1. Introduction
The protection of environment is becoming ever more important in the light of rising concerns about the global climate changes and also because of the various factors that can have a negative effect on the environment. The protection of the environment must combine the regulation, legislation and initiatives that increase the good and decrease the bad practices and consequences based on the researches and proven consequences to prevent further possible pollution and degradation of the environment. The paper will focus on the examination of the regulatory agency and environmental protection of the United States and then examined the situation in Alaska. The first division of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency with is regional divisions will be presented and further on the Region 10 under which jurisdiction the state of Alaska belongs. The paper will examine the major environmental challenges the Alaska state is confronted and then further focus on one major one to write the detail argumentation.
2. Regulatory agency – United States Environmental Protection Agency
The regulatory agency in charge of the environmental protection and issues regarding the environment in the United States is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The agency was established in the year 1970 to provide the environmental protection with researching, monitoring, development of standards and enforcement activities. The division of the agency is presented in the figure below (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). The tasks are divided among the different offices with different goals and different task scopes.
Figure 1 Organizational structure of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, n. p.
3. Region 10 and Alaska State environmental regulations
The agency consists of 10 regional offices and Alaska is in the region 10 where contact region 10 consists of Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington states. The region 10 organization and division consists of 12 different bodies: Regional Administrator and Regional Deputy Administrator, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, Office of Compliance and Enforcement, Office of Ecosystems, Tribal, and Public Affairs, Office of Environmental Assessment, Office of Environmental Cleanup, Office of management Programs, Office of Regional Counsel, Office of water and Watersheds, Alaska Operation Office, Idaho Operations Office, Oregon Operation Office and Washington Operation Office. Every office and department has its own goals and working area. Office of air, Waste and Toxic is managing the toxic issues, air, hazardous and solid waste with working goals to reduce waste and improve recycling programs. For the implementation of those goals the Office of Compliance and Enforcement is in charged. Office of Ecosystem, Tribal and Public Affairs, manages the wetlands enforcement and implements the efforts from environmental area and engages with the communities. The scientific and technical initiatives based on the collected data and analyses with proposed solutions come from the Office of Environmental Assessment. Investigation of the contaminated properties with emergency planning and prevention comes under the jurisdiction of the Office of Environmental Cleanup. For all of the administration along with the management and human resources is done in the area of Regional 10 office by the Office of Management Programs. Cases, regulatory and legal matters come under the Office of Regional Counsel. The last in the region is the Office of Water and Watersheds that implements the majority of the policy and acts accepted at the federal level that are connected with the water supply, infrastructure, sanitation and coast zone (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, n. p.). The division and responsibility among the agencies differ based on the area of working, but they are all under the EPA provision and under the specific regional division.
Alaska Operations Office is one among four field offices in the Region 10 and is based inside one of the five state agencies the Department of Environmental Conservation. Four other state agencies, which deal with the environmental issues, consist of the Department of Natural Resources, Department of Fish and Game, Department of Health and Social Services and Alaska Fisheries Science Center (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, n. p.).
4. Environmental concerns in the region and in Alaska state
There were various environmental issues raised in Region 10: Bristol Bay, Columbia River, and Puget Sound, Superfund and cleanup sites and tribal program (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, n. p.). From this Bristol Bay has shown to be very important for the state of Alaska along with the tribal program and cleanup sites. The environmental issues especially important in Alaska are focusing on the climate change, that has a severe impact on vulnerable ecosystem in this part of the country and affects the tribes, communities, animal and plant species. The Arctic is a place of massive oil reserves, coal, gas and minerals which extraction can have severe impacts. The state agencies are dealing with dozens of the coal related projects in Alaska. The mining along with the oil drilling could have a vast impact on the environment in a potential pollution or spill. The protection of ocean and offshore waters that is warming and shrinking the Arctic ice and affecting the ecosystems is causing vast challenges and present threat to some of already endangers species in the state. Besides threating wildlife also the indigenous peoples’ way of life is being impacted. The Tongass is a national coastal rainforest that is exposed to the privatization and clear-cutting that must be protected to guarantee the preservation of wildlife habitat and local economy and Native people traditional way of living. The next important issue is Bristol Bay that is going to be further examined and researched in the paper. The rivers and streams are habitat for the greatest wild salmon population on the planet with unspoiled ecosystem that is the fuel for many animals living in the tundra. The place has been confronting the issue of building a mine in the Bay (Alaska Conservation Foundation, n. p.). The environmental issues the state is confronted and current problems are:
(a) Bristol Bay
(b) The Tongass
(c) Climate Change consequences
(d) Coal energy and potential oil drilling
(e) Heating up the oceans
(f) Protection of Artic
5. Summary of the current problem - case of Bristol Bay
One of the current environmental challenges that Alaska is confronting is the possibility of large scale mining in the Bristol Bay. Bristol Bay has been threatened by the Canadian-based Northern Dynasty Minerals plans to operate and develop a molybdenum, copper and gold mine – Pebble Mine in the headwaters of the Bay. The environmental protectors along with the EPA on one side and on the other the Northern Dynasty Minerals are the key players. The company formally submitted plans to develop a mine in the year 2011 with several stages of development. The EPA proceeded under Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act to limit the Pebble deposit area. The section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act gives the EPA authorization to prohibit the specification of any area as a disposal site if it has a reason to believe that the discharge of materials in the area would cause unacceptable adverse effects. Under the act the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers must authorize the permit and resolve the environmental concerns (United States Environmental Protection Agency1, 7-8).
