The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in opposition to a proposed giant mine project in Alaska’s Bristol Bay, has initiated a set of regulations that industrial advocates such as US Senator Lisa Murkowski have termed a “Blueprint That Will Be Used Across the Country to Stop Economic Development.”
“The EPA is being disingenuous in saying that this decision is only going to impact mining in a particular area of Alaska,” said Murkowski (R-Alaska). “The EPA is setting a precedent that strips Alaska and all Alaskans of the ability to make decisions on how to develop a healthy economy on their lands. This is a blueprint that will be used across the country to stop economic development.”
Murkowski has been vocal in criticizing the EPA for allegedly attempting to expand its authority unilaterally under the Clean Water Act (CWA), stripping Alaskans of their right to develop their state economy. She has also criticized the EPA for basing its review of potential mining operations in Alaska on a hypothetical mining plan.
The EPA has backed off their plan to use the CWA to shut down the mine before a plan was submitted, however, and has instead pitched a set of regulations that would make moving forward with the mine project much more difficult, and could stifle it entirely.
The conditions include restricting discharges of dredged or fill material related to mines where those discharges would endanger the Bristol Bay watershed. The EPA’s proposal is subject to a public comment period through September 19.
The EPA’s stated motivation is to protect the world’s largest salmon fishery from the ecological destruction that would be caused by the mine.
The mine in question, the Pebble mine project in Bristol Bay, would be one of the world’s biggest–as deep as the grand canyon–and was projected to create 1,000 direct jobs and bring in up to $180 million in state revenue for Alaska. It would span 20 square miles of state-owned land, and a dam would be needed to contain the mine waste.
The Clean Water Act, under which the EPA receives much authority, was passed in 1972 with the purpose of preventing point and nonpoint pollution sources in order to restore and maintain the ecological integrity of American waters. In April, an EPA rule out sought to define “Waters of the United States,” over which the CWA has jurisdiction, not just as navigable waters, but also inclusive of tributaries and adjacent waters.
Pebble mine would sit near Lake Iliamna at the headwaters of two rivers which flow into Bristol Bay.
By James Haleavy
If those opposed to the Bristol Bay mining operation were really interested in protecting the environment, then why don’t they put forth a plan of their own to protect the salmon fisheries while allowing the mining operation to move forward.