Public record from PEN is that the US listing AND production will occur in October. I'd be surprised if this tout on the part of petitioners was not to some extent, known in advance by the Strata US legal team, and thus factored into releases about production timing etc.
The way I read the NRC docket is as follows (with minimal available detail):
The petitioners have requested, and been granted more time to have (key word here...) a 'review' of previous denials of contentions etc. They are in effect asking the permitting authority to have another look at its own/or its affiliate rulings, (Vintage correct me here please). There appears to be no legal barrier to progressing to production.
All contentions appear to apply to environmental specifics, and not project economics. This is a key distinction?
As far as I can see (at face value) there is no impedance to PEN completing its stated aims in the stated timeframe (the imperative for SH).
Its seems that irrespective of who carries the most regulatory clout here, the emphatic endorsement of PEN's standing applications is reflected the way in which the contentions had previously been denied. A credit to the Strata permitting team. It was a text book example of stakeholder PR.
What seems a reasonable conclusion to draw here is that Ross will proceed as planned, and within expected timeframes.
After the production begins, and for some time afterwards-perhaps years, its entirely likely that one civil group or another will need to be dealt with. Its just the way mining works, and we all know that uranium is a sensitive business.
PEN Price at posting:
2.5¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
