Michigan DEQ Permits Sulfide Mine, Imperils Menominee River

Featured

Marquette, MI — Regional environmentalists are expressing outrage and disappointment following news that the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has announced the final approval for two of four major permits Aquila Resources Inc. (Aquila) needs for its proposed Back Forty Mine Project in Lake Township, Menominee County, Michigan. The DEQ approved the company’s applications for a Nonferrous Metallic Mineral Mining Permit (Mining Permit), and the Michigan Air Use Permit to Install.

On December 28th, the DEQ published a press release headlined “Aquila Back Forty project gains conditional approvals by MDEQ; faces significant remaining hurdles; this press release disappeared midday, replaced by a second press release titled “Aquila Back Forty project gains two permit approvals by MDEQ.” The revised press release does not use the phrases “significant remaining hurdles” or “conditional.” 

“I’m disgusted by the process as well as the decision. Key stakeholders were not notified, including neighboring residents, tribal governments and environmental groups who’ve been involved for over a decade” said Kathleen Heideman, outgoing president of Save the Wild U.P. “Financial assurances that should have been established in the draft permit were just added, but now there’s no opportunity for public input as to their adequacy. There’s still no final permit for the mine’s wastewater discharges to the Menominee River which will degrade water quality and impair mussels and sturgeon. And the whole scheme hinges on a land swap between Aquila Resources and the State of Michigan, which has never been discussed in a public hearing.”

“The DEQ is violating its own regulations by issuing this mining permit,” said attorney Michelle Halley. “The permit application is incomplete, contradicts itself, and contradicts other public statements made by the applicant. This again demonstrates the DEQ’s deeply flawed permitting process.”

“Once again, it seems that the Michigan DEQ has set aside the wishes of the people, environmental concerns, and common sense, in order to help special interests pursue their objectives. It is apparent that the DEQ did not thoroughly review the information gathered during the public comment phase of this process,” said Ron Henriksen, spokesman for the Front 40 environmental group.

“No one, including the DEQ’s mine permit review team, was able to consider the project’s cumulative impacts to the Menominee River and wetlands because a wetland permit has not yet been submitted. The rerouting of River Road, still to be determined, promises to further impact riparian wetlands, the floodplain and cultural sites belonging to the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin,” said Heideman. “These are not ‘special conditions’ as the DEQ has implied. These are statutory requirements.”

“The DEQ’s approval is counterintuitive,said Alexandra Maxwell, member of the Mining Action Group. “Considering what will be destroyed – cultural properties and trust resources of the Menominee Tribe, fragile wetlands, water quality and the people’s trust in state government and due process – this decision is a betrayal. Once more, Michigan’s environmental regulators, who are trusted to enforce and protect the environment, have fallen far short of the mark.”

“This mine poses a grave threat to the water and land in the area. The edge of this open pit will come within 100 feet of the Menominee River. The DEQ is operating under the assumption that nothing catastrophic can occur. When there is a flood, acid mine waste will end up in the river and ultimately Lake Michigan. What will happen to recreational fishing? What will happen to the lake sturgeon, which have been rehabilitated through a $7 million project? What happens to the drinking water for downstream communities?” asked concerned citizen Nate Frischkorn.

“Shakey Lakes savanna, adjacent to the Aquila Back Forty mine site, is the largest and most intact oak savanna left in Michigan, and home to numerous rare, threatened and state-listed species. At the time of European settlement oak savanna was one of the most common habitats in the upper midwest, covering some 30 million acres. With less than 0.02% left, savanna is now one of our rarest landscapes. In 1990, this area was recommended for designation as a National Natural Landmark. The DEQ’s shortsighted decision to grant a mining permit here will further degrade one of Michigan’s rarest and most unique places,said botanist Steve Garske.

“The DEQ has a strange understanding of stewardship. Risky mining ventures, under and next to U.P. rivers, get permit approvals, in the face of widespread opposition from residents, Native American tribes, recreationists, and concerned citizens. Will the DEQ ever interpret a mining proposal as inadequate? Instead, we see more public land and waterways held hostage to industrial projects, more cuts into an already wounded landscape,” commented historian and Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition board member Jon Saari.

Environmentalist claim the Back Forty mine permit application was fraudulent. According to Heideman, “Aquila lied to regulators about the extent of their planned mine, to streamline the process. Aquila applied for a 7 year open pit mine and told the DEQ that NO underground mining would take place. But Aquila is promising something very different to international investors and local business leaders, saying the Back Forty is “two mines” — an open pit and an underground mine, with a combined life of 16 years. It is illegal and fraudulent to lie in a permit application. The Back Forty application should have been denied a year ago, on that basis alone.” Aquila’s corporate press release, published on December 29th, once again describes the Back Forty project as having a “16-year life of mine, of which 12.5M tonnes will be open-pit and 3.6M tonnes will be underground.” The mining permit granted by the State of Michigan is for a 7 year open pit mine only.

Two key permits are still needed before the Aquila Back Forty project can proceed: a NPDES permit authorizing the discharge of the mine’s industrial wastewater to the Menominee River, and a wetland permit, regulating the impairment and destruction of wetlands. The NPDES permit is “under consideration” according to the DEQ, given unresolved concerns raised by concerned citizens and the Environmental Protection Agency. Oddly, the “revised” DEQ press release states that a Wetlands permit application is also “under consideration,” despite the fact that the original application contained numerous errors and omissions and was rescinded, and a new application has not yet been submitted.

####

Founded in 1976, the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition’s purpose remains unchanged: to protect and maintain the unique environmental qualities of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan by educating the public and acting as a watchdog to industry and government. UPEC is a nonprofit, registered 501(c)(3) organization. For more information, call 906-201-1949, see UPenvironment.org, visit our Facebook page, or contact: upec@upenvironment.org.

Previously known as Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP), the UPEC Mining Action Group (MAG) is a grassroots effort to defend the clean water and wild places of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula from the dangers of sulfide mining. Contact the UPEC Mining Action Group at info@savethewildup.org or call (906) 662-9987. Learn more about the Mining Action Group at miningactiongroup.org or follow MAG’s work on Facebook or Twitter.

Sing the Wild U.P.

Featured

Welcome and thank you for your interest in our Sing The Wild U.P. songwriting competition! Sing The Wild UP is a video submission based songwriting competition sponsored by The Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition/The Mining Action Group. Songs must be inspired by a love for the Upper Peninsula or make a statement about the importance of conserving our land’s natural beauty and resources. These songs may be written in protest to environmental issues and threats or may simply give a voice of appreciation for our land. This competition is open only to residents of The Upper Peninsula. Please view the links below for more information.

Contest Rules and Guidelines – these are important!

Submission Form – can’t go far without this one!

Pay Entry Fee – certainly can’t go far without this one, either!


Meet our Judges!

Kim Parlato and the Nerdfighters

The Marquette Senior High School Nerdfighters are a group of service-minded students inspired by the activism of brothers John and Hank Green, who – as the VlogBrothers on YouTube and as themselves in real life – have been speaking out for truth, justice, and decreasing world suck. Musicians, writers, artists, and overall good human beings, the MSHS Nerdfighters organize the MSHS food drive for local food pantries and celebrate the talents of their peers by hosting “Music in the Mornings” in the MSHS Library, which provides attendees with free coffee and inspired entertainment by school music groups. This year, the group also collected books for the Marquette-Alger Reading Council’s Gift of Reading program and is working toward establishing a mural proposal protocol to ensure the walls of MSHS become covered in student art. These Nerdfighters are advised by English teacher and Marquette musician Kim Parlato, who fancied herself a singer-songwriter in one of her (many) former lives before she dedicated herself to the education of the Upper Peninsula’s amazing young people.

Ben Weaver 

Be outside – Protect the land and water – Sing while you do it. Songwriter/Poet Ben Weaver travels by bike crafting human powered musical expeditions. Recently Ben’s expeditions have taken him down the length of the Mississippi River, around Lake Superior, across the Kenai Peninsula in Alaska and throughout the Netherlands. Ben has released eight albums of original music and four books of poetry. Given the choice, he will side with the animals, the lakes, the streams and the trees.

Michael Waite

Michael Waite’s songwriting is thoughtful Americana without any glitz, both brutally and joyously honest. A classically-trained singer, he lives with his family in Michigan’s Huron Mountains and enjoys a repertoire of hundreds of songs ranging in style from Irish folk to bebop. His delivery of his own songs and original interpretations of others is influenced by his first musical exploration, the jazz trombone.


Prizes
First Prize:
The winning song will be performed live at the Ore Dock brewing Company on Friday, March 24th at the kickoff event to the Annual Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition Celebration! Then, you’ll get to record your winning song at Da Yoopers Studio! The top song and artist (or band) will get to work with local musicians/sound engineers Jesse DeCaire and Jim Bellmore of Da Yooper Studio in Ishpeming, Michigan. If the additional recording of songs is desired, a package price can be worked out at the time of recording. Mixing and a basic master of the winning song are included in the prize and a CD copy will be provided of the song at the end of the session. While a specific amount of recording/mixing time is not stated in the prize and will be very flexible and will depend on the availability of all participants, we ask that the scope of the recording be kept to a reasonable time frame (unless as stated above additional studio time was purchased).

Second Prize:
The second place song will be performed live at the Ore Dock Brewing Company on Friday, March 24th at the kickoff event to the Annual Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition Celebration! Second place winners will also receive a $200 cash prize.

Third Prize:
The third place song will be performed live at the Ore Dock Brewing Company on Friday, March 24th at the kickoff event to the Annual Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition Celebration and the winner will receive a gift card to Jim’s Music of $50.

Honorable Mention:
We will also celebrate an honorable mention for outstanding performance! This song will be performed live at the Ore Dock Brewing Company on Friday, March 24th at the kickoff event to the Annual Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition Celebration and the winner will receive a musician’s gift basket, all the goodies a budding musician needs!


 Have Questions?

Contact Alexandra Maxwell at miningactiongroupUPEC@gmail.com or Rebecca Rucinski at rebeccalrucinski@gmail.com

Public Comments from DEQ Hearing on Aquila – IN FULL (10-6-16)

Featured

Save the Wild U.P. would like to extend a hearty THANK YOU to all of our friends, allies and activists who came to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality’s public hearing on the proposed Back Forty project on October 5th. The Stephenson High School gymnasium was packed and the overwhelming message from concerned citizens was: Don’t Undermine the Menominee!

Individuals who signed up to speak were told they would have five minutes to share their concerns, but at the start of the meeting, it was dropped to three and then dropped again to two minutes. Folks who had prepared their comments ahead of time were unable to deliver the entirety of their concerns – but we have collected quite a few in full and have them available for you to read!

Public Comment from Jon Saari, vice president of Save the Wild U.P.

Public Comment from Bob Harrison, President, Badger Fly Fishers

Public Comment from Lanning Hochhauser, President, Dupage Rivers Fly Tyers (DRiFT)

Public Comment from Dr. Barry A. Coddens, President of the Gary Borger Chapter of Trout Unlimited

Public Comment from Richard Dragiewicz

Public Comment from Megan Berns, Secretary – Northern Illinois Fly-Tyers

Statement of Douglas Cox, Environmental Coordinator for the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin

Public Comment of Mr. Gary Besaw Legislator, Menominee Tribal Legislature

Public Comment of Ms. Joan Delabreau Chairwoman, Menominee Tribal Legislature

Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin

Public Comment from Mr. Pershing Frechette, Legislator, Menominee Tribal Legislature

Public Comment from Rich Sloat

Comments from Alexandra Maxwell, director of Save the Wild U.P.

Public Comment of Laura Gauger

Public Comment of Kathleen Heideman

Public Hearing on Aquila’s Back Forty Project: October 6th, 6pm CST

Featured

ACTION ALERT! We need your voices of opposition on October 6th! The public hearing for the Back Forty project is fast approaching! It will be held at Stephenson High School on October 6, 2016 from 6pm to 10pm CST in Stephenson, MI. The Department will accept written comments until November 3, 2016. Our friends in the group Concerned Citizens of Big Bay are offering gas and lodging stipends to people willing to travel to the hearing! Please contact Gene Champagne at genec_nsa@yahoo.com for more information.

As you all know, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) has issued a proposed permit decision on the Back Forty Project. This means the MDEQ is seeking comments from interested persons on the proposed mining permit decision, as well as two other pending permit decisions for the project: an air emissions and surface waters discharge permit. The MDEQ will hold one consolidated hearing and public comment period for all three permit decisions. A fourth permit application for impacts to wetlands will be considered by the MDEQ in a separate review process. As soon as we receive notice on the wetlands permit, we will share it widely!

Aquila’s Back Forty Project, an open pit sulfide mine proposed for the bank of the Menominee River, poses numerous environmental, cultural and social threats, including: degraded water quality in the Menominee River, impacts to endangered Lake Sturgeon and native freshwater mussels, lowered property values, and the destruction of integral cultural resources of the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin. To help you understand the scope of the Back Forty project, we’ve summarized all the outrageous details on Save the Wild U.P.’s website. Please review our Aquila Back Forty Facts — we will update you as we learn more!

Our friends and allies of the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin recently held the Menominee River Water Walk + “Remembering Our Ancestors” Gathering with great success! Activists, tribal members, and concerned citizens all came together last week to walk for the water, celebrate Menominee culture and to raise their voices in opposition to the Back Forty Project. Read all about the gathering here. Meanwhile, Marinette County (Wisconsin neighbors of the proposed mine) Board of Supervisors penned a strongly-worded resolution in opposition to the Back Forty project, citing environmental and health hazards and noting specifically the loss of the cultural resources of the Menominee Nation. “So what is in it (the mine project) for Wisconsin folks?” asked Marinette resident Dale Burie. “Absolutely nothing. Do we derive as a positive declining property values and chemically contaminated water? Water is life. Water determines the quality of life.” The resolution passed 28-0. We are coming together as a region, as stewards for the water, so please join us in this fight on October 6th.

Save the Wild U.P. and the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition Join Forces!

Featured

NEW ERA OF COLLABORATION AS UPEC AND SWUP COMBINE FORCES

Marquette — The Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition (UPEC) and Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP) are joining forces to create a far-reaching, inclusive environmental advocacy group for the Upper Peninsula. Effective January, 2017 SWUP will become a part of UPEC, allowing the strengths of both groups to be highlighted in their cooperative work to protect clean water, healthy ecosystems, and wild places. UPEC will maintain its focus on environmental education and advocacy for U.P. wild lands, while SWUP, with its new partner’s support, will continue its activism as the SWUP Mining Action Group within UPEC.

Horst Schmidt, UPEC President, said “We’ve done it! UPEC and SWUP are becoming One Voice. With five decades of combined leadership and effort, the merger leads to a strengthened organization reaching out to the citizens of the Upper Peninsula. We could not have done it without the dedication of board members of both groups. ”

The leaders of SWUP, Kathleen Heideman and Alexandra Maxwell, will be joining the UPEC board, adding depth and knowledge to its discussions. SWUP’s strength lies in its social media contacts and in its hard-hitting public commentary on sulfide mining related permits, most recently on the proposed zinc-copper mine targeting the Menominee River and the proposed expansion of the Eagle Mine in Marquette County.

“UPEC’s perspective is broader and more historical,” said Jon Saari, who has served in leadership roles in both organizations. “The U.P.’s extensive public lands are the key to providing the needed core area for nature’s story to unfold. Enhancing the quality of these wild lands and containing the threats to them are UPEC’s goals. If we can do this, the U.P. has a rare chance to demonstrate what it means to be a sustainable place in the 21st century.”

UPEC’s activities have focused on community outreach through its quarterly newsletter, its annual Celebration of the U.P., and its grant programs in environmental education and community conservation. “We awarded $34,000 in grants in 2016 in these two programs,” said President Schmidt, “and going forward we want to enhance our presence and partnerships U.P. wide.”

SWUP has gone through several transformations in its 12 year history, but has always maintained a presence as think-tank for citizens concerned about the environmental and social threats brought by sulfide mining. In recent years its accomplishments have included stimulating impressive public participation in the permitting processes, providing college-level fellowship programs, leading one-of-a-kind outdoor excursions to threatened wild places in Marquette County, and providing intelligent analysis on mining-related permits, and all for the purpose of protecting clean water and wild places.

UPEC and SWUP complement each other, said Kathleen Heideman, SWUP President. “This organizational transformation will enable members of the SWUP Mining Action Group, now organized under the larger tent of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition, to refocus on their grassroots work – defending Upper Michigan’s clean water and wild places from the threat of sulfide mining. We’re not getting bigger as a result of the merger, we’re getting better.”

As the groups join and navigate the path ahead, they will speak with “ONE VOICE” for the environment of the U.P.

####

Founded in 2004, Save the Wild U.P. is a grassroots environmental organization dedicated to defending wild places and clean water of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula from the dangers of sulfide mining. For more information contact info@savethewildup.org or call (906) 662-9987. Get involved with SWUP’s work at savethewildup.org or follow SWUP on Facebook at facebook.com/savethewildup or Twitter @savethewildup.

Action Alert – citizens oppose Aquila Back Forty sulfide mine!

Featured

Banner-for-wordpress-Aquila-letter-to-politicians

Citizen opposition to the Aquila Back Forty project is growing – ADD YOUR VOICE!

Please take a moment to let Michigan’s elected officials know that you oppose the Back Forty open pit sulfide mine, proposed for the bank of the Menominee River. First, click to READ THE LETTER OF OPPOSITION. Feel free to add your own specific concerns to the letter. When you’re ready, click SIGN AND SEND NOW – it’s that simple!

Your letter will be sent to Representative Ed McBroom, Representative John Kivela, Representative Scott Dianda, Senator Tom Casperson, Governor Rick Snyder, Senator Debbie Stabenow, and Congressman Dan Benishek. It will also be sent to Director Bill Moritz (Michigan DNR), Director Keith Creagh (Michigan DEQ), and Joe Maki (DEQ). Additional info is available on the DEQ’s website: http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,4561,7-135-3311_18442—,00.html

Letter to elected officials, opposing Aquila Back Forty mine application

Thanks, the petition is now closed.

End date: Oct 01, 2016

Signatures collected: 196

196 signatures

Latest Signatures
196 Kathy waterstradt WISCONSIN
195 Al Gedicks WI
194 Sam Mullan
193 Kay Cumbow Michigan
192 Kenneth Bishop MI
191 Charlotte Schnook Wisconsin
190 Briana Ramos CA
189 Kathleen Grignon Wisconsin
188 Roy Michaelsen Nebraska
187 Bradford Kasberg Michigan
186 Amy Bond Minnesota
185 Thomas May WI
184 Brian Witte Texas
183 Lisa Lyons WI
182 Ben Nance Wisconsin
181 Hilary Bohm WI
180 Jamie Reiter Wisconsin
179 Tiffany Reiter-Medina WI
178 Armando Rodriguez Wisconsin
177 Naneque LaTender Wisconsin
176 Leo Chinana
175 Diana Boles Va
174 Crystal Lepscier Wisconsin
173 Thomas Schopp Arkansas
172 Allison DeDecker AZ
171 Beth Waukechon
170 Tasha Caldwell Wisconsin
169 Eric Osthoff Wisconsin
168 Cherie Thunder Wisconsin
167 Barbara With Wisconsin
166 Gene Champagne Michigan
165 S M Wi
164 Elizabeth Flessert WI
163 Megan Dorsch WI
162 mary heinz Wisconsin
161 chris heinz Wisconsin
160 Jemima Cornish Michigan
159 Nicholas Vieth Michigan
158 Erica Blanton MI
157 James Edge Mi
156 Laura Chaltry Michigan
155 Michael McGuire CA
154 Jenni Johnson Mi
153 Cindy Deo Michigan
152 Tracy Marth Wi
151 Alan Marth Wi
150 Jacquelyn Lauerman Wi
149 paul slack wi.
148 Rhonda Pankow Wisconsin
147 Sarah Redmond MI
146 Michael Noyola-Izquierdo KY
145 Cole Tedford wi
144 Michael Krall Wyoming
143 Kevin J Kelley WI
142 Joan Campbell Wisconsin
141 Mark Hellermann NY
140 Yarrow Brown Michigan
139 Ross Wolfe MI
138 Bradley Vinje Wisconsin
137 John Carson Illinois
136 Mike Junge IL
135 Christopher Gennrich MI
134 Matthew Campbell WI
133 Elaine Baribeau Mi
132 Tara Richel MI
131 Joseph Cortese ILLINOIS
130 Barry Coddens MI
129 Greg Schick WI
128 James Weltzien Illinois
127 Myron Bezdicek MI
126 Mark LoVerde IL
125 Elias Anoszko MN
124 Roger Clausen WI
123 Michael Renish Wisconsin
122 Chris Van erer Wisconsin
121 Laura MacFarland Wisconsin
120 Michael Kuhr Wisconsin
119 Forrest Grulke Wisconsin
118 John Stelzer Wisconsin
117 Robert Zimmerman WISCONSIN (WI)
116 David Higley MI
115 Tony Garvey WI
114 David Johnson Wisconsin
113 Charlie Piette WI
112 Etienne Senker MI
111 James Gould Il
110 George Winklmeier MI.
109 Michael Norden OH
108 Steven Wall Wisconsin
107 Jerry Pasdo Wisconsin
106 William Greenwald Illinois
105 Paul Melchior Il
104 Bobbi McGuire Michigan
103 justin DJUPSTROM Michigan
102 justin DJUPSTROM Michigan
101 rich mcelligott Illinois
100 Dave Pinczkowski Wisconsin
99 john paterson IL
98 Robert Harrison WI
97 Jon Saari Michigan
96 David Flanders WI
95 Gregory Prosen Illinois
94 Michael Youssi Illinois
93 Robert Webb Il
92 Harry Blessing Illinois
91 Lewis Delin Illinois
90 Lanning Hochhauser Illinois
89 GEORGE MEESSMANN ILLINOIS
88 Lyn Dickinson Illinois
87 Bob Hovet il
86 Edward Cargill Il
85 Edward Miller Illinois
84 Darwin Adams Illinois
83 HERBERT SCHLATTER ILLINOIS
82 John Blohm Wisconsin
81 James Borst MI
80 Nancy Nyquist Michigan
79 Michael Blohm MI 49893
78 Iarflaith O'Malley Michigan
77 Barbara Pratt Michigan
76 thomas wiensch Wisconsin
75 Denise Victor Wisconsin
74 Jen Gallagher Fl
73 Kevin Thew Forrester MI
72 Amanda Warrens Michigan
71 Steve Nelspn
70 Tina Harris Michigan
69 Crystal Anderson Mi
68 Cassandra Alessandrini Michigan
67 Misty Bottkol MI
66 Dennis Piontek MI
65 Kathy Schram Illinois
64 Heather Harris
63 Patricia Morgan Michigan ❤️
62 Dwight Thoune Michigan
61 Kyle Bladow WI
60 anne koss Wisconsin
59 Brian Bottkol Michigan
58 Samantha FoxSparrow Michigan
57 Meg Knutson Michigan
56 Danielle Phelps Michigan
55 Stacey Lesperance Michigan
54 Jeff Rosene mi
53 Daniel Lesperance Wi
52 McGuire Irvine Texas, TX
51 Scott Carhoun Michigan
50 Alisha Autio Oklahoma
49 Karlee Merkling Michigan
48 steve ferguson Michigan
47 Tina Lesperance Michigan
46 Michael Salfai Wisconsin
45 Mary Witzman MI
44 mitzi frank Ohio
43 Barbara Vanderwall Michigan
42 Louis Galdieri
41 Cynthia Sherman-Jones
40 Andrea Piontek MI 49893
39 Laura Farwell Michigan
38 E Tate Mi
37 Jennifer Powell Michigan
36 James Noone Illinois
35 Diick Dragiewicz IL
34 Jay Kramer Wisconsin
33 Michael Leannah Wisconsin
32 jane pajot mi
31 Elmore Reese Michigan
30 Michele Bourdieu Michigan
29 Margaret Comfort MI
28 Mimi Andary Michigan
27 Keith Crowley Wisconsin
26 Joshua Roever WI
25 Ronald Nelson Wisconsin
24 Cheryl Dannenbring MN
23 Steven Garske Michigan
22 Dr. Phil Bellfy MICHIGAN (MI)
21 Marlene Nelson Mi.
20 Lindsey Dupler MI
19 Roslyn McGrath Michigan
18 Daniel Rydholm MI
17 Christopher Fries Michigan
16 Zelda Ziemer Michigan
15 Gary Ballweg Michigan
14 Janet Joswiak Michigan
13 Catherine Parker MI - Michigan
12 Nancy Haun Michigan
11 Pam Maak MI
10 Kimberly Horn Michigan
9 David Pitawanakwat Michigan
8 David Kayser Michigan
7 Nathan Frischkorn MI
6 Janeen Rastall Michigan
5 Monica Murzanski Michigan
4 Paticia Dunstan Michigan
3 Alexandra Maxwell Michigan
2 Lauren Yellen Mi
1 Kathleen Heideman MI

Will Michigan DEQ Reject Fraudulent Mine Permit?

