Author photo

By A.J. Roan
Mining News 

Pebble public input ends, 30-day decision

September 7, 2022 - North of 60 Mining News

 

Last updated 9/22/2022 at 3:09pm

Location of the proposed Pebble mine in Northwest Alaska.

Pebble Limited Partnership

Section 404(c) by the Environmental Protection Agency would restrict the use of certain waters in the Bristol Bay watershed for disposal of dredged or fill material at Pebble, essentially terminating any likelihood of the mine ever being built.

Pebble Limited Partnership presses for withdrawal of preemptive veto

As the Environmental Protection Agency closed public input on its 2022 proposed determination, Pebble Limited Partnership calls on the agency to withdraw its preemptive veto of the Pebble copper mine project, ultimately finalizing the permit process undertaken by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

About a year ago, the EPA made known its intention to reinitiate the process of making a Clean Water Act Section 404(c) determination to protect certain waters in the Bristol Bay region of Southwest Alaska.

You can read more details about EPA's announcement at EPA revisits Bristol Bay restrictions in the September 10, 2021, edition of North of 60 Mining News.

Both supporters and opposition to Pebble were called upon to participate in a public comment period that ended on Sept. 6.

In response, the Alaska Miners Association said, "EPA's use of this proposed determination is without question a preemptive veto – which would set a precedent that will have rippling effects across Alaska, not just related to resource development projects. The EPA should allow the established and ongoing process to play out before considering this preemptive veto."

On the other end of the spectrum, the United Tribes of Bristol Bay urged residents and Tribes to voice support for Clean Water Act protections that would come with an EPA determination that would prohibit and restrict the use of certain waters near Pebble.

"During the busiest season of the year, amidst a record-breaking salmon run, the people of Bristol Bay once again made it clear that EPA must finalize strong protections for our watershed and end the threat of Pebble Mine for good," said UTBB Executive Director Alannah Hurley.

The Pebble Partnership says there is absolutely no justification for the EPA's actions against the Pebble project.

"The EPA's proposed veto of Pebble is legally, environmentally and technically unsupported," said Pebble Limited Partnership CEO John Shively. "The EPA action is premature and it flies in the face of decades of regulatory precedent for fair and due process for development projects in Alaska and the nation."

Further reaching repercussions

Whether for or against developing a copper mine nearly 100 miles upstream from Bristol Bay, Alaska lawmakers have shown concern for the unforeseen ripples an early decision regarding Pebble would mean for resource development of any kind throughout Alaska and the country at large.

"Mining provides some of the best paying jobs in the state," said Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy. "Jobs that have never been needed more for Alaskan families to survive record price hikes in food and gas prices under Biden Administration policies. EPA's action could very well become the template for stopping future mines in Alaska and across the country."

The concern arises from the EPA potentially overstepping its authority regarding the Clean Water Act section 404(c), which is under the Army Corps of Engineers' jurisdiction.

You can read the official statements by Alaska's senators and governor at Alaska lawmakers respond to EPA decision in the June 3, 2022, edition of North of 60 Mining News.

"Congress did not give EPA broad authority to act as it has in the Pebble case," said Shively. "The 404 veto was intended to be narrowly defined and for specific areas. In this case, the EPA has preemptively vetoed 309 square miles (nearly 200,000 acres) of state of Alaska land, an area 66 times larger than any previous 404 veto. In fact, this site prohibition is 23 times larger than the entire mine site footprint. This is clearly a massive regulatory overreach by the EPA and well outside what Congress intended for the agency when it passed the Clean Water Act."

Additionally, there are many who view the efforts by EPA as politically motivated, and while both sides tout "science," the facts speak for themselves.

As for EPA's proposal, according to the original filing in 2014, "Region 10 is taking this step because of the high ecological and economic value of the Bristol Bay watershed and the assessed unacceptable environmental effects that would result from such mining."

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Final Environmental Impact Statement, however, came to a different conclusion.

"Based on the findings of the Final EIS, we already know Pebble can operate safely and reliably, while fully protecting the water, fish and wildlife resources of Bristol Bay," said Northern Dynasty Minerals President and CEO Ron Theissen.

You can read about the revised proposed determination that has lawmakers concerned at EPA takes another shot at stopping Pebble in the May 25, 2022, edition of North of 60 Mining News.

"The EPA's actions are politically motivated, and in our comments today we spell out just how indefensible this veto process has become," said the Pebble CEO. "The EPA has made wildly speculative claims about possible adverse impacts from Pebble's development that are not supported by any defensible data and are in direct contradiction with the facts demonstrated in the USACE's Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Pebble project. The FEIS clearly states that Pebble can be developed without harm to the Bristol Bay fishery. Regulations and court precedent specify EPA must establish that development will have demonstrable adverse impacts before it can initiate a veto, and the EPA did not do this. Simply put, EPA's speculation about impacts is not the same as demonstrating impacts will occur."

Homegrown resources rebuffed

"The biggest beneficiary of preventing Pebble and other US copper mining projects will be China," the Alaska Miners Association penned in its notice to the closing of public input.

The Pebble Mine project advanced to the final step of the permitting process would produce 320 million pounds of copper; 363,000 ounces of gold; 15 million lb of molybdenum; 1.8 million oz of silver; and 12,000 kilograms of rhenium annually over the first 20 years of mining, according to the results of a preliminary economic assessment published by Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd., which owns the Pebble Partnerhsip, last year.

"Perhaps the most egregious aspect of this entire process is the EPA's blatant dismissal of the significant economic benefits this project could have for the region and for the state without explanation or justification," added Shively. "The EPA gives short shrift to what hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs could mean for the communities around Iliamna Lake."

Considering that the PEA also shows that the Pebble deposit is large enough to support a mine of this size for roughly a century, benefits to all aspects of the Alaskan and American economy would be felt for generations.

You can read the forecasted economic benefits of Pebble at PEA reveals Pebble economics, benefits in the September 10, 2021, edition of North of 60 Mining News.

"EPA gives little to no consideration to the critical role copper will play in our nation's transition to more renewable sources of power," continued Shively. "There are multiple studies and reports that point to a looming supply gap for copper in the decades ahead. Pebble could be a critical source for the copper the nation needs to make this transition, or the U.S. will face the reality of being dependent upon China for the copper and other minerals necessary for green energy."

You can read about the impact of copper and the necessity of Pebble at Surprise $60 million investment for Pebble in the July 29, 2022, edition of North of 60 Mining News.

A map showing the exact location of the possible Pebble mine in Alaska.

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

"Should the EPA finalize its Pebble veto, there are numerous violations of rights, agreements and laws that profoundly affect the future of Alaska, and these will likely be contested in court," said Shively. "EPA has blatantly ignored the state of Alaska, which is the landowner that specifically selected the Pebble area for its mineral potential. If the EPA finalizes its veto and precludes any development on 309 square miles of Alaska land, it would be violating Alaska's Statehood Compact and the 'no-more' clause of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which requires congressional approval of any additional park land in Alaska. The EPA would also be violating the U.S. Constitution by taking away the State and the project's legally protected property interests in the mineral rights underlying the land, without any just compensation."

Per CWA 404(c) regulations, it required EPA to either withdraw the determination or prepare a recommended determination "within 30 days after the conclusion of the public hearing."

As the conclusion was Sept. 6, news regarding its decision is expected no later than Oct. 6.

 

Reader Comments(0)

 
 

Our Family of Publications Includes:

Mining News
Metal Tech News

Powered by ROAR Online Publication Software from Lions Light Corporation
© Copyright 2024