The Alaska Contractor - Summer 2008

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Mining industry prepares for water ballot initiative vote this fall BY PATRICIA LILES Alaska’s mining industry, experiencing record value and growth in the last four years and poised to continue that economic success, is preparing for this fall’s statewide public vote on proposed environmental regulations that would curtail existing mine operations and stop new mine developments throughout the mineral-rich state. Global market increases of metals currently mined in Alaska, construction of new mine operations and successful exploration work in the search for new mineral deposits in the Last Frontier boosted the state’s mineral industry to record values of nearly $4 billion in 2007. That industry value is nearly 300 percent more than the $1.067 billion in mining industry value recorded in 2003 in the annual Alaska’s Mineral Industry report produced by the state. Alaska map shows mine sites in development and production and communities with mining industry employees. Yet Alaska’s mining industry is facing the potential for dramatic change in its regulatory environment, specifically in proposed new rules regarding the handling of water and waste rock, or tailings. Mining industry opponents, forming a coalition that is working to stop development of the Pebble copper-goldmolybdenum deposit near Iliamna Lake, put forward two voter initiatives that would change key regulatory laws impacting the bulk of Alaska’s mining industry. A Superior Court judge struck down one of those initiatives earlier this year and in mid-May, the initiative’s supporters asked that it be withdrawn from the ballot. In mid-June, the Alaska Supreme Court agreed to let the initial ballot initiative be withdrawn, and to determine
whether the second measure should be put to a public vote, a challenge from industry and Alaska Native corporations. A decision is expected by mid-July, in order to allow the Aug. 26 primary ballot to be properly printed. Supporters of the ballot initiatives agreed with opponents in that having two similar initiatives on the ballot would be confusing to state voters. Additionally, the ballot sponsors believe that the second initiative, Ballot Measure 4, accomplishes their principal goals, which would set new rules overriding existing state and federal regulations regarding water handling and release, and the storage and disposal of mining waste – which includes overburden, tailings created after mine processing, and rock considered waste as it does not contain enough minerals to be processed economically. Both areas of mine operations are already regulated by a variety of state and federal rules, according to state regulators, who were prohibited at press time from talking about the specifics of the remaining ballot initiative. “In general, any mine discharges have to meet clean water standards. They allow certain amount of toxic pollutants described, in amounts proven not to be harmful to humans or fish,” said Ed Fogels, director of the state’s Office of Project Management and Permitting in the Department of Natural Resources. “Those standards are federally blessed, and so the system is already in place to regulate the release of those toxic agents. Natural waters contain many of those agents and many are required for life to exist in those areas.” Without discussing the specifics of the proposed new rules, Fogels said that Alaskan voters should carefully read Ballot Measure 4 before making a decision at election time. Called the Alaska Clean Water Initiative III, it was supported by a voter signature drive carried out by the Anchorage-based Renewal Resources Coalition, an organization critical of mining in general and in particular, the proposed Pebble project in southwestern Alaska. Still in the exploration stage, Pebble has employed as many as 700 people during the seasonal summer work program in the past recent years. Last year, project developers spent about
Page 5 and 6:
8005 Schoon St. Anchorage, AK 99518
Page 7 and 8:
HOMER WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT
Page 10:
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE New issues fa
Page 14 and 15:
Associated General Contractors of A
Page 16: Behavior-based safety and the const
Page 19 and 20: SAFETY Kevin P. Welker, KIEWIT BUIL
Page 21 and 22: 55, Ken says he has worked for the
Page 23 and 24: are producing little to no asphalt
Page 25 and 26: gether at one of the family cabins
Page 28 and 29: Juneau’s “in school” program
Page 30 and 31: trict, community, parents and educa
Page 32 and 33: Rural Alaska As in urban Alaska, th
Page 34 and 35: AGC of Alaska forms Construction Ed
Page 36 and 37: Construction Career Day introduces
Page 38 and 39: ilities during the few hours he was
Page 40 and 41: First UAA graduates earn four-year
Page 42 and 43: subcontract you need on your job,
Page 44: CM students intern at Anchorage con
Page 47 and 48: Girl Scouts earned this patch for p
Page 49 and 50: A tourist walks along Fifth Avenue
Page 51 and 52: southern U.S. building techniques a
Page 54: Steel bridge team wins regional com
Page 57 and 58: misrepresentations on to the engine
Page 59 and 60: Past projects Other major past proj
Page 61 and 62: for the project. Coeur asked regula
Page 63 and 64: Kensington were estimated by Coeur
Page 65: “The Sutton job was a big overlay
Page 69 and 70: to the Fort Knox mine. Kinross Gold
Page 71 and 72: water ballot initiative. Parnell la
Page 73 and 74: enced Marsh Alaska staff, it means
Page 75 and 76: Aerial shot that shows the scope an
Page 77 and 78: As production drops, there will com
Page 79 and 80: Do you or your company have profess
Page 81 and 82: The blasting crew from Advanced Bla
Page 83 and 84: “My partner and I are fans of art
Page 86: The Politics of Construction Vote
Page 89 and 90: Graduates of CH2M Hill’s pilot pr
Page 91 and 92: continued Anchorage Museum Expansio
Page 93 and 94: continued “Carlile continues to r
show all

The Alaska Contractor - Summer 2008

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?