Small win for Ascent Resources in Slovenian legal battle

Ascent Resources announced on Friday that it has been informed by the Environment Agency in Slovenia that the partners in the Petišovci project will not be required to carry out a full environmental impact assessment prior to the award of an IPPC Permit to install a new processing facility at Petišovci.

The AIM-traded company said that in May 2016, the Administrative Court ruled that despite there being no valid objections to the granting of the permit based on environmental issues, the court believed the process adopted by the government agency in reviewing the permit application was inconsistent with EU regulations.

As a result, the partners were invited to recommence the permit application from the start of the process by carrying out a preliminary screening exercise, the purpose of which was to determine whether a full EIA is needed before awarding the permit.

Throughout the process the company said it has maintained that the original decision was flawed and the additional process of no value.

An objection to the decision has been lodged by a non-government organisation, which Ascent says has consistently appealed against the construction of the processing facility at each stage of the process.

The Environment Agency and the government departments have consistently ruled in favour of the development, the board said.

The Administrative Court decision which revoked the permit was made on procedural grounds and did not endorse any of the issues raised by the NGO, it added, with the objections raised by the NGO in their latest appeal “consistently found to be without merit”.

Ascent said it is firmly of the view that the new processing facility, which will allow Slovenian gas to be treated in Slovenia and sold into the Slovenian National Grid system, is in the best interests of the country and asserted the actions of the NGO are damaging the national interest.

The board said it is encouraged by the efforts made by the authorities to address the problems created by the unexpected decision of the Administrative Court in May 2016.

If the Environment Agency had requested a full EIA, it is likely that the final award of the permit would have been delayed for at least an additional year, but the decision now means the company and its partners can expect the permit being fully awarded sometime in 2017, it explained.

“I am pleased with this decision which paves the way for an early reinstatement of the permit,” said CEO Colin Hutchinson.

“This not only provides the long-term solution for the field but also underlines the support which the project enjoys amongst its partners and the authorities.”