Bristol Bay Public Comment Deadline Extended to June 30

Today was to be the last day for submitting comments on Bristol Bay to the EPA.

From the EPA:

After considering the many requests to extend or maintain the length of the comment period, EPA has extended the deadline to submit public comments on the revised draft Bristol Bay assessment by 30 days, until June 30, 2013

An additional 30 days allows the public an opportunity to provide feedback on changes made to the assessment as a result of extensive input received in 2012. This extension is reasonable given the complexity and length of the revised draft assessment.

LINK

Robert Redford: Save Bristol Bay

Bobby Redford makes the case for Bristol Bay in this LA Times op-ed.

LINK

Comment Now to the EPA to Protect Bristol Bay

Then tell a friend.

Because this issue is so important to sport fishing jobs in Bristol Bay, Crystal Creek Lodge is offering a chance to win an incredible 4-day trip for two to fish Bristol Bay, Alaska. Win the fishing trip of a lifetime by using the Tell a Friend feature after you take action. When you urge a friend to comment, you'll be automatically entered for this amazing trip to an award-winning lodge on the Naknek River.

Comment Now!

Revised Draft Bristol Bay Assessment Available For Review

From the EPA....

Greetings!

EPA invites your comments on the revised draft Bristol Bay Assessment until Friday, May 31, 2013.  The May 2012 draft assessment was revised based on valuable feedback from peer reviewers, tribes and the public. 

• View or download the Revised Draft Assessment from the EPA Bristol Bay website.
• Read the Fact Sheet, which summarizes changes and provides information on how to comment.
• Read the Executive Summary, for an overview of the revised document. 

EPA is arranging for the original peer reviewers to evaluate the revisions the agency made to the assessment. This follow-up with peer reviewers on will take place at about the same time as the public comment period. 

EPA will finalize the assessment by the end of 2013.  A summary of our responses to all public and peer review comments will be available when the final assessment is released.

Thank you for your interest in EPA's work in Bristol Bay.

You have until the end of May to submit your comments.

Northern Dynasty's reaction to the EPA's assesment of their mythical main proposal?

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. responded today to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) release of a revised draft of the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment (BBWA) report originally released last spring, reaffirming that the new report fails to correct the central flaw that critics roundly agree invalidates the original and revised study.

"You simply cannot assess the effects of a mining project that has not been proposed, and for which key engineering solutions, environmental safeguards and site-specific mitigation factors have not been provided," said Ron Thiessen , President & CEO of Northern Dynasty, a 50% owner of the Pebble Limited Partnership

LINK (via:Yahoo Finance)

Here is a map from the EPA Executive Summary outlining varying footprint scenarios of the "yet to be proposed mining project."

The good guys spell out what the new EPA assessment spells out.

The science is clear: developing Pebble Mine will harm salmon and destroy streams even if nothing ever goes wrong at the mine,” said Tim Bristol, director of Trout Unlimited’s Alaska Program. “Pebble is far bigger and more threatening to renewable resource jobs than any other mine proposal in Alaska and it’s planned for the worst location possible: the headwaters of Bristol Bay. Clearly, the time for action to protect Bristol Bay under the Clean Water Act is now.”

LINK (via:Save Bristol Bay)

Bristol Bay Peer Pressure

The EPA has released the Final Peer Review Report prepared by the independent peer reviewers charged with evaluating EPA’s May 2012 draft assessment of the Bristol Bay watershed entitled An Assessment of Potential Mining Impacts on Salmon Ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska (Bristol Bay Assessment).

Naturally which side of the Pebble issue you're on determines your report release analysis.

Try as Pebble might to spin this into a science controversy, the bottom line is this: the facts and the science are clear and no one has called EPA’s findings into question. In fact, EPA has done due diligence and at the request of these independent scientists, has provided even more information.

LINK (via: Save Bristol Bay)

Pebble spokesman Mike Heatwole said it appears the EPA reviewers agree with some of the company's key points, mainly "that the report itself is pretty flawed in using a hypothetical mining scenario and just relying on impacts without having a concrete plan in front of them that takes into full consideration mitigation and how a modern mine would meet the permitting and review process."

LINK (via: Anchorage Daily News)

The EPA's response?

Based on the comments, and EPA’s commitment to fully address them, EPA has decided to convene a group of qualified experts to review the revised draft assessment in light of the issues raised by the peer reviewers. The final Bristol Bay Assessment will reflect this further expert review and be accompanied by EPA’s point-by-point response to the peer reviewers’ comments as well as public comments. These “response to comment” documents will be available when the final Bristol Bay Assessment is released.

My money is on Bristol Bay, and the EPA, when that final assesment is released.

EPA study "scientifically flawed, inappropriately timed and politically motivated"

Care to guess who made that statement?