The Guardian 20 April, 2005
Action against polluting uranium mine
An environmental organisation is taking action against the operators of the Ranger
uranium mine in Kakadu National Park because of the company's cover-up of dangerous
practices, including the poisoning of workers at the mine and the destruction of the
environment. "ERA has repeatedly shown its inability to comply with environmental
legislation and now it is also showing contempt for its obligations under the
Corporations Act", said Australian Conservation Foundation anti-nuclear campaigner
Dave Sweeney
The ACF has filed a formal complaint with the Australian Securities and Investment Commission
(ASIC) over false and misleading statements in the 2004 Annual Report of Kakadu uranium
miner Energy Resources of Australia (ERA).
The complaint outlines ERA's failure to comply with disclosure obligations under the
Corporations Act regarding breaches of environmental laws. It asks ASIC to require ERA to
publish a correction and to seek civil and criminal penalties against the company.
ERA's annual report states that the company operates in accordance with applicable
environmental legislation. However the directors' report fails to mention a number of severe
uranium contamination events that occurred last year at ERA's Ranger mine.
One notorious incident in March 2004 resulted in 28 workers falling ill after drinking water
contaminated with uranium levels 400 times greater than the maximum Australian safety
standard. ERA is facing criminal charges in May over this and another incident.
False assertion
On page one of the ERA Annual Report the directors state: "ERA operates in accordance with
relevant Federal and Territory environmental legislation …" This statement is demonstrably
false as it fails to refer to serious breaches of environmental legislation both during the reporting
period and repeatedly over the life of the uranium mine.
In fact, ERA currently facing two charges in relation to the contaminated water event in March
last year. In addition ERA is facing a further charge under the Mining Management Act relating
to contaminated vehicles leaving the mine site in breach of de-contamination and clearance
procedures which caused preventable radiation exposure to a local mechanic and his
children.
The sole reference to the pending prosecution of ERA says only: "Improving the management of
radiation at Ranger was a focus in 2004 following a number of highly publicised breaches of
ERA procedures resulting in the company's prosecution under the Mining Management
Act."
There is no description whatsoever of the underlying incidents leading the prosecutions.
Furthermore, the reference itself is misleading. ERA is not being prosecuted for breaches of
"ERA procedures", but for serious breaches of applicable law.
"It is deceptive and misleading for a company with such a poor track record to claim to its
investors and analysts that it operates in accordance with environmental laws", said Mr
Sweeney.
This is not the first time ERA has failed to disclose material environmental events. After the
March contamination incident, the company didn't make any disclosure to the Australian Stock
Exchange until six days after the event.
"Failing to act against this corporate recidivist would send a very bad message to the business
community generally about their disclosure obligations", Mr Sweeney said. "ERA has far more
success controlling the flow of information to its investors than it does controlling the flow of
radioactive water on its own mine site."