Tag Archives: Rio Tinto

To the editor: Road to ruin

Posted on by
Reply

Road to ruin | The Mining Journal | April 7, 2013

To the Journal editor:

The Upper Peninsula has a long history of mining and logging. Regardless of one’s personal position on this issue, don’t let the county leave public safety on the side of the road when considering proposed truck routes in Marquette County.

The Marquette County Road commission and Rio Tinto are negotiating plans to spend over $40 million restructuring the roads leading to the Eagle Mine, including over 20 miles of restructuring work on Marquette County Road 550.

The shoulder widths being called for by the Marquette county roads commission are below Federal Highway Administration recommended minimum widths of four foot paved, and below Michigan state standards of a six foot paved shoulder called for during restructuring work, that will endanger the public’s use of the Big Bay highway.

The three foot paved shoulder proposed by the county road commission is below acceptable standards. In the interests of public safety and to adequately plan for future use of this valuable traffic corridor, the county should rebuild the Big Bay highway with the minimum acceptable shoulder width called for during a restructuring project.

The county is failing to consider additional growth in northeast Marquette County, the demands of emergency responders, a projected increase in non-Eagle Mine truck traffic, other commercial development, private landowners, the residents of Powell and northeast Marquette townships and the tourists and travelers to Big Bay.

The county’s plan also fails to adequately provide for safe non-motorized and recreational use of this valuable transportation corridor.

Everyone that travels the Big Bay highway should be concerned. Everyone with an economic stake in Marquette County’s future should be concerned.

Demand the county provide adequately for public safety. Develop the Big Bay highway to the minimum acceptable roadway design standards.

In the interests of public safety, economic stimulus and future growth, the county has the duty before it to add six foot paved shoulders during the Big Bay highway restructuring project.

Mike Beck, member

American Planning Association

Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals

http://www.miningjournal.net/page/content.detail/id/585959/Road-to-ruin.html?nav=5067

Letter to Chairs of Natural Resources Committee regarding CR 595

Posted on by
Reply

Via Telefax delivery:

March 20, 2013

The Honorable Richard “Doc” Hastings
Chairman, Natural Resources Committee
1203 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Fax: (202) 225-5929

Waves crashing on the rocky shoreline by Jacob Emerick

The Honorable Edward J. Markey
Ranking Member, Natural Resources Committee
2108 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Fax: (202) 225-4273

Dear Chairman Hastings and Ranking Member Markey:

We write regarding the upcoming testimony of Mr. James Iwanicki, Engineering Manager of the Marquette County Road Commission. Mr. Iwanicki is scheduled to provide testimony at a hearing on “America’s Mineral Resources: Creating Mining and Manufacturing Jobs and Securing America.” His testimony is slated to take place this Thursday, March 21, 2013, before the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources (Committee). We also ask that you allow the voices of those whose homelands are being sacrificed in the name of foreign mining companies currently operating in an irresponsible and unsustainable manner in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan to be heard.

Collectively, we are members of a federally recognized Indian tribe, former resource extraction industry regulators, and environmental advocacy groups made up of many of the more than 200 practicing physicians, clergy, property owners, workers, residents, and frequent visitors of the Upper Peninsula who oppose irresponsible mining activities currently underway. Many of us provided testimony and written comments describing our concerns and made recommendations for the proposed mine haul road that Mr. Iwanicki is slated to testify about before the Committee.  Unlike Mr. Iwanicki, whose responsibilities are limited to road maintenance and construction in Marquette County, Michigan, we are prepared to provide the House Natural Resources Committee or any of its subcommittees, with a concise description of the unsustainable practices that threaten our resources, including treaty protected tribal trust resources, our environment and our way of life.

We expect that the testimony provided Mr. Iwanicki will downplay the relationship of the road to Rio Tinto’s operations and that the Committee will be told that the road would enhance safety, recreation and “economic benefits for county residents.” Because Mr. Iwanicki’s responsibilities are limited to roads there are many aspects of this debacle of which  the Committee will not be apprised. Many are directly related to the primary purpose of the hearing. Mr. Iwanicki is likely unprepared to talk about the impacts this proposed road would have had to National Wild and Scenic Rivers, the McCormick Wilderness, and the health and way of life of the people who work, live and recreate in this area. This is the case because there was no environmental impact statement prepared for the road project. This was possible only because Rio Tinto, which claimed that it would fund the road entirely but only if the project could be permitted within a truncated timeframe that did not allow for the analyses required by federal law.

We believe that Mr. Iwanicki will inform the Committee that he was operating under a budget set by Rio Tinto and under a timeline set by Rio Tinto. We urge the Committee to question Mr. Iwanicki accordingly and specifically ask for an explanation that reconciles the obvious elimination of any use of federal transportation funds to avoid National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements with the exclusive use of Rio Tinto funding. It’s only reasonable to conclude that if the project has all of the benefits that Mr. Iwanicki will tell the Committee it has, using some federal transportation funds would be acceptable. This however was impossible for Mr. Iwanicki as a result of Rio Tinto’s arbitrary time limit. By setting the timeline and funding limitations Rio Tinto simply made it impossible to incorporate mitigation requirements to fulfill the Clean Water Act’s wetlands protection mandates. Rio Tinto maintained control over the project Mr. Iwanicki was charged with managing. It’s important to note that Mr. Iwanicki only became the manager of this proposed project when Rio Tinto’s own road proposal failed to meet these same federal requirements. The failure here is not EPA’s, but Rio Tinto’s failure to recognize and comply with federal environmental protection laws.

Because the proposed road was primarily for the purpose of avoiding traffic problems associated with Rio Tinto’s mining activities, there are literally dozens of substantive natural resource related issues and legal concerns that Mr. Iwanicki will not relate to the Committee. For example, Mr. Iwanicki is not likely to tell the Committee that while Rio Tinto touts the use of health impact assessments through its role as a member of the International Council of Mining and Metals, none has been prepared for any of the activities Rio Tinto has conducted in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The Natural Resources Committee also will not learn how Rio Tinto obtained permits from the State of Michigan to construct and operate a hard rock mine with insufficient financial responsibility assurances in place as EPA fails to complete its rulemaking to address the inability of our government to continue to clean-up the millions of pounds of toxic chemical releases to our environment from these mines each year. Mr. Iwanicki will surely not explain the regulatory fiasco at Rio Tinto’s Eagle mine where a State of Michigan ground water permit is the only thing in place to regulate up to 504,000 gallons of industrial mine water discharges that Rio Tinto itself told the EPA were “not discharged below the surface of the ground.” Additionally, we are very certain that Mr. Iwanicki will not tell anyone at the hearing that State of Michigan water program technical staff who worked on Rio Tinto’s Eagle mine permits and the Governor of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula District Manager who had a very significant role during the permitting process are now on Rio Tinto’s payroll and working at the Eagle mine.

Through his testimony, we expect that Mr. Iwanicki will explain how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through what has been described by our Congressional representative as “regulatory overreach,” eliminated employment opportunities in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. We believe Mr. Iwanicki will testify that EPA’s “overreach” occurred in conjunction with a road construction project called County Road 595. Further, it is our understanding Mr. Iwanicki will state that EPA’s refusal to withdraw objections pursuant to provisions of the Clean Water Act that are in place to protect wetlands constituted this alleged “overreach.” We assure you that EPA’s decision to exercise its authority and follow the provisions of the Clean Water Act were not only completely appropriate – but long overdue and sought after by the citizens of the area likely to be impacted by the proposed road. To be clear, the proposed road was initially designed to address concerns related to the transportation of ore on existing roads from Rio Tinto’s Eagle mine, currently in the final stages of construction. Had EPA properly exercised its authority it would have required or prepared an Environmental Impact Statement, which EPA has the discretion to do. Through that process, issues involving the transportation of ore from the Eagle mine and other mines currently being proposed could have been addressed. Unfortunately, Rio Tinto, through extensive lobbying and other actions, set out to eliminate any and all federal environmental regulatory oversight of its activities. If one seeks to find blame with any aspect of mining and its ancillary activities in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan they would be prudent to look carefully at the actions taken by Rio Tinto.

The regulatory failures associated with recent mining activities in the Upper Peninsula are monumental. Conflicts of interest, inadequate financial assurances, catastrophic technical mistakes, inadequate and insufficient scientific and environmental analysis, significant lack of experience among technical staff employed by State and federal regulatory agencies, complete absence of cumulative impact assessments and more, all are certain to contribute to a situation where we will see a net reduction of jobs in the resource extraction industry. This does not have to be the case and we are prepared to explain this situation to the Natural Resources Committee in full measure. While they operate with breathtaking arrogance and an unfounded sense of entitlement, these companies continue to avoid public debate regarding the manner in which they operate. We hope you agree that respectful and informed debate is the American way to create jobs through responsible and safe development of our natural resources.

In closing, please know that we have placed our trust in your abilities and integrity, and we seek only to remain confident that the Natural Resources Committee will not make decisions that forsake the laws and federal trust responsibilities of the United States. Please feel free to contact us if you believe we can be of service to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Sincerely,

Gene Champagne
Concerned Citizens of Big Bay
Big Bay, Michigan

Jeffery Loman
Member, Keweenaw Bay Indian Community
L’Anse, Michigan

Emily Whittaker
Executive Director, Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve
Big Bay, Michigan

Margaret Comfort
President, Save the Wild U.P.
Marquette, Michigan

Catherine Parker
Marquette, Michigan

Richard Sloat
Iron River, Michigan

Cc:
Congressman Douglas Lamborn, Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, Via fax: (202) 226-2638
Congressman Rush Holt, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, Via fax: (202) 225-6025
Congressman Daniel Benishek, Member, Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, Via fax: (202) 225-4710

Analysis: Rio Tinto’s Permit Modifications

Featured

Posted on by
2

By Cynthia Pryor

The main and substantive issue, in the new Air Quality permit application for the Rio Tinto Eagle Mine, is Rio Tinto’s assertions that an air emission control is not required for the Main Air Raise Vent (MVAR). The MVAR is a stack that is 128″ (10.6′) in diameter and 65′ high and is the only vent for all the underground workings for the mine. The emissions will include all those items associated with the development and retrieval of the ore body including blasting, ore handling, truck traffic, diesel fuels, large mine heaters, etc. Rio’s original Air Quality Permit was approved with the inclusion of a Bag House and air filter on this MVAR stack – that would capture 99% of all emissions which would include reactive sulfides resident in and broken loose from this ultramafic massive sulfide ore body.

