{"id":33259,"date":"2020-12-02T00:05:32","date_gmt":"2020-12-02T08:05:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/?post_type=custom_news&p=33259"},"modified":"2022-05-26T11:18:39","modified_gmt":"2022-05-26T18:18:39","slug":"examining-why-the-pebble-mine-died","status":"publish","type":"custom_news","link":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/news\/examining-why-the-pebble-mine-died\/","title":{"rendered":"Examining Why the Pebble Mine Died"},"content":{"rendered":"

In a final decision that surprised many, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has denied a key federal permit<\/a> to the Pebble Limited Partnership (PLP), bringing to an end the company\u2019s 13-year-long bid to build the controversial Pebble Mine in southwest Alaska. The Corps deemed PLP\u2019s final proposal \u201cnoncompliant\u201d with the requirements of the Clean Water Act\u2014one of the few times the agency has rejected a major resource extraction project in Alaska.<\/p>\n

The Pebble Mine was slated for a largely undeveloped swath of wilderness near Bristol Bay, a watershed that supports one of the world\u2019s most productive wild sockeye salmon populations. The rejection hinges on PLP\u2019s final compensatory mitigation plan, which described how the company expected to make up for destroying wetlands with the construction of its copper and gold mine by temporarily preserving more than 45,000 hectares of undisturbed wetlands nearby.<\/p>\n

In its rejection, USACE concluded that the mine and its supporting infrastructure, which would have involved building roads, a port<\/a>, and a natural gas pipeline and power plant, are \u201ccontrary to the public interest.\u201d That determination cited the project\u2019s \u201cprobable\u201d and \u201ccumulative\u201d impacts. For example, PLP\u2019s proposal suggested that green-lighting the Pebble Mine could \u201cforeseeably result in the development of additional new mines,\u201d which would further damage the area\u2019s wetlands.<\/p>\n

In August<\/a>, USACE outlined that PLP would need to offset the damage that the mine would cause to 1,300 hectares of wetlands and nearly 300 kilometers of streams, and that the compensation must occur in the same watershed where the mine was to be built. That challenge apparently proved too great for the company. USACE said PLP\u2019s final plan failed to meet nine out of 13 basic requirements. As a result, the project\u2019s \u201cunavoidable adverse impacts\u201d to wetlands, and the company\u2019s inability to mitigate them, led USACE to deny the permit.<\/p>\n

Questions remain about how the flurry of activity surrounding the mine proposal\u2014outside of the fine details of the federal permitting and environmental review process\u2014may have played into the decision. PLP executives\u2019 undisclosed long-term plans for the mine, and their apparently cozy relationships with regulators\u2014revealed in the secretly recorded Pebble Tapes<\/a>\u2014might have affected its prospects. As could have the criticism of President Trump\u2019s son, avid fisherman and Pebble Mine opponent Donald Trump Jr. But many Alaska Natives, fishermen, conservation groups, and former federal regulators are celebrating the news of the mine\u2019s rejection.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s great news. It affirms the work that we did at EPA back in 2014,\u201d says former US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10 administrator Dennis McLerran, who signed off on restrictions that halted PLP\u2019s efforts years earlier\u2014a move the Trump administration reversed in 2019<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe concluded that there were potentially significant adverse effects on the fishery in Bristol Bay after doing three years of twice-peer-reviewed science,\u201d says McLerran. \u201cAnd so now the Corps has reached the same conclusions based on the apparently secret mitigation plan.\u201d<\/p>\n

USACE\u2019s rejection of PLP\u2019s plan comes after a particularly tumultuous period of public and interagency consultation and deliberation. Despite repeated requests by Bristol Bay tribes to review and give feedback on PLP\u2019s final mitigation plan, the public only saw the company\u2019s final plan\u2014which was completely different than previous versions<\/a>\u2014after USACE rejected the mine last week.<\/p>\n

In the final version of its plan, PLP proposed to protect 10 times the area of the wetlands it destroyed, for a period of 99 years. The plan involved transferring state lands that are currently open to mining and other uses into a new Koktuli Conservation Area, a sprawling protected area in the Koktuli River watershed that would have been open to activities such as hunting and fishing. The Koktuli watershed, home to a unique and rare class of sockeye salmon<\/a>, is where the bulk of the mine\u2019s footprint would have been.<\/p>\n

The Clean Water Act typically requires<\/a> that mitigation efforts create new wetlands or restore degraded ones, but sometimes allows preserving wetlands when they are threatened by degradation or development. PLP says in its plan that, given the Koktuli watershed\u2019s \u201clargely undisturbed nature,\u201d preservation was its only option for meeting USACE\u2019s standards. The company then revealed that its own active mining claims constitute roughly a third of the potential conservation area.<\/p>\n

In its decision, USACE cited a range of shortcomings with this plan, from inadequate information about the mitigation measures, to a missing maintenance plan, to the lack of mitigation offered to make up for building the port. In particular, USACE noted that the plan did not justify using preservation, which must be permanent and used together with wetland restoration.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat you would have to do is actually improve on nature if you were to try to mitigate for the impacts within the watershed,\u201d McLerran says. \u201cTo think that you could come up with compensatory mitigation in a pristine watershed is a bit arrogant.\u201d<\/p>\n

PLP CEO John Shively said in a statement<\/a> that the company is examining its options. \u201cWe are obviously dismayed,\u201d he said. \u201cIt is very disconcerting to see political influence in this process at the 11th hour.\u201d He added: \u201cFor now, we will focus on sorting out next steps for the project including an appeal of the decision by the USACE.\u201d<\/p>\n

Brian Litmans, legal director for Trustees for Alaska, a nonprofit environmental law firm, is doubtful the company will succeed. \u201cI think this is way beyond issues with Pebble dotting its i’s and crossing its t’s.\u201d<\/p>\n

McLerran thinks that should PLP pursue litigation, USACE\u2019s decision would ultimately hold up in court. But he emphasizes that the Bristol Bay region and its salmon are not yet safe from mining. The next step, he says, is to find permanent protections. \u201cI think it\u2019s a great day, but people need to remain vigilant.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In a final decision that surprised many, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has denied a key federal permit to the Pebble Limited Partnership (PLP), bringing to an end the company\u2019s 13-year-long bid to build the controversial Pebble Mine <\/p>\n

…<\/span><\/div>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":33260,"menu_order":0,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[211],"acf":{"hero_video_url":null,"hero_video_caption":"","deck":"Regulators handed a rare rejection to the proposed Alaska copper and gold mine.","authors_group":[{"by_group":"by","contributors_group":[15449]}],"word_count_override":"","podbean1":"","podbean2":"","redirect":"","geolocation":{"address":"United States","lat":59.72479196815956,"lng":-148.5344005555164,"zoom":8,"place_id":"ChIJCzYy5IS16lQRQrfeQ5K5Oxw","country":"United States","country_short":"US"},"related":[30946,32700],"twitterimage":33262,"facebookimage":33261,"twitterdescription":"","edited":"","factchecked":"","code":"","no_old_story_flag":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/33259"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/custom_news"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/33259\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":33264,"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/33259\/revisions\/33264"}],"acf:post":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/32700"},{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/30946"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/33260"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33259"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33259"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hakaimagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33259"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}