5.1. The importance of geographical location - facts
The importance of the geographical location lies in the economy, culture, animal and plant species and wetlands. The region is also an active earthquake zone. The region is home to the salmon, bears, caribou, moose, whales and wolverines that could be put in danger the species that are already endangered species with the production of vast amounts of contaminated waste. The Bristol Bay is habitat for the 29 fishes, around 190 birds and around 40 terrestrial mammals. Bristol Bay has the world’s largest sockeye salmon fisher which supports around 14.000 jobs, and generates around $480 million in direct economic expenditures and sales and has been the way of living for the Alaska Natives. Wild salmon have a recreational, nutritional, economic and cultural value even beyond the Bay. The value of the earth divided into two parts for the Pebble mine has been estimated at $100 to $500 billion. Beneath the ground there are 2.8 million tons of copper, for about 107 million ounces of gold and more than 2.8 million tons of molybdenum (Dobb, n. p.).
5.2. United States Environmental Protection Agency arguments and proposed solutions
Both sides have a different arguments that are going to be examined based on their official reports and web pages. The action taken in the Bristol Bay has been more focused on preventing the oil and gas companies from drilling, which was protected with presidential memorandum but does not affect the Pebble mining plans. The EPA assessment concluded that the Pebble Mine can have potentially devastating consequences and impacts on wild salmon. It is not just the species that is endangered, but also the economy. The EPA region 10 proposed the restriction of certain water in the Bay because of the ecological and economic value of the watershed and possible effects that would result from the mining. Mining of the Pebble deposit would result in the excavation of the largest pit made in this area with the 7 square miles and in depth of around 33/4 of a mile, a lot of mine waste rocks and tailings, mine waste impoundments with covering around 10 square miles in the area of wetland, ponds and lakes important for the fishery. The area of mining would be bigger than Manhattan and beside the mining area additional infrastructure would need to be built with wastelands plants, pipelines and transportation corridors. In the report it was concluded that with the development of a 0.25 billion ton mines would result in the loss of streams, wetlands, lakes, ponds and streamflow alternations (Chamers, Moran, Trasky, 15-26). The report stated various possible sources of contamination with the use of chemicals, explosives, fuels with polluting the ground and surface waters, possible pipeline failures, the impact of structural problems, possible earthquakes and flooding, rain and other potential failures. The report includes the current practices of other mines and consequences and the Pebble plans from which it derives its conclusion (Chamers, Moran, Trasky, 27-40). Regional economics are very important to the whole region since the fishery employs many of the citizens and native residents compromise almost 70% of the Bay communities. The economic value of fish harvest, sport fishing and hunting million wildlife tourism represent economic value and economic impact of the wild salmon ecosystem is estimated and $318 to $573 million annually with generating around 5.000 jobs (Chamers, Moran, Trasky, 81-86).
The agency has therefore given the proposed solution that it is in the best interest to prevent the mining in the Bristol Bay area since it can severely impact the local and state economy, can have devastating consequences for the unique environment and ecosystem with many wildlife animals that could be put in risks with the building of the mines in such dimension and with disturbing the indigenous patterns of living and domestic culture. The benefits of proposed actions from the EPA would go to the Alaska people that would be protected from the potential environmental pollution, loss of fishery and economy.
5.3. The Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. arguments and proposed solutions
The Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. retained the US Senator William S. Cohen to conduct an independent investigation into the EPA actions regarding the Pebble project. Cohen has in the report concluded that decision about building a mine is very important for the economy, environment, people, wildlife and fish and expressed concerns about EPA fair and appropriate process and that EPA should not rely on the hypothetical mining scenarios (Cohen, 3-12).
The Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. Web site states the advantages of the Pebble project of the Alaska and national economic benefit. They have calculated that in between 1 to 5 years of construction they would provide 16.175 direct and indirect jobs, and in the initial production phase from 5 to 29 years 14.715 jobs that would only grow in the years further. First five years would result in the $1.6 billion GDP annual and would increase in the initial production phase to $2.4-$2.7 billion. The third advantage would be the government revenue calculated on an annual basis for the first five years at $323 million and in the initial production phase from $670 to $772 million. He states the Pebble can be as potential largest private sector employer (Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd., 3-6). With living the possible negative effects aside, the proposed mining and construction would in the first place benefit the company as can be seen from the estimation of the reserves of gold and other minerals, but could have the positive effect on the local economy by providing more jobs and paying taxes.
The Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. is proposing its solution to create and boost the Alaska’s economy with creation of jobs for the economically depressed region and assuring that the protection of the environment will be ensured. The mine would be the largest open-pit mine with values of molybdenum, gold and copper worth around $300 billion and would generate $135 million tax revenues for the state of Alaska (Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd, n. p.).
5. 4. Economics – comparison
The economic impacts are resulting in the direct economic impact: jobs, income and output value created in the business directly involved in fishing, processing, retail or distribution and multiplier economic impacts: jobs. Income and sales created in other industries (Goldsmith, Guettabi, Knapp, 14). The Bristol Bay sockeye salmon fishery supplies almost half of the world. In the year 2010 and fisherman harvested 29 million sockeye salmon worth around $165 million in direct harvest. The export of the salmon products represents 6% of the total value of seafood export of the US. The majority of the processing and fishing happens in Alaska, but has an effect on many other states. The Bay is not just the state, but also the national economic important. The values are presented also in the table below. The economic importance of Bristol Bay shows in the profits gained from the seafood industry, supporting infrastructure and utilities, a taxpayer and source of income and local jobs. In Alaska more than 50% of the employees are in the fishing sector (Goldsmith, Guettabi, Knapp, 14-30).
Source: Goldsmith, Guettabi, Knapp, 27.
For the United States national Bristol Bay salmon processing and fishing generates a multiplier effect in an estimate of 5.800 jobs annually, and brings $286 million income and $801 million in output value. The Alaska is the second among all states present in the table that has the biggest multiplier effect (Goldsmith, Guettabi, Knapp, 27).
On the other side as has already been stated the Canadian company has done the economic research on the benefits the Pebble mine would bring to the state and country’s economy. The figures below show the jobs created in different timetables and GDP with governmental revenue for all three levels federal, state and local (Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd, n. p.).
Economic impact of the Pebble mine
Source: Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd, n. p.
6. Alternative solutions
The situation is difficult to resolve since on one side the Pebble mine could bring economic benefits for Alaska and on the other present greater threat to the economy itself with fishery and environmental degradation. The Canadian company and Pebble partnership have until this year not submit the feasibility study, but has issuing and pointing to the incorrect EPA study conducted for the Bristol Bay. The alternative solution is that companies should avoid further stalling the process with various tactics such as the attempt to discredit the EPA. Office of Inspector General’s report on EPA’s Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment has released the 17 month long evaluation of EPA assessment and concluded that there was no evidence of bias or predetermination of the outcome of the assessment and that all laws, risk assessments, peer reviews and public involvement were appropriately followed (United States Environmental Protection Agency2, n. p.). The solution must be made for the whole arctic region on the area of mineral development, since it can bring the advantages to the local economies but with the precaution agenda that should avoid all possible devastating impacts the economy can have on the environment. The alternative solutions and more detailed accounting of the Pebble Partnership about storage of heavy equipment’s, materials, fluids, and debris on tundra, about the abandoned facilities, building and equipment, full listing of oil and other spills and the costs of further cleanup, information about the drill holes and sumps associated with them were just some of the requirements and proposition of the petition given to the State of Alaska in 2015 (Petition to the State of Alaska for a Detailed Inspection and Reporting of Impacts Associated with the Pebble Limited Partnership’s Multi-Year Hardrock Exploration and Reclamation at the Pebble Deposit, 10-30).
