I have been looking into the Tanbreeze project to gain an...

I have been looking into the Tanbreeze project to gain an understanding on the scale of processing timeline they have experienced in the Greenland government.
It seems the most similar in operation (REE etc) and also in proximity (next door) to GGG.Howeve rthey don’t have the uranium factor to consider.
It appears evident from my discussions with its director that the following information quoted below was experienced by the company during their processing of their application.
He offers highest praise for the authorities but did experience some delays as shown.
He has given me further thoughts upon GGG and more. But I have kept that part and the rest of the content between usfor confidentiality reasons, its not fair for me to share it, in respect and in appreciation for his knowledgable time and advice and for also GGG.
So I am only sharing what was offered upon the processing side he experienced with Tanbreeze within the Greenlandic system and leaving it at that (now that he has been fully approved and out of that processing stage).

Although I understand it’s not as positive as I hoped to hear. Nor is it what wed want to hear. I am sure. It is fact and it does give us a more realistic understanding on the process timeline involved here. Which is the most pertinent question on all our minds at the moment;

“Our application was largely approved by2015. The delay has mostly been asking the same questions in other words. They approve it and then a year later unapprove it and ask the same questions."

This seems a pattern I have observed for a few of the applicant companies within the system unfortunatly.

"Both our eia and sia have been approved. There has never ever been a problemwith the eia and that department has resisted all attempts to create problems or go back on their word .
In the case of the sia the demand is for a FULL ree separation plant to be built in Greenland and they are requesting 95% local workforce and that is compulsory.."

From what I see GGG seems to have 17% percent in construction. Tanbreeze has 80%. GGG has 35% in the mine and Tanbreeze has 95%. Could be some further work required there too perhaps.

"In 2015 we were guaranteed a full licence in 6weeks In fact we have had similar statements probably ten times”

This part does concern me a bit.
I understand the two projects will need to follow the same processing path and also the same conditions. Makes sense or it would be considered favourtisium.
So full REE processing is a good thing. But maybe it could create more length in approval to sort. SiA seems well advanced. But perhaps amendments may be needed there as well to meet employment conditions for locals. Who knows. We can only wait and see..

Note this does not mean GGG would experience a similar timeframe for approval. I am hoping for less.However admittedly the uranium factor does complicate things a bit in comparision to the Tanbreeze project development. I just dont like the fact that it took another 4 years after what Ive assumed is the the SIA and EIA approval to actually get the mining licence As it was "stuck" in the system. This may relate to the delays detailed in the recent international mining survey on departmental performance. But hopefully something the authorities are working upon looking forward

I hope this helps clarify our expectations a bit for everyone.