Urani Naamik rejected, page-7

Here's most, but not all, of the article...

Authorities reject criticism from Urani Naamik. Number fraud. Unsubstantiated and without facts. The environmental organization Urani Naamik is lashing out at both Greenland Minerals and the Government of Greenland's experts in the Greenland Minerals case. Authorities reject the criticism. In a 12-page memo, the environmental organization Urani Naamik criticizes both Greenland Minerals' technical background report prepared by the ERM (Environmental Resources Management) and the PA's experts for their handling of the Kuannersuit project. It writes the newspaper Sermitsiaq. The memo, signed by Chairman Jan Rehtmar-Petersen, states, among other things, that the advisers ERM have defrauded with figures to reduce dust pollution. It is about the activities of the open pit mine quarry during the winter period, the length of the road from the port to the mining area, the length of the road sections from the open fracture to the crushing plant and, finally, the maintenance of the stretch of road. Overall, based on manual map reading, assumption of road transport and road maintenance, Urani Naamik believes that dust pollution will be 2 1/2 times greater than indicated in the technical background report. "All activities in the open mine have been reduced by 70-74 per cent. One "forgets" the winter, when you can not spray with water. On this scam, Greenland Minerals over-reduces by 54-55 percent. On the map you can clearly see fraud with the length of the gravel road from the port to the mining area. When you measure carefully, you get the length of the gravel road of 11.5 kilometers, including climbs on the gravel road," the memo reads. According to Urani Naamik, the dialogue around dust pollution during the hearings has been marked by improperity and lack of facts: "Throughout the process of Greenland Minerals' consultation on the Kuannersuit project, DCE (National Centre for Environment and Energy) has behaved naively...)

The above signifies two things: one, that the EIA review is active; and two, that Urani Naamik, in accusing DCE of naivete, may have become desperate.