Northern Dynasty, In reply to: Pebble Permitting A

Northern Dynasty, In reply to: Pebble Permitting Advances Debated by US Congressional Committee
PR Newswire• October 28, 2019

(As this sinks in, NAK should start climbing.)

Pebble CEO Tom Collier appears before House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and the Environment
VANCOUVER, Oct. 28, 2019 /PRNewswire/ - Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (TSX: NDM; NYSE American: NAK) ("Northern Dynasty" or the "Company" reports that on October 23, 2019, Pebble Limited Partnership ("Pebble Partnership" or "PLP" CEO Tom Collier appeared before the US Congressional Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's Subcommittee on Water Resources and the Environment to discuss recent advances by the Pebble Project through the federal Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS" permitting process.

Collier said the Democrat-controlled committee invited six Pebble critics to appear as witnesses at the hearing, including paid activists and consultants, as well as himself. The CEO of Northern Dynasty's 100%-owned US subsidiary said it is clear that sworn opponents of the project are alarmed at the steady progress Pebble continues to make toward a Final EIS and Record of Decision ("ROD" from the US Army Corps of Engineers ("the Corps".

"With the publication of an overwhelmingly positive Draft EIS in February, the formal withdrawal of the Obama Administration's unprecedented 404(c) Proposed Determination in July, and our inexorable progress toward a Final EIS and ROD in the first half of 2020, people are starting to understand that Pebble is a project of merit," Collier said. "We've known for some time that our project will meet and surpass the rigorous environmental standards enforced in the United States and Alaska, and believe that it will secure its operating permits. Our critics are starting to understand that as well."

Members of the subcommittee split along partisan lines, with Republicans objecting to Congress interfering with the administration of regulatory due process for the Pebble Project.

"We are wading into a project and an issue that is currently in the middle of a comprehensive review under the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"," said Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-ARK), Ranking Member of the subcommittee. "I…believe in proper regulatory due process through a fair and objective federal environmental permitting process. I believe in giving an applicant the opportunity to have the Corps of Engineers and the State of Alaska, along with a suite of other federal agencies, review this project objectively on the merits of this permit application."

Given the pendency of the Corps' EIS permitting process for Pebble, Westerman argued the subcommittee's time is better spend on other issues, rather than "a partisan priority currently under review at the federal agency level."

Although the hearing will have little effect on Pebble's progress through federal permitting, Collier took the opportunity to counter the positions and concerns of those opposed to the project.

Collier on the findings of the Corps' Draft EIS: "For over 15 years, a battle has been fought over whether building a copper mine 200 river miles from Bristol Bay in Alaska would significantly damage the salmon fishery in that region. The debate is now over. In February of this year, the US Army Corps of Engineers issued its draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Pebble mine and unequivocally concluded that the project will not harm the Bristol Bay fishery."

Collier on the US Environmental Protection Agency's ("EPA" decision to withdraw its Proposed Determination: "Another concern expressed today has been whether EPA withdrawing its preemptive, unprecedented veto – also known as the Proposed Determination – was the correct decision. There can be no question that it was.

"First, the entire Proposed Determination was the epitome of bad process – a lack of statutory authorization, no valid scientific record to speak of, and unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats trying to regulate a major economic development project out of existence. The Proposed Determination was also faulty process because it deliberately avoided NEPA and an EIS, which together comprise a superior, time-tested means of evaluating major development projects."

Collier on the growing desperation of Pebble opponents: "One of my fellow panelists today, former EPA Regional Administrator Dennis McLerran, has called Pebble's permit application the 'camel's nose under the tent,' which I suppose means that he believes that Pebble plans on shoehorning in a larger project despite the fact that we have scaled back the footprint in the mine plan currently before the Corps of Engineers. I have several responses.

"First, I believe it shows the level of desperation that the Pebble opposition has reached. Think about it – to oppose this permit application, they are forced to argue that it must in fact be far different than what is actually proposed. In other words, they are struggling to find problems with what is currently pending before the Corps."

Collier on the key criticisms of Pebble opponents: "One is that the political fix is in, and that's why we're where we are in the permitting process. The second is the process is being rushed. And the third is the (Draft) EIS is inadequate. And one of the things that's been pointed to repeatedly are the criticisms that have been filed by EPA and by the Department of Interior ("DOI".

"And the point I want to make is that they (EPA and DOI's criticisms) don't support those three points. In fact, they run directly against them. If the political fix is in, why is it that Trump's EPA and Trump's DOI are criticizing the Draft Environmental Impact Statement? It's just absurd and it is an internally inconsistent position to take.

"Second, if this is a rushed process, why are these agencies building speed bumps for the process? I mean that's crazy. And then the third point, and this one is the most important. Now that these criticisms have been put on the table, it is incumbent on the Corps of Engineers to address them and address them thoroughly. And if they don't address them thoroughly, then a court is going to throw this permit right out the door the minute it's issued.

"And so, one of the things that's happened is that the process is in fact working, which was your original point. This is a draft. Criticisms have been put on the table and those criticisms are going to be addressed. And if they aren't addressed, we won't be able to have our permit upheld when the courts reviews."

In expressing his support for the Pebble EIS permitting process, Rep. Don Young (R-AK) reminded subcommittee members that the State of Alaska has encouraged investment in mineral exploration and development at Pebble.

"And people forget, Madam Chair, that this is state land," Young said. "This is not federal land. The State of Alaska had the right to choose 103 million acres of land and they chose this land. And they put it up for (mineral) discovery and it was discovered. And under the discovery clause, you have a right for exploration. On the right for exploration, you have a right for development if you go to the permitting process."

Since the conclusion of the subcommittee hearing last week, there have been further signals the Corps and the EPA continue to work together constructively on the Pebble EIS. On October 25, 2019, the Corps granted EPA a requested extension to the date by which it must decide whether to 'elevate' its consideration of the Pebble EIS from EPA Region 10 to EPA Headquarters in Washington DC under Section 404(q) of the Clean Water Act.

"The EIS process for Pebble, including the collaboration of multiple government agencies, is working as it should," Collier concluded.

"We have every reason to believe progress will continue, that the Corps will deliver a final EIS and positive Record of Decision on time next year, and that its process and decisions will withstand any subsequent legal challenge. I think our increasingly anxious opponents believe that to be the case as well."