|  November 24, 2014  |  
Overcast   25.0F  |  Forecast »
Bookmark and Share Email this page Email Print this page Print Feed Feed

Alaska Miners Association submits comment review on EPA's Revised Bristol Bay Assessment

AMA describes a "highly flawed document with no credibility or scientific integrity"

May 29, 2013 - ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Today, the Alaska Miners Association (AMA) submitted comments and a technical review to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on its Revised Bristol Bay Assessment, echoing a technical review of the first draft released in June 2012.

EPA essentially ignored most concerns and critiques lined out in the in the 2012 submittal by AMA, ensuring that the Assessment remains a highly flawed document that skirts sound science and selects subjective pieces of data to achieve a desired outcome.

In its review, AMA asserts that the Revised Assessment continues to ignore the existence of U.S.

Environmental laws, specifically the National Environmental Policy Act (N EPA), and evaluates a hypothetical mine that would not and could not be permitted under NEPA.

The fabricated mine assumes no modern mine engineering standards, no avoidance and mitigation techniques, and unrealistic fish habitat and roads.

EPA chose to ignore AMA's suggestion to review existing mines in Alaska that have an exceptional environmental track record, and instead chose to review "legacy" mines built before NEPA and other laws were in place to regulate their activity.

AMA notes that in addition to using bad science, the Assessment i s tremendously biased as well.

It includes and validates reports by individuals who have admitted scientific fraud on other works.

It incorporates reports from well known and outspoken opponents to the proposed Pebble Mine, yet ignored reports from AMA and several environmental engineering firms based in Alaska.

"AMA remains incredibly disappointed in this Assessment," said Deantha Crockett, AMA Executive Director.

"While we believe the Assessment should not have be en conducted in the first place, last June we submitted more than 30 pages of technical review in hopes that EPA would take our concerns to heart and incorporate realistic, science based information into the document.

Our concerns fell on deaf ears and closed minds, and this Assessment continues to be a flawed document that lacks credibility, validity, and most of all, sound science.

Basing any regulatory decisions on this poorly crafted Assessment will set a terrible precedent not just for the mining industry, but all development and economic growth sectors, and will hurt Alaskans and the residents of Bristol Bay the most."

To read AMA's comments and technical review on the 2013 Revised Bristol Bay Assessment, please visit:

http://www.akrdc.org/alerts/2013/revisedbbamembercomments.html

EPA is accepting comments on the Revised Assessment through this Friday, May 31.

Add your comment:
Edit Module
Advertisement
Edit Module
Advertisement
Edit Module
Advertisement
Edit Module
Advertisement
Edit Module
Advertisement