7. Conclusion
For the environmental policies and issues in the United States, the United States Environmental Protection Agency is in charged and it has many divisions in different areas. For the Alaska the Region 10 regional division is regulating the environmental issues. There are many different environmental concerns raised in the state of Alaska from global climate change consequences on the arctic ice, warming the oceans and its effect on the animal, plant and human living. The environmental concerns are also focused on the rising interest in the potential oil drilling and coal energy. The protection of the Tongass forest and protection of the Bristol Bay that is the habitat for various endangered species that could be threatened with the increasing economy intervention into the environment with shrink their habitat, pollution, degradation and causing the economic loss for the local, state and country’s economy.
The paper focused on the examination of the economics Bristol Bay and the difference of opinions and perception between the governmental institution EPA region 10 that has the support of the majority of the locals in Alaska and the Canadian company Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd that is planning to build the Pebble mine in the country. Both sides have in their report presented the concerns for the environment and also potential losses or economic benefits of constructing the Pebble mine. There are economic benefits in the building the mine but also the possible threats of degradation of the environment and endangered the local way of living focused on fishing and with potential pollution causing devastating consequences. The common ground has not been reached and the future will show what will the governmental institutions, state institutions and local government and agencies do to solve the issue of the Bristol Bay.
Work cited
Alaska Conservation Foundation. The Issues. N. d. Web. 27 Feb. 2016 (http://alaskaconservation.org/conservation-issues/arctic/)
Chambers, Dave, Moran, Robert, Trasky, Lance. Bristol Bay’s Wild Salmon Ecosystem and the Pebble Mine: Key Consideration for a Large-Scale Mine Proposal. 2012. Web. 27 Feb 2016 (http://www.wildsalmoncenter.org/pdf/PM-Report.pdf)
Cohen, S. William. Report of An Independent Review of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Actions in Connection With its Evaluation of Potential Mining in Alaska’s Bristol Bay Watershed. 2015. Web. 26 Feb 2016 (http://files.cohengroup.net/Final/Final-Report-with-Appendices-compressed.pdf)
Dobb, Edwin. Bristol Bay: Alaska’s Choice: Salomon or Gold. National Geographic. 2010. Web. 27 Feb. 2016 (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/12/bristol-bay/dobb- text/1)
Goldsmith, Scott, Guttabi, Mouhcine, Knapp, Gunnar. The Economic Importance of the Bristol Bay Salomon Industry. Institute of Social and Economic Research. 2013. Web. 27 Feb 2016 (http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu/Publications/2013_04- TheEconomicImportanceOfTheBristolBaySalmonIndustry.pdf)
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. Pebble Will Support 15.000 American Jobs and Contribute More than $2.4 Billion Annually to US GDP. 2013. Web 27 Feb 2016 (http://www.northerndynastyminerals.com/ndm/NewsReleases.asp?ReportID=595746 %22)
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. 2013. National Economic Impact Study of Alaska’s Pebble Project. Web. http://www.northerndynastyminerals.com/i/pdf/ndm/NDM_PebbleProject_NEIS_May 2013.pdf
“Petition to the State of Alaska for a Detailed Inspection and Reporting of Impacts
Associated with the Pebble Limited Partnership’s Multi-Year Hardrock
Exploration and Reclamation at the Pebble Deposit (Permit No. 6118)”. 2015. Web. 27 Feb 2016 (http://www.adn.com/sites/default/files/2015-11-03%20-- %20FINAL%20Petition%20to%20DNR%20re%20PLP%20Exploration%20w%20Ex hibits%20%281%29.pdf)
United States Environmental Protection Agency. About EPA. N.d. Web. 25 Feb, 2016. http://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-organization-chart
United Sates Environmental Protection Agency1. Proposed Determination of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 Pursuant to Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act: Pebble Deposit Area, Southwest Alaska. 2014. Web 27 Feb, 2016 (http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014- 07/documents/pebble_es_pd_071714_final.pdf)
United States Environmental Protection Agency2. EPA Regional Administrator Dennis McLerran Statement on Office of Inspector General’s Report on EPA’s Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment. 2016. Web. 27 Feb 2016 (http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/9741F2AE0112327085257F390065785E )
