ME home
 
  SME FaceBook SME Twitter SME LinkedIn RSS Feed

Subscriber or
SME Member Log On

WEB-ONLY CONTENT

Go to SME eNEWS

MINING INDUSTRY EVENTS

Al Azhar‚Äôs 14th International Conference on: Engin  - Conference
Dec 12, 2017 - Dec 14, 2017
WM2E 2017 Energy Tech Expo  - Exhibit
Dec 14, 2017 - Dec 16, 2017
George Fox Conference  - Conference
Jan 24, 2018
2018 SME Annual Conference & Expo  - Conference
Feb 25, 2018 - Feb 28, 2018

METAL PRICES


Au
Ag
Pt
Pd
Ni
Cu
Al
Pb

AGGREGATES
AND MINERALS
MARKETPLACE


http://aggregatesmineralsmarketplace.com
The Mining Engineering, SME and NSSGA
Online Buyers Directory Site
The Online Global Mining and Minerals Library Site

Pebble Project arguments could be delayed by judge
May 5, 2015

Backers of the Pebble Project in Alaskas filed a federal lawsuit that claimed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA violated the 1972 Federal Advisory Committee Act by in effect forming a federal advisory committee stacked with mine opponents and lacking mining industry influence.

Arguments for that case are scheduled for May 28, but U.S. District Judge Russel Hollad was considering postponning those arguments.

Alaska Dispatch News reported that in an order Holland cited information from a Alaska Dispatch News story, “that there is an Inspector General’s investigation of matters having to do with the proceedings that are the subject of this litigation.”

Holland, a semi-retired Reagan appointee, granted an injunction late last year that temporarily halted the EPA’s efforts to preemptively “veto” a federal water discharge permit for the proposed mine. The agency embarked on that effort early in 2014 and proposed strict limits last summer, saying it had determined that large-scale mining posed an environmental danger to the Bristol Bay watershed and its rich salmon rivers.

Arguments are scheduled for May 28 on the EPA’s motion to have Pebble’s case tossed. If Pebble prevails, it would be able to move forward with the “discovery” phase of the trial, digging through agency officials’ emails and conducting interviews. An eventual win for Pebble in the case would mean that EPA could not use its Bristol Bay watershed assessment to veto the project.

But Holland wrote that the “court is concerned that the Inspector General’s investigation might involve the claim made by Pebble Limited Partnership in this case based upon the Federal Advisory Committee Act.” Holland asked both the EPA and the Pebble Partnership to submit briefs by May 14 “as to whether or not it should proceed … prior to the completion of the Inspector General’s proceedings.”

The results of the ongoing investigation by the inspector general’s office ­— an independent oversight arm of the agency — are expected this summer, Inspector General Arthur Elkins Jr. said in congressional testimony last month.

So far, investigators “have reviewed extensive documents, thousands of email records and other correspondence, and interviewed numerous current and former federal employees and state employees, tribal representatives, the Pebble Limited Partnership’s chief executive officer, and peer reviewers,” Elkins said.

Related article search: