Pebble opponents in Bristol Bay say they will refuse access to lands for controversial mine project

A major change by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for surface access for the proposed Pebble Mine has raised more worries about the project among rural community and Native corporation leaders in the Bristol Bay region.

Pebble is a large copper-gold-molydenum deposit near Lake Iliamna, southwest of Anchorage. Communities in the region worry that contamination from the mine could damage local watersheds and endanger streams and rivers that support rick salmon fisheries.

Village corporations and Bristol Bay Native Corp., the Alaska Native regional corporation for the area, oppose the mine and are now refusing to grant right-of-way access or sell construction gravel or rock for the controversial mining project.

On May 22 the Army corps announced its selection of a “least environmentally damaging” project alternative as a part of its regulatory review of the proposed mine, which is being advanced by Pebble Limited Partnership, a subsidiary of Northern Dynasty Minerals.

The new alternative involves an 86-mile “northern access” alternative from a port on Cook Inlet to the mine site, which is about 10 miles north of Iliamna. A pipeline would also be built to ship ore concentrates to the port in a liquid slurry rather than by truck.

In making the decision, the corps said has dropped consideration of a shorter road on a more southern route that involved a proposed shuttle ferry that would transport supplies to the mine and ore trucks. In a briefing, corps officials said concerns had been voiced over effects of trucking the ore and of the ferry operation on seals in the lake.

What bothers leaders in the region, they say, is that the new alternative is a major shift that is not subject to further public comment or review by state or other federal agencies. “This is a significant project change, and one that is not reflected in the preliminary final environmental impact statement,” that the corps has developed, and which has been released.

The current regulatory timeline remains unchanged, however. The corps intends to publish the Final Environmental Impact Statement this summer and to issue a formal Record of Decision for the project this fall, corps officials said.

Because the new alternative is not part of any single project plan available now to the public — it was assembled with parts of earlier proposals by the mining company — opponents have concerns that there may be surprises when the FEIS and Record of Decision are published.

“It is unacceptable for PLP to make such a significant change in its plans after the completion of the preliminary final environmental impact statement,” said BBNC Vice President of Lands Dan Cheyette.

“There are numerous problems with the northern transportation route. It has not been vetted and scrutinized by both the public and cooperating agencies on the same level as other transportation routes.

“It is completely misleading and inaccurate for the Corps to suggest that such a major change this late in the process is what Alaskans wanted,” Cheyette said.

“As it stands now, the Corps is barreling towards a record of decision based on a project application that is significantly different than the focus of the preliminary final environmental impact statement. This is unacceptable, and about as far as PLP and the Corps can get from a thorough and robust permitting process,” he said.

For its part, Pebble Limited partnership said components of the northern route have been subject to study as alternatives in the EIS process. The company has also conducted extensive environemental and water quality studies on its own prior to the start of the corps’ review.

The new road route would transverse surface and subsurface lands owned by Bristol Bay Native Corp., or BBNC, including land at its eastern terminus that sits on property jointly owned by subsidiaries of BBNC and Igiugig Village Council.

It crosses lands that are not and will not be available for the purpose of building Pebble mine. “Both entities (BBNC and Igiugig Village Council) have expressed to the corps and PLP that these lands are not and will not be available to accommodate Pebble mine. BBNC sent a letter to the Corps reiterating that PLP does not and will not have permission to access its lands. B

BNC also asked the Corps to remove from consideration any plan that would rely on BBNC surface and subsurface estates,” Cheyette said.

However, Pebble Partnership spokesman Mike Heatwole expressed confidence that access agreements will ultimately be worked out. “We intend to work with each of the landowners along the northern corridor,” he said in an email. “We believe we will be able to gain the right of way needed to build the transportation corridor.”

If built, the road would follow a route that is near the existing Pile Bay road, a rough road that begins at Williamsport, on the western Inlet, about five miles north of the new proposed port for Pebble at Diamond Point. Part of the new route would follow the existing road, which would need significant upgrades, but much of it would follow a new corridor that would cross surface lands owned by two village corporations, Iliamna Native Corp. and Pedro Bay Corp.

Iliamna’s corporation has an agreement with Pebble to grant access but Pedro Bay does not, and says it opposes the mine. BBNC itself owns an 80-acre section, a former Native allotment, along the new route of the road and says it will not allow access, Cheyette said. Nor will material from for the road from gravel mine sites be made available by BBNC, he said, although there are also gravel sites on state-owned lands, which would be available for the road.

“It is completely misleading and inaccurate for the Corps to suggest that such a major change this late in the process is what Alaskans wanted,” Cheyette continued.

“As it stands now, the Corps is barreling towards a record of decision based on a project application that is significantly different than the focus of the preliminary final environmental impact statement. This is unacceptable, and about as far as PLP and the Corps can get from a thorough and robust permitting process.”

Igiugig Village Council meanwhile released its own tartly-worded statement: “The corps continues to disregard our concerns, has failed in their trust responsibility to adequately consult with our tribe, and has not completed thorough analyses of the impacts this project will have on our people. The move (to the new route) deviates from the previous preferred alternative, known commonly as the ‘southern route’ which included an ice-breaking ferry and a port at Amakdedori,” on western Cook Inlet,” the statement said.

The village tribal council is also majority owner of Iliaska Environmental LLC, the majority owner and operator of a major rock quarry at Diamond Point. Ordinarily, rock from the quarry would be used to reinforce bridges along the road, but the tribe will not sell to Pebble, spokeswoman Christina Salmon said. “PLP’s plan for Diamond Point does not fit with our plans (for the quarry, and should not be considered an acceptable alternative,” she said in a statement.