Positive Comments from Yeo!, page-7

.


http://www.env.go.jp/en/recycle/asian_net/Country_Information/Law_N_Regulation/Malaysia/mal54629.pdf

I'm not going to make judgment as to the regulations.

This as we know it is all about the ever increasing pile of by-product, a product that if it conforms to regulations and limits IMO should be given a tick of approval, and would've years ago, if it wasn't such a great political football.
They would not accept it as road base, so why were they ever going to accept it as a soil conditioner.

We have two forms of gypsum – an iron-rich phosphogypsum (WLP) that contains very low level naturally occurring radiation and a magnesium-rich gypsum known as NUF which is a non-radioactive material.

When and What indications did Lynas receive that option 1 (reuse) was unlikely to be the preference of the new government.
Were these indications through the media or a government official?

If Condisoil is rejected I think that we are all owed a scientific based explanation as to why TF so.

Not amused ATM.

.