Featured

Banner-for-wordpress-Aquila-permit-fraud

MARQUETTE – Grassroots environmental group Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP) has announced that they will be asking Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) to reject Aquila’s Back Forty mine permit application. SWUP is raising alarming questions about false or contradictory statements made in Aquila Resources’ Back Forty mine permit application. Aquila plans on developing an open pit sulfide mine on the Menominee River, extracting rock, processing ore – containing lead, zinc, copper, gold and other heavy metals – with flotation, cyanide and smelting, and dumping their waste on the banks of Upper Michigan’s largest watershed.

TAKE ACTION:  join our SIGN-ON letter to Michigan’s DEQ!

The Back Forty mine permit application – over 37,500 pages, including the environmental impact assessment – is currently under review by the MDEQ. Concerned citizens, regional environmental organizations, and the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin are also scrutinizing the permit.

When reviewing any mine proposal, one basic question must be answered: “what is the proposed Life of Mine (LOM)?” In order to correctly calculate a mine’s risks, benefits and cumulative environmental impacts, an accurate LOM estimate is essential. According to Aquila’s permit application, “The (Back Forty) Project will be an open pit mining operation” and the “Life of Mine (LOM) operation is planned to be approximately 7 years.”

This is misleading. Elsewhere, Aquila describes the Back Forty project as having a “16 year life of mine (LOM), of which 12.5 Mt is open-pit and 3.6 Mt is underground.” Back Forty is described as a 16 year mine in Aquila’s press releases, in communications with the Menominee Indian Tribe, and in letters to investors and local community leaders. According to their Project Fact Sheet: “we support a transparent process(…) visit our website at aquilaresources.com/projects/back-forty-project for more information.” Visitors to Aquila’s website find a 16 year mine described.

“Apparently, the only folks who haven’t been told about Aquila’s 16 year open pit and underground mining plan are the DEQ regulators who are busy at this very moment, reviewing Aquila’s application for a 7 year open pit mine,” said Kathleen Heideman, SWUP president.

Significantly, the 16 year LOM is described in Aquila’s current NI 43-101 report, required by Canadian Securities Administrators. “Aquila’s NI 43-101 report should be used by Michigan regulators to truth-test whether this company is being ‘open and transparent’ concerning the Back Forty project,” said Michelle Halley, Marquette attorney and member of Save the Wild U.P.’s advisory board.

aquila-pit-and-underground-diagram-NI43101

Is Aquila Lying To State Regulators? Should DEQ Care?

Aquila’s application asserts that mining and milling facilities are scaled to accommodate the life of the mine. By minimizing LOM, the company can misrepresent all of the mine’s impacts, including tailings capacity, size of waste rock storage areas, total limestone needed for neutralizing total waste rock, total need for importing and storing cyanide and other chemicals used in the processing of the ore, total crushing and processing throughput, milling equipment capacity, water treatment plant capacity, dewatering and draw-down estimates, air pollution quantities, noise, pit backfilling estimates, remediation planning, post-closure timelines, and more.

“The Back Forty mine application raises more red flags than I can count – critical oak savannas, sturgeon fisheries, treaty-protected natural resources, and indigenous archaeological sites will be threatened or destroyed by this mining operation. Sulfide mines are known to pollute indefinitely. This mine doesn’t belong on the Menominee River,” said Alexandra Maxwell, SWUP’s executive director.

Aquila-project-has-no-underground-plan

By claiming that “no underground mining” will occur, Aquila’s application sidestepped valid regulatory concerns under Michigan’s Part 632 rules governing sulfide mining. In the application checklist, underground items were marked “not applicable,” and Aquila skipped questions about Subsidence, Impacts to Public or Private Water Supply Wells, Closure of Openings and more, stating “project does not include an underground mine as such contingency planning for subsidence is not required.” In the permit application, Aquila flatly states “underground mining was considered but rejected (…) underground mining is not a prudent alternative for this ore body. The shallowness of the ore body, specifically the shallow ore zones, heavily influences the effectiveness of open pit mining.”

“Actually, Aquila hasn’t ruled out underground mining anywhere else — only in their permit application. Are they talking out of both sides of their mouth?” asked Heideman. “It undermines their credibility.”

Aquila-MDA-investors-June2015-underground-cut-off-value

“The Aquila Back Forty project must not be permitted on the basis of a fraudulent permit application for a short-lived open pit mine, only to have the company request endless revisions until Back Forty’s open pit gradually morphs into an unrecognizable and potentially unregulated underground mine,” warned Maxwell.

The Back Forty mine permit application for a 7 year mine appears misleading and inaccurate, at best, and fraudulent at worst. Aquila’s clear intent — expressed in every document except their mine permit application — is to develop a 16 year mine. Tacking on a subsequent underground mining phase could increase the mine’s life by a factor of 129%, forcing dramatic and non-public-involved revisions to every aspect of the permit application currently under review by the State of Michigan.

“If Aquila affirms that this 7 year open pit LOM is accurate, and defends the permit application, all public statements containing the Back Forty’s 16 year life of mine estimate should be viewed as baseless or fraudulent statements, designed to attract investors and gain greater political and community support,” said Heideman.

“Misinformation about the ‘life of mine’ has infected this permit application. We are asking DEQ regulators to act promptly to dismiss Aquila’s mine permit application, given the inaccurate statements. Public trust in our regulatory process is at stake,” said Maxwell.

DEQ Public Comment Deadline Extended

Concerned citizens are urged to submit their written comments by 5:00 P.M. on Tuesday, February 16, 2016. Mail comments to MDEQ Back Forty Mine Comments, Office of Oil, Gas, and Minerals, 1504 West Washington Street, Marquette, Michigan, 49855; or by email to Joe Maki: makij3@michigan.gov

Founded in 2004, Save the Wild U.P. is a grassroots organization dedicated to defending the clean water and wild places of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula from the threat of sulfide mining. For more information contact info@savethewildup.org or call (906) 662-9987. Get involved with SWUP’s work at savethewildup.org on Facebook at facebook.com/savethewildup or on Twitter @savethewildup.

##

Environmentalists Criticize Open Pit Sulfide Mine Planned for Menominee River

Featured

banner-dont-undermine-menominee

MARQUETTE – In November, Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP) learned that Aquila Resources (Aquila) submitted a mine permit application to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) for their “Back Forty Project” (“Back 40” in some sources, including MDEQ’s website). Aquila describes the proposed mine as “gold- and zinc-rich” but their investor materials list several other “metals of primary interest” including lead, copper and silver. The Back Forty, a volcanogenic massive sulfide deposit, also contains additional toxic metals, arsenic, corrosive sulfosalts, and radioactive elements including uranium. Aquila’s mine permit application has been deemed “administratively complete” by the MDEQ.

Several grassroots environmental organizations, including Save the Wild U.P. and the Front 40, with local property owners, have been deeply critical of the Back Forty proposal for years, contending that an open pit sulfide mine, with on-site processing and tailings, will pollute the adjacent Menominee River. Tribal natural resources, including archeological sites, are also threatened by any mining operation on the Menominee River, the largest watershed drainage system in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. According to the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, “our origin or creation begins at the mouth of the Menominee River.”

“With a watershed of over 4,000 square miles (4,070 square miles with 2,618 square miles located in Michigan and 1,452 square miles located in Wisconsin, according to the Environmental Protection Agency) and more than 100 tributaries, the Menominee is the U.P.’s largest river system. It supports large populations of smallmouth bass, walleye and northern pike, and provides spawning habitat for sturgeon. Nearby Shakey Lakes Savanna is one of the few intact savanna ecosystems left in the Upper Midwest, and supports rare prairie plants and abundant wildlife. Mounds, garden beds, and other remnants of an ancient Native American village are also clearly evident. Aquila Resources couldn’t have chosen a worse place for a mine,” said Steve Garske, biologist and Save the Wild U.P. board member.

“I question the wisdom of digging an open pit mine on the edge of a river,” said Alexandra Maxwell, SWUP’s executive director. “These metals are wrapped in an enormous amount of sulfides, so the risks to the U.P.’s clean water are real, unavoidable, and numerous.”

“In describing the Back Forty project, Aquila doesn’t mention the sulfides and pyrites in their rock. With a sulfide mine on a riverbank, acid mine drainage is a real threat. Aquila has no experience dealing with acid mine drainage. Back Forty would be their very first project, anywhere,” said Maxwell.

According to Ron Henriksen, spokesman for the Menominee River Front 40 environmental group, “This is not a done deal. Even though Aquila’s permit was deemed ‘administratively complete’ by the MDEQ, the company must comply with Lake Township’s ‘Mineral Extraction Ordinance’ and ‘Land Usage Approval.’ Front 40 will continue to do what is necessary to ensure that a metallic sulfide mine is not allowed to impact our rivers, lakes, groundwater and lands.”

“As a long-time Lake Township landowner and taxpayer, I am concerned that a foreign company can come in and dictate, through, what appears to be a flawed permit process, what will happen to the area,” said Marla Tuinstra of Lake Township.

In opposing this sulfide mine proposal, Save the Wild U.P. cites numerous threats to the Menominee River watershed. “Aquila’s press release never mentioned the Menominee River. That’s a very bad sign. This project would literally undermine the Menominee River – first with an open pit mine, and later with an underground mine, with milling and tailings proposed for the site as well. Furthermore, cyanide will be used in the processing, exponentially increasing the risks. I applaud all of the citizens who are fighting the Back Forty project, and defending Michigan’s clean water,” said Kathleen Heideman, SWUP president.

“We still have the opportunity to help make “Pure Michigan” a reality, rather than just a catchy slogan,” said Jim Voss, a resident of Lake Township.

OPPORTUNITIES TO GET INVOLVED

Public Notice – Concerned citizens are asked to review the proposed Mine Permit Application, now available by following directions on the MDEQ website: http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,4561,7-135-3311_18442—,00.html

Public Meeting – The MDEQ will hold a Public Meeting concerning Aquila’s Mine Permit Application. The meeting takes place on January 5, 2016, from 6 to 9 p.m. CST, at Stephenson High School, W526 Division Street in Stephenson, Michigan.

Public Forum – Save the Wild U.P. and Front 40 will host “Don’t Undermine the Menominee River!” an informational forum reviewing the Back Forty sulfide mine proposal, and what’s at stake. The forum will take place on Wednesday, February 17, 2016, from 6 to 8 p.m. in the Shiras Room of the Peter White Public Library in Marquette.

UPDATE

Public Comment Deadline has been EXTENDED to February 16! – Concerned citizens and other interested persons are urged to submit written comments by mail or e-mail until 5:00 P.M. on Tuesday, February 16, 2016. Mail your comments to MDEQ Back Forty Mine Comments, Office of Oil, Gas, and Minerals, 1504 West Washington Street, Marquette, Michigan, 49855; or by email to Joe Maki: makij3@michigan.gov

NEW:  DEQ Information Session – MDEQ staff have been asked to hold an additional educational session for the public, concerning Aquila’s Back Forty Mine Permit Application. This meeting is tentatively schedule to take place on March 9th, 2016, at 7p.m. CST, at the Lake Township Hall Co. Rd. 577/G-12, Stephenson, MI 49887. For confirmation, contact Joe Maki: makij3@michigan.gov – for directions, contact Lake Township at 906-753-4385. 

Save the Wild U.P. is a grassroots organization dedicated to defending clean water and wild places from the threat of sulfide mining, and to preserving the Upper Peninsula’s unique culture. For more information contact info@savethewildup.org or call (906) 662-9987. Get involved with SWUP’s work at savethewildup.org on Facebook at facebook.com/savethewildup or on Twitter @savethewildup

Open Letter To Governor Mark Dayton Regarding Your Recent Tour Of Eagle Mine In Upper Michigan

Featured

As published in the Minnesota StarTribune:

When talking PolyMet, don’t be fooled by Michigan’s Eagle Mine

You call this a good example of environmental protection?  Hardly. This facility poses threats to the surrounding air, water and land. 
___________________________

Dear Gov. Mark Dayton,

When we learned you’d be touring Eagle Mine in Michigan’s wild Upper Peninsula, we — Board and Advisory Board members of grassroots environmental group Save the Wild U.P. — asked to meet with you, to share key concerns about the Eagle Mine. We’d like you to make an informed decision on the PolyMet project. Since you were unable to meet with us during your visit, we’re sharing our concerns publicly.

You toured Eagle Mine’s facility, which the sulfide mining industry deems an environmentally responsible sulfide mine. Did you happen to notice the newly constructed, heavy-duty paved haul road you traveled on from Big Bay, pavement which ends at the gates of Eagle Mine? Under Michigan’s Part 632 Legislation governing sulfide mining, that road should have been regulated as a mining haul road, subject to an environmental impact assessment and permit revisions. Through a series of political-corporate sleights of hand, however, the haul road was paid for by Eagle Mine, but constructed as a County Road.

Did Eagle show you their air pollution? For example, did Eagle proudly show you the Main Vent Air Raise on the bank of the Salmon Trout River, a wild blue-ribbon trout stream flowing swiftly down to Lake Superior? During the mine’s permitting phase, Eagle pledged to use environmentally responsible baghouse filters to remove heavy metals, sulfide rock particles, exhaust from underground equipment, and cancer-causing particulates ejected from the mine following blasting. Did they mention that they changed the design, revised the permit, and removed all filters? Now, twice daily, the underground sulfide orebody is blasted, and a plume of heavy metals is blown from the stack at high velocity. The pollutants are carried on the winds, falling out over the surrounding environment. Only one stack test was ever done, more than a year ago, prior to the mine becoming fully-operational. Twice daily, we are told, someone stands at the vent site and views the plume to rate how dark it is, a sort of visual opacity test — although one blast takes place at night. The actual contents of Eagle’s air pollution plume remain entirely unassessed and unregulated.

Did Eagle Mine show you the Salmon Trout River, a pristine, groundwater-fed river? At their treated wastewater infiltration system, the mine’s deionized wastewater is returned to the shallow groundwater aquifer, where it bonds with metals in the ground as it percolates. Almost immediately, it is outside of Eagle’s fenceline. Did Eagle Mine explain they are utilizing groundwater as if it were a sewer pipe, conveying wastewater directly to springs which feed the East Branch of the Salmon Trout River? We’d like you to understand that the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and the EPA have allowed Eagle Mine to use the wrong permit — a Groundwater Discharge Permit, meeting only human drinking water values, rather than an NPDES Clean Water Act permit, with the more sensitive pollution limits for copper and other contaminants needed to protect macroinvertebrates and other stream life, including trout. We hope you learned there are no monitoring wells tracking the movement of Eagle’s wastewater toward these critical springs. The Salmon Trout River will be harmed — it’s simply a question of when.

Eagle Mine LLC’s milling facility, the Humboldt Mill, also poses multiple threats to clean water, with discharges from its tailings degrading the Escanaba River watershed, and the Lake Michigan basin. Note that Lundin Mining has provided a mere $23.2 million in total financial assurances for both the mine ($18m) and the mill ($5.2m) — a tiny sum, inadequate to fund even an EPA cleanup investigation.

The sulfide mining industry would like you to ignore these serious issues — impacts to the air, water, and land, as well as grossly inadequate bonding assurances — while falsely portraying the Eagle Mine as environmentally protective. The Eagle Mine should be viewed as a dire warning, rather than a good example. We urge you to deny the PolyMet permit, and protect Minnesota’s most valuable natural resource: clean water.

Kathleen Heideman, President of Save the Wild U.P.
president@savethewildup.org

Board of Directors, Save the Wild U.P.
Advisory Board, Save the Wild U.P.

 

Founded in 2004, Save the Wild U.P. is a grassroots environmental organization dedicated to preserving the Upper Peninsula of Michigan’s unique cultural and environmental resources. For more information contact info@savethewildup.org or call (906) 662-9987. Get involved with SWUP’s work at savethewildup.org on Facebook at facebook.com/savethewildup or on Twitter @savethewildup.

SWUP To Host Winter Gala, Fred Rydholm Sisu Award To Be Announced

Featured

MARQUETTE— Grassroots environmental group, Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP) will hold their Winter Gala at the Steinhaus Market on Saturday, December 5th, from 6pm to 9pm. SWUP kicks off their 12th year of environmental advocacy by hosting an evening filled with locally sourced cuisine, music, keynote speaker Louis Galdieri and a Silent Auction. The Winter Gala is an opportunity for SWUP to update the community on their environmental work, while celebrating the hard work of their supporters, and members of the creative community. Tickets for the event are available at both Steinhaus locations or by calling (906) 235-9251.

During the evening filled with music, food and information, Save the Wild U.P. will announce the Fred Rydholm Sisu Award. Presenting the award will be Fred Rydholm’s son, Daniel.

The Fred Rydholm Sisu Award was previously awarded to educator and environmental activist Gail Griffith. Save the Wild U.P. established the award to recognize the dedication and perseverance of community-minded activists and environmental stewards. “We’ve created this award in honor of the late Fred Rydholm, who wholly embodied SWUP’s environmental values, as well as the yooper term sisu — perseverance, grit, resilience — a concept created by Finnish immigrants to the U.P.,” said Alexandra Maxwell, SWUP’s Executive Director.

Maxwell, who began her work with Save the Wild U.P. as a grassroots outreach coordinator, running SWUP’s Summer Fellows program, stepped into the role of Interim Director last year, and was recently named Executive Director. “I am honored to serve in this capacity, to take up a torch that so many of our community leaders have carried. Environmental issues desperately need our attention in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, and I am grateful to contribute whatever I can to the community and the region that I love,” said Maxwell.

Save the Wild U.P.’s Winter Gala will feature hearty appetizers and desserts from Steinhaus Market, live music from local jazz combo Soul Pasty, a spectacular Silent Auction featuring original work by dozens of U.P. artists, artisans and small business owners, environmental solidarity and issue updates.

The evening’s keynote speaker will be Louis V. Galdieri, writer, filmmaker and co-director of the acclaimed “1913 Massacre,” a documentary film which “captures the last living witnesses of the 1913 (Italian Hall) tragedy and reconstructs Calumet’s past from individual memories, family legends and songs, tracing the legacy of the tragedy to the present day, when the town – out of work, out of money, out of luck – still struggles to come to terms with this painful episode from its past.”

Following the Winter Gala, Galidieri will present his film with a special Q & A session at the Peter White Public Library on December 7th at 7pm in the Community Room, as part of their “DocuMonday Meets the Filmmaker Series.” The event is free of charge, for more information call 226-4318.

“I really look forward to seeing our supporters at the Gala” said Kathleen Heideman, SWUP president. “Save the Wild U.P. worked hard all year, reviewing permits and mineral leases, making a federal appeal to the Environmental Protection Agency urging them to require a wastewater discharge permit for Eagle Mine that would actually protect the Salmon Trout River, engaging regulators at Public Hearings, leading well-attended hikes to remote wild places and pristine wetlands, and educating a whole new generation of environmental leaders! Critical work remains to be done, of course — but there’s much to celebrate as we enter a new year of environmental advocacy.”

Save the Wild U.P. is a grassroots organization dedicated to defending clean water and wild places from the threat of sulfide mining and to preserving the Upper Peninsula’s unique culture. For more information contact info@savethewildup.org or call (906) 662-9987. Get involved with SWUP’s work at savethewildup.org on Facebook at facebook.com/savethewildup or on Twitter @savethewildup.

Louis V. Galdieri and Alexandra Maxwell are available for interview. For more information or to schedule an interview call (906) 662-9987 or write info@savethewildup.org.

PUBLICITY MATERIALS

Photograph of Louis V. Galdieri: http://bit.ly/1MoWZT0

lvgbiopic15

Suggested caption: “Louis V. Galdieri will be the keynote speaker for Save the Wild U.P.’s upcoming Winter Gala on December 5th.”

Bio: Writer and filmmaker Louis V. Galdieri co-produced and co-directed 1913 Massacre, the 2012 feature-length documentary about the Italian Hall disaster and the Woody Guthrie song it inspired. He blogs regularly about the ethics of mining and the new mining around Lake Superior.

Photograph of Soul Pasty: http://bit.ly/SoulPastyImage2
Suggested caption for band photo:  “Soul Pasty will provide musical entertainment at Save the Wild U.P.’s Winter Gala at the Steinhaus Market. Left to Right, Harry South on bass, Bud Clowers on drums, Travis Swanson on guitar and Zach Ott on keys.”

12204772_10205606799430549_1661575046_n

Bio and Photograph of Alexandra Maxwell, Save the Wild U.P.’s new Executive Director: http://savethewildup.org/about/board-staff/

 

Join SWUP’s Wild Summer Events!

Featured

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Save the Wild U.P. Announces Calendar of Wild Summer Events

Marquette — Grassroots environmental group Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP) has announced a series of “wild events” for the coming summer. Save the Wild U.P.’s guided outdoor programs are perfect for nature-lovers, concerned citizens, history buffs, hikers, artists and budding environmental activists.

“These are awe-inspiring experiences, intended to lead folks off the beaten track, and out into the Wild U.P.,” said Alexandra Maxwell, SWUP’s interim director. “With each event, we’re highlighting the intrinsic value of wild and scenic places, clean rivers, and undisturbed wetlands. Folks can check Save the Wild U.P.’s facebook page to learn about about additional events, including summer speakers and concerts.”

