Water Resources – Water Policy Consulting LLC

Governor Dunleavy Nominations Graphite Creek Project to Fast-41 Permitting

Hot Springs Creek Below the Proposed Graphite One Mine Site

Due to Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy’s nomination of Graphite Creek project in the remote Kigluaik range north of Nome, as a high-priority infrastructure project, as eligible for new legislation intended to fast track the permitting process for transportation projects. Title 41 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, (Fast-41) adopted by Congress during the Obama administration which was intended to be a surface transportation reauthorization focusing on highway, transit, and rail programs. The Act establishes a new Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council (FPISC), authorized to stream line the NEPA process including elimination of public review and comment. Due to the unprecedented authority provided to the Council, until now, the Act has traditionally been applied only to Infrastructure and transportation Projects.

However, mining companies and the Trump administration have been pressuring FPISC to include mining as a sector under the Act. According to the mining industry magazine Critical Minerals Alaska 2020, “a federal entity meant to provide a one-stop-shop capable of coordinating permits across different federal agencies, thereby streamlining and shortening the overall process for large infrastructure projects that are eligible for the program. Mining projects that supply the materials needed for the energy, communication, and transportation infrastructure in the U.S. may be eligible for Fast-41.” [1] If the proposed Graphite One Mine is included into Fast-41, Critical Minerals Alaska 2020 says it “could help reduce the seven to 10 years it takes the average large mining project in the U.S. to get through the permitting process.”[2]

The sudden surge in the mining of graphite and other precious minerals in Alaska results from a dramatic increase in demand for batteries, solar power, computers, and other high-tech products that require such minerals. For instance, graphite is a significant component of the lithium-ion batteries used for electric cars and some renewable energy systems. According to the World Bank , due to the growing global interest in such cars and energy, the demand for graphite, lithium, cobalt, and other battery metals could increase by nearly 500 percent by 2050.[1] The report says that, “[g]raphite demand increases in both absolute and percentage terms since graphite is needed to build the anodes found in the most commonly deployed automotive, grid, and decentralized batteries. ” Similarly, according the United States Geological Survey, there are currently no graphite mines in the United States, requiring American battery and other manufacturers to import 58,000 metric tons of graphite during 2019.[2] According to CMA2020, with “5.7 million metric tons of quality graphite outlined so far, Graphite One Inc.’s Graphite Creek deposit in Northwest Alaska could provide a reliable domestic supply of graphite to North America’s burgeoning lithium-ion battery sector.” [3]

[1] Shane Lasley, High priority Alaska REE, graphite projects Gov nominations elevate mine projects to Fast-41 permitting, p. 6-7, High priority Alaska 2020 (November 2, 2020).

[2] Ibid.

[3] Shane Lasley, Western Alaska deposit could feed graphite into supply chain, Mining News, CRITICAL MINERALS ALASKA, pp. 28-29 (2020)

Our Anti-Environmental President

Op-Ed by Jessica Shepherd

President Trump’s claim in September that he is “the number one environmental president since Teddy Roosevelt” is as ironic as it is galling. In truth, it would be more appropriate to call Trump the number one anti-environmental president of all time for his assault on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the greater environmental community.

Trump has consistently thumbed his nose at environmental protections by withdrawing the United States from the Paris Agreement, his ongoing attempts to reinterpret touchstone environmental laws like the Migratory Bird Act, and through his appointments of climate-change denier Scott Pruitt, and then coal and oil ally Andrew Wheeler to head the EPA.

Kowtowing to Trump, the EPA, in defiance of their name and mission “to protect human health and the environment”, has steadily given in to industry interests — waving away concerns about pesticides, reducing constraints on toxic emissions in our air and water, scrapping requirements for mining companies to set aside cleanup funds, and loosening stream-side dumping regulations on the coal industry. Moreover, Trump has signed off on watered down EPA regulations intended to limit greenhouse gas emissions by reducing fuel economy standards and doing away with limits on methane flaring for oil and gas production on public lands. And let’s not forget Trump’s push for oil and gas leasing here in Alaska with the opening of the Arctic Coastal Plain to drilling and expansion into previously off-limit areas in the National Petroleum Reserve.

Talking advantage of a dire situation, in March 2020, as the COVID-19 pandemic diverted our attention, the EPA suspended enforcement of environmental regulations on companies that were deemed unable to comply with emission standards due to the pandemic. At the same time, Trump signed an executive order scaling back the review process for new projects under the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act.

