Northern Dynasty: Files Motion to Modify its EPA Veto Complaint by Adding New Claims Against the US Army Corps of Engineers

In This Article:

VANCOUVER, BC / ACCESSWIRE / June 10, 2024 / Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (TSX:NDM)(NYSE American:NAK) ("Northern Dynasty" or the "Company") and 100%-owned U.S.-based subsidiary Pebble Limited Partnership ("Pebble Partnership" or "PLP") have filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint in the federal district court in Alaska to reverse the U.S. Army Corps ("USACE") decision to deny the project a permit.

Ron Thiessen, President and CEO of Northern Dynasty, said "It is important to understand that this is not a new lawsuit. It is simply an amendment of the complaint we filed against the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") by adding the USACE as another defendant. We think this substantially strengthens the existing case by focusing directly on the permit denial which was an underlying reason for the EPA veto."

On March 15, 2024, Northern Dynasty and PLP filed an action in federal district court in Alaska seeking to overturn EPA's veto of the Pebble Project. On June 7, 2024, both parties filed a motion to add the USACE as a defendant to that case, and to amend the complaint to claim that the denial of the Pebble permit was unlawful as clearly set out in the USACE Remand Order. And the EPA preemptive veto is based on the fabrications of the permit denial, again, as highlighted in the Remand Order.

On November 25, 2020, the USACE denied the Pebble Partnership's permit application that would have allowed it to move forward with the proposed mine development project. PLP filed an administrative appeal of that denial. In April 2023, the matter was remanded to the Anchorage office of the USACE requiring that it reconsider the permit denial due to a number of significant errors in the original denial. On April 15, 2024, the USACE refused to reconsider the denial as ordered by the Administrative Appeal Hearing Officer ("the hearing officer"), stating it had done so because the project had been vetoed by EPA.

Mr. Thiessen said, "We believe the EPA veto and the USACE permit denial were both undertaken entirely for political reasons and are contrary to the factual record, especially USACE's own environmental analysis, the Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS"), which only supports granting a permit and does not support issuing a veto. We believe both decisions will be reversed by the court, which relies on the factual record to make decisions."

The Pebble Partnership's amended complaint claims that the USACE must complete the reconsideration of its permit denial as ordered by the hearing officer. In addition, the complaint alleges that the permit denial was unlawful because it reached conclusions contrary to the those determined and described in detail in the FEIS, including that the project might damage the Bristol Bay fishery when USACE's scientific review set forth in the FEIS had found just the opposite, and that there was risk of a catastrophic failure of the tailings facility when the FEIS concluded the opposite.