Hudbay has failed to provide legal justification for Clean Water Act permit, Natural Resources Committee chairman says

The chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee is warning that the Canadian mining company planning to construct the $1.9 billion Rosemont Mine has failed to provide government regulators with a plan to legally compensate for the massive environmental destruction the mine would create.

Toronto-based Hudbay Minerals Inc. is seeking permits to construct what would become the third largest open pit copper mine in the United States in the Santa Rita Mountains on the Coronado National Forest southeast of Tucson. The last remaining permit needed by Hudbay is a Clean Water Act permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The permit would allow Hudbay to destroy more than 2,500 acres of Coronado National Forest, obliterating streams and washes under hundreds of millions of tons of waste rock and mine tailings. Hudbay has proposed a controversial plan to mitigate the damage that  Federal, State and County agencies, as well as conservation groups, have asserted does not meet regulatory standards.

Natural Resources Committee Chairman Raul Grijalva and Arizona Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, in whose Congressional District the mine is located, warned the Corps in a Jan. 23 letter  that Hudbay’s mitigation plan does not meet legal muster.

Hudbay “has not presented to the American people a legally and technically sound mitigation plan that addresses the massive destruction of wetlands, springs and seeps, and other important aquatic resources, including Cienega Creek and its tributaries,” the joint letter states.

In the letter, Grijalva and Kirkpatrick, both Democrats, requested the Corps provide the Natural Resources Committee extensive documentation about the decision-making process being used by the Corps in determining whether to issue a Section 404 Clean Water Act permit for the mine. They also requested a meeting with the Corps prior to it publicly announcing its permitting decision.

Grijalva and Kirkpatrick met with Corps officials on Feb. 28. After the meeting, they issued a joint press release stating that the Corps is set to issue the crucial permit “without full consideration of the facts.”

“We both believe critical questions remain unanswered, including whether there has been adequate review under the National Environmental Policy Act,” states the joint letter signed by Grijalva and Kirkpatrick. “We’re going to pursue every avenue to ensure Rosemont is handled transparently, and we will be conducting additional oversight of this project.”

The Corps’ imminent decision to issue the Section 404 CWA permit comes more than two years after the agency’s Los Angeles district office recommended that the permit be denied in July 2016.

In their January letter, Grijalva and Kirkpatrick demanded that the Corps provide the Natural Resources Committee extensive documentation on its decision-making process. The letter highlighted their concerns about the proposed mine including:

• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has repeatedly asserted that Hudbay “has failed to provide a plan to adequately mitigate the environmental impacts of the mine” and that EPA Region IX “recommended denial of the Sec. 404 permit.”

• The Corps Dec. 2016 letter to Hudbay explaining why the Los Angeles district office recommended denying the permit stated that the “proposed Rosemont Mine will cause or contribute to violations of state water quality standards and significant degradation of waters of the United States.”

• The December 2016 letter also stated that the Corps’ Los Angeles district concluded that the proposed mitigation to offset the impacts of the massive mining project was “inadequate.”

• The same letter also stated that construction of the mine would be “contrary to the public interest” and would have adverse effects to “cultural resources and traditional cultural properties important to tribes.”

Mine opponents are considering their legal options when the Army Corps moves ahead and issues the Clean Water Act permit for the mine.  Three federal lawsuits already have been filed seeking to stop the project.

The Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit in September 2017 alleging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service violated the Endangered Species Act when it issued a biological opinion approving the mine.

Two months later, four environmental and conservation groups filed a lawsuit alleging the U.S. Forest Service violated the National Environmental Policy Act when it issued a Record of Decision (ROD) approving the mine.

Three Native American Tribes filed a lawsuit in April 2018 alleging the Forest Service violated federal laws including the Forest Service Organic Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act when it issued the ROD.