ME home
  SME FaceBook SME Twitter SME LinkedIn RSS Feed

Subscriber or
SME Member Log On




2017 George A. Fox Conference  - Conference
Jan 23, 2019
2019 SME Annual Conference & Expo  - Conference
Feb 24, 2019 - Feb 27, 2019
CMA 121st Nat'l Western Mining Conference  - Conference
Feb 24, 2019 - Feb 27, 2019
Fuutre of Mining Australia 2019  - Conference
Mar 25, 2019 - Mar 26, 2019



The Mining Engineering, SME and NSSGA
Online Buyers Directory Site
The Online Global Mining and Minerals Library Site

EPA halted by judge's ruling in Pebble Mine case
November 25, 2014

U.S. District Court Judge H. Russel Holland issued a preliminary injunction that will temporarily block the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from taking action against the proposed Pebble Mine near Bristol Bay.

The Hill reported that the ruling provides temporary relief for the Pebble Partnership, the developer behind the Pebble Mine near Bristol Bay.
In July, the EPA proposed to block the mine due to its potential pollution and harm to tributaries of the bay. The action came despite the fact that a permit application for the mine has not yet been filed.

Judge Holland’s ruling hinged on whether the EPA violated the federal law on advisory committees when it concluded that the mine would unacceptably harm waterways and the fish that live in them.

The Pebble Partnership complained that the EPA used “de facto advisory committees that worked behind the scenes, and out of the public eye,” which resulted in “biased, junk science.”

Under the law, advisory committees to federal agencies must be transparent and open about their proceedings. But the EPA instead used three groups opposed to the mine to write its scientific assessment, the company said.

Holland’s decision was only preliminary and temporary, and did not comment on the merits of Pebble’s case. It blocks the EPA from finalizing its decision on the mine.

Pebble Chief Executive Officer Tom Collier told the Alaska Dispatch News that the ruling is a “procedural victory,” and doesn’t answer whether the EPA overstepped its authority by preemptively working to veto the project.

“We expect the case may take several months to complete,” Collier said. “This means that for the first time EPA’s march to preemptively veto Pebble has been halted.”

The EPA defended its scientific studies to the News, saying it used an extensive, peer-reviewed scientific process.
Pebble is working on a number of fronts against the EPA.

Another lawsuit was thrown out by the same judge in September as premature, and lawmakers in the House are investigating whether the EPA acted properly.

The House also passed a bill this year inspired by Pebble that would prohibit the EPA from blocking water pollution permits before they are filed.

Related article search: