Australia-US minerals deal backs decision to allow Alcoa to keep clearing WA bush, document reveals | Western Australia

The Australian government’s decision to allow US mining giant Alcoa to continue clearing parts of Western Australia’s jarrah forest despite previous illegal cleaning practices was entered into in part as a result of a critical minerals deal reached between Australia and the Trump administration last year, a new document shows.

The document also reveals that Alcoa illegally cleared land for its bauxite mining practices in the area south of Perth for 15 years, despite warnings from the federal environment department.

Conservationists have expressed outrage that an “unprecedented” $55 million fine announced by the environment minister was only applied to a six-year period in which the illegal clearing allegedly took place.

Murray Watt said on Wednesday the fine – known as an enforceable undertaking – was for clearing that took place from 2019-2025 in known habitat for nationally protected species without an approval under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.

Announcing the fine, Watt said he had granted Alcoa a national interest exemption to allow it to clear the northern Jarrah Forest for 18 months while the government considered a proposal for an expansion of the company’s Huntly and Willowdale sites. mining operations until 2045.

But a new document reveals the Environment Department has told Alcoa since 2011 that its mining operations in the forest required approval under Australia’s environmental laws.

A spokesman for the department said any clearing before 2019 fell outside the statute of limitations, meaning that investigation into whether enforcement action “against any earlier non-approved clearing was not possible.”

The document – ​​a statement outlining Watt’s reasons for granting the exemption – shows the minister believed it was justified because of Alcoa’s links to a critical minerals deal reached between Australia and the Trump administration last year, which included the sale of gallium to the US for use in the defense and renewable energy sectors.

Watt also noted that the Japanese government and the Japanese company Sojitz Corporation were joint venture partners with Alcoa to develop a gallium plant at Alcoa’s refinery at Wagerup and both the Australian and US governments committed financing and equity to the project.

Watt decided that while the involvement of the US and Japanese governments did not override Australia’s environmental laws, the exemption was a way to “reinforce and reassure” both countries about Australia’s commitment to the project and the critical minerals framework.

Matt Roberts, the executive director of the Conservation Council of WA, said “to learn that Alcoa has been illegally clearing the northern jarrah forest since 2011 is outrageous and an insult to every West Australian.”

“Furthermore, the government has prioritized corporate interests and foreign defense interests over the jarrah forests, the endangered species that rely on the forests and Perth’s drinking water – which shows how misplaced their priorities are.”

The national interest exemption power was largely used for emergencies in the past including for activities related to firefighting during this summer’s bushfires in Victoria and the emergency collection and captive management of red handfish threatened by marine heat waves in Tasmania.

‘It’s mind boggling’

Georgina Woods, head of research and investigations at Lock the Gate, called the decision “disgraceful”. She said the document “reveals that the environment minister was essentially told by the mining company that this action was necessary to meet Australia’s obligations under the critical minerals agreement with the United States.”

“This mining company got away with breaking the law for 15 years under successive Australian governments, illegally clearing a global biodiversity hotspot and then, when it finally admitted it needed some paperwork to continue its destruction, applied for and was granted an exemption from the law within 19 days. It’s flagrant and it’s mind-boggling,” she said.

“In the twisted logic of Australia in the Trump era, the national interest lies not in honoring and protecting the beauty and richness of our natural heritage, but in sacrificing it to foreign mining companies.”

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News Email}

WA’s northern Jarrah forests are home to threatened species, including the state’s unique Carnaby’s and Baudin’s black cockatoos.

Alcoa has mined in the region for decades, with the reasons showing that there was a long-running dispute between the company and the federal environment department over whether its operations were covered by “continuing use” exemptions from the law for activities covered before the enactment of the EPBC Act in 2000.

The document shows the department believed Alcoa’s clearing of the forest for bauxite mining since 2011 was not covered by these exemptions and required an assessment for its impact on protected species and ecosystems.

In November last year, the federal parliament approved amendments to the EPBC Act that imposed tighter restrictions on the use of the continuous use exemptions. The clearing of vegetation older than 15 years will no longer be exempt from assessment and approval in terms of the laws.

Following the changes, Alcoa “now accepts that it requires EPBC Act approvals for the Huntly and Willowdale mine operations” and has submitted an application for the operations at both mines to be considered through a strategic assessment process, the document said.

On January 30, Alcoa submitted an application for a national interest exemption, arguing that without one it would not be possible to continue to supply bauxite to its refineries at Pinjarra and Wagerup and “is in a position not to continue its operations.”

Alcoa argued that its application should be accepted to avoid “unintended consequences” of the EPBC reforms and that it would not be able to maintain the supply of bauxite without more cleanup “and if continuous supply cannot be maintained, it will affect future production of gallium.”

Because the department told Alcoa its operations had not been exempt from the law since 2011, Watt did not accept that the new laws passed last year justified granting the company the national interest exemption.

But he did accept that granting the exemption would be in the national interest because it would “allow mining operations to continue to maintain the viability” of the gallium project, which had the support of the US and Japanese governments.

He said it would help Alcoa “sustain its operations and its financial viability” while its expansion proposals are evaluated and would employ a workforce of about 6,000 people. Watt also decided that it would help Australia diversify critical mineral supplies for the net zero transition and defense materials.

The department’s spokesperson said it was the department’s opinion that intensified mining by Alcoa since 2011 required approval.

“The limitations of the law have made the resolution of this long-standing non-compliance complex, but these $55 million undertakings deliver a strong and lasting solution,” they said.

“This case highlights the limitations of the current regulatory framework, where protracted investigations and limited compliance tools have made enforcement slow and complex.”

They said the recent reforms to Australia’s wildlife laws “respond to these issues by strengthening the regulator’s ability to act early, act decisively and prevent prolonged non-compliance from reoccurring.”

An Alcoa spokesman said the national interest exemption would allow the company to “fully modernize our approvals under the EPBC Act” and maintain thousands of jobs. They said the minister’s reasons made it clear that “Alcoa and the government had a difference of position in relation to our historical position in relation to our approvals under the EPBC Act.”

“As noted in the statement, our operations predate the EPBC Act and Alcoa has continued operations on the basis that certain exemptions under the Act applied,” they said.

“Alcoa voluntarily entered into agreements (enforceable undertakings) with the government to reconcile this difference of position and more importantly the associated investment for conservation programs and research for the health of the Northern Jarrah Forest.”

The WA Greens upper house MP, Jess Beckerling, said it was “surprising to read that Alcoa has been illegally cleaning up since 2011, that the department has notified Alcoa of its obligations since that time, but that no penalty has been imposed until now.”

“The idea that gallium production for the US military should provide Alcoa with a national interest exemption from federal laws is ridiculous,” she said.

Watt declined to answer specific questions, referring Guardian Australia to an interview with ABC radio in Perth this week in which he described the fine as “an unprecedented amount for a company to pay after doing illegal cleaning.”

He told the ABC: “This conversation has been going on between my department and Alcoa for about 10 years” and “there was a difference of opinion legally about whether they were required to get approval or not, and that has now been resolved because of our new laws.”

He said the Albanian government had “stepped up its compliance efforts” and was “persecuting many more people” than previous governments.