Save the Wild U.P.’s 2015 Summer Events Calendar
Available in PDF format: http://bit.ly/1IQp2tz

2nd Annual Grassroots Organizing Bootcamp — Marquette
May 23 and May 24, 9:30am – 5:30pm each day
Become an environmental advocate for your community! This year’s 2-day Bootcamp agenda is packed with engaging information — 9 special guest speakers covering 13 critical topics, including wolves, local geology, the hydrology of the Salmon Trout watershed, indigenous environmental movements, and the regional fight to protect Lake Superior from the dangers of sulfide mining. Weekend wraps up with a guided geology hike around Presque Isle. Lunches are provided, but space is limited. ENLIST NOW: rsvp@savethewildup.org, or call (906) 662-9987.

Guided Hike in the Caving Grounds — Negaunee
May 28, 6pm
Join SWUP for a guided walking tour of the “Caving Grounds” of Negaunee’s Old Town district. Experience ghostly neighborhoods and sunken streets, learn about early iron mining methods, hear stories recorded by Negaunee residents, and see first-hand the social cost of mining: undermined homes and struggling economies. Meet at 6pm Old Town Park in Negaunee. RSVP appreciated: rsvp@savethewildup.org.

Guided Hike to Pinnacle Falls — Yellow Dog Plains
June 24, 12:30pm
Enjoy a guided hike to Pinnacle Falls on the Yellow Dog River, truly one of the wild gems of Marquette County. Your guides Cynthia Pryor and Kathleen Heideman will share stories of ecology, geology and local history. Learn how the Yellow Dog River was named, and threats from sulfide mining just upstream. Pack a bag lunch for a group picnic at the falls, bring bug spray or netting, hiking shoes and a camera. Meet at Big Bay Outfitters (Big Bay). Plan to arrive early — group will leave at 12:30pm. SAVE YOUR SPOT: rsvp@savethwildup.org, or call (906) 662-9987.

Attention ARTISTS and HIKERS!
Wildcat Canyon Creek Hike — Michigamme Highlands
July 15, full-day outing
Get off the map – start seeing wild places! Save the Wild U.P. and Painters on the Loose will guide a caravan of visual artists, hikers and environmental activists deep into the rugged, unpaved heart of Marquette County. Our special destination will be Wildcat Canyon Creek, which lies in the path of the defeated but still-controversial 595 road proposal. Artists will set up their easels, while others enjoy a rugged group hike along the Wildcat, which includes delicate waterfalls. To join this special event, please contact rsvp@savethewildup.org by July 12, so carpooling and caravan arrangements can be made in advance.

Threatened & Endangered: Native Plant Hike — Michigamme Highlands
August 1, 12:30pm
Native plants and creeping industrialization — what’s at stake? Search for the answers on this unique botanical hike in the Michigamme Highlands, led by botanist Steve Garske. We’ll explore two remote sites threatened by the route of proposed CR-595: lands near the Yellow Dog River and Mulligan Creek. Sponsored by the North Woods Native Plant Society, Save the Wild U.P. and the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve. Meet-up at Big Bay Outfitters (Big Bay). Plan to arrive early — group will leave at 12:30pm. FULL DETAILS: rsvp@savethwildup.org, or call (906) 662-9987.

Explore Marquette’s lost “Great Swamp” — Marquette
August 22, 3pm
What happened to Marquette’s “Great Swamp”? Join historian Jon Saari for a slideshow explaining how the city’s historic wetlands were drained, filled and lost to residential and industrial development. After the lecture, we’ll follow Jim Koski and Jon Saari on a colorful walking tour to see evidence of the lost swamp! Sponsored by Save the Wild U.P. and the Marquette Regional History Center. Special location: event starts at 3pm in the Wildcat Room of the Superior Dome. RESERVE YOUR PLACE: rsvp@savethwildup.org, or call (906) 662-9987. Suggested donation of $5 for Marquette Regional History Center.

*

Summer events are offered in conjunction with Save the Wild U.P.’s Summer Fellows program, a dynamic, on-the-ground initiative designed to educate a new generation of environmental leaders. SWUP’s unique, interdisciplinary fellowship  program educates students on U.P. mining history, the hazards and risks associated with sulfide mining, industrial threats to wild places, and practical and effective ways for citizens to “be the change” they wish to see in the world.

Save the Wild U.P.’s 2015 Summer Fellows program is focussed on critical issues related to the controversial County Road 595 proposal. The program begins with an intensive two-day forum on sulfide mining, geology, Upper Peninsula mining history, mining legislation, wolves, hydrology and environmental advocacy, and other topics. Throughout the summer, fellows will learn from experts in their fields, while advocating for environmental justice and transparency in corporate and government relations. Students participate in hikes, lectures and community education on the most pressing issues facing the Upper Peninsula’s wild places.

Founded in 2004, Save the Wild U.P. is a grassroots environmental organization dedicated to preserving the Upper Peninsula of Michigan’s unique cultural and environmental resources. For more information contact info@savethewildup.org or call (906) 662-9987. Get involved with SWUP’s work at savethewildup.org or follow SWUP on Facebook at facebook.com/savethewildup or Twitter @savethewildup.

 

Unified Opposition to Graymont ‘Land Transaction’!

Featured

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Unified Opposition to Graymont ‘Land Transaction’

MARQUETTE — Tribal officials, clergy, local residents and leading environmental organizations of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan have joined forces to deliver a letter to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR), outlining their collective opposition to the Graymont ‘Land Transaction.’

In a unified letter of opposition sent to the DNR’s Director Keith Creagh on Friday February 27th, they urge him to reject the Graymont land sale “which threatens to sacrifice public lands for the benefit of a foreign mining company, at the bargain price of a few hundred dollars per acre.”

Graymont, a Canadian mining company, first submitted an application to purchase over 10,000 acres of public land from the DNR in November of 2013. Graymont intends to construct surface limestone quarries and, eventually, an extensive underground mine. These lands are currently open to the public for hunting and recreational trails, supporting wildlife, and managed for timber — contiguous forest lands considered some of the most productive forest land in the Eastern Upper Peninsula.

The area under consideration includes fragile wetlands and critical ecosystems. These public lands support unique hydrology and biodiversity, including “karst” habitat identified in Michigan’s Natural Features Inventory, limestone features (cliffs, pavement, sinkholes, caves) and special ecologies uniquely adapted to limestone: bats reliant on limestone caves, globally-rare “alvar” plant communities, and limestone wetlands critical to the endangered Hine’s Emerald Dragonfly, termed “one of North America’s rarest dragonflies” by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

The collective letter of opposition is signed by individual citizens as well as major groups, including the Michigan League of Conservation Voters, Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition, Friends of the Land of Keweenaw’s Board of Directors, the Chippewa Ottawa Resource Authority, the Central U.P. Group of the Michigan Chapter of the Sierra Club, Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, Concerned Citizens of Big Bay, Save the Wild U.P., the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, Students for Sustainability of Northern Michigan University, Northwoods Native Plant Society, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, Citizens Against the Rexton Project, Concerned Clergy of Marquette, the Marquette Unitarian Universalists Social Action Committee and multiple individual property owners in Trout Lake, MI.

In the letter, the groups enumerate serious environmental and economic concerns, including “…the displacement of existing limestone quarrying jobs, and the loss of sustainable, long-term jobs in the forestry and tourism sectors.” In addition, “the sale of these lands interferes with Indian tribes’ rights by having an adverse impact on fishing, hunting and gathering activities of tribal members under the 1836 treaty.”

meme-Graymont-simplemessage

“Graymont recently revised the land transaction for the umpteenth time, increasing their proposed royalty payments to 18.75 cents per ton — but only for a short duration,” said Kathleen Heideman, SWUP’s president. “That’s a pittance in comparison to current market values and contemporary royalty offers. It all adds up to nothing, really.”

“These are serious and unresolvable objections,” said Alexandra Maxwell of Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP), who helped organize the collective letter of opposition. “Our message to Director Creagh is simple: don’t make this deal.” According to Maxwell, Save the Wild U.P. has been following the developments of this project since Graymont submitted its application; SWUP and other groups have consistently attended public meetings and submitted commentary critical of this potential land sale. “Now a majority of environmental organizations and concerned citizens throughout the U.P. have reached a clear consensus–the Graymont project must be stopped.”

The DNR will be accepting written comment from the public concerning the newest revision of the Graymont proposal through March 19th. “We strongly urge folks to review the facts,” said Maxwell, “and then write directly to Director Creagh, asking him to reject the Graymont land deal. Concerned citizen still have time to protect their public lands, in their own words.”

Written commentary may be submitted to: DNR-GraymontProposalComments@michigan.gov

Comments can also be mailed to the Roscommon Customer Service Center, ATTN: Kerry Wieber, 8717 N. Roscommon Rd, Roscommon, MI 48653.

“A foreign mining company wants to buy 10,000 acres of our public land?” said Heideman. “By my calculation, that’s ten thousand great reasons to reject the deal.”

The group’s letter can be viewed or downloaded here:  Letter of Unified Opposition to Graymont Land Transaction

meme-Graymont-whatsatstake

###

Save the Wild U.P. is a grassroots environmental organization dedicated to the preservation of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan’s unique cultural and environmental resources. For more information or to schedule an interview, contact info@savethewildup.org or call (906) 662-9987.

 

County Road 595: A bad idea in the wrong place

Featured

By Jessica Koski*

Proposed Marquette County Road 595 would irreversibly impact high quality wetlands at the headwaters of several watersheds and foreseeably lead to additional roads that would open up one of Michigan’s last remaining wilderness areas to resource exploitation.

Wetlands are a foundation of our nation’s water resources and are one of the most biologically productive ecosystems on Earth, rivaling that of tropical rainforests. Vital to the health of waterways, wetlands recharge groundwater, absorb floodwaters and filter pollution. They provide essential wildlife habitat, agricultural resources (berries, wild rice), timber production and economic activities. Michigan’s economy depends on tourism dollars from hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation businesses enabled by wetlands.

Yet, wetlands are on the frontlines of development and their preservation is vastly underappreciated. Michigan has already lost more than half of its original 11 million acres of wetlands due to filling and draining.

Aerial view of Mulligan Creek, showing the Snowmobile Trail #5 crossing, proposed route of County Road 595. Photo by Jeremiah Eagle Eye.

Before:  Aerial view of Mulligan Creek, showing the Snowmobile Trail #5 crossing, proposed route of County Road 595. Photo by Jeremiah Eagle Eye.

 

 

After:  Mulligan Creek fragile wetlands were degraded by Plum Creek Timber's illegal "road improvements" along the 595 route, as documented in 2014.

After: Mulligan Creek fragile wetlands were degraded by Plum Creek Timber’s illegal “road improvements” along the 595 route, as documented in 2014.

From an Ojibwe standpoint, many culturally significant plants, foods and medicines occur in wetlands and within the County Road 595 project area. These resources are an essential part of Ojibwe lifeway; and tribal rights of access, collection and use are guaranteed through treaties signed with the United States.

Threatened (legally protected) with a status of "imperiled" in Michigan.

Protected: Narrow-leaved gentian is threatened (legally protected) with a status of “imperiled” in Michigan. Found along the proposed 595 route.

Last month, the Marquette County Road Commission voted to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for its “arbitrary and capricious” objection to County Road 595 over two years ago. In reality, the MCRC failed to submit an application consistent with federal Clean Water Act requirements.**

In EPA’s objection letter, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality was given detailed requirements to address inadequate wetland minimization and compensation plans, and 30 days to satisfy the objection or deny the permit. MDEQ denied the permit, although the process could have transferred to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers authority.

Prior to a decision, EPA heard directly from the public in Marquette on August 28, 2012. Many citizens expressed concerns in opposition to County Road 595, contrary to many government officials.

Wildcat Canyon Creek crossing, along the proposed 595 route, which would require 22 stream and river crossings.

Wildcat Canyon Creek crossing, along the proposed 595 route, which would require 22 stream and river crossings.

The lawsuit’s price tag is $500,000 and road construction is estimated to cost $80 to $100 million, without additional maintenance costs. Eagle Mine says they won’t fund the lawsuit or road. Taxpayers are promised they won’t foot the bill. According to local officials, state Sen.Tom Casperson, R-Escanaba, is a driving force behind the lawsuit and an assembly of secret private funders.

Casperson’s road rage is currently attempting to amend Michigan’s Constitution to rob the state’s Natural Resources Trust Fund for timber and mining infrastructure. This is contrary to the opinion of Michigan’s Attorney General and the original intent of the Fund since 1976 to support environmental preservation and enhance outdoor recreation benefits for the public.

Recent Eagle Mine trucking accidents are undeniably a public safety concern. However, even if MCRC is successful, it would be years before County Road 595 could be a reality. Are there alternative actions to more immediately protect the public from ore trucks? Yes.

In June 2013, the Marquette City Commission asked MDEQ to require Eagle Mine to amend its Environmental Impact Assessment regarding transportation. MDEQ denied the request claiming the city is not within the mine’s “affected area.”

Marquette County could object to MDEQ’s unwillingness to enforce the state mining rules. Part 632 states that an EIA shall define the affected area. Because the company significantly changed transportation from rail to truck after receiving a mining permit, the people of Marquette County were never rightfully provided an opportunity during the permitting process to weigh in on transportation impacts and the now inaccurate affected area.

Eagle Mine can also go beyond regulatory requirements and implement best practices. In fact, their original permit included hard cover trailer tops, but switched to soft cover tarps for easier loading and unloading. Is a convenience for Lundin Mining Corp. more important than public safety?

The company could also reconsider its original rail option. This would create jobs, alleviate stress on public road infrastructure and better protect public safety and the environment.

Rail probably could have saved much wasted investment and headache for the local community. Also, imagine if as much political support and energy exhausted into County Road 595 went toward a truck bypass around the city.

Ultimately, local officials are empowered with zoning and ordinance authority to establish more stringent conditions for how, when and where heavy ore trucks travel through the city.

Eagle Mine ore trucks

Note: author Jessica Koski is a member of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC). She is an alumna of the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies and currently serves as Mining Technical Assistant for the KBIC. This article appeared in the Marquette Mining Journal on Sunday, Feb. 8, 2015. It is reprinted here with the author’s permission.

Concerns raised about proposed discharge permit for Eagle Mine’s Humboldt Mill

Featured

Concerned citizens from across the U.P., residents of Humboldt township, members of the grassroots organization Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP), members of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC), and others gathered at the Westwood High School in Ishpeming on Tuesday night, to discuss a draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for Eagle Mine’s Humboldt Mill.

The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) held the Public Hearing to discuss a proposed “reissuance” of an expired NPDES Permit, which originally authorized Eagle Mine’s Humboldt Mill to discharge wastewater into a wetland located between the Humboldt Pit and US-41.

During the hearing, residents raised serious questions and provided critical feedback to the MDEQ. Many believe that draft permit will degrade water quality in the Escanaba River. Unresolved environmental issues plague Humboldt Mill. Tailings produced by Eagle will be deposited into an existing pit, adding to legacy contamination. There is an ongoing investigation by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding the mill’s status as a Superfund site. An additional outflow pipe was recently built between the tailings pit and wetlands of the Escanaba River without permits or public involvement.  Residents are especially alarmed by increased discharges— 2.8 million gallons per day (MGD), compared with 0.82 MGD in the first permit. The new discharge pipe (“Outfall 002”) will handle 50% of that discharge.

“As we learned at the State hearing Tuesday night, in addition to problems like flooding the private property of nearby residents, MDEQ’s proposed NPDES permit for discharges at the Humboldt Mill is inconsistent with federal law and it fails to protect the Escanaba River Watershed that once was cherished fishing ground,” said former federal offshore oil regulator and KBIC tribal member Jeffery Loman. “I intend to hold the EPA accountable for these failures. The EPA is responsible for overseeing the Clean Water Act and they are the trustee for treaty-protected tribal resources at stake here.”

During the hearing, Steve Casey, MDEQ’s District Supervisor of Water Resources, seemed uncertain as to why baseline environmental assessment were needed for a wetland receiving NPDES discharges, or why “additive impacts” (such as legacy pollution of wetlands and sediment scouring) must be calculated before a NPDES permit is granted. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, “Agencies have an obligation to evaluate waters in terms of how they interrelate and function as ecosystems rather than as individual units, especially in the context of complex ecosystems where their integrity may be compromised by environmental harms that individually may not be measurably large but collectively are significant.”

“The MDEQ was obviously unprepared for the level of precision shown in the commentary at this public hearing. But our community has been tirelessly committed to protecting our land and water from mining interests for more than ten years now. We know that regulators aren’t enforcing the rules and are instead relaxing them to benefit multinational mining companies — threatening our clean water as well as our democratic process,” said Alexandra Maxwell, SWUP’s Interim Director.

Residents voiced concerns over numerous changes (deemed “Insignificant Changes” by MDEQ staff) which have allowed Eagle Mine to radically change plans for Eagle Mine and Humboldt Mill, violating Michigan’s Nonferrous Mining Regulations. Under Part 632, Eagle’s permits require amendment. There was no public input or environmental impacts assessment for construction of a pipeline terminating at the newly-constructed “Outfall 002” — this significant structure and related wetland impacts were deemed “insignificant” — yet the draft NPDES permit will authorize use of the outfall, a clear violation of due process. The public was not notified when the location of Humboldt’s Water Treatment Plant (WTP) was switched, and the draft permit fails to mention the WTP’s treatment capacity, 1.44 MGD.  Given the WTP’s design flaws, up to 50% of Humboldt’s wastewater discharges may bypass the treatment plant, sending the mill’s tailings water directly into the environment. “Environmental concerns and due process concerns are one and the same,” said attorney Jana Mathieu.

Richard Sloat was angered by the permit’s failure to require stream monitoring or discharge monitoring.  “Water temperature data is not being recorded for the Escanaba River. This pipe will discharge ‘treated or untreated’ waste into that river. There is only one instance of a recorded temperature at the water treatment plant, documented because of a contamination leak in September, when the wastewater temperature reached 78.1 degrees — they want to discharge warm water into the Escanaba River, a cold-water fishery, in September?!”

“I find it outrageous that MDEQ and Eagle Mine failed to consider the environmental impacts of increased discharges — 240% more! — authorized by this permit!” said Kathleen Heideman, SWUP president. “No baseline information was provided, either for the wetland or the Middle Branch of the Escanaba River. Eagle Mine’s original permit failed to evaluate these sites, and now they want to dump wastewater into unassessed ecosystems! No wetland hydrology or biology data was included in the draft permit, so there’s no way to calculate the risks, and the certain degradation that will result.”

humboldt-meme1

Water quality will clearly be undermined by this permit, a violation of the Clean Water Act, but Eagle Mine is seeking an exemption in its Antidegradation Demonstration, stating that the lowering of water quality is necessary for “important social and economic development in the area” — however the Humboldt Township Board announced during Tuesday night’s hearing that they were unanimously opposed to the permit. Concerned citizens and representatives of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC) raised objections to Eagle’s Antidegradation Demonstration, collectively requesting updated and comprehensive proof of the social and economic benefits.

Residents are concerned about the enormous increase in discharge — from 0.82 to 2.8 million gallons per day (MGD). Both mass limits and concentration limits for pollutants have been increased, allowing more pollution of wetlands, and the Escanaba River. The first NPDES permit allowed discharge from only a single pipe (“Outfall 001”).

Pollutant limits are substantially increased for multiple parameters, according to the draft NPDES permit. Below are two tables showing increased limits for quantity (Figure 1) and increased limits for concentration (Figure 2):

pollutant-increases.jpg

Attorney Michelle Halley, who has worked extensively on Eagle Mine issues, said, “This NPDES permit allows discharges  to the Escanaba River that do not protect the fishery. Because of that, it violates the Clean Water Act.”

“It is important to remember that ore being processed at the Humboldt Mill comes from Eagle Mine, containing valuable copper and nickel — along with dangerous sulfides, salts, and a long list of toxic metals,” said Maxwell. Water monitoring at Eagle Mine has documented more than 100 exceedances of groundwater discharge limits since the permit was issued in 2007, including serious exceedances of arsenic, copper, lead, molybdenum, silver, and vanadium —  and uranium levels in water at the Eagle Mine facility have risen to 103 ug/L, more than 3 times higher than the EPA’s Maximum Concentration Level.  Since uranium monitoring was not included in Eagle Mine’s permit, the mine claims that no permit violation has occurred.

To protect aquatic life, conservative water quality standards should be calculated for all potential contaminants. The draft NPDES permit fails to list limits for many contaminants, including: Aluminum, Antimony, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Chromium, Fluoride, Iron, Lithium, Magnesium, Molybdenum, Potassium, Silver, Sodium, Thallium, Tin, Titanium, Strontium, Sulfate, Vanadium, and Uranium.

“The problem really boils down to a regulatory process focused on permitting rather than preventing pollution,” said Steve Garske, SWUP Board member and western U.P. resident. If contaminants are present in the ore from Eagle Mine, it is reasonable to expect they will also be present in Humboldt Mill’s tailings. It is unclear why discharge limits at the mill do not reflect known contaminants from the mine, and all legacy contaminants previously found in testing of the Humboldt site.

At the hearing, MDEQ’s Steve Casey provided a brief update on Eagle Mine’s Groundwater Discharge Permit, which was considered deeply flawed by concerned citizens.  Casey acknowledged Eagle’s ongoing vanadium exceedances, shared some theories as to why contaminant levels might be increasing in the groundwater — and confirmed that MDEQ has still not approved Eagle Mine’s Groundwater Discharge Permit, which expired two years ago. “You cannot understand the impacts of this endeavor until you understand the water,” said Cynthia Pryor, watershed resident and longtime community watchdog. “Neither the mining company nor MDEQ understand how hydrogeology functions at the Eagle Mine and at the Humboldt Mill.”

 

View Save the Wild U.P.’s written comments re: Proposed NPDES Permit, MI-0058649submitted to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency on January 16, 2015 (PDF)

 

Motives questioned on the Yellow Dog Plains

Featured

Published in the Mining Journal, November 12, 2014.

To the Journal editor:

So the Eagle Mine has set its eyes on 40 more acres of state land on the Yellow Dog Plains (Oct. 30 article by John Pepin), for geological exploration and supposedly not for a new mine.

This exploration is, as Eagle Mine spokesman Dan Blondeau explains, “part of our commitment to the community,” apparently to grow the mine. At best, this is an odd use of “commitment” and “community,” and at worst an exercise in Corporate Speak.

I have watched this mine develop over the last ten years as a watchful and dismayed observer. It was to be a small remote mine site, a limited, respectful cut into the earth with minimal impact on its wildland setting.

And then the mine portal got pounded into Eagle Rock, a site sacred to the Anishinaabe. The generator-only power system ended up on the grid, with cables laid to the mine site. The trucking of ore to a railhead north of Marquette was forgotten long ago. The “woodland” haul road along the Triple A has turned into a full-blown super highway that has re-engineered the landscape. Lundin Mining Corp., which took over Eagle Mine two years ago, seems to have an eraser for a memory when it comes to commitments.

