation of the business must be reported to the supervisory authority no later than three months before the intended commencement of mining operations. The control program must specify measurement methods, measurement frequency and evaluation method."
link to the PDF (the whole verdict in 191 pages)

_____
Legal fees
The Land and Environment Court rejects the respective claims of Sami Village Gabna and Talma Sami for legal costs.

AN APPEAL.
The Land and Environment Court dismisses the claims of xxx, xxx, xxx and xxx, xxx and xxx for financial compensation due to the mining activity applied.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 13 users

brewm0re

Regular
@beserk I found it in Finland!

"General condition
The business must be conducted, facilities designed and work carried out in main accordance with what the company has stated in the application documents and has otherwise stated or undertaken in the case, unless otherwise stated in this judgment.

Explosions
Blasting in open pits may only be carried out on weekdays during the day between 07.00-18.00 after a predetermined time and after a clear audible warning signal. Nearby residents who wish to do so must be informed about times for blasting.

Blasting in the open pits must be carried out so that vibrations in the nearest homes are minimized. Vibrations as a result of blasting in the open pits must not result in a higher oscillation speed in the vertical direction in the housing's supporting basic structure such as plinth or plinth than 5 mm/s in more than 5% of the blasting occasions per calendar year and never exceed 7 mm/s.

Control of ground vibrations must take place at each blasting occasion by measuring at a nearby residential building. Measurement must comply with SS 4604866:2011.

Air shock waves resulting from the blasts in the opencast mines must not exceed 100 pascal free field value in more than 5% of the blasting occasions per calendar year and must never exceed 200 pascal. Control of air shock waves must take place at each blasting occasion by measuring at a nearby residential building. Measurement must follow SS 02 52 10.

Noise
Noise from construction work other than particularly noisy construction work (such as drilling, rock knocking and piling) must not give rise to a higher equivalent noise level at homes than
Non-holiday Monday – Friday (day)At 07.00-19.0060dBA
Weekend off Monday – Friday (evening)At 19.00-22.0050 dBA
Saturday, Sunday and holiday (day)At 07.00-19.0050 dBA
Saturday, Sunday and holiday (evening)At 19.00-22.0045 dBA
At nightAt 22.00-07.0045 dBA

Particularly noisy construction work may only be carried out on weekdays at 07.00-19.00.

Noise from the activity must not give rise to a higher equivalent noise level at homes
Non-holiday Monday – Friday (day) At 06.00-18.00 50 dBA
Night time At 22.00-06.00 40 dBA
Other times 45 dBA

Work steps that can typically result in instantaneous noise levels above 55 dBA in homes may not be carried out at night.

Control must take place through immission measurements or through near-field measurements and calculations. An initial check must take place within three months from when all parts of the business that may cause noise have been put into operation. Inspections must then take place as soon as there have been changes in the operation that may lead to increased noise levels, but at least once a year.

Chemicals and hazardous waste
Storage of chemicals and liquid hazardous waste may only occur on an embanked and sealed surface equipped with rain protection. The embankment must contain the volume of the largest storage vessel and 10% of the total volume of other storage vessels. The storage must be protected against collision. Spills and leaks must be collected and taken care of immediately.

Dusting
Measures must be taken to limit the spread of dust that may pose a nuisance to human health and the environment.

Reindeer nutrition
The company must annually carry out consultations with Talma Sami village and Gabna Sami village with the aim of minimizing the negative impact of the operation on the reindeer husbandry. The company must provide information in the environmental report that consultations have been held during the year.

During the period from 1 December to 31 May inclusive, the company may not carry out blasting or drilling for production in the open pits, primary crushing of mined ore or transport of ore or waste rock from the open pits.

Release to water
County retention water, contact water and potentially contaminated water must undergo purification before it is allowed to overflow into Hosiojärvi (county retention water from open pits, runoff from industrial areas, ore stockpiles and non-final-covered parts of sand and waste rock reservoirs, leachate from the sand and waste rock reservoir, water from cells for sludge and process water from the concentrator).

