Alaskans have a lot riding on DNR

It’s too early to know what a letter sent from a federal agency means for a local coal mining project near Sutton. On its face, it calls into question the wisdom of placing unchecked confidence in the Alaska Department of Natural Resources.

A spokesperson for the Wishbone Hill coal prospect has described the letter as an over-reach by President Barack Obama’s administration that seeks to rewrite history from 1996.

But we wonder if that’s really the case.

The folks who first asked the federal Office of Surface Mining to review the case aren’t high-powered attorneys with bottomless pockets. The folks in December 2011 who asked for this federal review are our neighbors who live next to the proposed mine.

They have skin in this game. They are biased in favor of their existing way of life and are concerned by the implications a large-scale coal-mining project could have in their neighborhoods.

Yet this isn’t about whether mining is good or bad, safe or too risky. And it absolutely isn’t about jobs. This is about everyone following the rules — the feds, the state and any companies that want to mine here.

What does it mean that a group of our neighbors with no formal training in federal or state rules for mining has seemingly identified a permitting error dating back to 1996? Did DNR know about the error? Is there additional documentation in DNR’s files that will explain what now seems to be its apparent failure to follow Alaska law regarding issuing permit extensions and permits to mine?

Alaskans have a lot riding on these answers. What happens at Wishbone Hill is just the tip of the iceberg. What could it mean for mega projects like the proposed Pebble Mine and Donlin Creek?

One argument for supersized projects says that Alaskans shouldn’t worry; we should trust our regulations because they are some of the most stringent in the nation. Even if the regulations represent the gold standard for safety, can we trust the people who enforce the rules?

DNR has until Sunday to send the federal agency any additional documentation about the permits that might change the facts of the federal review.

Frankly, we hope DNR has an ironclad answer that will support its view that the permits to explore and mine at Wishbone Hill are valid. If not, we fear our faith in DNR’s ability to follow the law and insist the permittees they regulate do the same has been significantly tarnished.

After all, if a group of laypeople in Chickaloon can discover this sort of permitting problem, it seems reasonable that someone at DNR over a span of 15 years should have spotted it, too.