Can we trust the Pebble permitting process?

I attended the public presentation given by Pebble Partnership last week in Homer. I asked Mike Heatwole, vice president of public affairs, how much public land would be off-limits to hunting if Pebble is approved. He said this will be "negotiated" with the Department of Natural Resources.

This gets to the heart of what's wrong with State's permitting process. Instead of meeting definitive criteria established a priori, important aspects of permitting will be negotiated; in essence a politically-based call.

This raises serious concern. Despite all the rhetoric about rigorous permitting, the statutory requirements for DNR's water rights permit (vital for Pebble) are based on "the commissioner shall consider." The statute does list several generic concerns, but never defines consider; hence requiring nothing that is technically defensible. Apparently, reading a report could qualify. In short, the statute gives the commissioner wide discretion, leaving the door open for lots of private negotiation and judgment about what data suffices, verification, resource trade-offs, etc. Is this comforting? Not to me.

More

Letters to the editor

Chuitna mine threatens Alaska way of life

Read more

Surprising results to fill the assembly seat

When I first walked in the room I was immediately intimidated. I thought there had to be a mistake. I walked into the Clerk’s Office to confirm... Read more

Hacking not tolerated, neither is unethical behavior

Let me see if I understand: Russia hacks the DNC and discovers acts they deem to be unethical by American standards. This information is then... Read more

Looking forward to a better 2017

Happy New Year to all!

The evening after Christmas Day, 2016 and while contemplating possible discussion topics for our next “What the... Read more