Eagle Mine seems to be betting that all the “community” wants is economic development that benefits humans. But the Yellow Dog Plains is one of those storied places in our collective imagination. That place, and the larger community we live in, includes rivers, forests, wildlife, rocks and waterfalls, and quiet backwoods camps.

Surface drilling, as Lundin intends on this parcel of state land, may or may not lead to a new mine, but will have impacts right on the edge of the Yellow Dog River floodplain. If this were private land, we would have little say, but this is our land, public land, and the public should have a big say in what happens there.

What would our reaction be if a foreign mining corporation wanted to do exploratory drilling in Presque Isle Park? You would hear the uproar all the way to Big Bay.

We need a public hearing on this proposal. Too much is at stake.

Jon Saari, vice president, Save the Wild U.P

* For detailed information on the proposed mineral lease, see our press release.

SWUP has worked closely with Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve to ensure that citizens have an opportunity to voice their concerns, and protect the wild lands and pristine waters of the Yellow Dog Plains. We’ve created a petition calling on Michigan’s DNR to deny this new mineral lease.

Protect your public lands and clean water: sign the petition here.

Eagle Mine seeks new mineral lease, Save the Wild U.P. demands Public Hearing

Featured

SWUP-lease-banner
MARQUETTE – The Eagle Mine LLC, currently owned by international mining conglomerate Lundin Mining, is seeking a new mineral lease from the State of Michigan for 40 acres of land (NE 1/4 SE 1/4, Section 13, T50N, R29W, Michigamme Township, Marquette County) beside the Yellow Dog River, a federally-recognized National Wild and Scenic River with a status of ‘excellent’ water quality.

According to documents obtained by grassroots organization Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP), Michigan’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has known about this application since July. The DNR’s announcement of Lundin Mining’s mineral rights lease application was published on Monday October 20th, 2014, commencing a legally-required 30-day public comment period.

SWUP contends the DNR and the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) have institutional conflicts of interest in regulating metallic sulfide mining. Most recently, the organization has found that just one month after Lundin’s Eagle Mine submitted a letter of interest to Michigan’s DNR, the DNR Fisheries Division changed its 2003 recommendation of “Non-development” to “Development, with no restrictions” in August of this year. DNR retains restrictions on the property for a recreational trail, endangered plants, and “neotropical migrants” including Kirtland’s warbler.plat

SWUP encourages concerned citizens to demand a Public Hearing and a transparent, democratic evaluation of the proposed lease by sending an email Karen Maidlow, Property Analyst, Minerals Management, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, at maidlowk@michigan.gov, while copying info@savethewildup.org as the organizations is maintaining an independent analysis of comments received. Comments regarding the mineral rights lease can be mailed directly to Karen Maidlow, Property Analyst, Minerals Management, DNR, P.O. Box 30452, Lansing, MI 48909.

“It’s no surprise that Lundin is seeking to lease more minerals,” says attorney Michelle Halley. “Save the Wild U.P., the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, and others have known that Eagle Mine is just the beginning of a regional mining development strategy. In the long term, the public will pay a high price for mining projects performed with inadequate permitting, monitoring and enforcement.”

Save the Wild U.P.’s president Kathleen Heideman is outraged. “It’s alarming that the State of Michigan is seriously considering this mineral lease request. The land in question is only one hundred feet from the Yellow Dog River’s 100-year floodplain, which means the land is vulnerable to extreme flooding events (King & MacGregor Environmental, Inc., 2011). For me, that’s a giant neon sign spelling R-I-S-K-Y: sulfide ore and water are a dangerous mix! Also, the DNR’s Wildlife staff identified the land as habitat for the Kirtland’s Warbler, a state and federally-listed Threatened and Endangered species.”

“Mining activity on this land poses a direct threat to the Yellow Dog River: land disturbance, drilling contamination, groundwater impairment, surface water pollution, you name it. The DNR needs to reconsider their classification of the property’s restrictions. Given the river’s proximity, this land is absolutely too sensitive to allow mining development,” says Cynthia Pryor, watershed resident and dedicated environmental watchdog.

According to SWUP Director Alexandra Thebert, “Leasing mineral rights means drilling, and drilling can quickly lead to a new mine. We must ensure that the enormous liability of mining on State-owned land isn’t a burden shifted to taxpayers while increasing the profits of a foreign mining company.”

“Public lands belong to the public — not private corporations. This is not an isolated parcel of surplus land,” said Jon Saari, vice president of SWUP. “It adjoins another 840 acres of contiguous State Land on the Yellow Dog Plains.” Current recreational use includes camping, fishing, hunting, ATV riding, and snowmobiling. Marquette County’s Snowmobile Trail #5 runs right through the property – as does the controversial County Road 595 route defeated last year.

Gene Champagne, Concerned Citizens of Big Bay, sees a pattern of deception and creeping industrialization of the Yellow Dog Plains. “Clearly, mineral leasing leads to surface operations – and the land under consideration in this proposed mineral lease is only half a mile from the freshly-paved Triple A road. We renew our call for a federal corruption investigation concerning the State’s failure to regulate Eagle Mine, fraudulent permitting, bait-and-switch electrical infrastructure, the steamrolling of road upgrades, and total disregard for cumulative environmental impacts.”

“This mineral lease request should be denied,” agreed Alexandra Maxwell, SWUP outreach coordinator. “Metallic mineral lease of this land would serve only the short-term goals of Industry at the immediate and long-term expense of taxpayers. Once again, the State of Michigan seems wholly incapable of serving the public trust. We demand that a Public Hearing be held.”

Founded in 2004, Save the Wild U.P. is dedicated to protecting our communities, lakes, and lands from the hazards of sulfide mining, which threatens to contaminate nearby watersheds – including Lake Superior – with acid mine drainage. SWUP continues to raise public awareness about mining exploration and development, regulatory errors and conflict of interest issues. More information is available at savethewildup.org or by calling (906) 662-9987.

* Note: we’re partnering with the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve to send a unified, clear message to the Michigan DNR: deny Eagle Mine’s application for a mineral lease on the Yellow Dog River!

Protect your public lands and clean water: sign the petition here.

 

CR 595 – Under Construction?

Featured


View CR 595 – Under Construction? in a larger map

CHAMPION – Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP) has released over 300 geotagged photos of bulldozing and road construction along the previously-defeated CR 595 route which was proposed as a direct route from the Lundin Eagle Mine near Big Bay to the Humboldt Mill along U.S. 41 near Champion in Marquette County, Michigan.

The photos were taken after SWUP was alerted to major road construction taking place at the remote headwaters of the Mulligan Creek by a member of the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve’s RiverKeeper program.

Construction along this route included multiple instances of wetlands impacts, including unpermitted culvert installation and wetlands dredging and filling, with no evidence of a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit – a permit required by law to alter or destroy wetlands during the permitting review of the CR 595 proposal.

SWUP President Kathleen Heideman is outraged. “We’ve already been through an administrative process during which three federal agencies determined that the CR 595 development should not occur. If that’s what’s occurring now – if the construction happening out at the Mulligan Creek is just a backdoor for building CR 595 after all – then this is illegal,” said Heideman.

“The EPA’s decision was very clear: no CR 595 route should be constructed. Now the Mulligan Creek and its fragile headwaters are being gouged, dredged, driven-through, filled, and degraded – it is absolutely obscene. We’re demanding that the MDEQ, EPA, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers get involved up here — boots on the ground — pronto,” said Heideman.

In 2011, a Wetland Delineation Report was conducted on the CR 595 corridor for the Marquette County Road Commission, delineating the wetlands boundaries in the area.

“None of the contractors, logging companies, MDEQ, or the Marquette County Road Commission can claim they did not know there are wetlands here. There is a 742 page report clearly outlining the wetlands surrounding the CR 595 route, including the Mulligan Creek,” said retired chemistry professor and SWUP board member Gail Griffith.

Botanist Steve Garske, who also serves as Secretary for SWUP has personal experience with the area, said, “When I traveled through the proposed CR 595 route in 2009, I saw hundreds of narrow-leaved gentian plants beside the road in the Mulligan Creek headwaters area, as well as a population of the rare Farwell’s milfoil in at least one of the streams near the road. At that time, the CR 595 route was a rutted 2-track, a snowmobile trail. This gentian is rare in Michigan – it occurs in only three counties in the state. When they bulldozed this new, unpermitted road they undoubtedly buried, destroyed, or otherwise degraded colonies of this protected species, a clear violation of state law.”

“This is an egregious wetland fill. No attempt has been made to control erosion. The black silt fencing used in every other road construction project is nonexistent here. Already several of the culverts are completely plugged with sand, and sand and silt are washing down into the streams and wetlands – and no evidence of permits exists for multiple poorly-installed culverts,” said Garske.

“Any new roads being constructed in this environmentally sensitive area should be reviewed as part of a network of related actions. We need to stop the creeping incrementalism – a new bridge here, new culverts there, wetland destruction along the way. Cumulative impacts must be considered. That’s precisely what makes the CR 595 proposal a bad deal for taxpayers and environment. We will continue to report on this issue – democracy must not take a back seat solely for a haul road connecting the Eagle Mine to the Humboldt Mill,” said Alexandra Thebert, SWUP executive director.

According to the one current permit granted by the Michigan DEQ (posted at 46.69° N and 87.9° W), only “snowmobile trail”-related bridge work is authorized. Bridge materials are documented in the photographs on the north end of the snowmobile trail near the Yellow Dog River by a site where a contractor is currently “replacing” a series of culverts installed during the late 1990s – no permits are visible for multiple culvert installations.

Save the Wild U.P. was formed in 2004 to protect the U.P.’s unique communities, lakes, and lands from the hazards of sulfide mining, which threatens to contaminate the Lake Superior Watershed with acid mine drainage.

 

SWUP President to MDEQ: Regulate, don’t facilitate

Featured

meme-quote-EOWilson

The following is SWUP President Kathleen Heideman’s letter to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality concerning the proposed Groundwater Discharge Permit at the Eagle project.  

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Permits Section
Water Resources Division
DEQ Box 30458
Lansing, MI 98909

Attention: Rick D. Rusz, Groundwater Permits Unit
Attention: Jeanette Baily, Project Coordinator

Dear Ms. Bailey and Mr. Rusz:

In writing this letter, I am respectfully submitting my comments to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) on the proposed revision of the groundwater discharge permit (#GW1810162) for mining wastewater discharges and other discharges, as authorized by the rapid infiltration system (TWIS) at the Eagle Mine in Marquette County, MI.

Eagle Mine, currently owned by Lundin Mining (and formerly owned by Rio Tinto) is currently permitted to construct a sulfide nickel-copper mine on the Yellow Dog Plains of Upper Michigan, with direct and indirect impacts to the Yellow Dog River Watershed, the headwaters of the Salmon Trout River, numerous groundwater-spring-fed tributaries of the Salmon Trout, and the groundwater systems underlying the Yellow Dog Plains (which remains poorly understood). The mine is publicly stating that mining operations will begin later this year.

As an adjacent landowner to Eagle Mine property, and given our reliance on several shallow wells used in our cabins, and given the presence of marshy lakes, wetlands and spring-fed ponds on our family’s lands, this groundwater discharge permit is troubling and appears deeply flawed on multiple levels — legal, regulatory, ethical, scientific and practical flaws abound.

LUNDIN MINING BEARS BURDEN OF PROOF

Regulatory oversight demands limits and enforcement. We refuse to take Eagle Mine’s “word for it” when it comes to clean water.

In applying to renew this groundwater discharge permit, which it acquired as part of the Eagle Mine purchase, Lundin Mining has the renewed burden of proving that Eagle Mine’s operations “will not pollute, impair or destroy natural resources.” Further, the Eagle facility must comply with EPA and State guidelines for water quality, specifically Michigan’s Part 632 and the Part 22 standards and statutes concerning groundwater, and MDEQ must strictly enforce those limits, and not assist the company to explain away or excuse any violations.

STRICT, CONSERVATIVE ENFORCEABLE LIMITS FOR DISCHARGED POLLUTANTS

Repeatedly, MDEQ officials and the Eagle Mine public relations team have made statements reassuring the public that this permit is just a formality, something that needs to be renewed every five years, nothing to worry about. This is insulting. A Groundwater Discharge Permit is not a document to take lightly: this is a permission slip, authorizing a global mining corporation to pollute Michigan waters UP TO any and all numeric limits set in the permit. Eagle Mine, in recent interviews and statements to the press, repeatedly downplayed the great volume of discharge authorized by this permit — HALF A MILLION GALLONS A DAY of DISCHARGED EFFLUENT — by saying they are only discharging a smaller amount at this time. MDEQ staff have also repeated this line – reminding the public that the volume of total discharges are currently lower. Nevertheless, 504,0000 gallons of daily discharges are authorized by the permit, because that is what Eagle Mine requested, based on their calculations of total expected discharges. That permitted number, half a million gallons of discharge permitted per day, remains unchanged.

What has changed? Plenty:

  • Ownership of the mine has changed.
  • The mine’s critical permit authorizing air pollution has been changed — to entirely eliminate pollution controls on the MVAR, which has direct impacts on groundwater and surface water quality.
  • This permit includes proposed changes to the Reporting Methods which include numerous “report only” and phone call reports: this will only make it more difficult for citizens to learn about groundwater compliance problems, when violations occur, or performance issues with the mine’s WWTF. The proposed changes to reporting methods serve only to obfuscate. At the public hearing, MDEQ acknowledged that if there was a problem reported (by phone to an MDEQ staff member), “he’d make a note and put it in a file.” This is ridiculously old-fashioned and certainly not transparent. The state’s electronic systems used to report water-quality and WWTF malfunctions need to be comprehensive in scope and consistently implemented.
  • This permit includes proposed changes to Effluent Limits that will degrade water quality.
  • This permit includes proposed changes to the Groundwater Limits for compliance wells which will undermine water quality
  • Finally, Eagle Mine suggests that the site’s “natural conditions” have changed!

MDEQ — on behalf of Lundin — is requesting increased limits due to some unspecified “natural conditions” in soils and groundwater. At the recent public hearing, anecdotally, MDEQ explained that the “new background data” is based on “data gathered between 2008 and 2011 or 2012.” No data was presented to substantiate this claim, no maps or spreadsheets containing dated sampling done by MDEQ has been shared, and there seems to be no third party water analysis or corroboration of this new “baseline” data. This request would establish a dangerous precedent: mines being permitted on the basis of one set of background data, then requesting changes to background data after the permits have been issued.

What are the actual “natural background conditions?” Compared with data from groundwater studies conducted for Rio Tinto by North Jackson, Golder Associates and TriMatrix analysis from 2004 and 2005, the new permit levels authorize exponentially MORE POLLUTION than natural background conditions actually dictate. Many of the initial levels were barely registering any level for monitored pollutants.

Some examples: most recently, in quarter 4 of 2013, chloride levels in an D-level well near the TDRSA registered more than 600 mg/L for chloride. The federal limit is 250 mg/L. By comparison, a bedrock A-level well at Eagle, tested in 2004, registered 18 mg/L for chloride. Something has changed, but it isn’t the natural soil conditions. At the hearing, MDEQ staff acknowledged that the chloride exceedances continue to be upward trending “over 700 mg/L.” And yet, MDEQ has failed to issue a single groundwater quality violation!

If anything — given the large number and recent history of exceedances for salts and metals at the Eagle facility, numeric limits need to be tightened, and the water treatment system should undergo independent certification to prove that it is working as intended. Raising the limits to match a facility’s poorer-than-expected performance is poor science, and fails to be protective of either groundwater or surface water quality.

According to Eagle Mine, we are told that “natural background conditions” have somehow changed — and that the data collected during Rio Tinto’s baseline hydrologic and geologic assessment phase was spotty, not comprehensive in scope, and now MDEQ must raise the limits to accommodate the mine’s recent exceedances, rather than adhere to limits set by the original permit. With the exception of vanadium and uranium, all constituents were defined by the mine’s initial baseline data.

Eagle project was granted their mining permit on the basis of that baseline data — groundwater data, surface water data, rock data, aquifer flow data, etc. During the contested case, the groundwater permit was presented by Kennecott, and the groundwater discharge permit was defended on the basis of that early background sampling. *IF* the baseline data used to determine Eagle Mine’s underlying assumptions about water quality and hydrogeological assessments is now deemed, in 2014, to be untrustworthy or insufficient, then the public must have no faith in the mine’s permitting process, and the mine should be formally required to get a new mining permit which includes ALL AVAILABLE NEW DATA, including water monitoring by all parties, exceedances, etc.

VIOLATIONS

When the first Groundwater Discharge Permit for Eagle Mine was being hammered out, Rio Tinto-Kennecott assured the public that they were investing in Upper Michigan for the long term, and that they shared our concern for clean water. “Your community is our community” they said. “This is where our children play, where we plan on staying for the long haul.” Rio Tinto / Kennecott has since sold the Eagle project to Lundin Mining. So much for the long term and water quality. Protecting water quality is not easy, and not cheap, but the alternative is not pretty. When our water quality is degraded by an industry, MDEQ must issue violations.

Depending on which situations are counted, exceedances related to water quality and water monitoring at the Eagle project total between 45 and 110 violations! The exceedances were not minor – in a recent cases, exceedances were more than twice the EPA’s enforceable water standards. A number of the violations had to do with pH, ironically, since this is a “world class water treatment facility” and pH treatment lies at the core of its many touted features. Effluent exceeded pH limits on multiple occasions, and in several cases they couldn’t close the valve very quickly once they realized what was happening.

Yet none of these violations has produced a single fine from the Michigan DEQ, or an independent verification of the “natural soil conditions” being blamed, or a review of the equipment being blamed at the treatment plant.

MERCURY LIMITS

Mercury testing mentions a quantification level of 0.5 ng/l unless “higher level is appropriate” due to “sample matrix interference.” Please clarify whether sample matrix interference has been calculated or anticipated? If it has not been calculated or anticipated, why not? The mine’s exemption for allowable mercury should be reconsidered in this groundwater discharge permit. How is this limit protective of surface waters, which are already impaired by mercury? Will the mine’s self-monitoring data for mercury (submitted to the MDEQ via e2-DMR) be made available for public review? Has the direct addition of mercury (air-born deposition from unfiltered MVAR-pollution) been calculated, and that total subtracted from the allowable limits, to remain protective of groundwater and surface water?

pH LIMITS

The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that drinking water should have a pH between 6.5 and 8.5 (http://www.agwt.org/content/acid-rain-and-ground-water-ph); given the Federal guidelines, the MDEQ would be irresponsible if it raised the allowable pH in Eagle’s monitoring wells. Groundwater tests in the mine area are indicating alkaline groundwater (the bonding and water-transport of heavy metals is impacted by the pH of water). Increasing the allowable limit only increases that problem. The pH limit set for compliance wells in the original groundwater discharge permit already exceeds the EPA’s range for groundwater pH.

According to A Citizen’s Guide to Understanding and Monitoring Lakes and Streams:

“Pollution may cause a long-term increase in pH. The more common concern is changes in pH caused by discharge of municipal or industrial effluents. However, most effluent pH is fairly easy to control, and all discharges in Washington State are required to have a pH between 6.0 and 9.0 standard pH units, a range that protects most aquatic life. So, although these discharges may have a measurable impact on pH, it would be unusual (except in the case of treatment plant malfunction) for pH to extend beyond the range for safety of aquatic life. However, since pH greatly influences the availability and solubility of all chemical forms in the stream, small changes in pH can have many indirect impacts on a stream.”

For this reason, increasing the pH of a discharge which shortly vents to surface waters is not protective of groundwater – and certainly not protective of surface water. A third of a mile away from the compliance wells, groundwater with a higher than natural pH could soon be emerging from the hillside, in the form of springs and spring-fed tributaries of the Salmon Trout River. Water monitoring of these streams, and the Salmon Trout River, has shown consistent surface water pH ranges between 6 and 7.5.

MDEQ limnology data from 2004 supports very low initial natural levels and a natural pH as low as 6.1 in the adjacent Salmon Trout’s headwaters. This is corroborated by data collected by Yellow Dog Watershed and USGS. Raising the groundwater discharge permit’s levels will fail to be protective of the stream’s natural pH, and aquatic stream life.

URANIUM MONITORING

Given the 2013 confirmation of uranium in waters at the Eagle Mine facility, uranium in effluent exceeding 5 ug/L will now require reporting, and some indication of the “source.” Confirming the source of the contamination — why has this not been done already? No hard evidence was made available to the public to support Eagle’s ‘uranium in imported rock’ theory.

We are reassured that the uranium is being removed during the water treatment process, along with salts and heavy metals. And yet, according to the CEMP website, the “water quality in the TDRSA and Water Treatment Plant is not regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act. Water quality is covered under Eagle Mine’s Mine Permit and Groundwater Discharge Permit, but neither has requirements or limits for uranium. Accordingly, the detection of uranium is not a violation of any current state or federal permit.”

Given the known presence of uranium in the water at Eagle mine, the lack of concrete evidence provided by either Rio Tinto or Lundin for the uranium’s source, and public discomfort regarding the presence of a radioactive substance that could contaminate water at Eagle Mine, strict numeric limits for uranium MUST be added for groundwater monitoring.

According to an MDEQ statement: “A new standard requires monitoring for uranium in the wastewater produced by the mine. If it ever is detected at even a fraction of the safe drinking water standard, the mine must take steps to (?) reduce or eliminate the source of uranium.” Alas, “taking steps” is not an enforceable action, and it is not a measurable outcome. Reducing or eliminating the source of uranium should be tackled now, not in the future, and all wiggle-language must be removed from this permit.

The Community Environmental Monitoring Program’s announcement about uranium included this statement: “Eagle Mine BELIEVES that the detected uranium is fully contained, will be completely removed by the WTP and poses no risk to the environment.” A groundwater permit is not about BELIEF. If beliefs entered into the permitting process, my Anishnaabe friends would still be able to worship at an Eagle Rock free from fences and hard-hats and a mine portal.

Also, given that Eagle Mine assures the public and MDEQ that uranium is “completely removed by the WTP” this claim must be substantiated by a third party, and the proper “waste classification” and disposal of the WWTF/WTP’s waste products must be guaranteed as part of MDEQ’s regulatory process. It is well known that Eagle Mine’s WWTF/WTP waste is not going to the Marquette County landfill facility, which raises a lot of serious questions.

SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE TESTING

Proposed changes — testing only for Specific Conductance — may allow the masking of significant changes in heavy metals levels within the discharged water. If the e2-DMR testing for specific conductance is CONTINUOUS and recorded daily, and submitted electronically, why would the mine be given 24 hours to “notify” the MDEQ that the effluent is outside Allowable Operational Range?

In addition, concerned citizens would like access to reporting data Eagle Mine is required to submit into the e2-DMR system.