Also, in March, the Department of Justice (DOJ) scraped the longstanding use of Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) to fund environmentally beneficial projects. According to the EPA “A SEP is an environmentally beneficial project that a violator voluntarily agrees to undertake in settlement of a civil penalty action, as an option to offset some portion of the monetary penalty. One goal of the SEPs is to improve the environmental health of communities that have been put at risk due to the violation of an environmental law.” SEPs were frequently used by the EPA to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy. Examples include investments in local wind and solar power generation, retrofitting diesel-powered school buses with pollution control devices, the purchase of hybrid vehicles for a National Park, and funding for energy-efficient building technology for public buildings.

Thanks to the Trump Administration, the air we breathe now contains higher levels of mercury and other toxic particulate matter from vehicles and coal-fired power plants, and CO2 levels, despite a downturn at the start of the pandemic, are once again trending upward toward an ill-fated future. Faced with another four years of Trump, we’ll need to rename the EPA the “Environmental Destruction Agency” (EDA) and rewrite its mission to better reflect its new role in destroying human health and the environment.

Mind you, this is just an overview of Trump’s egregious environmental rollbacks.

If there is any good news, it’s that Trump has not been completely successful in his vendetta against established environmental safeguards. For example, his attempt to water down the Migratory Bird Treaty Act would have resulted in a reinterpretation of the law to apply only to the intentional killing of birds, laying blameless those whose actions cause the “incidental” killing of millions of birds annually through industrial activities like power line electrocutions, toxic tailing ponds, or the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill that killed more than a million birds. A federal court overturned the policy revision in August of this year.

In contrast to Trump’s crusade against the environment, Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan would invest in net-zero emissions while creating new, green energy jobs. His 110-page plan will benefit first those communities who have been most directly affected by environmental violations, especially communities of color and the Native community. The comprehensive plan promises to “take immediate action to reverse the Trump Administration’s dangerous and destructive rollbacks of critical climate and environmental protections.”

Ten Tribes Partnership Takes a Seat at the Table for Colorado River Management

The Colorado River basin is home to 26 federally recognized tribes in seven western states. Despite their long-standing rights to about 20% of the water that flows through the Colorado, many tribes are excluded from water management decisions and don’t benefit from basic water infrastructure and a secure supply of clean, safe water. The Ten Tribes Partnership is taking a seat at the decision-making table by building capacity among tribes to claim their right to water, establishing water leases, and helping restore the river’s health. Drawing upon a spiritual mandate to “ensure that this sacred water will always be protected and available” the tribes are working to “advance sustainable water management through collaborative decision-making.”

Winners and Losers Among Northern Fish as Climates Change

A recent Canadian study, undertaken by York University and the University of Saskatchewan, studied climate resilience among northern fish species with some surprising results. Northern fish are, by nature, remarkably resilient, adjusting to a range of conditions including short summers with 24-hours of daylight and abundant food followed by long dark winters with little or no food availability. But as streams warm, prompting an increase in the invertebrates on which salmon feed, salmon species are tending to grow faster and have greater reproductive success. That’s the surprise, and could be a boon to indigenous communities, especially as salmon expand their ranges further north. But for some fish, mainly dolly Varden and Arctic grayling, which are specialized to thrive in cold Arctic waters, there may be no adaption or migration option at hand as rivers warm and summers grow longer.

EPA Should Veto Pebble Permit

In 2017, the US Army Corps of Engineers released the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to develop the world’s largest copper mine in the Bristol Bay watershed, located in the sensitive headwaters of Bristol Bay in Southwestern Alaska. The Mine which is proposed by the foreign-based Pebble Limited Partnership would destroy several miles of streams which are critical the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the world and upon which twenty-five federally recognized tribal governments depend for subsistence. In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Corp was chartered with drafting the EIS to analyze in detail, the environmental impacts of proposed projects.

Next to the Project Chariot when, in the 1950s, the United States Atomic Energy Commission proposed to detonate an atomic bomb off the coast of the Chukchi Sea in order to create harbor there, the Pebble Mine could be the most contentious industrial development activity ever proposed in Alaska. Due to its potential impact on water and salmon resources, it risks the economic and cultural lifeblood of the region. As a result, the mine is opposed not only by 80 percent of Bristol Bay’s residents but also by a broad spectrum of entities that include commercial fishermen, businesses, sportsmen, and conservation groups.

