Northern Dynasty: Compelling Summary Judgement Legal Briefs Filed Demonstrating Why the Veto is Illegal and Should be Withdrawn Immediately

Executive Summary

• Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. and its subsidiary Pebble Partnership filed a Summary Judgment Brief in Alaska Federal Court on October 3, 2025 challenging the EPA’s veto of the Pebble Project.
• The filing is intended to demonstrate that the veto is illegal and to accelerate settlement discussions with the government for its withdrawal.
• The company set a court‑mandated response deadline of January 2, 2026 for the U.S. government and opposed a request by the government to stay the case.

Key Details

• Filing Date & Court: Summary Judgment Brief filed on October 3, 2025 in Alaska Federal Court (U.S. District).
• Plaintiffs: Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd., Pebble Limited Partnership, State of Alaska, Iliamna Natives Ltd., and Alaska Peninsula Corp.
• Defendant/Respondent: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (veto decision) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
• Core Arguments Presented:
• EPA vastly underestimated economic impact on Alaska and the U.S.; Pebble is a unique project with significant job creation potential.
• EPA’s veto conflicts with the Alaska Statehood Act and the Cook Inlet Land Exchange, which designate state lands for mining.
• EPA relied on speculative rather than scientific evidence regarding fish and habitat impacts.
• EPA’s finding of “unacceptable adverse effect” is irrational given minimal stream loss and lack of proven salmon population decline.
• Recent Supreme Court clarification on Clean Water Act jurisdiction indicates most Pebble lands are not subject to federal wetland regulation.
• CEO Statement: Ron Thiessen (President & CEO) expressed confidence in the legal case, stating the brief will aid settlement talks and highlighted the “illegal veto” as overreach.
• Court Schedule: Government must file a response brief by January 2, 2026; any stay request by the government was objected to by Northern Dynasty.
• Strategic Preference: Company prefers a prompt withdrawal of the veto through negotiation and subsequent dismissal of litigation rather than prolonged court proceedings.

Notable Quotes

“We are pleased to have filed the Summary Judgement Brief and to simultaneously be continuing our settlement discussions with the government to remove this illegal veto.” – Ron Thiessen, President & CEO
“While the court proceeding advances, our preferred option still remains negotiating a prompt withdrawal of the illegal veto by the government and then dismissing the litigation.” – Ron Thiessen

The release contains forward‑looking statements regarding permitting, project economics, and potential financing; these have been omitted from this summary per instructions.