PART 8 LIMITS

Part 8 applies to this groundwater discharge permit, as it addresses potentially toxic metals (authorized by this permit), and includes calculations and special considerations for the bioconcentration factor (BCF) and the biota-sediment accumulation factor (BSAF) of the discharge’s’ impacts on aquatic life found in surface waters. Furthermore, Part 8 specifically addresses the potential interaction between multiple toxic substances in the Eagle Mine effluent, identifying 6 critical heavy metal pollutants (cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, zinc) which function as additive pollutants and whose health/toxicity impacts (for aquatic life, and human health) must be addressed cumulatively — which MDEQ has failed to evaluate:

KMH_groundwaterpermit-comments table

PART 22 LIMITS

Part 22 applies to this groundwater discharge permit, as the statute limits groundwater discharges for heavy metals, which in some cases are specifically noted as being “insufficient to protect water quality where groundwater is known to vent to surface water.”

General Conditions state that “The discharge shall not, nor not be likely to be become, injurious to the protected uses of the waters of the state”. Waters of the state of Michigan include groundwater, lakes, including Lake Superior, rivers and streams, including the Salmon Trout and its tributaries. This is clearly the situation we find at Eagle Mine. In such a case, part 22 clearly states that the standards may be tightened by lowering the discharge limits for groundwater and/or effluent, to achieve a standard protective of the surface water.

REQUESTED ACTION
1. POLLUTANT LIMITS MUST BE LOWERED, NOT RAISED

Since the first groundwater permit was issued, the underlying conditions of the environment have changed, and permit limits must be adjusted downwards to accommodate the cumulative effects: with MDEQ’s blessing, Eagle project removed the air filtration system planned for installation on the MVAR stack, in spring 2013. No filter, scrubber or bag-house now will capture the mine’s airborne pollutants, which adds a certain, calculable burden of heavy metals and other pollutants to surrounding surface waters: wetlands, streams, rivers, springs and meltwater. In addition, Eagle Mine’s air-deposited pollutants will land on the vegetation and sandy soils of the Yellow Dog Plains, and be flushed by melt/rain events into surrounding streams and wetlands. Toxic salts and heavy metals will be dissolved and carried by surface water (especially likely given the acidic nature of unfiltered air-deposited sulfide particles).

The total burden for the MVAR contamination must be calculated and then subtracted from the allowable pollution limits for Eagle’s groundwater discharges. If MDEQ’s groundwater permit fails to incorporate these known increases, surface waters would be exponentially impaired, as surface water contamination limits are so much lower.

ALL of the original projections and allowable-pollution calculations for groundwater, surface water and soils assumed that the mine’s air vent emissions would be controlled by a filter system. Given the new reality – a sulfide mine vent with no air controls, at an MVAR located a quarter mile upwind from the TWIS site — potential pollution concentrations are now underestimated by a factor of perhaps six.

Airborne pollutants — including a cocktail of chemicals, heavy metals and salts — will be increasingly deposited on the bare soils of the Eagle Mine facility and more importantly, on the lands immediately surrounding the facility, as visualized by multiple airborne dispersal diagrams, presented by MDEQ last spring. Anticipated air-deposited pollution and its impacts to flora/fauna have been previous calculated, presented to the public, and defended by the MDEQ. The proposed groundwater discharge permit fails to adhere to principles of conservatism, as it fails to include any of the expected air pollution burdens to the system; thus it does not sit on the side of sound science.

REQUESTED ACTION
2. REQUIRE TRACER FIELD

Reviewing all the original hydrogeological flow models, studies and analysis conducted by Golder, Trimatrix and North Jackson, the term “simulated” occurs repeatedly. The limited flow data gathered from well tests was run through computer simulations to determine the path that will be taken by Eagle’s groundwater discharges, how they will mix and move with groundwater, and where these discharges will emerge from the hillsides in the form of groundwater springs, feeding directly into the Salmon Trout River. These include ridiculous flow simulations that suggest a particle of groundwater will pick the most circuitous, indirect path, following ridge lines and remaining in the ground for many more miles/years than seems realistic to anyone who actually knows the hydrogeology of the Yellow Dog Plains and its terrain.

Given the lack of reliable testing concerning the path and speed of groundwater, and the dearth of monitoring wells beyond the TWIS, we still don’t know exactly when or where Eagle’s discharges, mixing with groundwater, will vent to nearby surface waters. Again, groundwater discharge permit limits must be protective of surface waters, but as the permit stands, lacking flow/path monitoring, that is impossible.

I urge the MDEQ to require Eagle Mine to install and undertake a full tracer field test for the lands surrounding Eagle Mine’s TWIS — ideally, north, northeast, east and perhaps even the southeast sides (as major concerns have been raised concerning redirection of groundwater flow as a side effect of mounding). Based on the tracer data, a set of additional groundwater compliance wells, at a correlating array of depths, should then be added to the system at the half-way point between the Eagle’s TWIS and the proven groundwater-surface water interface. No more simulations.

REQUESTED ACTION
3. REQUIRE FULL DISCLOSURE OF WWTF’s WASTE DISPOSAL

What is the total annual groundwater discharge permit fee paid by Eagle LLC for permission to pollute our groundwater resources?

Do the fees assessed for Eagle Mine appropriately reflect the volume of discharges, the risks (environmental hazards to a blue ribbon trout stream, Lake Superior, a remote area never impacted by industrial groundwater pollution), or the cost of administering and permitting the WWTF, as compared with other groundwater discharge permits issued for industries, mom-&-pop carwashes, or area laundromats? When asked directly for this information, MDEQ responds that citizens need to submit a FOIA request for the answer! This is incredibly frustrating, given that MDEQ’s public website provides other (inadequate and incomplete) information about groundwater permit fees, including the following files (which fail to mention the Eagle Mine groundwater discharge permit, or sulfide mining WWTF fees):
wb-groundwater-permits-AnnualFeeFAQ_248028_7.pdf
wb-groundwater-permitfees_248029_7.pdf

Given that the Marquette County Landfill has refused to dispose of waste products from Eagle Mine’s water treatment plant (uranium/salts issue raised the need for an expensive, lined facility), where exactly are the materials (filter cake/sludge/precipitates) being disposed of?

Michigan citizens demand to know that Eagle’s filtered materials, including uranium, are being properly disposed of, and not creating a groundwater hazard for another community that is receiving the material. Is the presence of uranium, toxic levels of heavy metals and salts in the waste properly classified, and properly disclosed at the waste’s disposal point?

During the debate over Eagle’s original mining permit included a possible scenario for disposal of sludge and WWTF wastes by entombing them within the mine, during backfill/cementing operation. Is this option still under consideration, and how will groundwater safely impacts (long-term, within saturated backfill materials) be evaluated? Will a decision to use this waste-disposal technique require a groundwater permit? Given that the public is not being notified as to the current destination of waste from the Eagle WWTF, this needs to be clarified immediately.

REQUESTED ACTION
4. PROTECTION OF THE GSI, WATERSHED DEMANDS A NPDES PERMIT

This flawed permit fails to address the certainty that the wastewater discharged at the TWIS, into the groundwater, will be emerging into groundwater-surface water interface short distance later — the permit dodges this, but MDEQ cannot dodge the issue. By failing to require Eagle Mine to get a NPDES permit to authorize and monitor the surface discharge points, the current groundwater discharge permit is authorizing an illegal discharge. A NPDES permit must be required.

REQUESTED ACTION
5. DO NOT REDEFINE THE BACKGROUND QUALITY

According to Part 22: “Background groundwater quality” means the concentration or level of a substance in groundwater within an aquifer and hydraulically connected aquifers at the site receiving a discharge, if the aquifer has not been impacted by a discharge caused by human activity. Based on the statute’s definition of background groundwater quality, one cannot accept the MDEQ’s undefined reassessment of unspecified “background data” gathered from “2008-2011” — given that exploration activities (underway in 2008), and extensive landscape changes (starting in 2009, impacting groundwater, and diverting/impounding surface waters) took place during these year. For the purposes of “background groundwater quality” no data can be included from years 2008-2012 given that the aquifer had been impacted by human activity.

According to MDEQ: “The department prepared the proposed permit after an extensive review of the mine’s wastewater treatment system, which began operation in 2011. The new permit includes minor revisions reflecting actual water conditions at the site.”

MDEQ has also stated, “Local conditions the DEQ is working to address with the renewed discharge permit include: Independent of any activity from the mine, naturally occurring background basicity and concentrations of vanadium in the groundwater exceeded the original permit standards, according to a recent assessment. Revised, site-specific limits for vanadium and pH were established in accordance with the groundwater quality administrative rules. These revised limits account for the naturally occurring conditions.

Please explain to the public: how was the monitoring and assessment done to establish these “naturally occurring conditions”? Were any new “background wells” installed for data collection? Who conducted the data analysis? Why was the data related to this “recent assessment” not made available for concerned citizens and watersheds to independently review, prior to the permit’s extended public comment period, and/or the public hearing?

“Additionally, copper and lead levels in one well were higher than the permit allowed on three occasions, but the issue has been resolved. The well was disturbed during construction and has since been reconstructed. In the most recent sample, copper and lead levels were in compliance with the permit.”

When effluent limits are compared with surface water standards, I find that Eagle Mine’s groundwater allowable limits are consistently being set higher than what’s protective of surface water – resulting in regular exceedances that are higher than federal enforceable limits. Raising either effluent or groundwater limits to match (or nearly match) the EPA’s MCL value, will certainly not correct this problem, as exceedances are often exceeding the EPA limits!

REQUESTED ACTION
6. REEVALUATE PUBLIC ACCESS + PUBLIC IMPACTS

The public “access” to permit info and the location of the permit hearing was highly questionable. Please understand that this permit hearing was only scheduled after multiple concerned citizens lobbied MDEQ – and the initial public comment period even expired before a decision to hold the public hearing was announced. Moreover, the venue selected for the public hearing (a rural high school located west of Ishpeming, about 50 road miles from the mine itself, and 40 miles from the mine’s nearest impacted community (as defined by Part 632) — Big Bay. For the convenience of the greatest number of the public, most everyone agrees that Marquette is a far better venue choice than West Ishpeming.

Venue of the Public Hearing was a serious hardship: I’ve heard from many people who wanted to attend and could not! Many people set up carpools to reach the hearing. I personally contacted Marq-Trans (the public bus system for Marquette County) about public transit options, especially for college students who have free access to established bus routes, but learned that you’d need to ride three (3!) separate buses simply to get from downtown Marquette to downtown Ishpeming — and none of their fixed routes actually go to Westwood High School, where the permit hearing was taking place, and it didn’t really matter, because all of the busses would all quit running hours before the permit hearing would end! So — it really seems that “public access” to this “public hearing” wasn’t a serious consideration for anyone at MDEQ. That’s really unacceptable behavior for a state agency.

In addition, a “FAQs” file was initially made available online (I probably downloaded it during the month of December 2013). Reviewing info in the month leading up to the public hearing, I discovered that it referenced three other “attachments” which were not attached. When I contacted the apparent author of the FAQs file (Geri Grant, SWP, listed in the file’s “info field”) asking for these files, she contacted MDEQ and was told that these critical attachments would not be available until the night of the hearing.
WHY? — given that the FAQ sheet itself was first made available back in 2013? And why was Geri Grant listed as the author of this MDEQ file?

Why should the public have to submit FOIA requests to get basic information about groundwater permit fees? Why was the Public Hearing not listed on the MDEQ website’s calendar? The process surrounding this flawed permit has been repeatedly dismissive of the public’s right to know, and right to participate. MDEQ owes it to the citizens of Michigan’s U.P. to do better.

“The less information available to the public about the full range of impacts from the proposed mine and the less time and opportunity for the public to counter the false claims of the mining company, the better the chances of permitting.” – Al Gedicks

If you have any questions regarding my criticisms, comments, or requested actions, please do not hesitate to contact me at president@savethewildup.org or by mail:
224 Riverside Road, Marquette MI 49855.

Sincerely,

Kathleen M. Heideman
President, Save the Wild U.P.

Mining industry has big plans for the western UP and beyond | Steve Garske

Featured

The rush is on for the copper, silver, nickel, and other hardrock minerals of the Lake Superior region, and especially Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. One of the latest arrivals to the UP is the recently-formed Highland Copper Company, Inc. This month geologist and Highland Vice President for Exploration, Dr. Ross Grunwald, has been on tour, giving a detailed powerpoint presentation of the company’s activities and plans in Ontonagon, Ironwood, Calumet and Houghton.

Highland Copper Company is a Canadian company based in Longueuil, Quebec. Along with its wholly-owned subsidiary Keweenaw Copper Company, Inc., the company is “focused on exploring and developing copper projects within the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, U.S.A.” Incorporated about 2 ½ years ago, they now have 21 full-time employees. They are currently exploring four deposits – three in the Keweenaw Peninsula, and another near Bald Mountain, north of Ironwood near Lake Superior. They are also in the process of buying the White Pine facility and mineral rights from Copper Range Co., a subsidiary of First Quantum Minerals LLC of Canada. Drilling is being done at all these sites. As noted in this January 10th Globe story, the drilling at Bald Mountain was not generally known until Grunwald mentioned it at the Ironwood meeting.

Grunwald explained that at this point the Highland (and Keweenaw) Copper Companies are mining exploration and development companies, not mining companies. If the prospects turn out to be economically viable, they would likely be sold to other companies that would mine them. The company provided a fact sheet with a map of their projects. Their extensive website has a fair amount of information about the company, including the results of drilling done so far.

Grunwald and his partners are not the only ones that believe there’s money to be made from these prospects. Highland has been wildly successful in raising investor funds, bringing in some $25 million since September 30th in a stock offering of 43 cents per share. The money will go to continued exploration, as well as the purchase of the White Pine mine. Grunwald stated that the if and when White Pine is reopened, a new underground mine would be constructed to access the extensive copper deposits northeast of the present mine. The tailings would be backfilled into the old, water-filled mine. While smelting would not be done at White Pine, some concentrating of copper ore could be done there using staged flotation reactor technology. Meanwhile the company’s stated intent is to continue to explore for copper and other minerals throughout the Keweenaw region.

In their online “Corporate Presentation” the Highland Company notes that Michigan has a favorable political climate for mining. Their list of “favorables” includes support from the Governor and local officials, new laws encouraging mining and making Michigan a “right to work” state, and a “supportive” Michigan Department of Environment Quality staff. They state that local citizens favor development but admit that some “have questions.”

When asked at the Ironwood presentation whether Highland Copper Company had any financial ties to billionaire Chris Cline of Florida, Cline’s GTac corporation, or the Houston-based Natural Resource Partners (NRP), in which Cline is a major investor, Grunwald gave a flat-out “No.” A bit of research, mostly of these company’s own website, reveals a complicated web of connections, though.

As mentioned in several places on their website, Highland has entered into a joint venture partnership with an entity called Bowie Resource Partners LLC (BRP LLC). As stated on the website, BRP owned approximately 8.8 million mineral acres in 29 states, including approximately 60,000 gross acres of copper rights in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan as of 2011. BRP LLC is a joint venture formed in June 2010 between Natural Resource Partners L.P. (NRP) and International Paper (IP). Both companies are listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Once mainly invested in coal, BRP’s holdings now include everything from oil, gas, and mineral rights to water rights and cell tower placement rights.

According to one source, Chris Cline owns 31% of NRP. As outlined on NRP’s website and their prospectus, NRP is the managing and controlling partner of BRP with a 51% interest, with IP controlling the remaining 49%. Furthermore, oilman Russell Gordy of Houston, owner of RGGS Land and Minerals LLC, sits on the NRP board of directors. RGGS owns most of the surface and mineral rights leased/optioned to GTAC in Iron County. BRP owns and manages current mineral leases, and manages the development of the more than 7 million acres of former International Paper land. Thus Highland has a joint partnership with BRP, which is controlled by NRP, of which Chris Cline (owner of GTac) is a major shareholder.

There can be little doubt that the descent of multiple mining companies on the UP and states west is a well-planned, well-funded effort by incredibly wealthy investors to turn the Lake Superior region into a major resource extraction zone, similar to the Appalachians of West Virginia (where Cline got his start in the coal industry). The question is whether the citizens of the region will let him.

(For more on the financial connections between Cline, GTac and NRP, check out the well-researched article “Circles of Friends – Spheres of Influence“ posted December 10, 2013.)

Steve Garske is a Board Member of Save the Wild U.P. and can be reached at steve [at] savethewildup.org.

CR 595 Back among the Living? Not so quick | Jon Saari

Featured

meme---leopold--PE-test

When in January, 2013 the Mining Journal headline proclaimed “CR 595 Project Killed,” many opponents were skeptical that this was the last we would hear about it. CR 595 in all its incarnations is like a zombie. It seems dead, but then reappears in new guises.

First it was a private Woodland Road, then a public county road funded by the mining company. Its latest incarnation is as THE LONG-TERM SOLUTION to the trucking dilemma of the City of Marquette and Marquette Township. The City recently proposed a highly restrictive trucking ordinance within the city, thus forcing all parties anew to the negotiating table. A bypass around Marquette is being proposed as the short-term solution, but reviving CR 595 within a regional transportation plan is seen as a long-term solution.

The proponents cheering this revival are a familiar cast – County commissioners Gerald Corkin and Deb Pellow and Road Commission engineer-manager Jim Iwanicki – but there is a new voice among them, State Senator Tom Casperson (R – Escanaba) and his aide Matt Fittante. Fittante mesmerized a group of local administrators, planners, and politicians in Marquette township recently, who were all too eager to see the proposed CR 595 as the solution to their transportation woes — never mind that the mine was permitted without a comprehensive look at its outside-the-fence regional impacts. In the 2006 permit application the ore from the Eagle Mine was to be trucked to a railhead north of Marquette. But when Kennecot/Rio Tinto in 2008 purchased the Humboldt Mill, the transportation route was changed to CR 550 and US-41 through the City of Marquette. Efforts began to promote a direct north-south route from mine to mill mostly through undeveloped wild lands.

It is an intense issue made to the liking of Senator Tom Casperson. He seems to enjoy taking on controversies, such as the first wolf hunt in Michigan. He has championed some of the most anti-science natural resource legislation ever seen in Michigan, including a bill to eliminate biodiversity as a value in state forest planning (SB 78). His interest in CR 595 is to use it as a case study of “bad behavior” by federal regulatory agencies, particularly the EPA, and of over-reaching environmental laws, such as the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act. He was invited to Washington, D.C. recently to make that argument at a House hearing, using CR 595 as an example.

Casperson’s agenda of weakening federal environmental regulation must be taken seriously. But local officials and planners should not be lured into serving his long-term agenda, just because CR 595 appears to give them a solution to a truck traffic problem.

There are good reasons why this latest revival of CR 595 should not, and probably will not, succeed.

First, the collusion of public officials in brokering a haul road for an international mining company sets a bad precedent. It creates an illusion that the road is a multi-purpose undertaking when in fact it is a haul road directly from mine to mill. This repurposing of a haul road did not pass the scrutiny of the Corps of Engineers the first time around, so why should it the second time around when the Corps is the lead permitting agency?

Second, after the DEQ denied the permit, the game changed. The mining company returned to its original permitted route and is investing in improving county roads AAA, 510, and 550, not to mention a Marquette bypass and street improvements within the city. How can anyone with a straight face argue that CR 595 with its significant wetland destruction is still necessary because there is no viable transportation alternative? The route may take longer to travel but it will be an upgraded trucking route ready to use by the time the mine opens.

Third, Rio Tinto/Lundin is unlikely to reoffer $80 million for the constructing of CR 595, now that it has invested over half of that into the “alternative” original route. It needs the other half to pay for the greater energy costs of the longer route. This calculus could change if the period of mining is extended through the discovery of new viable mineral deposits; that is not guaranteed. Using public money for a mine haul road (or a haul road disguised as rural development) would be an affront to taxpayers. So where is the money for CR 595 to come from?

Marquette county residents will be treated to an intense lobbying spectacle around CR 595 over the next months and years. The zombie may get up and start walking again.
But it is hoped that the intact wildness of the area north of Wolf Lake Road will never be fractured by an all-season highway, and that local officials will accept that part of their job is protecting the landscape from such degradation.

Jon Saari is a Board member of Save the Wild U.P. and former President of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition. He has written extensively about CR 595 since 2010. This article first appeared in the December 2013 issue of Marquette Monthly as a letter to the editor.

New highway proposed for Eagle Mine

Featured

Looks like Lundin Mining inherited a transportation route mess from Rio Tinto when it bought the Eagle Mine located 30 miles north of Marquette.

The Marquette County Road Commission (MCRC) is considering a plan to use eminent domain to seize private property to build a new 55 mph highway from CR 550 (“Big Bay Road”) to the Eagle Mine. The MCRC has said it wouldn’t be making these improvements if not for the Eagle Mine, making it illegal to use eminent domain for the benefit of this multi-national mining company. Area property owners and residents are speaking out against the highway and the threat of eminent domain.

This is not a plan for road upgrades, this is a plan for a brand new highway — and we must speak out! Check out the proposed route changes to the Triple A and CR 510 and responses to questions raised at the recent public hearing. Area residents deserve a new Public Hearing to weigh in on the new proposed upgrades.

The MCRC modified the proposed realignment based on public outcry. But the process is on an accelerated path; as the MCRC approved its plan modifications at the same meeting the modifications were proposed.

Your voice is important! Write a letter to the editor, or call your local Marquette County Commissioner to discuss the proposal for a new highway.

Meanwhile, the City of Marquette is struggling with Lundin Mining’s plan to run ore trucks through the city and Northern Michigan University’s campus. In July, the City Commission’s request to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) to have transportation be considered part of the Eagle Mine’s permit was denied, which would have forced the mining company to mitigate environmental impacts of truck traffic in Marquette.

Though the Lundin Eagle Mine says they’ll only increase total truck traffic by a small percentage, these trucks will be filled with ore, increasing the weight on the roadways by an estimated 50%. This poses not only a financial burden on taxpayers for years to come, but, more importantly, a huge safety risk for our communities.

** Update** The City of Marquette Public Hearing was cancelled. We are disappointed that the City of Marquette has chosen to postpone tomorrow’s Public Hearing on a truck ordinance en lieu of private meetings with Lundin Mining Company.

Stay up-to-date with these rapidly-evolving issues by checking out our FB page at Facebook.com/SavetheWildUP — together we will keep da U.P. wild!

Uranium found at mine location | Mining Journal

Featured

April 5, 2013

MARQUETTE – Testing by Rio Tinto and the Superior Watershed Partnership has confirmed the presence of uranium in water samples from the bottom of a rock storage area at the Eagle Mine, which exceeds the federal maximum concentration level for safe drinking water.

The finding does not violate any state or federal regulatory permits at the mine, but technicians will continue monitoring and testing to learn more about the uranium.

“The significance largely is that it was unexpected and (yet) there it is, present; and trying to identify the source and is it being contained and removed,” said Jon Becker, a communications and development specialist with the Superior Watershed Partnership in Marquette. “We feel the public is going to be interested in that and we want to make sure that they know that we’re all looking at it and evaluating.”
Article Photos

Superior Watershed Partnership senior planner Geri Grant collects a water quality sample from the Temporary Development Rock Storage Area sumps at Rio Tinto’s Eagle Mine in Michigamme Township during the first quarter of 2013 verification monitoring.