Yet, despite the fact that public citizens, commercial interests, tribes, conservation organizations, and even an international mining corporation oppose this environmentally and economically disastrous Mine, the Corps under the Trump Administration, established a flawed NEPA analysis in its rush to permit it. As a result, the Pebble Mine has been referred to by the conservation community as “quite simply one of the most reckless Projects anywhere in the world today.” Last year, when opening the Oversight Committee hearings regarding the mine, Congressman Peter DeFazio, Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, called it “an abomination” and stated that “the Pebble Mine proposal is a bad idea made even worse by the sham review process currently underway.”

Under the current proposal and future development plans, the mine would be so destructive to the environment and the Alaska economy that there has been a consistent pattern of major investors walking away from the project once they understand the overwhelming opposition and unavoidable environmental and economic risks. The fourth major firm to abandon the project since 2011, First Quantum Minerals Ltd., which had provided $37.5 million upfront and pledged $150 million over the following three years to fund the permitting process in exchange for a 50 percent share, pulled out in late May of 2018.

When the Final EIS for the project was released last month, a string of politicians, and other public figures came out in opposition to Pebble. For the first time cracks in the Trump Administration’s relentless anti-environmental regulatory strategy arose when Donald Trump, Jr. tweeted “As a sportsman who has spent plenty of time in the area I agree [that] the headwaters of Bristol Bay and surrounding fishery are too unique and fragile to take any chances with…Pebble Mine.” Similarly, long time extraction industry supporter, Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan, who after reviewing the Final EIS stated:

“… I am increasingly concerned that the final EIS may not adequately address the issues identified in the draft EIS regarding the full risks of the project as proposed to the Bristol Bay watershed and fishery… These processes should also not be rushed or fast-tracked, especially given the size and complexity of this particular project.”

While Sen. Sullivan, however, has expressed concern for the obviously flawed EIS process, so far, he is not off the fence yet as indicated by his statement that “While it is a major step in the permitting process, it must be emphasized that the Final EIS is not a decision document. The final EIS for the Pebble Mine is the first step in a long, demanding permitting process….”

In 30 years of working in the area of environmental law and policy, however, unless stopped by a lawsuit or legislation, I can’t remember a single project that was not given the go-ahead after it was recommended in a Final EIS.

When the FEIS was released on July 24, there are now, less than a couple of weeks remaining before the final decision on the permit and for the Environmental Protection Agency to veto the project. Dan Sullivan and other politicians need to take a firm stand and pressure the agency to do just that.

Clean Water Act Dries Up Under Trump Administration Rule

A coalition of Democratic attorneys general attempted, without success, to delay the implementation of a new definition of streams and wetlands put forth by the Trump administration. The new “Waters of the U.S.” Rule or WOTUS removes environmental protections for streams, wetlands and groundwater, and is seen as a major win for farmers and land developers. Under the new ruling, pesticides and fertilizers can now be dumped directly into waterways, and wetlands can be destroyed or filled in to accommodate construction projects. Contamination of drinking water from unregulated pollutants puts millions of Americans at risk. The ruling went into effect on June 29^th. Read more here.

In another effort to stop implementation of the Rule, the Navajo Nation and several environmental groups filed suite in U.S. District Court in New Mexico against the Trump Administration. The law suit which also includes Amigos Bravos, the New Mexico Acequia Association, the Gila Resources Information Project and the Environmental Integrity Project and other environmental groups also claims that the Administration failed to consider the impacts of Climate Change on western watersheds that are already affected by over a decade of drought. As a result, smaller systems which are affected more by low flows and higher temperatures from drought conditions will be impacted more significantly by reduced protection from polluters. Agricultural and other livelihoods will that rely on Acequia and other non-industrial irrigation systems dependent upon adequate and timely snow, rain and runoff for crops will be put at risk.

According to Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez, “At this point in time, with climate change occurring around the world, it’s more prudent than ever to protect our land, water and air. We, as Diné People, have a duty to preserve and conserve our natural resources to ensure that our future generations have access to clean water, air and land.”

