In 2001, Northern Dynasty Minerals, Ltd. optioned 186 square miles of what is called the Pebble Deposits. In 2005, the organization discovered Pebble East and also acquired 100 percent of the mineral rights to that property, thinking that after feasibility and environmental studies, they could begin production in 2015. But in 2013, one of the company’s big partners, Anglo American PLC. withdrew, forcing Northern Dynasty to scale back its operations.
At stake is a massive deposit of gold, copper and molybdenum, right at the headwaters of the Kvichak and Nushagak Rivers, two of the eight major rivers that feed Bristol Bay. Preliminary plans call for a mining complex 20 square miles in size in the Bristol Bay watershed. This land is located in a seismically active region and would require the world’s largest earthen dam to be built. The proposed dam would be 700 feet high and several miles long.
A 10-square-mile-wide containment pond is also to be built, intended to hold between 2.5 billion and 10 billion tons of mine waste that Pebble would produce over its lifetime. Because of the amounts of sulfides in the ore body itself, the containment pond would require environmental treatment forever. The danger of groundwater contamination is very great with this project, and one of the main reasons so many people are against it.
The EPA gets involved
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released their assessment on the proposed Pebble Mine project in Jan. 2014. In it, they questioned the impact on salmon fisheries should the project commence, but did not oppose the plan. It wasn’t until July, 2014 that the EPA Region 10 applied restrictions that effectively halted the project, even before an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) had been submitted.
On Dec. 15, 2014, President Obama blocked oil and gas drilling from taking place in the Bristol Bay region of Alaska through an Executive Order. Alaska’s Republican Senator, Lisa Murkowski sided with the president, saying she was OK with the decision.
Can the government say no to landowners before they explain what they want to do?
Between the two treasures, salmon and minerals, sits the Obama administration and the EPA. The White House has already sided with the salmon fisheries, a $500 million a year operation. How Obama came to side with the fisheries is apparently a complex tale involving “millionaire activists, Alaska Natives, lawsuits and one politically explosive question: Can the federal government say no to a property owner before he has a chance to explain what he wants to do,? says the Washington Post.
While Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. has raised $13 million from the sale of shares in its efforts to fight the EPA, it is expected that the EPA will invoke a rarely used legal authority to bar Northern Dynasty from beginning work on the Pebble Mine project, citing risks to the salmon fisheries and the environment of the Bristol Bay. The agency has the backing of conservationists, fishermen, and native tribal groups. Millionaire activists, Hollywood stars and environmentalists have also joined in the fight to bar the mining of the Bristol Bay.
It is the rarely used legal authority, a preemptive veto, only used one time in the past 40 years, that has the EPA under scrutiny by Republicans in Congress. Basically, the EPA has decided to block the proposed mining operation, and to do this, they are taking action under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act based on an analysis of a hypothetical mine.
The EPA’s handling of the Pebble Mine project has prompted two federal lawsuits, one of them accusing the agency of violating the 1972 Federal Advisory Committee Act, or FACA, This act is intended to prevent outside influences in governmental decisions. In addition to the lawsuits, Northern Dynasty has released publicly thousands of pages of internal EPA documents that they say prove their claims of illegal collusion between the agency and mining opponents.
The EPA has defended their actions, saying they do business with an “open door.” Dennis McLerran, who heads the EPA’s regional district that includes Alaska and the Pacific Northwest said, “This is an undisturbed watershed and an incredible economic powerhouse that supports both a large commercial industry and a subsistence fishery” relied upon by generations of Alaska Natives. This has been one of the most open and transparent processes that could have been designed.”