The mine’s Temporary Development Rock Storage Area is designed to be an environmentally secure feature which holds waste rock from mining tunnel excavation until it is later put back underground to fill voids where ore was removed.

The bottom of the storage area has two multi-layered lining systems: a primary contact water sump and a lower secondary lining, called the leak detection sump.

Last month, a laboratory in Indiana determined a water sample taken from the leak sump in February by partnership staff – as part of its ongoing Community Environmental Monitoring of Rio Tinto’s mining activities – was found to contain 72.6 parts per billion of uranium.

Partnership staff was test sampling water quality in the leak sump to compare with previous test results produced by Rio Tinto.
Since December 1993, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has been regulating uranium in community drinking water supplies to reduce the risk of kidney disease and cancer.

A Western Upper Peninsula Health Department advisory on uranium said the EPA standards for safe drinking water are based on assuming a person drinks two liters of water each day for 70 years.

The EPA maximum concentration level for uranium under the Safe Drinking Water Act is 30 parts per billion, with concentrations exceeding that level considered unsafe. Consequently, the laboratory was required by law to report the uranium level from the leak sump water sample.

“It’s a reporting requirement of the act because they don’t necessarily know what the source of that water is,” Becker said. “If it was a drinking well, it’d be an issue of concern. This is not drinking water.”

Rio Tinto’s rock storage area and water treatment plant are not governed by the Safe Drinking Water Act, but by the company’s mining and groundwater discharge permits.

Dan Blondeau, a Rio Tinto spokesman in Humboldt, said the estimated 26,000 gallons of water in the leak sump came primarily from rain that fell when the rock storage area was being built three years ago.

Since September 2011, Rio Tinto has removed 2,864 gallons of that water to contact water basins and then to the mine’s water treatment plant for processing.

Blondeau said that process includes ion exchange and reverse osmosis filtration, which are two methods federal regulators recommend for removing uranium from drinking water.

After being treated, water is either recycled back into the mining process or discharged into the ground through the mine’s treated water infiltration system.

“The mine site is designed to collect and treat water that comes into contact with mining activities,” said Eagle Mine environmental and permitting manager Kristen Mariuzza. “We are confident in the system and the methods being used to ensure that only clean water is released back into the environment.”

Becker said the partnership has tested water going into the treatment plant and coming out of it to see if the uranium is being removed. Results are due back from the lab next week.

Until then, Becker declined to speculate on the possible impact.
“Just the word (uranium) is going to be alarming to some people,” Becker said. “It’s helpful to know that the processes that are in place at the water treatment plant are the processes that EPA recommends as the best treatment. But until we have monitoring results that demonstrate the efficiency of that, we don’t want to speculate.”

Meanwhile, Blondeau said tests on solid wastes from the water treatment plant showed uranium levels consistent with Upper Peninsula geology in one waste test and none in another, indicating the treatment plant is successfully removing the uranium.

However, those results have not been substantiated independently by the partnership, which will make new similar tests next week. The solids removed by the process are disposed of at a municipal landfill.
When the initial leak sump water sample results were received from the lab in mid-March, partnership staff quickly returned to the mine to retest the water.

Expedited results from the partnership’s lab showed uranium levels of 61 and 58 parts per billion and no uranium in the contact water sump.
Rio Tinto’s test results from its samples and lab showed 56 parts per billion of uranium in the leak sump and a low concentration of 0.13 parts per billion in the contact water sump.

To help identify the source of the uranium, the partnership requested core samples from Rio Tinto in addition to samples of the waste rock and the aggregate used in the storage area leak detection liner.

Steve Casey, district supervisor for the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality’s water resources division at K.I. Sawyer, said he thinks the uranium source may be the aggregate. If obtained from a Big Bay area quarry nearby, the material may contain Jacobsville sandstone.
The sandstone is known from several counties in the U.P. and its formation extends along the Lake Superior shoreline, east toward Big Bay.

Casey said the sandstone’s composition is known to include uranium, while the waste rock from the mine portal is not.

One Michigan Technological University study focused on testing bedrock wells in Jacobsville sandstone found 25 percent of 270 wells tested with uranium exceeding the EPA maximum concentration limits.

Casey characterized the uranium detection at the Eagle Mine as “not terribly surprising or uncommon.”

“We’ve seen numbers about three times that high in wells,” Casey said.
Casey said the DEQ tested 419 private wells and 20 percent exceeded the safe drinking water standard for uranium, including one well registering 202 parts per billion.

Western U.P. Health Department materials said uranium occurs naturally in some area bedrock and groundwater, making wells susceptible to contamination. High levels of uranium have been found in Baraga, Houghton, Keweenaw, Gogebic and Ontonagon counties.

The department said “the amount of uranium in bedrock and well water will vary greatly from place to place and without testing, it is not possible to determine if the water is safe for drinking.”

Health department officials said bathing and showering with water containing uranium is not a health concern.

Construction of the Eagle Mine’s rock storage area began in September 2010. By October, the secondary liner was installed and a leak survey performed. The primary liner, risers and the pumping system was completed by November.

In September 2011, the DEQ approved a certificate of quality assurance for construction of the liner systems. That same autumn, Rio Tinto began monitoring the rock storage area as it began digging the mine portal and storing waste rock.

Becker said early last year, Rio Tinto also discovered elevated sulfate levels, which periodically were above the reporting level and have been trending downward since August 2012.

A mining company investigation did not identify a source, but similar to Casey’s uranium source theory, Rio Tinto speculated a small amount of sulfate material was contained in the aggregate used to build the liner.

Monitoring of sulfates and uranium will continue regularly by Rio Tinto and the partnership, with results reported to the public at:www.cempmonitoring.org.

John Pepin can be reached at 906-228-2500, ext. 206.

http://www.miningjournal.net/page/content.detail/id/585930/Uranium-found-at-mine-location.html

Sulfide Mine Permit Denied: “A Win for Wetlands”!

MARQUETTE, MI – Regional environmental groups are celebrating the news that a disputed Wetlands Permit for Aquila Resources’ Back Forty sulfide mine has been denied by a Michigan Administrative Law Judge, concluding a two year review of the contested case. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (now the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy) sparked controversy when it approved Aquila’s Wetlands Permit in 2018, over the objections of regulatory staff who were prepared to deny the permit.

The permit was contested by multiple petitioners, including an adjacent landowner, the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, represented by Earthjustice attorneys, and the grassroots Coalition to SAVE the Menominee River. According to Earthjustice attorney Janette Brimmer, Aquila “refused to provide all of the information the state needed to determine the full environmental impacts the mine will have on the Menominee River and the surrounding area.”

AQUILA BACK FORTY PROJECT OVERVIEW 

The Back Forty project proposes to excavate an enormous 84 acre open-pit mine, 800 foot deep, on the banks of the Menominee River, 150 feet from the water. The mine site would be approximately 1100 acres in size, of which 280-300 acres is public land, part of the Escanaba State Forest. Most of the mine site would be covered by waste rock, ore storage, milling facilities and tailings storage. Nearly all of the Back Forty rock is reactive – capable of producing Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) when exposed to air and water. AMD pollution devastates watersheds and lasts hundreds of years. Tailings and waste rock will be stored on-site during mining; tailings waste will remain on the surface forever. During closure, the open pit mine will be backfilled with waste material. Once this takes place, groundwater contaminated with AMD is predicted to seep into the river. Environmental groups claim that the Back Forty’s environmental impacts could be significantly reduced by using feasible, common-sense alternatives.

Local wetlands data (State of Michigan Wetlands Map Viewer, 2021) combined with Back Forty site diagram (Aquila Resources, 2018). Direct and indirect wetland impacts extend beyond the project boundary to adjacent wetland complexes, and the Menominee River.

BACK FORTY WETLANDS PERMIT DISPUTE

The permit would have allowed Aquila Resources to destroy  wetlands of the Menominee River watershed in order to construct and operate an open-pit sulfide mine, waste storage dam, and mill. Wetland impacts included direct and indirect losses due to excavation, placing of fill, or building parts of the facility on top of wetlands, removing groundwater, permanently changing hydrology, impairing wetland ecosystems, and contaminating the surrounding watershed with toxic dust from mining operations, and acid-mine drainage.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Judge Pulter’s decision makes it clear that Aquila Resources’ application was not simply flawed, but incompetent:

“In many cases addressing feasible and prudent alternatives, the applicant’s initial site plan has the most impact to the resource. During the processing of the application, it is common for the applicant to reduce the amount of wetland impacts sought in its original site plan. (…) In this case, however, the amount of wetland impacts increased with each modification of Aquila’s site plan. Aquila did not proffer evidence of how it had re-designed its site plans with a view toward reducing wetland impacts. (…) Because it considered three site plans, each of which increased in wetland impacts, the record does not contain evidence of feasible and prudent alternative locations and methods. Therefore, I find, as a Matter of Fact, that Aquila failed to demonstrate that there are no feasible and prudent alternative locations or methods.”

Wetlands are strictly protected under state and federal law. Before wetlands can be destroyed, Aquila must demonstrate that the impacts are unavoidable. The applicant failed that test, and so Judge Pulter concluded that Aquila’s Wetland Permit must be denied:

  • “Aquila failed to demonstrate that there are no feasible and prudent alternative locations and methods because it did not proffer evidence of how it had re-designed its site plans with a view toward reducing wetland impacts.” 
  • “The proposed project will have a probable negative effect on historic, cultural, scenic, and ecological values.” 
  • “The proposed project is not in the public interest.”
  • “Aquila failed to demonstrate that the disruption to the aquatic resources caused by proposed activity will be acceptable.” 
  • “The proposed activity is not wetland dependent.” 
  • “Aquila failed to demonstrate that a feasible and prudent alternative does not exist.” 
  • “Therefore, Aquila is not entitled to a permit in this case.”

MEDIA STATEMENTS

Dale Burie, president of the Coalition to SAVE the Menominee River:

According to Davis & Kuelthau attorney Ted A. Warpinski, who represented the Coalition, “Judge Pulter issued a thorough and thoughtful decision recognizing the many flaws with Aquila’s wetlands permit application and rejecting the attempt by EGLE to correct those flaws with improper permit conditions. We are grateful for the cooperative efforts of the Earthjustice attorneys representing the Menominee Tribe as well as the diligent efforts of Mr. Boerner who joined us in challenging this wetland permit.”  We encourage Aquila to accept that this is simply not a suitable location for a mining operation.

Al Gedicks, executive secretary of the Wisconsin Resources Protection Council:

Judge Pulter’s careful consideration of the scientific testimony in the contested wetlands case reveals a consistent pattern of Aquila’s manipulation of scientific research to conceal significant negative impacts to wetlands from the proposed Back Forty mine. Ms. Kristi Wilson, an environmental quality specialist  from EGLE’s Water Resources Division (WRD) testified that Aquila failed to provide information requested by the WRD regarding dewatering of the open pit and its effects on wetlands within the project area. Without this information the WRD could not evaluate the impact to wetlands. Mr. Eric Chatterson, a geology specialist from the WRD, testified that Aquila “predetermined what was going to happen and it just manipulated the mathematics to make that happen.” The end result was a fraudulent application that prevented the public from recognizing the full extent of the harm to wetlands from this project. Aquila’s conduct in this case is ethically reprehensible.

Guy Reiter, executive director of Menikanaehkem:

Menikanaehkem applauds Judge Pulter’s decision, in denying this wetland permit. Menikanaehkem has always been a strong defender of our beautiful Menominee river and our vast Menominee cultural resources located around the river.

Ron Henriksen, spokesperson for the Front 40 Environmental Fight:

We are so appreciative of the hard work by individuals, tribes, and environmental organizations which helped the judge reach this important decision.  Front 40 Environmental Fight was founded in 2003 to help defend the Menominee River and Shakey Lakes from the hazards of sulfide mining; for the past 17 years, we have informed the public about the dangers of sulfide mining through education and outreach — and the community responded overwhelmingly, rejecting Aquila’s dangerous Back Forty mine! We thank everyone who is working to protect our wetlands, and the Menominee River.

Kathleen Heideman, member of the Mining Action Group:

This decision is a thoughtful, clear-eyed rebuke of Aquila Resources. Aquila’s approach to permiting the Back Forty project has been hasty and incompetent, and reveals a disregard for Michigan’s natural resources. The decision demonstrates that the Wetland Permit was subject to denial for dozens of reasons — critical data was never provided to regulators, hydrological modeling was unsupported, and statutory requirements were not met. Most critically, Aquila failed to undertake any meaningful review of the feasible alternatives, in order to minimize the impacts to wetlands, or avoid wetlands altogether.

Horst Schmidt, president of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition:

This is great news for the people of Wisconsin and Michigan. Aquila’s inability to submit a permit without major deficiencies reinforces our concern that this company is unable to meet the minimum standards for developing a safe mining operation. It’s a shame people must waste their time for years fighting to keep the State of Michigan from approving a mine that threatens one of the Great Lake’s best sports fishing habitats, even as Michigan and Wisconsin nonprofits and environmental agencies work jointly to restore sturgeon habitat in the Menominee River. I congratulate the Administrative Law Judge on this wise environmental ruling.

Carl Lindquist, executive director of the Superior Watershed Partnership and Land Conservancy

We applaud the decision to deny this permit. We’ve worked with eight Native American tribes and other stakeholders to list the Menominee among American Rivers’ Top Ten Most Endangered Rivers in the United States. We are convinced that Aquila’s open pit mine is too risky. In addition to exposing sulfide based ore, the mining process would use cyanide and other toxins, a stone’s throw from one of the largest tributaries to Lake Michigan. The risks to wetlands, groundwater, surface water, the Great Lakes and the cultural legacy of the Menominee Indian Tribe are simply too great.

SUPPORT

Independent review of the Aquila Back Forty Wetland permit was made possible by the generous support of groups and individuals concerned about the future health of the Menominee River. Working collaboratively, the Mining Action Group of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition and the Front 40 secured grants and donations from Freshwater Future, Superior Watershed Partnership, the Western Mining Action Network, DuPage Rivers Fly Tyers (DRiFT), Northern Illinois Fly Tyers (NIFT), Badger Fly Fishers, M&M Great Lakes Sport Fisherman, Wisconsin Smallmouth Alliance, Fly Fishers International, Great Lakes Council of Fly Fishers International, the Emerick Family Fund, and from many individual fishing enthusiasts throughout the Great Lakes area.

KEY LINKS

JOIN THE CONVERSATION!

Join UPEC’s upcoming Livestream Event “A WIN FOR WETLANDS” to learn more about this important environmental legal decision. “A WIN FOR WETLANDS” will offer a panel discussion featuring Al Gedicks of the Wisconsin Resources Protection Council, Dale Burie of the Coalition to Save the Menominee, Guy Reiter of Menikanaehkem, and Kathleen Heideman of the Mining Action Group. The event will take place on Thursday, January 14, 2020, at 7 pm EST, livestreamed via Facebook and Zoom. Connect using these links:

Join Facebook Livetream
https://www.facebook.com/Upper-Peninsula-Environmental-Coalition-195291337192049/live_videos

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83113438020?pwd=d3pZcjNyYW9uVmZUTy9vc2ZIN0UwUT09

Meeting ID: 831 1343 8020
Passcode: 2021
One tap mobile
+12532158782,,83113438020#,,,,*2021# US (Tacoma)
+13017158592,,83113438020#,,,,*2021# US (Washington D.C)

# # #

Coalition to SAVE the Menominee
President Dale Burie, (615) 512-3506
The Coalition’s mission is to protect the water quality of the Menominee River for generations to come and ensure clean water for the two municipalities that draw their water supply from the mouth of the Menominee River. jointherivercoalition.org

Front 40 Environmental Group
Spokesperson Ron Henriksen, frontforty2016@aol.com
The Front 40 grassroots organization formed in response to the threat of a metallic mineral mine on the Menominee River. Since 2003, their primary objective has been to ensure that metallic sulfide mining operations are not allowed to adversely impact our rivers, lakes, groundwater and lands. menomineeriver.com

Menīkānaehkem 
Guy Reiter, (715) 853-2776
Menīkānaehkem is a grassroots community organization based on the Menominee Reservation in Northeast Wisconsin working to revitalize our communities.

Mining Action Group 
Kathleen Heideman, info@savethewildup.org
The Mining Action Group, formerly Save the Wild UP, was founded in 2004 to defend the clean water and wild places of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula from the dangers of sulfide mining.

Superior Watershed Partnership
Executive Director Carl Lindquist, (906) 228-6095
The Superior Watershed Partnership is an award winning Great Lakes nonprofit organization that has set records for pollution prevention and implements innovative, science-based programs that achieves documented, measurable results. SWP is a leader in watershed protection for the Lake Superior Basin and the headwaters region of the Great Lakes ecosystem.

Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition
UPEC Coordinator Dave Harmon, upec@upenvironment.org
Founded in 1976, the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition’s purpose remains unchanged: to protect and maintain the unique environmental qualities of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan by educating the public and acting as a watchdog to industry and government. UPEC is a nonprofit, registered 501(c)(3) organization. UPenvironment.org

Wisconsin Resources Protection Council
Executive Secretary Al Gedicks, (608) 784-4399
The Wisconsin Resources Protection Council was founded in 1982 to help counter the lack of information about the effects of large-scale metallic sulfide mining on our state’s precious water supplies, on the tourism and dairy industries, and upon the many Native American communities that are located near potential mine sites.

 

 

 

 

Is “Michigan’s Mining Future” a Shared Vision?

MARQUETTE – Environmental groups working to protect Upper Michigan’s natural resources from the environmental hazards of metallic mining are questioning the intent of the “Michigan’s Mining Future” legislation, introduced by State Rep. Sara Cambensy (D-Marquette).

House Bill 4227 would create a governor-appointed “Committee on Michigan’s Mining Future.”

The purpose of the advisory-only committee would be to develop “legislative and policy recommendations” to “enhance the growth of the mining, minerals and aggregate industry” and “strengthen and develop a sustainable mining industry in Michigan.”

“House Bill 4227, in its focus on economic development, ignores the scope of environmental problems caused by mining. Environmental groups may be invited to the table, but the make-up of this committee suggests the outcome – more mining – is almost inevitable. Meanwhile, we are still spending hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up after historic mining booms: polluted lakes and streams, abandoned mines, mercury in wetlands, tailings that threaten Lake Superior fisheries, and more. We advise U.P. residents to keep all options open, rather than going head-long into more disastrous mining cycles,” said Horst Schmidt, president of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition.

“We applaud Rep. Cambensy’s effort, but raise cautionary questions about the balance of representation on the committee. A larger vision of wise environmental stewardship is required, and the understanding that we must live within ‘sustainable’ limits in order protect our natural resources,” said Jon Magnuson of the Interfaith Northern Great Lakes Water Stewards.

This legislation in its current state does not provide a good framework to protect Michigan’s precious natural resources when considering future mining projects,” said Michigan Environmental Council Deputy Policy Director Sean Hammond. “Although this bill does provide a platform for a needed discussion on the future of mining, especially with continued questions on the implementation of our mining statutes, the way in which it is currently written too heavily favors growing mining, with no mention of natural resource protection. Therefore, we cannot support this bill.”

“I welcome the news that the State may be ready to take a clear-eyed look at mining in the Upper Peninsula. As the district most impacted by metallic mining, we must understand mistakes of the past and address current regulatory challenges, in order to ensure a ‘sustainable’ environment going forward. This bill suggests a foregone conclusion: that mining is central to Michigan’s future. Is that true? I am not convinced that we have a shared vision of Michigan’s future,” said Kathleen Heideman of the Mining Action Group.

“The long-term impacts to the human environment from mining are at least as, if not more important than expanding mining operations in Michigan. But the proposed Committee —  three representatives of the mining industry, a union representative, and two faculty members specializing in geology or mining, versus only two representatives of environmental groups — would relegate those speaking for the environment to token representation, stacking the deck six to two, plus one position for a recognized Native American representative. We suggest that the committee be expanded to include two faculty members with specialties in ecology, water quality, wildlife biology, or a related field, and four, rather than two, representatives of environmental organizations. Only with such a committee makeup will there be a fair balance of interests,” said Jeffrey Towner, board member of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition.

Environmental groups in the U.P. say they were not involved in crafting House Bill 4227.

“In the past 175 years, Michigan’s environment has suffered greatly in the pursuit of mining profits. And in the past ten years, we’ve had enough of the “economy over environment” paradigm, with environmental agencies doing as much to facilitate the exploitation of our public trust resources as they do to protect them,” said Jon Saari, board member of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition. “We look forward to meeting with Representative Cambensy to share our vision of Michigan’s future.”

For more info on House Bill 4227, see http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2019-HB-4227

####

Mission of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition

Founded in 1976, the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition’s purpose remains unchanged: to protect and maintain the unique environmental qualities of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan by educating the public and acting as a watchdog to industry and government. UPEC is a nonprofit, registered 501(c)(3) organization. For more information, call 906-201-1949, see UPenvironment.org, or contact: upec@upenvironment.org.

Mission of the UPEC Mining Action Group
The UPEC Mining Action Group (MAG), formerly known as Save the Wild U.P., is a grassroots effort to defend the clean water and wild places of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula from the dangers of sulfide mining. Contact the Mining Action Group at info@savethewildup.org or call 906-201-1949. Learn more about the Mining Action Group at miningactiongroup.org.

 

Designed to Fail

Back Forty Tailings Facility ‘Not a Pond,’ Aquila Says”?

Response by the Mining Action Group

The Aquila Back Forty’s Mining Permit amendment, under consideration by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, features a tailings dam (aka “tailings management facility”, or TMF) to be built using the extremely risky “upstream” method.  Objections to the Back Forty’s TMF design have been raised by numerous environmental groups, including the Mining Action Group of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition, Menominee River Front 40, the Coalition to Save the Menominee River, the Center for Science in Public Participation, the Wisconsin Resource Protection Council, the Michigan Environmental Council, and others.

The upstream tailings dam method is designed to fail, environmental groups warn.  Industry experts consider the upstream method to be the least desirable type of tailings dam construction, due to its high risk of dam instability.

It is used because it is cheaper to construct, but is not the “Best Available Technology”. TMF dam walls are “raised” and each successive raise is partially supported by tailings, as depicted in the Back Forty TMF diagram above. This design is fundamentally unstable, and part of what makes the “upstream” construction method especially risky. The upstream dam method has been banned in several countries.

A POND IS NOT A POND, SAYS AQUILA?

Aquila’s public relations manager, Dan Blondeau, is trying to assure concerned citizens that the Back Forty’s upstream tailings dam won’t fail. In correspondence with filmmaker Mark Doremus, Blondeau claimed the “Back Forty tailings facility is NOT a pond and will NOT store liquid tailings.”

“I’d say Blondeau should read the permits,” said Kathleen Heideman of the Mining Action Group.

“The Back Forty tailings WILL be pumped as a wet slurry. These WILL be liquid tailings,” said Heideman. “The Back Forty tailings facility WILL contain a pond.”

The permit amendment makes it clear that wet tailings, deposited in the TMF structure, will be topped by a huge pond – water from the tailings:

  • “The decant pond expands from 100,000 cubic meters (m3) capacity to a maximum of 150,000 m3, then diminishes to 50,000 m3 at the end of operations”
  • “The height of the decant pond will rise as the TMF is constructed, with a maximum height of 36 meters at full build-out”

It may be hard to visualize the size of that pond, but “150,000 m3” (cubic meters) means the decant pond will be roughly six times larger than the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in Washington DC[1]

In the Aquila Back Forty Dam Safety Permit, the volume of “supernatant water” (floating on the surface of tailings) is predicted to be even larger – almost 40 million gallons:

  • “The maximum volume of supernatant water allowed in the (tailings) decant area will decrease with time from 0.15 Mm3 (39.6 Mgal) to 0.05 Mm3 (13.2 Mgal)”

40 million gallons of water – how big is that?

  • “A good-sized bath holds 50 gallons, so a million gallons would be 20,000 baths” [2]
    The Back Forty TDF pond will hold enough water to fill 800,000 baths.
  • “An Olympic-sized swimming pool holds 660,000 gallons of water” [3]
    The Back Forty TDF pond will hold enough water to fill 60 Olympic swimming pools.

Blondeau claimed the Back Forty tailings dam has a “maximum projected height of 130 feet” but the permit states a maximum projected height at closure of “42 meters” (138 feet tall). How tall?

  • A mature white pine tree averages 50 to 80 feet tall.
  • At 138 feet, the Back Forty tailings dam will be 55% taller than Marquette’s Landmark Inn (89 feet tall).

WILL ADDITIONAL TAILINGS STORAGE BE NEEDED?

The Back Forty tailings facility will cover 124 acres of the mine site.

“Blondeau fails to acknowledge the monstrous size of the Back Forty tailings dam,” said Heideman. “124 acres of tailings  – that’s like 50 city blocks, or 100 football fields. Tailings will cover an area 25 times larger than the Superior Dome at Northern Michigan University,” said Heideman.

And that may be just the beginning. The Mining Action Group has questioned whether Aquila is being honest in calling the Back Forty project a “7 year open pit mine” operation. Environmentalists believe that Aquila is planning an underground mining phase, although the permit applications deny that any underground mining will take place.

From 2015 until early 2018, Aquila Resources described the Back Forty project as having a “16 year life of mine and mill of 16.1 Mt of ore, including both open pit and underground mining.” This claim was repeated in Aquila’s press releases, investor statements, in presentations to the local community, and in correspondence with the Michigan DNR and the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin. In 2016, Aquila told their investors they would submit an underground permit once the open pit mine and milling facility were operating. Now the applicant is winking, telling investors that underground expansion will require “additional studies…”

Environmental groups claim that Aquila will pursue additional 9 years of underground mining, for a total of 16 years of mining. If true, the TMF will need to “accommodate” additional waste.

That’s the reason why mining companies build “upstream” tailings dams – the structure can “grow higher” if the mine needs to store more waste. TMF impoundments are frequently expanded through additional raises, which greatly increases the height of the dam walls and the total volume of waste rock and water contained within the structure. This habit of incremental raising greatly exacerbates the problem of instability, and has resulted in the catastrophic collapse of several tailings dams.

Strict impoundment loading limits were not defined in the Back Forty mine permit amendment application. It is reasonable and foreseeable to assume that Aquila has selected the controversial “upstream dam” method because it could allow for sequential expansion through raising of the dam wall (as pictured above) What may begin as a TMF with “three raises” can grow exponentially via incremental change, if permitting review is not environmentally protective. The tailings dams at Brumadinho and  Mount Polley were raised higher than originally designed, multiple times.

PERMANENT WASTE STORAGE

“Instead of talking about 100 year rainfall events, we need to be thinking about a 10,000-year lifespan,” said Heideman. “What are the real storm risks, the real seismic risks, the groundwater risks from failure of materials with a limited life, like the plastic liners underneath the TMF?”

When the risks are properly calculated for a 10,000-year lifetime – the figure often used for how long these tailings structures will need to maintain their integrity – experts say there is “a significant and disproportionate chance of failure for a tailings dam.” [4]

“TRIED, TESTED, AND PROVEN”?

Blondeau claims that the design of the Back Forty TMF “uses tried, tested, and proven engineering methods” because “similar facilities are already in operation at the Malartic Mine and the MusselWhite Mine in Canada, and the Neves Corvo Mine in Portugal.”

These mines  – Malartic, Musselwhite, and Neves Corvo – offer proof of nothing. “Thickened tailings” have been used for less than 10 years. The type of ore, tailings, and method of disposal varies widely – and the TMF designs are very different:

Malartic Mine

The Malartic Mine has only been operating since 2011. Malartic’s tailings are non-reactive. The thickened tailings have “solid material concentrations of between 65 and 70%” with “little or no free water. They form cone-shaped cells of various heights. The tailings are used to “cover acid-generating tailings” (to a depth of 3 meters), to remediate a previously abandoned tailings impoundment. To “avoid overflows, a sterile stone wall will be built around the various cells.” This is significantly different from the Back Forty TDF, where tailings will be highly reactive, tailings will decant a large quantity of water, and TMF walls will be built using reactive waste rock, not “sterile stone.” [5]

Musselwhite Mine

The Musselwhite Mine in Northwestern Ontario went into production in 1997 and “began thickened tailings disposal in May 2010.” “The cold climate presents a special challenge to operating the thickened tailings system as there is very little precedent experience.”  To reduce the likelihood of acid generating and metals leaching in the long term, the Musselwhite Mine announced plans “to remove the sulphide minerals from the tailings stream using a flotation plant.” Construction of a tailings thickener began in 2009; this was done to “to allow for an increased life span (capacity) of the current tailings management area. The thickener will reduce the water content in the tailings to approximately 74% solids to allow for stacking/mounding of the dry tailings…” [6] This is significantly different from the Back Forty TDF, where tailings are highly reactive, sulfides are not removed, and tailings are not “dry” or “stacked.” [7]

Neves Corvo Mine in Portugal

Owned by Lundin Mining, the Neves Corvo Mine opened in 1988. “Neves-Corvo has been developed as an underground operation, exploiting a number of polymetallic sulphide orebodies” with“tailings from the mine stored into a 190 hectare tailings management facility (“TMF”) bounded to the north by a rockfill embankment across a natural river valley. The facility was originally developed for subaqueous tailings deposition, but converted to thickened tailings deposition in 2010 “with an accompanying thickened tailings plant to increase the storage capacity.” At Neves Corvo, due to “multiple expansions of underground mining” and “expansion of the zinc processing plant and the volume of tailings produced, there will also be a need to expand the tailings thickening plant.” Additionally, underground “voids are being backfilled using a mixture of development rock, cement, and “paste fill (PF) made from cycloned process tailings.” This is different from the Back Forty TDF:  Neves Corvo uses an upstream tailings dam [8] but the disposal of thickened tailings (begun in 2010) has not solved their tailings storage problems:  new mining and “expansion of the zinc processing plant” resulted in yet more tailings; a new “Feasibility study for expanding the TMF… will provide a comprehensive tailing development scenario.”  

Read that again:  after 30 years of mining, Lundin is still trying to come up with a “comprehensive tailing development scenario” for Neves Corvo Mine? Ever-expanding operations come with demands “for additional tailings and mine waste rock storage at the Neves Corvo tailings storage facility, beyond the 2015 deposition design. Specifically an increase of up to 27 Mt of tailings and as much as 10 Mt of mine waste rock need to be accommodated…” [9]

That’s exactly what must be avoided at the Back Forty.

In all these mines, “thickened” tailings management was used to address “capacity problems” caused by expanding mining operations – suggesting these mines were not carefully planned, or failed to disclose future mining phases, resulting in undersized tailings storage. Mining companies treat TMFs like magic garbage bins, which must expand on demand to “accommodate” whatever amount of tailings and waste is produced.

FILLED WITH REACTIVE WASTE

The Back Forty is a polymetallic orebody. After processing, the finely ground tailings will contain hazardous metals cable of producing acid mine drainage and mobilizing metals through leaching. Geochemical modeling provided in Aquila’s 2015 application demonstrated that 77% of the waste rock and nearly all ore is reactive. The leachate produced by geochemical analysis of Back Forty tailing samples had an average pH of 2.5, very acidic.

All tailings held inside the TMF will be reactive, at risk of acid mine drainage. Recent tailings dam collapses, like the Brumadinho tailings dam in Brazil and the Mount Polley tailings dam in Canada, resulted in catastrophic environmental damages but their tailings were either inert or less reactive.

Blondeau downplayed the hazardous nature of the Back Forty tailings, comparing them to “toothpaste” and “drywall mud.”

In fact, the Back Forty’s tailings will be more toxic than either Brumadinho or Mount Polley.

“Mr. Blondeau’s comparison of the consistency of the dewatered tailings to ‘drywall mud’ or ‘toothpaste’ is not reassuring when you consider that with the ‘upstream’ design these mudlike materials end up being a structural part of the dam!” said Steve Garske of the Mining Action Group. “The remaining water in the tailings is what causes these dams to fail.”

Heideman calls the comparison with drywall mud and toothpaste “insulting.”

“There is no beneficial reuse. There is nothing domestic or healthy about it. These are toxic industrial tailings, full of mercury, lead, cancer-causing metals, acid-generating sulfides, residual sodium cyanide, chemical frothing reagents used in the milling process, and more. Failure of the Back Forty’s upstream tailings dam, whether it happens in five years or five hundred, would be an unspeakable environmental catastrophe.”

DESIGNED TO FAIL

Upstream mine tailings dams have been called “bombs waiting to explode” – and they are collapsing. The “failure rate of tailings dams has remained at roughly one failure every eight months… Over a 10,000-year lifespan (a figure often used for how long these structures will need to maintain their integrity) this implies a significant and disproportionate chance of failure for a tailings dam.” [10]

“This is really the mining industry’s dirty secret: upstream tailings dams are cheap, risky, and unstable,” said Heideman. “The State of Michigan cannot allow the Back Forty project to proceed as designed.”

 


NOTES

  1. https://www.bluebulbprojects.com/MeasureOfThings/results.php?comp=volume&unit=cm&amt=100000
  2. https://water.usgs.gov/edu/mgd.html
  3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic-size_swimming_pool
  4. https://ofmpub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=513583
  5. http://www.mining.com/malartic-gold-mine-class-action-lawsuit-trial-begins/
  6. http://csr.goldcorp.com/2010/docs/2009_musselwhite.pdf
  7. https://papers.acg.uwa.edu.au/p/1104_21_Kam/
  8. https://www.lundinmining.com/site/assets/files/3643/neves-corvo-technical-report.pdf
  9. https://papers.acg.uwa.edu.au/p/1504_40_Lopes/
  10. https://ofmpub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=513583

 

 

New ​Report Finds Fault with Sulfide Mine’s Plans

MARQUETTE, MI — A new technical report from the Center for Science in Public Participation (CSP2) identifies serious faults with Aquila Resources’ Back Forty Mine Permit Amendment application, now under review by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality.

The technical review of the Back Forty permit was conducted by Dr. Kendra Zamzow, an environmental geochemist, and Dr. David Chambers, an internationally-known expert on tailings dam safety. CSP2 analyzes mining applications in order to “provide objective research and technical advice to people impacted by mining.”

The Back Forty project proposes to excavate an 800 foot deep open-pit sulfide mine on the banks of the Menominee River, 100 feet from the water. Milling will also take place on-site, using cyanide leaching, mercury recovery, and flotation. Aquila claims to be “minimizing impacts” but the footprint of the facility has ballooned to 440 hectares (1087 acres), largely due to a larger tailings management facility. Most of the mine site would be covered by waste rock, ore storage, milling facilities and tailings storage. Environmental groups claim that the Back Forty’s environmental impacts could be significantly reduced by using feasible, common-sense alternatives — but Aquila has rejected these options.

Nearly all of the Back Forty rock is reactive – capable of producing Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) when exposed to air and water. AMD pollution devastates watersheds and lasts hundreds of years. Tailings and waste rock will be stored on-site during mining, and the tailings will remain on the surface forever. Aquila has told their investors they will pursue underground mining as a “second phase” of operations, but this is not acknowledged in any permit. Underground mining could extend the mine’s life from 7 years to 16 years, greatly magnifying the risks. During closure, the open pit will be backfilled with waste and tailings. Once this takes place, groundwater contaminated with AMD is predicted to seep into the river.

CSP2’s technical report evaluated the Back Forty mining permit, including updated environmental impacts, feasible alternative designs, financial assurances, and Aquila’s proposed use of an “upstream” tailings design, the same risky construction method that has resulted in catastrophic tailings dam failures around the world.

Key Findings of CSP2’s Technical Report

  • The Tailings Management Facility (TMF) is to be constructed using the upstream dam construction method, which is the least safe design. It also applies an underestimated seismic event to the construction design.
  • There are no details for the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP).
  • There is no information on how mercury from the retort will be stored or transported, or whether there is a facility to receive it.
  • Mercury emissions from the retort did not go into air deposition modeling.
  • Air deposition modeling suggests that Spring Lake currently meets mercury water quality standards, but will exceed (violate) them after mining begins. By using old data, Aquila Resources may be biasing the baseline high, underestimating the impact of emissions.
  • There are significant unexplained inconsistencies with the volume of chemical reagents, and the storage capacity for lime.
  • Recent data suggests upper groundwater layers flow faster than the data used in the groundwater model. The groundwater model was not updated, and may underestimate the volume of dewatering and impacts to wetlands.
  • Biological monitoring should include mussels, but currently that is not scheduled.
  • There are no plans to monitor surface water for metal concentrations, although sediment and mine discharge will be monitored for metals. Surface water metal analysis should be added.
  • Financial assurance is underestimated.

“This report only underscores the fact that the original Mining Permit should not have been granted,” said Ron Henriksen, spokesperson for the Front 40, which helped secure the review. “Aquila continues to provide inadequate applications with missing information. The DEQ should rescind this entire permit, have the applicant revise their mistakes, and refile it, properly formatted, with all material in one complete, organized application package.”

“These flawed permits and their environmental impacts are deeply interconnected. We urge the State of Michigan to hold a consolidated hearing on the Mine Permit Amendment, the Air Permit application, and the Dam Safety Permit application – an option allowed under Part 632 in cases where an applicant applies for multiple permits,” said Kathleen Heideman, a member of the Mining Action Group of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Group (UPEC).

“We need a thoughtful, consolidated hearing to discuss these permits,” said Heideman. “Nothing less than the future of the Menominee River is at stake.”

“The mine permitting process generates thousands of pages of data and arguments and choices. What is a grassroots environmental organization to make of it? Our logical minds can see where the loose ends are dangling. By hiring mining experts ourselves, we can identify those loose ends as areas of serious concern about this mining permit.  We can enter the discussion that would otherwise be dominated by agency staff, lawyers, and mining company engineers. Expert commentary gives us a louder and more credible voice,” said Jon Saari, a board member of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition.

“CSP2’s expert review of Aquila Resources’ latest Back Forty mining permit application has exposed serious flaws in their mining layout and operational design. This includes their insistence on using the risky upstream dam construction for their tailings facility,” said Steve Garske, a member of the Mining Action Group of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition. “If constructed as planned, this mine will literally be an accident waiting to happen.”

Technical review of the Back Forty Mine Permit Amendment was made possible by a collaborative effort of the Mining Action Group, the Front 40 Environmental Fight, the Coalition to Save the Menominee River, a 2019 grant from Freshwater Future’s Great Lakes Network, and a 2019 emergency mini-grant from the Western Mining Action Network.

Public Participation

The deadline for submitting written comments on the Aquila Back Forty Mine Permit Amendment permit has been extended until February 15, 2019 at 5pm (EST). Mail comments to Back Forty Mining Permit Amendment, MDEQ-OGMD, 1504 West Washington Street, Marquette, MI 49855, or email comments to DEQ-Mining-Comments@michigan.gov with “Back Forty Mining Permit Amendment” as the subject.

Learn More

 

CSP2 disputes claims in letter about Back Forty mine

Wednesday, January 30, 2019  – Eagle Herald

Dear Editor,

I recently received a copy of an editorial published in the EagleHerald, “Communications director says release was ‘misleading’,” by Nathan Conrad, communications director for the Natural Resource Development Association.

I am the president of the Center for Science in Public Participation (CSP2). I have agreed to review the application to construct a tailings dam at the proposed Back Forty mine, but as yet have not received the technical documents I need to perform this review. Nonetheless, Mr. Conrad decided to criticize CSP2 before I have done my analysis.

He said in the letter to the editor: “CSP2 is the same anti-mining group that reviewed a wetland permit last year for opponents of the Back Forty mine. Furthermore, the same local environmental groups opposed to mining previously hired CSP2 to review Eagle Mine’s permits.”

This is attacking the messenger, not the message. It is a logic of innuendo, and a smear tactic. The only factual information in this statement is that a report was done — not that the report was either objective or biased, or right or wrong, and why.

Mr. Conrad goes on to assert: “In 2015, it was made known CSP2 colluded with an “anti-mine coalition” and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in an attempt to derail the Pebble Mine project in Alaska.”

This is not only false, but unless Mr. Conrad has factual evidence to substantiate this claim, which he doesn’t, it is a libelous statement.

CSP2 provides an objective analysis of the data — data that is typically paid for by, and collected by the mining industry. CSP2’s analysis and critiques are not based on who collected or paid for the data, it is an analysis of the data itself. If there is to be a criticism of our reports, then critique the report, not the reporter.

If, however, Conrad wants to insist that it is political agenda, or who one works for that counts, then who should be trusted, a scientist working for a nonprofit helping citizen groups, or a scientist employed with a for-profit company, paid by the mining industry?

David M. Chambers
Center for Science in Public Participation, Bozeman, Mont.

Writer disputes points, talks about permits

Tuesday, January 29, 2019 – Eagle Herald

Dear Editor,

In his recent letter to the EagleHerald (posted below), Nathan Conrad paints concerned citizens as “known anti-mining” “opponents” who are trying to “obstruct and mislead.” In fact, we’re local residents concerned about the Back Forty sulfide mine, which will destroy clean water and other natural resources. Unlike Conrad’s Natural Resource Development Association, we’re 100 percent volunteer — no paid staff, no lobbyists. We hired well-respected experts at The Center for Science in Public Participation (CSP2) to assist with the complex technical review of the proposed Back Forty mine permit.

Conrad’s letter made false statements, including:

  • “According to The Center for Science in Public Participation own website, since 2007, the organization has been providing technical support to a loose coalition of groups opposed to the proposed mine.” False. This refers to the Pebble Mine, not the Back Forty.
  •  “Furthermore, the same local environmental groups opposed to mining previously hired CSP2 to review Eagle Mine’s permits.” False.
  •  (Aquila) “received all state and federal permissions required for the construction and commencement of operations at the Back Forty Project.” False. Aquila’s permits are replete with unmet special conditions — incomplete or missing environmental studies, infrastructure designs, financial assurances, etc. No construction or operations can take place until all conditions are satisfied.

When Conrad said the mine received “four final permits” he meant:

  • Mining permit — defunct, in litigation
  • Air pollution permit — defunct, being modified
  • Wetland permit — wetland destruction, in litigation
  • NPDES permit — pollutant discharge to the Menominee River

Aquila rushed headlong in pursuit of these permits, desperate to meet investor deadlines to get more funding. But haste makes waste, as the saying goes. Aquila’s permits were shoddy and must be amended. A fifth permit is under review for the tailings dam, one of the mine’s riskiest features.

Mining and milling will obliterate this scenic area. The true riches of the place aren’t found underground, but in the flowing river, sturgeon, mussels, native plants, ancient garden beds, and the burial mounds belonging to ancestors of the Menominee people.

Lowered water quality. Lost wetlands. The industrialization of yet another wild place. These are the Back Forty’s permitted environmental impacts.

Aquila’s “commitment to clean mining” is totally meaningless. Millions of tons of reactive waste tailings raise the permanent threat of groundwater contamination or catastrophic dam failure. Contaminated waters from the pit will seep into the river. Air pollution — mercury, lead and other metals — will settle nearby and accumulate in lakes. This is how clean water is lost: Permit by permit, to a thousand cuts.

Did Conrad read the permits? “Clean mining” claims do not change the devastating facts of the Back Forty project. We look forward to CSP2’s technical review.

Kathleen Heideman
Mining Action Group of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition, Houghton, Mich.

Responding to:

Communications director (**) says release was ‘misleading’

Tuesday, January 22, 2019 12:00 AM  Eagle Herald

Dear Editor,

A press release distributed by a known anti-mining group published in the EagleHerald Extra (“Environmental groups to fund technical review of permit amendments for Back Forty Mine,” Jan. 17, 2019) was grossly misleading and provides a disservice to your readers.

According to The Center for Science in Public Participation (CSP2)’s own website, since 2007, the organization has been “providing technical support to a loose coalition of groups opposed to the proposed mine.”

CSP2 is the same anti-mining group that reviewed a wetland permit last year for opponents of the Back Forty mine. Furthermore, the same local environmental groups opposed to mining previously hired CSP2 to review Eagle Mine’s permits.

In 2015, it was made known CSP2 colluded with an “anti-mine coalition” and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in an attempt to derail the Pebble Mine project in Alaska.

CSP2 may claim it is independent from Mining Action Group, Front 40, and UPEC but the group is far from impartial. For the press release to suggest its “independent” is dubious at best. In fact, the press release clearly shows it has reached its conclusion before the “independent” review is conducted.

The fact of the matter is — despite anti-mining groups’ attempts to obstruct and mislead — Aquila Resources has been granted four of four final permits by Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality. Because of Aquila’s commitment to clean mining, it has received all state and federal permissions required for the construction and commencement of operations at the Back Forty Project.

Nathan Conrad

Communications Director for the Natural Resource Development Association

**  In his letter to the editor of the Eagle Herald, Mr. Conrad identified himself as the “Communication Director for the Natural Resource Development Association” but failed to disclose that he is a registered lobbyist for AQUILLA RESOURCES, one of the “leading members” of the Natural Resource Development Association. Talk about misleading!

U.P. Environmentalists Receive ‘White Pine Award’ from Michigan Sierra Club

Marquette, MI – The Sierra Club Michigan Chapter presented the White Pine Award to the Mining Action Group of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition during a reception held at the Neighborhood Empowerment Center in Lansing on January 26.

The Mining Action Group received the White Pine Award for their “extraordinary dedication to environmental protection,” according to the Sierra Club. “This Upper Peninsula-based volunteer group plays the leading role in reviewing and challenging mine expansions and new proposals such as the expansion of the Eagle Mine near Marquette and the final permitting of the Back Forty mine in Menominee County.”

Formerly known as Save the Wild U.P., the Mining Action Group is a 100% volunteer, grassroots effort to defend the clean water and wild places of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula from the dangers of sulfide mining. The group was formed in 2016 when Save the Wild U.P. merged with the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition. MAG’s leadership team includes Jeffrey Towner, Jon Saari, Steve Garske, Horst Schmidt, and Kathleen Heideman, who serve as board members of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition.

“Pictured left to right, Anne Woiwode, Chair of the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter, presents the 2019 White Pine Award to Kathleen Heideman of the Mining Action Group. Photograph provided by the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter.” Download this photo.

“Pictured left to right, Anne Woiwode, Chair of the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter, presents the 2019 White Pine Award to Kathleen Heideman of the Mining Action Group. Photograph provided by the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter.”  Download this photo.

 

“Pictured left to right, Gail Philben, Director of the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter, talks with Kathleen Heideman of the Mining Action Group. Photograph provided by the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter.” Download this photo.

“Pictured left to right, Gail Philben, Director of the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter, talks with Kathleen Heideman of the Mining Action Group. Photograph provided by the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter.” Download this photo.

 

David Aho of Rudyard and Kathleen Heideman of Marquette attended the event as representatives of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition. Among those honored by the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter were State Senator Stephanie Chang of Detroit, named Environmentalist of the Year, Mona Munroe-Younis of Flint, who received the Bunyan Bryant Award for environmental justice, and the Bridge Magazine, recipient of the Environmental Journalism Award.

 


SIERRA CLUB MICHIGAN CHAPTER PRESS RELEASE 

For Immediate Release January 28, 2019
Contact: Gail Philbin, Director at 312-493-2384
Anne Woiwode, Chair at 517-974-2112

Sierra Club Michigan Chapter Awards Honor Those Who Make a Difference Every Day

Sierra Club Michigan Chapter Awards presented January 26 in Lansing recognize the extraordinary contributions of Michiganders and Michigan organizations who are making valuable contributions to protection of public health, natural resources and democracy. The Chapter is honored to acknowledge the following awardees (photos available upon request):

State Senator Stephanie Chang of Detroit received the highest honor the Michigan Chapter bestows, the Environmentalist of the Year Award. The award honors exceptional leadership in environmental protection in Michigan. Sen. Chang maintained a perfect rating on the Chapter’s environmental voting scorecard during her tenure as a State Representative. She has worked with Sierra Club to introduce legislation to protect against toxic air pollution, make water a human right, expand clean energy, and restore citizen oversight to the Department of Environmental Quality.

Bridge Magazine was awarded the Environmental Journalism Award. The mission of the online Bridge Magazine is “to inform Michigan citizens through fact-based, nonpartisan journalism that identifies critical issues.” Bridge CEO John Bebow led the effort by his publication to elevate the role of reporting on environmental issues in Michigan by hiring Jim Malewitz as their full time environmental reporter in 2017. Jim’s reporting has catalyzed a growing interest in other media outlets to increase environmental reporting. Bridge has also become a critical, “go to” investigative journalism forum, helping to promote transparency in government through its “Truth Squad” reporting on candidates and in-depth articles on Michigan democracy issues. Learn more at bridgemi.com

Mona Munroe-Younis of Flint was awarded the Bunyan Bryant Award for environmental justice work. Mona helped establish the Michigan Chapter’s Environmental Justice Action Group in 2017, which quickly developed into a cohesive, democratically organized alliance of residents on the frontlines fighting environmental injustice in the Flint/Detroit region. Learn more at sierraclub.org/michigan/environmental-justice-action-group

Change Media was recognized with the Michigan Chapter’s Digital Excellence Award. Change Media is a Michigan firm that has created sophisticated social media campaigns that help the Chapter target supporters and environmentalists on Facebook in past elections and built our social media presence. Their efforts include the Chapter’s groundbreaking political ad and video program in 2016 and our work to support Gretchen Whitmer’s campaign and other endorsed candidates in 2018. Learn more at changemediagroup.com

Mining Action Group received the White Pine Award for extraordinary dedication to environmental protection. This Upper Peninsula-based volunteer group plays the leading role in reviewing and challenging mine expansions and new proposals such as the expansion of the Eagle Mine near Marquette and the final permitting of the Back Forty mine in Menominee County. Learn more at savethewildup.org

Pegg Clevenger of Jackson was honored with the Sylvania Award for her exceptional leadership as a new Michigan Chapter volunteer. Pegg quickly emerged as a leader and budding expert on factory farms when she and others in Jackson learned about a proposal for a massive hog factory in their area in 2017. Pegg led the effort to mobilize the community and get the facility’s state permit modified to lessen the impact on a nearby wetland.

As the new chair of the Southwest Michigan Group, Roz Linsea, was recognized with a Michigan Chapter Service Award. Roz has built a strong regional Sierra Club group that educates and engages local residents about important environmental issues. She is a big solar energy booster in West Michigan as a partner in Solar Winds Power Systems, LLC., the business she runs with her husband Mike, that participates in the Sierra Club Solar Partnership. Learn more at sierraclub.org/michigan/sierra-club-solar-partnership

Mary Andersson was recognized with the Marlene Fluharty Award for her volunteer leadership at multiple levels of the Sierra Club. She’s a longtime member and volunteer who has held numerous positions including Outings Chair, Political Chair and Executive Committee representative for the Crossroads Group. She has served as a Chapter Political Committee member and has attended service outings at the group and national level.

Chris Back has been awarded the Trillium Award for outstanding student contributions. Chris began as a Sierra Club political intern on Gretchen Driskell’s campaign in 2016 and has served as the Chapter’s communications intern since January 2017. He has been an active Spartan Sierra Club member since 2016 and was just elected to the Michigan Chapter Executive Committee.

David Holtz was honored with the Theodore Roosevelt Political Leadership award. For more than five years David has served on the Chapter’s Political Committee, which has benefited from his decades of experience in the political and communications arenas. He has elevated democracy-related issues within the Chapter’s strategic priorities and in 2018 coordinated the Sierra Club’s work with the Gretchen Whitmer gubernatorial campaign.

Richard Morley Barron received the Chair’s Award for his exceptional leadership of the Michigan Chapter Political Committee for eight years. During his tenure as PolCom chair, Richard, in collaboration with Political Director Mike Berkowitz, led the dramatic expansion of Sierra Club’s political engagement in Michigan. Richard continues to serve on the Michigan Chapter Executive Committee, and has served as the Michigan Chapter Legal Committee Chair.

 

                                                                    ######

 

The Sierra Club is America’s largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization, with more than 3.4 million members and supporters nationwide, and over 120,000 in Michigan. In addition to creating opportunities for people of all ages, levels and locations to have meaningful outdoor experiences, the Sierra Club works to safeguard the health of our communities, protect wildlife, and preserve our remaining wild places through grassroots activism, public education, lobbying, and litigation. For more information, visit http://www.sierraclub.org/michigan

 

Aquila Back Forty Mine Permit Amendment – Public Comments of Al Gedicks

Public Comments of Al Gedicks, executive director, Wisconsin Resource Protection Council
DEQ Public Meeting in Stephenson, MI – January 9, 2019

TAILINGS DAM FAILURES

The proposed Back Forty tailings waste storage uses the “upstream” dam construction method. According to the 4 th World Landslide Forum in Slovenia in 2017, “Several examples of recent tailings dam failures involved dams constructed by the upstream method, where
the new embankments are founded on tailings, causing the dam to become progressively more dangerous as its height increases.” According to Aquila’s mine plan, waste rock will be used to build the embankment around the tailings dam.

Based upon the record of historical failures, two distinct failure mechanisms seem to be dominant. The first mechanism is related to the development of progressive failure in a weak soil layer in the dam foundation. Appendix A of the Golder Report states that the project site is typically covered with topsoil underlain by a variable thickness of silty sand overburden soil of very loose to loose relative density.

The second dominant failure mechanism is related to static or dynamic liquefaction of loose tailings material at a critical state. Static liquefaction is the sudden loss of strength when loose soil, typically granular material such as tailings sands, are loaded and cannot drain. Loading and deformation produce a tendency for the materials to contract and develop excessive pore pressure faster than drainage systems can relieve the pressure. Static or dynamic liquefaction of loose tailings may occur at a critical condition, where a rapid (undrained) small increase in the shear strain results in a large increase in pore pressure, reduced effective stresses and a dramatic reduction of shear strength. Typical for these types of failures is that they occur rapidly with no warning, so it is an extremely dangerous phenomenon. Although it is called static liquefaction, a triggering event usually causes the rapid strength loss.

There are many potential triggers, including:

  • vibrations from construction equipment
  • rise in water pressure in a slope
  • stress increase due to a dam raise
  • stress concentrations due to a higher dam
  • loss of horizontal confining stress due to lateral strains in
    the foundation or dam

Source: Klohn Crippen Berger, “Static Liquefaction and Strength Loss in Tailings Dams,” posted on April 11, 2018. Available at https://www.klohn.com/blog/static-liquefaction-strength-loss-tailings-dams/

Static liquefaction and strength loss of tailings dams due to undrained failure has become a major concern in tailings management following the Mariana, Brazil and Mount Polley
tailings dam failures. At both Mount Polley, British Columbia and the Samarco mine in Brazil, the companies’ failure to act on warnings and prepare for possible disasters points to an alarming corporate practice of putting production and profit ahead of safety concerns.

Source: Judith Marshall, “Tailings dam spills at Mount Polley and Mariana: Chronicles of Disasters Foretold,” Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, August 2018. Available at https://www.policyalternatives.ca/tailings-disasters

CAUSES OF TAILINGS DAM BREAKAGE

The causes of tailings dam breakage are numerous. Apart from construction problems, poor maintenance or unusual weather are cited in a review of tailings dam failures in Geotechnical News Magazine in December 2010.

Aquila’s amended permit application minimizes the potential for external erosion of the tailings dam from the runoff of rainwater by using 18-year-old data on the severity of storms. It is not sound science to predict the safety of tailings dam storage on such old data.

According to the chief scientist at Climate Central, “Across the board, the United States has seen an increase in the heaviest rainfall event, and the Midwest specifically has seen an increase of almost 40 percent.” In August 2018, in Wisconsin’s Coulee Region–and Vernon County in particular–was hammered by heavy rains that cause two dam failures and damaged at least five more dams.

The public needs information on the potential volume of tailings release, the chemical composition of the tailings release, and the flow of tailings release to the Menominee River and wetlands under both dam-break and dam-failure scenarios.

AQUILA’S FINANCIAL ASSURANCE PLAN

Aquila has proposed a financial assurance plan for the Back Forty Project that is clearly inadequate to administer reclamation, remediation, and post-closure monitoring. The indirect cost estimates for the Back Forty financial assurance are less than that recommended by most sources.

One of the often-quoted public sources of guidance is the U.S. Forest Service’s “Training Guide for Reclamation Board Estimation and Administration.” The Forest Service recommends indirect costs at a minimum of 39%, ranging up to 128% of the direct cost of reclamation and closure. The amount of indirect cost proposed for the Back Forty financial assurance is 10%. This amount is clearly inadequate.

Source: Dave Chambers, “Review of Aquila’s Back Forty mine proposal,” Center for Science in Public Participation, February 24, 2016.

Aquila’s total financial assurance cost estimate for the end of construction operating period and the Life of Mine (LOM) operating period is $130.5 million. Compare this with the $544 million financial assurance to protect taxpayers from future cleanup costs at Polymet’s proposed mine and processing site near Babbitt and Hoyt Lakes, Minnesota–if the company went bankrupt or couldn’t do the work itself.

The amount of financial assurance is calculated to cover the cost of closing and reclaiming the mine, in addition to long-term water treatment needed to meet state and federal pollution standards.

Source: Dan Kraker, Minnesota Public Radio, “Polymet offers state $544M if it couldn’t pay for mine cleanup,” December 15, 2017.

The calculation of direct cost for reclamation involves a significant amount of detailed analysis. Aquila can offer its estimate of the financial assurance, but it is the responsibility of the DEQ to carefully check these calculations for their accuracy. There is significant financial incentive for Aquila to make optimistic assumptions about the cost of individual items of the financial assurance, in order to keep these costs to a minimum. However, it is always less expensive for the mine proponent to conduct reclamation activities than it is for the DEQ to contract and oversee these same activities.

If the DEQ does not have the expertise internally to check the assumptions and calculations made by Aquila in its financial assurance calculations, then it should retain the services of a qualified contractor to review Aquila’s financial surety bond.

Such reviews can and often do result in millions of dollars in increases in the financial assurance, which is of major significance to the public, since this is a potential financial liability. After Minnesota’s review, Polymet’s new financial assurance plan provides about $200 million more than the initial estimate included in its first mine permit application.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

In the 900 pages of Aquila’s Mining Permit Amendment Application, there is a systematic dismissal of the potential for pipeline spills, tailings spills, tailings impoundment failures, and other releases of hazardous materials. The economic and environmental costs of these releases are not covered in either state or federal financial assurance programs—even though they commonly occur at metallic sulfide mines.

In a recent report,* Earthworks reviewed state and federal documents and a federal database for fourteen copper-sulfide mines, representing 89% of copper production in 2010—the most recent data available from the U.S. Geological Survey. These mines provided a representative view of the types of environmental impacts resulting from the development of copper-sulfide deposits, focusing on pipeline spills, tailings failures and water collection and treatment failures.

The report found that:

  • ALL OF THE MINES (100%) experienced pipeline spills or other accidental releases.
  • At 13 of the 14 mines (92%), water collection and treatment systems failed to control contaminated mine seepage, resulting in significant water quality impacts.
  • Tailings spills have occurred at nine operations, and a partial failure of the tailings impoundment occurred at four out of fourteen mines (28%). The total costs for just 7 of these large failures was $3.8 BILLION DOLLARS, at an average cost of $543 million per failure.
  • These losses, according to dam committee reports and government accounts, are almost ALL the result of failure to follow accepted practice.

According to the report, these failures are a direct result of the increasing prevalence of tailings storage facilities with greater than a 5-million cubic meter total capacity—necessitated by lower grades of ore and the higher volumes of ore production required to attain or expand a given tonnage of finished product.

In Aquila’s mine permit application, they proposed to store 5.1 million cubic meters of tailings, thereby increasing the risk of a tailings spill, according to the scientific literature.

In Aquila’s amended application, they propose to store 4.9 million cubic meters of tailings, despite the increased size of the tailings dam. How is it physically possible to have a larger tailings dam with a smaller volume of tailings?

Regardless, whether it is 5.1 million cubic meters or 4.9 million cubic meters, the large volume of tailings poses a serious risk for a tailings dam failure—which is ENTIRELY OMITTED in Aquila’s amended permit application.

* Source: Earthworks, “U.S. Copper Porphry Mines: The Track Record of Water Quality Impacts Resulting from Pipeline Spills, Tailings Failures and Water Collection and Treatment Failures,” July 2012. Available at: https://www.earthworksaction.org/files/publications/Porphry_Copper_Mines_Track_Record __8-2012.pdf

Aquila’s amended application states that the project will generate a total of 61.56 million tons of waste, including 48.81 million tons of waste rock, 8.95 million tons of tailings, and 3.80 million tons of overburden. All of this waste must be safely stored and contained in the tailings storage facility in perpetuity. According to the International Commission on Large Dams: “Tailings facilities are probably the largest man-made structures on earth.” They also contain some of the most toxic metals that threaten human health–such as arsenic, lead, and mercury.

Aquila’s public statements about the Back Forty Project have admitted that “Mining worldwide hasn’t always effectively managed environmental impacts” and this has been unfortunate. However, according to Aquila, “Today’s practices and regulations are meant to address these issues.”

However, if we look at the evidence on catastrophic mine waste, a new study reveals that catastrophic mine waste failures are increasing in frequency, severity, and costs—all around the world. The study by Bowker and Chambers* found that nearly half of all recorded “serious failures” happened in modern times, between 1990 and 2010. It calculated an average cost of $543 million for the most serious spills, with some climbing well above $1.3 billion. Since 1990 a dozen spills even resulted in the loss of lives–over 380.

These losses, according to dam committee reports and government accounts, are almost all the result of failure to follow accepted practice. These failures are a direct result of the increasing prevalence of tailings storage facilities with greater than a 5-million cubic meter total capacity, necessitated by lower grades of ore and the higher volumes of ore production required to attain a given tonnage of finished product.

Aquila’s original plan was to store 5.1 million cubic meters of tailings. The amended application proposes to store 4.9 million cubic meters of tailings.

The study projects 11 very serious failures between 2010-2020, at a total unfundable public cost of $6 billion. “There is no organized industry attempt to cover these losses in a risk-management loss-prevention program, and no political jurisdiction issuing permits is large enough to prefund a low-frequency, high-consequence loss of this scale. The inevitable result is either ‘government pays,’ or the damages go uncompensated.”

Aquila’s tailings storage facility is a disaster waiting to happen.

Source: Risk, Public Liability & Economics of Tailings Storage Facility Failures by Lindsay Newland Bowker & David M. Chambers, Washington, D.C., Earthworks, 2015.

Aquila Back Forty Mine Permit Amendment – Public Comments by Andi Rich

Public Comments of Andi Rich, supporter of the Coalition to Save the Menominee River
DEQ Public Meeting in Stephenson, MI – January 9, 2019

Why are we being required to review amendments of such a large project with changes so extensive that they can only be described as a full rewrite?

It is not reasonable to expect the public to filter the already-complex documentation initially submitted, in addition to the exorbitant amount of changes, and I would like to make the common sense request that as this project no longer resembles the initially approved permitted project, that Aquila should be allowed to walk away from the initial permit; but, in order to obtain a valid permit for this entirely new project, they should re-submit their request as a new permit application. This is the only way to allow an organized, fair, and thorough review, unobscured by the tremendous new amount of documents to review.

Citing the 2012 Earthworks report: 100% of the fourteen mines studied experienced pipeline spills or other accidental releases, 92% had water collection and treatment systems that failed to control contaminated mine seepage, tailing spills occurred at nine of the operations, and a partial failure of the tailings impoundment occurred at four out of fourteen mines (over 25%). Total costs for just seven of these 16 large failures was $3.8 billion, at an average cost of $543 million per failure.

With an average $543 million price tag for errors, the EXPECTATION BY AQUILA that the DEQ review what basically amounts to a completely new permit request (but harder to follow), with innumerable chain reactions from each change, IS UNREALISTIC, since the likelihood of our community members and even trained professionals, such as yourselves, to complete this exorbitant task with any type of accuracy is not only unlikely, it is also unrealistic.

When small, fairly common errors that occurred in 100% of the sulfide mines reviewed by Earthworks come with an average price tag of millions of dollars, I submit that our community deserves a permit application that is far more comprehensive than this jumbled mess of changes. Our safety depends on it.

More Red Flags for Aquila: Enviro Groups Fund NEW Technical Review of Back Forty Sulfide Mine

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — JOINT PRESS STATEMENT

 

STEPHENSON, MI — The Front 40 Environmental Group and the Mining Action Group (MAG) of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition (UPEC) have secured a new independent technical review of the Aquila Back Forty Mine Permit Amendment application, to be completed by the Center for Science in Public Participation (CSP2). CSP2 analyzes mining applications in order to provide objective research and technical advice to people impacted by mining. Dr. Kendra Zamzow and Dr. David Chambers are conducting the review.

The Back Forty project proposes to excavate an 800’ deep open-pit sulfide mine on the banks of the Menominee River, 100’ from the water. Milling will take place on-site, using cyanide leaching and flotation. Most of the mine site will be covered by waste rock, ore storage areas, milling facilities and tailings storage. Aquila claims to be “minimizing impacts” but the footprint of the facility has ballooned to 440 hectares (1087 acres), largely due to a larger tailings management facility. Environmental groups claim that the Back Forty’s environmental impacts could be significantly reduced by using common-sense feasible alternatives — but Aquila Resources has rejected these options.

Nearly all of the Back Forty rock is reactive, or capable of producing Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) when exposed to air and water. AMD pollution devastates watersheds, and lasts hundreds of years. Tailings and waste rock will be stored on-site during mining, and the tailings will remain on the surface forever. Aquila has told their investors they will pursue underground mining as a “second phase” of operations, but this is not acknowledged in any permit. Underground mining would extend the mine’s life from 7 years to 16 years, greatly magnifying risks. During closure, the open pit will be backfilled with waste and tailings; as a result, AMD groundwater contamination is predicted to seep into the river.

CSP2’s review will consider changes to the Back Forty mining permit, including environmental impacts, feasible alternative designs for waste storage, transportation plans, remediation, financial assurances, and the proposed use of an “upstream” tailings design, a risky construction method that has resulted in catastrophic tailings impoundment failures. Dr. Chambers, an internationally-known expert on tailing basins, will review this aspect of the permit.

“The Back Forty mine will threaten freshwater resources and destroy important cultural resources belonging to the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin,” said Kathleen Heideman, a board member of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition.

More than 120 concerned citizens, tribal members, environmental groups and others participated in the recent Michigan Department of Environmental Quality’s (MDEQ) public meeting, held on January 9th in Stephenson, MI. Many speakers expressed frustration over access to the permit files, including password errors, server problems,and  browser or operating system incompatibilities. In light of these problems, the MDEQ has been asked to grant a 30-day Extension of the Public Comment Deadline.

The Mining Action Group also requested a consolidated hearing process in order to discuss the Back Forty Mining Permit Amendment request, a modified Air Quality permit application, and a new Dam Safety permit application. “We need a thoughtful, consolidated hearing that will allow concerned citizens to discuss all of these interconnected permits,” said Heideman.

Technical review of the Back Forty Mine Permit Amendment is made possible by a collaborative effort of the Mining Action Group, the Front 40 Environmental Fight, the Coalition to Save the Menominee River, a 2019 grant from Freshwater Future’s Great Lakes Network, and a 2019 emergency mini-grant from the Western Mining Action Network.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Comments on the Aquila Back Forty permit will be accepted until February 6th at 5pm (EST). Mail comments to Back Forty Mining Permit Amendment, MDEQ-OGMD, 1504 West Washington Street, Marquette, MI 49855, or email comments to DEQ-Mining-Comments@michigan.gov with “Back Forty Mining Permit Amendment” as the subject.

The MDEQ has been asked to extend the Public Comment deadline, but no decision has been announced. Please contact Melanie Humphrey for an update on the extension request:  906-250-7564, HUMPHREYM@michigan.gov

Instructions for reviewing the Back Forty permit materials were included in the MDEQ’s Public Notice: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-ogmd-mining-Back_Forty_mine_amendment-PublicMeetingNotice_1.9.2019_641172_7.pdf

Mission of the Mining Action Group
The UPEC Mining Action Group (MAG), formerly known as Save the Wild U.P., is a grassroots effort to defend the clean water and wild places of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula from the dangers of sulfide mining. Contact the Mining Action Group at info@savethewildup.org or call (906) 662-9987. Learn more about the UPEC Mining Action Group at miningactiongroup.org.

Mission of the Front 40 Environmental Fight
The Front 40 is a grassroots organization that was formed in early 2003 in response to the threat of a metallic mineral mine potentially being developed on the shores of the Menominee River in Lake Township, Michigan. It is the principal objective of the Front 40 Environmental Group to ensure that metallic sulfide mining operations are not allowed to adversely impact our rivers, lakes, groundwater and lands. Learn more about the Front 40 group: menomineeriver.com.