Ultimately WA Environment Minister Bill Marmion has the authority to scrap the project, but the EPA’s recommended level of assessment effectively amounted to a “no to the proposal” in the words of its chairman Paul Vogel back in March.
LDO is arguing that the process adopted by the EPA was so “fundamentally flawed that the report cannot be relied upon”
The company said the EPA’s determination was without merit and contradicted the material submitted, including the input provided by government agencies and expert advice.
LDO aims for a more thorough assessment of the project and a public environmental review process which also covers potential economic benefits.
LDO managing director Peter Ross said the company was only seeking the opportunity to undertake further studies.
“In now reviewing the process followed by the EPA in making its decision and developing this report, we can reach no conclusion other than that we were denied adequate opportunity to participate in the process or to respond to information provided to the EPA by other parties,” he said.
“The EPA's lack of transparency throughout and its decision to take irrelevant and unproven factors into account are key elements of our appeal.
“Secondly, the report itself is fundamentally flawed and simply does not support the EPA's conclusion.”
A review of the EPA’s decision also discovered that the government agency factored in issues which were beyond its charter.
“For example, detailed expert advice on water and subsidence provided to the EPA was dismissed within 24 hours, all advice from government agencies indicated that more studies were needed and there is no mention of evidence or assessment on the social factors cited in the EPA's decision,” Ross said.
“Not only does the EPA's decision to exclude LDO from the process mean the report to the minister is not accurate or complete, even the information they did consider is largely either irrelevant or does not support its decision.”
The EPA’s resistance to the project could set a negative precedent for other coal mining proposals in the state and followed its recommendation against the development of the Coolimba coal mine in the Mid West earlier this year.
The Vasse project is about 15 kilometres from the town of Margaret River and the tenement area covers 80 hectares, including land underneath the river.
Bord and pillar mining was proposed for areas 160-500 metres underground according to the EPA.
The draft mining plan targeted a production rate of 1.2 million tonnes per annum for a mine life of 20 years.
The Vasse project is conservatively estimated to have resources of at least 116Mt, according to data provided by Intierra.
The Vasse project was being advanced by LD Operations on behalf of its private owners, AMCI (70%) and Core Coal Holdings (30%).
