Final environmental review for controversial Pebble Mine expected July 24, developer says

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is due to publish a Final Environmental Impact Statement for the controversial Pebble Mine on July 24, the company planning the project said.

“It is our understanding based on conversations with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that the final EIS will be published in the Federal Register on July 24th. This will mark one of the most significant milestones for the Pebble Project,” said Tom Collier, CEO of Pebble Partnership.

“Following the final EIS, the Army Corps will use this document as it prepares the Record of Decision, or ROD, for Pebble – a step expected to follow the publication of the final EIS,” Collier said. The ROD will set out key terms for federal permits for the giant project, such as the environmental impact mitigation that will be required.

Pebble is a large, undeveloped deposit of copper, gold and molybdenum located a few miles north of Illiamna, a community on Lake Iliamna southwest of Anchorage. It would be a surface mine, at least initially, with mineral ore extracted and processed at the mine and shipped to a new port planned for the project on the southwest side of Lower Cook Inlet.

The ore would be moved in a slurry, mixed with water, by pipeline from the mine to the port. A road would also be built from the port to the mine. A natural gas pipeline would also be built to carry gas for power generation from the Kenai Peninsula across Cook Inlet to the mine.

Typically, the ROD is closely followed by issuance of key permits like a “Section 404” wetlands dredge and fill permit required by the federal Clean Water Act. The plan for Pebble, which will be detailed in the FEIS, will be closely scrutinized for its effects on regional wetland and possible contamination of salmon-bearing streams.

“The Army Corps has been thorough and transparent with their work to date as they have undertaken this objective, technical review of our proposed plan for a mine at the Pebble site. They have worked through a range of technical issues that came from the public comments and agency reviews of the draft EIS,” Collier said.

Bristol Bay residents who oppose the mine are maintaining their criticism, however. Mine tailings stored in impoundment systems at the mine could be leaked over time, releasing toxins into waterways. Bristol Bay supports rich salmon runs important doe commercial and subsistence fishing, and the mine poses a major risk, critics say.

Despite the risk, the Trump administration is pushing hard for Pebble. “In this time of long-overdue focus on the structural barriers to equality that remain deeply embedded in our society, the Pebble Mine and its permit review exemplify the depth and breadth of those barriers in federal permitting,” said Alannah Hurley, executive director of United Tribes of Bristol Bay, a coalition of regional tribal groups.“The blatant attempt by the Trump administration to elevate the interests of a small, financially challenged Canadian company (Northern Dynasty Minerals) over the interests and longstanding opposition of the Tribes and Native communities of Bristol Bay is a prime example of structural racism at work,” Hurley said.

“These communities—the First People of Bristol Bay—have done everything within their power for decades to defend their way of life from a preposterous project that, science has told us, will inevitably contaminate their region, their resources, their economic lifeblood, their subsistence way of life, and their culture,” Hurley said in a statement.

Collier, however, pointed to the economic contributions the mine would make to the region, particularly small communities near the project in the Lake and Peninsula Borough where jobs are scarce.

“The draft of the final EIS shows the tremendous economic opportunity a project like Pebble could mean for the residents of Southwest Alaska. It shows that the communities closest to Pebble could have year-round employment and increased economic activity,” Collier said.

If the mine is built several thousand people would be employed in construction and several hundred in long-term production jobs. Mining jobs typically average over $100,000 a year in Alaska, according to McDowell Group, an economic consulting firm that has studied the minerals industry in the state.

“We also know the project will make significant contributions to Alaska’s overall economy – something that is even more important given today’s time of tremendous economic uncertainty,” Collier said.