Melting Permafrost Linked to Russian Oil Spill

In late May of this year, a huge oil tank collapsed in Norilsk, an industrial city in north-central Siberia. An estimated 21,000 tons of diesel fuel spilled into the Ambarnaya and Daldykan rivers coating the water with an oily crimson layer. A failed attempt to contain the spill lead to further contamination downstream as the oil spread northward, entering the 45-mile-long Lake Pyasino, a on its way to the Arctic ocean. One of the largest spills documented in the Arctic, the Norilsk spill has been compared to Alaska’s 1989 ExxonValdez oil spill. As with the ExxonValdez, the spill occurred during spring migration, poisoning the waters just as fish and birds are returning to their natal grounds.

Russian mining firms identified melting permafrost as the culprit – destabilizing the soil under the tank. Clearly, as the arctic warms, the potential for lethal spills increases. Better surveillance of melting permafrost with inexpensive temperature probes would likely have prevented the spill. Despite the up-front costs, preventative measures save hundreds of millions of dollars in clean-up efforts and safeguard wetlands and the wildlife and human inhabitants they support.

Voluntary compensation for damages from Norilsk Nickle in the amount of $148 billion rubles, or $2 billion dollars.

USDA Forest Service Updated “Forests to Faucets” Data released

Forests to Faucets premiered in 2011 to portray the relationship between forests and source water across the U.S. The updated version 2.0 (F2F2) dataset released in April assesses all 88,000 HUC12 watersheds in the U.S. to identify those forests important to downstream surface drinking water supplies and evaluate each watershed’s natural ability to produce clean water. F2F2 includes future risks to watersheds such as development, wildfire or climate-induced changes to water quantity. More information available, here.

Share Your Drought-Related Projects and Activities on the New Drought.gov

In order to provide opportunities for increasing knowledge through networking and information sharing to better predict drought events, the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) established the Pacific North West Drought Early Warning System (PNW DEWS). To this end, the NIDIS is requesting in-put on drought-related projects and activities that are going on throughout the Pacific North West and in Southern Alaska regions. This information will be displayed on the Drought.gov website (to be re-launched in late Spring 2020).

For more information about the types of activities NIDIS wants to feature on the website and to submit activities, click here. (The form takes about 10 minutes to complete).

In light of experience the first drought experienced in the Southern region of Alaska and likely to continue in years to come, WPC’s asked about whether the NIDIS is planning to establish an Alaska DEWS. In response Britt Parker – the Coordinator of the Pacific Northwest DEWS stated “[w]e are working with partners to identify ways to provide more support for Alaska! While I do not think it will result in setting up a DEWS immediately, we are looking at options for the long term while identifying research and efforts to better understand drought in Alaska in the short term.

For questions contact Britt.Parker@noaa.gov

Another great resource that can assist in forecasting drought and stream flows in Alaska is the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail & Snow Network (CoCoRahs). The contact information for the CoCoRahs Alaska Coordinator is:

Martin Stuefer
Alaska State Climatologist
Alaska Climate Research Center
University of Alaska Fairbanks
2156 Koyukuk Drive
P.O. Box 757320
Fairbanks, Alaska 99775-7320
907-474-6477
mstuefer@alaska.edu

Emergency Recovery Plan for Global Freshwater Biodiversity Loss

Covering approximately 1% of the Earth’s surface, the world’s freshwater rivers, lakes and wetlands are home to 10% of all species and more fish species than in all the oceans combined. Posing a threat to global communities who rely on rivers, lakes, and tributaries for food, water, and economic well-being, however, 83% of freshwater species and 30% of freshwater ecosystems have been lost since 1970. In response to the alarming rate of loss of freshwater ecosystems, a recently released study developed by scientists from across a spectrum of environmental and academic institutions outlines a framework for protecting such ecosystems.

Calling it an “Emergency Recovery Plan”, the study proposes six scientifically based strategies to preserve freshwater biodiversity, that have proved successful in certain locations. These solutions include: Returning rivers and streams back to their natural flows; Protecting freshwater from toxic effluents, overfishing, invasive species and mining activity; Protecting critical habitat; and Restoring river connectivity through regulation of land uses and water infrastructure. James Dalton, Director of the International Union for Conservation of Nature Global Water Program says, “all the solutions in the Emergency Recovery Plan have been tried and tested somewhere in the world: they are realistic, pragmatic and they work. We are calling on governments, investors, companies and communities to prioritize freshwater biodiversity – often neglected by the conservation and water management worlds. Now is the time to implement these solutions, before it is too late.”

For more information see press releases for Conservation International and WWF.