Northern Dynasty, supporters file latest court briefing over Pebble veto dispute
TSX- and NYSE-listed Northern Dynasty Minerals and its US-based subsidiary Pebble Limited Partnership have filed a brief in the Alaska Federal Court responding to the Department of Justice (DoJ) brief filed on February 17 on behalf of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The State of Alaska, Iliamna Natives and Alaska Peninsula Corporation also filed response briefs on April 14.
The arguments presented “clearly demonstrate the flaws in the DoJ brief and the compelling reasons why the veto is illegal and should by withdrawn immediately”, Northern Dynasty says in a statement.
The proposed Pebble mine, which aims to tap one of the world's largest copper and gold deposits, had gone through a lengthy approval and permitting process for decades, but its construction is yet to start.
EPA restricted in a 2023 decision the development of the proposed Pebble copper, gold and molybdenum mine by effectively blocking the disposal of mine waste in certain waters within the Bristol Bay watershed area, under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This prevented the project from advancing through the federal permitting process.
The Iliamna Natives and Alaska Peninsula Corporation, which represent the communities closest to the copper and gold mining project, subsequently sued the EPA for exceeding its authority related to the veto. Northern Dynasty itself filed a suit in March 2024 against the EPA’s 2023 decision.
Northern Dynasty president and CEO Ron Thiessen maintains in the company’s latest statement that the veto remains illegal and he has a high level of confidence that the court will agree and order that the veto be vacated.
The conclusions upon which the government rested its veto determination are directly contradicted by the Final Environmental Impact Statement prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act with the assistance of independent consulting firm Aecom.
Moreover, Thiessen explains EPA did not attempt to provide an explanation as to why its conclusions contradict those reached in the Final Environmental Impact Statement – which serves as the ‘gold standard’ for resolving complex scientific and factual issues where various parties hold different views.
Northern Dynasty’s latest brief to the court outlines how EPA’s economic analysis failed to comply with the law because it did not calculate the positive economic impacts offered by the project. Instead, EPA reportedly exaggerated the negative impact costs.
“The EPA’s choice to arbitrarily ignore the potential of the proposed mine to generate billions of dollars of economic activity based on capital investments and tax revenues alone, benefiting the region, Alaska and the US, is irresponsible,” Thiessen states.
Besides, Thiessen explains, the standard used by EPA to determine that the veto should be issued was much lower than what the statute requires and EPA only concluded that certain negative impacts ‘may’ occur rather than that they ‘will’ occur.
Northern Dynasty believes the issue to be bigger than just the Pebble project, saying that projects across the US are put at risk with such a precedent by EPA.
The company also says DoJ has contradictory sentiments if it supports the EPA in such decisions while trying to advance a pro-energy, pro-mining and pro-development agenda.