Facility
Ditches, pump pits, basins and other plant parts that handle the water that is intended to undergo purification must be tight. Relationship drawings must be submitted to the supervisory authority at a time determined in consultation with the supervisory authority.

Breakaway masses of moraine and peat and such masses that are otherwise taken out of the business must be used in the business or stored to the extent required for the post-processing of the business and used for this purpose. The company must report to the supervisory authority the planned design of moraine storage before the construction of such moraine storage begins, and must then annually report to the supervisory authority a balance of the amount of moraine stored and consumed.

The sand and gravel reservoir must, with the exception of parts of the gravel embankment, be constructed with a foundation consisting of a liner, which is connected to a collecting ditch. Drainage systems must be installed under the respective upper liner and with separation of the respective drainage water. Construction of the sand and gray rock reservoir can take place in stages.

Inspection of completed construction works (complete and in stages) must be carried out by an independent inspector, who is appointed by the company after consultation with the supervisory authority. The inspection report and relationship drawings must be submitted to the supervisory authority at a time determined in consultation with the supervisory authority.​

Finishing
The waste in the sand and waste rock storage must be covered with a qualified cover. Covering must begin within one year from when the surface, or part of it, is completed to its final form.

Backfilling in open pits that are above the equilibrium level for groundwater in the respective open pits must be covered with qualified coverage. Coverage must begin within one year of the completion of backfilling of an open pit.

The qualified cover must be designed and carried out with criteria to ensure that the oxygen transport rate through the cover in a normal year is limited to a maximum of 0.5 mol/m 2 and year. The cover must be designed with a 0.5 m thick sealing layer of moraine mixed with bentonite, a 2 m thick protective layer of moraine and a 0.1 meter thick plant establishment layer that is vegetated, or another design that provides an equivalent oxygen transport rate.

An implementation description for final post-processing must be submitted to the supervisory authority no later than one year before the operation is planned to finally cease.

Ecological compensation
The company must carry out measures to compensate for the loss of natural values that arise through the operation. The compensation measures must correspond to at least 115% of the impact value, calculated according to the CLImB calculation model or a similar calculation model. The compensation area must be located within
Kiruna municipality or, alternatively within Norrbotten county. The compensation plan​
must be drawn up in consultation with the supervisory authority and submitted to the supervisory authority no later than one year from when the permit has gained legal force and has been used or later if the supervisory authority so allows. The supervisory authority may then decide on compensatory measures.

Species protection
Felling within the area of operation may not take place during the period from May 1 to July 31 inclusive.

Financial security
The company must provide financial security for costs for carrying out the restoration measures that the business may cause as follows
Basic security must be provided with SEK 140 million (140,000,000). The security must be submitted to the Land and Environmental Court for review no later than three months after the legally binding permit judgment.
Security for post-treatment of the sand and gray rock reservoir must be set up in stages so that it finally covers a total of SEK 85 million (85,000,000) as follows
a security of SEK 30 million (30,000,000) must be submitted to the Land and Environmental Court for review no later than two years after the permit has been claimed,
security of SEK 25 million (25,000,000) must be submitted to the Land and Environmental Court for review no later than five years after the permit has been claimed, and
security of SEK 30 million (30,000,000) must be submitted to the Land and Environmental Court for review no later than seven years after the permit has been claimed.

When the basic security according to point a) is to be provided, the amount must be calculated using the consumer price index. When the staged security according to point b) is to be provided, both the basic security and the staged amount/s must be calculated using the consumer price index. January 2020

shall constitute the base month and calculation shall take place against the latest valid consumer price index as of the day the security is submitted to the court.



Control

The company must draw up a special control program regarding conditions 15-17 that ensures and documents that the coverage meets the requirements in condition 17. The control program and relevant relationship drawings must be submitted to the supervisory authority before coverage begins.

A program for self-control regarding the construction phase of planned facilities must be drawn up and reported to the supervisory authority no later than one month before construction work is intended to begin. The control program must specify measurement methods, measurement frequency and evaluation method.

A program for self-control regarding the operation of the business must be reported to the supervisory authority no later than three months before the intended commencement of mining operations. The control program must specify measurement methods, measurement frequency and evaluation method."
link to the PDF
Wow! This is a great find!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

brewm0re

Regular
"COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
Accompanying the document

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council

establishing a framework for ensuring a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials and amending Regulations (EU) 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, 2018/1724 and (EU) 2019/1020

...

Driver 2.2: Unpredictable and fragmented permitting procedures
Industrial activities along the raw materials value chains, including exploration, mining, processing, refining and recycling, make use of energy-intensive processes with potentially significant impacts on the environment and local communities. Therefore, various areas of legislation, including on land use planning and nature conservation, apply to their planning and operation. Compliance with these rules is ensured through the obligation to obtain several permits before starting operations.
EU legislation determining the process and substance of permitting procedures related to CRM projects includes the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Birds, Habitats 314 , Water Framework, Industrial Emission Directives and the Seveso Directive (an overview of permitting-related EU legislation is included in Annex 8). This legislation seeks to mitigate the risk of causing significant adverse environmental effects, such as generation of contaminants deposited on land, in the air and water, with the development of exploration, mining, refining and recycling activities. Member State legislation on the process and criteria for issuing permits reflects such EU rules and adds rules in areas of national competence.
The costs and time associated with permitting procedures and the likelihood of obtaining a permit are key considerations underlying investment decisions in the CRM sector. Currently, the unpredictability of the length of national permitting processes and of the criteria for the assessments and documentation required are often reported as barriers to investment in new CRM projects. 315 Consultations with stakeholders in the context of this initiative have further underlined the degree to which this unpredictability is perceived as a barrier to building an EU CRM value chain. 316
For raw materials extraction projects, the MINLEX study showed that times to obtain a permit (related to all relevant rules, not only environmental) can vary between procedures from 3 months to 3 years. 317 More problematically, outliers can be found with timelines up to 9 years. 318 Current examples of CRM projects where permitting procedures are, for different reasons, lasting longer than was initially expected include:
  • the Sakatti project in Finland, aimed at producing platinum group metals (as well as nickel and copper), where the permitting process started in February of 2018 and where, as per December 2022, there was no decision yet (approx. 4 years later) 319 ;
  • the Mina do Barroso project in Portugal, aimed at producing lithium, where the permitting process started in 2018 with a decision initially expected within 140 working days - in line with the guidelines of the responsible authorities - and where currently the decision is expected in April 2023 (approx. 4 years later) 320 ;
  • the Talga project in Sweden, aimed at the production of natural graphite, where the EIA report was submitted in May 2020 and where, as per December 2022, there was no decision yet (approx. 2,5 years later) 321 .
..."
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52023SC0161

_______
https://single-market-economy.ec.eu...l-raw-materials/critical-raw-materials-act_en
_______
;)
View attachment 34553
This is what I thought you were referring to in the media thread on EU Proposal (ie not the conditions). Been a long day!
You went one better in the next thread with the ACTUAL Conditions! 👏
 
  • Like
  • Fire
Reactions: 3 users

cosors

👀
77 opponents ...
and what I immediately noticed or searched in vain I won't mention here for the time being. But maybe one of you will figure it out.)
a little riddle
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

beserk

Regular
Wow! This is a great find!
Cosors excellent panning for nuggets of valuable info...and the reason this was reported and reproduced in full from a Finnish source is that the Finns have been a party to the whole process since the Torne constitutes the border further down stream at the confluence with Muonio river.

-beserk
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

beserk

Regular
"COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
Accompanying the document

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council

establishing a framework for ensuring a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials and amending Regulations (EU) 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, 2018/1724 and (EU) 2019/1020

...

Driver 2.2: Unpredictable and fragmented permitting procedures
Industrial activities along the raw materials value chains, including exploration, mining, processing, refining and recycling, make use of energy-intensive processes with potentially significant impacts on the environment and local communities. Therefore, various areas of legislation, including on land use planning and nature conservation, apply to their planning and operation. Compliance with these rules is ensured through the obligation to obtain several permits before starting operations.
EU legislation determining the process and substance of permitting procedures related to CRM projects includes the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Birds, Habitats 314 , Water Framework, Industrial Emission Directives and the Seveso Directive (an overview of permitting-related EU legislation is included in Annex 8). This legislation seeks to mitigate the risk of causing significant adverse environmental effects, such as generation of contaminants deposited on land, in the air and water, with the development of exploration, mining, refining and recycling activities. Member State legislation on the process and criteria for issuing permits reflects such EU rules and adds rules in areas of national competence.
The costs and time associated with permitting procedures and the likelihood of obtaining a permit are key considerations underlying investment decisions in the CRM sector. Currently, the unpredictability of the length of national permitting processes and of the criteria for the assessments and documentation required are often reported as barriers to investment in new CRM projects. 315 Consultations with stakeholders in the context of this initiative have further underlined the degree to which this unpredictability is perceived as a barrier to building an EU CRM value chain. 316
For raw materials extraction projects, the MINLEX study showed that times to obtain a permit (related to all relevant rules, not only environmental) can vary between procedures from 3 months to 3 years. 317 More problematically, outliers can be found with timelines up to 9 years. 318 Current examples of CRM projects where permitting procedures are, for different reasons, lasting longer than was initially expected include:
  • the Sakatti project in Finland, aimed at producing platinum group metals (as well as nickel and copper), where the permitting process started in February of 2018 and where, as per December 2022, there was no decision yet (approx. 4 years later) 319 ;
  • the Mina do Barroso project in Portugal, aimed at producing lithium, where the permitting process started in 2018 with a decision initially expected within 140 working days - in line with the guidelines of the responsible authorities - and where currently the decision is expected in April 2023 (approx. 4 years later) 320 ;
  • the Talga project in Sweden, aimed at the production of natural graphite, where the EIA report was submitted in May 2020 and where, as per December 2022, there was no decision yet (approx. 2,5 years later) 321 .
..."
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52023SC0161

_______
https://single-market-economy.ec.eu...l-raw-materials/critical-raw-materials-act_en
_______
;)
View attachment 34553
Hi where did you fund the footage from the Kiruna municipal council meeting in the Kristallen the New Kiruna Centre town hall,?

-beserk
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

cosors

👀
Hi where did you fund the footage from the Kiruna municipal council meeting in the Kristallen the New Kiruna Centre town hall,?

-beserk
Hi beserk!
Watch the short video here:
https://www.svt.se/nyheter/sapmi/professor-kan-vara-svart-att-stoppa-gruvan

I brought the picture because I am curious how they will cope with the decision to be against, when the decision is against their own government, against the EU, against the EU Presidency of Sweden, against the CRA, against the EU Green Deal and against the emission targets. And it is not a small splinter party.
Look at the documents of the CRA for 'strategic' and what that means and then look at this round. That was my thinking and reason for posting it. I don't want to be in their shoes. And that's in a mining town like Kiruna. But each as he likes.

In the first and smallest expansion stage about 1.16M tonnes of CO² will be saved. This corresponds to the footprint of about 340,000 Swedes or about just under 3.3% of the total Swedish population. How do they sell that to their voters?
Life Cycle Assessment

https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/sweden
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

Micreg

Regular
77 opponents ...
and what I immediately noticed or searched in vain I won't mention here for the time being. But maybe one of you will figure it out.)
a little riddle
I’m guessing it was the same crazy person who posted:

"And destroy 4 rivers! IF they get permission. Large factories near the Hertsön district and a cottage area and harbour for leisure boats...Yes, yes....graphite mining is intended to be in the middle of the Torne River and the Vittangi River…”
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users
Top Bottom