While Virginia Uranium Inc.’s (VUI) Project Manager, Patrick
Wales, has talked about VUI’s dedication to uranium mining safety, its
parent company, Virginia Energy Resources Inc. can’t even differentiate between
“indicated resources” and “mineral reserves” in technical
disclosures released on its website. This is especially odd given the
significance of its ‘mistakes’.
One source found the following: “The Company [VUI] filed a
technical report dated September 6, 2012 titled "NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment Update, Coles Hill
Uranium Property, Pittsylvania County, Virginia, United States of America"
by Lyntek Inc. and BRS Engineering "in support of a listing
application dated August 31, 2012. The technical report did not comply with the
requirements of NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 because it incorrectly
included wording that "the
preliminary economic assessment...indicates that the portion of the [indicated]
mineral resource...is economic under current conditions" (Indicated resources are simply economic
mineral occurrences that have been sampled from locations such as outcrops,
trenches, pits and drillholes to a point where an estimate has been made, at a
reasonable level of confidence, of their contained metal, grade, tonnage,
shape, densities, physical characteristics.).”
The source goes on to state, “With respect to the Company's
disclosure of the Coles Hill PEA on its website and corporate presentations,
the economic analysis appears unbalanced because the Company discloses upside
uranium price sensitivity without providing equal downside sensitivity.”
The point is that if Virginia Energy Resources cannot be
forthright with its investors and potential investors about the economic
opportunities the Coles Hill uranium deposit holds, Virginians in particular should
be weary of claims made by any company affiliated with Virginia Energy
Resources, including VUI.
A company’s integrity is measured by the sum of its parts. If
one part of a company, in this case a parent company, willfully lies to its
investors, it creates the perception that the company in question has a
business culture that doesn’t respect, much less care about, the truth. More often
than not, if one part of a company demonstrates improper business practices, it
can be found throughout its daughter, sister and/or parent companies as well.
What Virginia Energy Resources demonstrated by its informational
“inaccuracies” is its willingness to put profits above facts, the truth, and
not inconceivably, the safety of its business practices in order to turn a
greater profit. So why should Virginians trust that its daughter company, VUI,
wouldn’t do the same to protect and enhance its profits?
The reason why I oppose uranium mining in Virginia goes
beyond the fact that an ‘incident’ could have irrevocable harm on Virginia’s
environment and the people living in that environment; it also has to do with the
motives of those who would be performing the mining. In the case of VUI, its
motives and that of its parent company are clear: profits over people and
profits over truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment