The Tribune

BY NEIL HARTNELL

TRIBUNE Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

BAHAMA Rock yesterday confirmed it will likely “close permanently” if the Government fails to approve access to a new aggregate source on the 515-acre former Bahamas Cement Company property that it acquired last year.

The Grand Bahama-based aggregate miner and quarrying firm, in a statement responding to Tribune Business questions, asserted that such a shutdown will be averted if the Davis administration gives it the go-ahead to access a new materials supply source to replace the one it asserts is now heavily depleted at its current location.

Also affirming that 69 hourly workers are due to be furloughed, or temporarily laid-off for no longer than 60 days, with effect from Monday, September 21, the company reiterated that the loss of its production will likely “double” aggregate costs in The Bahamas for the Government, businesses and citizens.

Bahama Rock, in a presentation made during the July 29 town hall meeting on its project, disclosed that The Bahamas requires more than 350,000 tons of aggregate per year while warning that the loss of its supply source would double the cost of such materials for the Bahamian construction industry and result in delivery costs per ton being “up to 150 percent higher” due to extra import-related expenses.

The company yesterday said any supply loss, or shortage, coupled with price increases would impact road, home, school, hotel and tourism, disaster relief and other infrastructure needs here in The Bahamas. It also pledged to employ science and technology “to mitigate any potential concerns” nearby Grand Bahama communities and residents have surrounding blasting and environmental impacts from excavation activities at the Bahamas Cement property.

“The company remains committed to exploring opportunities that may allow affected employees to return to work sooner should circumstances permit,” Bahama Rock said of the temporary lay-offs and furloughs that will take place following the Friday, September 18, production halt at its existing property. It then revealed that it has already closed the purchase of the Bahamas Cement Company site.

“Bahama Rock and its affiliates completed the land acquisition of the Bahamas Cement Company property last year but have been unable to obtain the required government approvals to develop the property,” the aggregate miner disclosed. 

“Bahama Rock’s remaining permitted aggregate reserves are effectively depleted. Therefore, Bahama Rock could be forced to close permanently if the adjacent reserves on Bahamas Cement Company are not permitted. Obtaining permits for the Bahamas Cement Company property would avoid a permanent closure, ensure a reliable supply of essential materials, and prevent loss of employment, among other benefits to The Bahamas.”

However, Bahama Rock’s proposal is facing significant opposition from residents in Eight Mile Rock and other nearby communities. Several complained the company and government have failed to address concerns that previous blasting caused cracks to appear in their buildings.

Activist groups such as Preserving Paradise have also made clear their opposition, while Fred Mitchell, minister of foreign affairs and Immigration, in an August 7, 2026, statement asserted that the Government does “not support the proposed expansion of the Bahama Rock operation”.

Bahama Rock, though, said any permanent shutdown of its Grand Bahama operation could have major repercussions for the construction and real estate development industries, in particular, throughout The Bahamas. “Bahama Rock is a major Bahamian supplier of raw materials to the construction industry,” it reaffirmed.

“This material is required for roads, homes, schools, tourist attractions, disaster relief and other infrastructure needs. If this source disappears, The Bahamas will likely have to import aggregates from a different country.

“Importing aggregates is expected to double the cost of the material, which would mean higher costs for the Bahamian government, businesses and citizens. The Bahamas could also face serious material supply issues during natural disasters without this local source.”

Pointing to the annual $25m it injects into Grand Bahama’s economy, plus the 85 jobs it provides and another 200 that it indirectly supports, Bahama Rock told this newspaper: “The significance of the Bahamas Cement Company project extends well beyond Bahama Rock.

“It supports continued development and competitiveness of Grand Bahama, and the nation as a whole. As Freeport and Grand Bahama has developed over the last 50 years, port creation and expansion has proven to be a key employment driver. Thousands of well-paying jobs have been created, allowing for meaningful economic growth on the island as well as throughout The Bahamas.”

The extraction of aggregate and limestone from the Bahamas Cement Company site, if given the go-ahead, is billed as also eventually facilitating Freeport Harbour’s near-270 acre expansion and increase its - and the island’s - value as an economic asset by creating a new turning basin and “deep-water berths”.

Activists and other opponents, though, remain unconvinced. The Preserving Paradise group and its spokesman, C Allen Johnson, yesterday demanded greater transparency from both Bahama Rock and the Government as they asserted that more than 600 questions they have submitted on the project remain unanswered.

And they again challenged Bahama Rock’s warnings about the impact on The Bahamas’ aggregate supply and the associated cost if the Freeport Harbour expansion, and Bahamas Cement Compaany aggregate mining, are not allowed to proceed.

“The national supply argument also needs verification. The shutdown of Bahama Rock does not automatically indicate that there is an unavoidable shortage of aggregate in the Bahamas,” Preserving Paradise argued.

“We must evaluate the available capacity of other producers, the suitability of their products, delivery times and prices. If there is a possibility of continued extraction in [Bahama Rock’s] existing Area 3 by another operator, we need to verify the remaining reserves, ensure lawful access and obtain the appropriate approvals. We should neither assume that these alternatives exist nor dismiss them without proper investigation.

“Additionally, the proposed harbour benefits require a funded delivery plan. Excavating limestone and constructing usable port infrastructure involve different commitments. The public deserves to know what will be built, when it will be built, who will build it and at what cost.”

Preserving Paradise, arguing that “this silence is unacceptable” over Bahama Rock and the Government’s alleged failure to respond to its inquiries, also demanded an explanation for the more than 18-month gap between completion of the project’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) by the BRON consultancy in October 2024 and the public consultation that occurred in June and July 2026.

“The chronology requires clarification,” the group argued. “The EIA is dated October 16, 2024, while the public consultation meeting took place on July 29, 2026, - 51 days before the announced production stoppage.

“It is important to note that July 29 was the date of the consultation meeting, not the start of the EIA process. The cover of the EIA indicates submission to Bahama Rock, but it does not confirm when regulators received a complete application. These distinctions are significant because accountability must be based on accurate information.

“What transpired during the approximately 21 months between the EIA's date and the public meeting? When were the relevant documents submitted? What additional information was requested, and when was it provided? Who was in control of the consultation timeline?”

Preserving Paradise also demanded: “Bahama Rock must clearly explain its contingency planning. While the knowledge that reserves are finite does not definitively indicate that management was aware of the exact date of September 18, 2026, it highlights the importance of scrutinising reserve forecasting and business continuity.

“When did management first predict the depletion of permitted reserves? What alternatives were considered in case expansion approval took longer than anticipated or was denied? What measures were put in place for employees and customers? Approval is not guaranteed. Responsible planning must take this uncertainty into account.”

And, referring to the furloughs, it added: “Workers deserve transparent information regarding their income, benefits, recall prospects, redeployment options and the potential consequences of a prolonged stoppage.

“They also deserve a candid explanation of whether approval would allow for an immediate return to production. The EIA’s tentative schedule includes several months of preparatory work. Therefore, an updated operating timetable is crucial. The human cost of disrupted employment should not overshadow the need to address environmental concerns.

“Whether intentionally or not, linking potential job losses to a pending application creates undue pressure. The Government must ensure that this pressure does not compromise the level of scrutiny. Workers should not be left to bear the consequences of unresolved corporate planning and regulatory issues.”

But Bahama Rock, noting that it has been operating for 38 years, countered: “The company and its employees are committed to safe operations, environmental stewardship and regulatory compliance in every facet of its operation.

“The company employs advanced technology and monitoring to ensure [it] reduces and eliminates impacts on surrounding communities. Residents and members of the public are welcome to request visits to the operation.

“The company is in the midst of working with the relevant governmental authorities to address environmental and other concerns. We are committed to reliable science and technology, coupled with community engagement, to mitigate any potential concerns of the community.”

The Grand Bahama Chamber of Commerce, in a statement yesterday, said it recognised the importance and value of Bahama Rock’s operation - and the jobs it supports - to the island and wider Bahamian economy.

“Economic opportunity and the preservation of Bahamian jobs are critical to Grand Bahama’s future, but so too is ensuring that development is sustainable and gives appropriate consideration to our environment and our communities,” said Ralph R. Hepburn, the GB Chamber’s president.

““That is why a thorough, transparent and timely review process is so important. The public needs confidence that decisions of this magnitude are informed by sound science and appropriate independent technical review, while businesses need confidence that proposals will be considered fairly and within reasonable timeframes.”

The GB Chamber said its delegation “also raised concerns expressed within the community, including those surrounding historic blasting and vibration, groundwater, flooding, excavation and dredging, and the potential environmental impact of future operations” when it met Bahama Rock management for a site tour last week.

“Bahama Rock management provided information on its monitoring practices, and its approach to environmental and community concerns, and responded to questions raised by the delegation,” the GB Chamber added.

“The Chamber believes environmental and regulatory oversight must be rigorous and credible, with relevant findings communicated clearly to the public,” it said. “The Chamber encourages all key stakeholders to remain engaged in constructive dialogue and work towards a resolution that appropriately considers the economic, environmental and community interests of Grand Bahama.”