Rio Tinto has reconfigured their plant so that they have moved the original underground cement batch plant and associated material silos (aggregate, cement) to the surface near Eagle Rock. They say there will be no crushing underground and an ore pass system will not be utilized – therefore reducing sulfide dust and emissions to such a low level that a bag house would no longer be required. In fact they say that a bag house would not even function properly – the emissions are so low. They will instead control all underground dust with water spray from a tank truck and and a hose.

All of Rio’s assumptions are based on modeling programs, heater systems whose emissions are exempt from regulation, and the assertion that will be able to control all dust with water spray from a hose. The DEQ does not require them to have controls on this huge MVAR stack, even though there will be controls on every other emission source at the mine, including an emergency generator. The DEQ does not require any air quality monitoring of the site or of this stack. Emission testing of the stack will only take place when Rio Tinto is producing 1,660 tons of ore a day. The DEQ will not require any emission testing during the blasting of adits or production of ore under this tonnage rate. Sulfide, heavy metals, blasting emissions, fuel emissions, etc. will be free flowing into the air on the Yellow Dog Plains with no control, no monitoring, and very limited testing.

The DEQ calls the Yellow Dog Plains an attainment area – which is a geographic area which has air quality below Federal Air Quality Standards. In other words, the air is good on the Plains and Rio has now the ability, under law, to pollute this air until they reach the limit of the air quality standard set by the EPA. Their models show that they can do this at 91% of the attainment level. That leaves 9% left for someone else to pollute to get them at a Saginaw, Detroit Chicago level of Air Quality. These emissions are only representative of the mine area itself. All diesel emmisons and fugitive dust from the transportation of the ore on public roads are not included in this emission standard calculation. The DEQ says they have no regulatory oversight of public roads. Nor do they have oversight of the underground workings to prove they can make their claims of low emissions. That is someone else who takes care of that (Mine Safety and Health – MSHA) . The DEQ is only concerned with what comes out of the stack and Rio’s models say they can do it and that is all the proof they need until they do their first production emissions test.

From the beginning, the State of Michigan has recognized that non-ferrous sulfide mining is different and that sulfides, from metallic sulfide mines, released into the environment and coming into contact with air and water can cause Acid Mine Drainage and damage to our land, our waters and our communities. The DEQ Air Quality staff do not seem to see any danger to the Salmon Trout River which flows a mere 150′ from this stack. They have required no impact assessment of the Yellow Dog watershed, nor an impact statement to Eagle Rock – the KBIC sacred site within the fence of this mine. They see no danger to the community of Big Bay and it’s peoples, lake and streams who are an immediate few miles downwind from the Eagle Mine.

Our job is to ask for proof that their models are correct – by demanding air quality monitors at the site that run 24/7 for the life of the mine.
We must also demand that Rio Tinto keep the promise that they made in their original permit (made as a result of public comment and pressure!) to put an air filter on the main polluting source at the site – the MVAR stack. “PROMISES KEPT” is Rio Tinto’s main motto. Let us make them hold to that promise.

 

CR 595 project plans dropped – Victory for now, but the fight’s not over

Featured

Posted on by

“We are relieved that the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality has decided not to issue a permit for CR 595, aka the ‘road to nowhere,’ but we are well aware the fight isn’t over yet,” says Margaret Comfort, president of Save the Wild UP.

“This has been a David and Goliath struggle,” says Comfort. “Activists throughout the Midwest are watching this issue — would the EPA and the DEQ accomodate of one of the world’s largest mining companies and allow them to build a haul road through fragile wetlands? This is a victory for working people and all citizens across the UP: big business lost this round.”

“We are so grateful for the support of community members throughout the Upper Great Lakes Region who questioned the wisdom of this ‘Wilderness Road.’” Comfort was among hundreds of citizens who attended public hearings, wrote the EPA, and spoke out against the proposed haul road.

“This boondoggle was a corporate driveway dressed up as a public service. Rio Tinto has a lot of nerve to set up the County Road Commission to build their private infrastructure. Taxpayer money should never have been spent lobbying for Rio Tinto’s haul road, period,” says Kathleen Heideman, board member of Save the Wild UP.

“Thanks to the EPA and the DEQ for carefully reviewing this project, and acting in the best interest of our fragile wetlands and intact ecosystems. Once lost, they can’t be replaced.” says Gail Griffith, SWUP board member.

Save the Wild UP is a grassroots environmental organization dedicated to the preservation of the Upper Peninsula’s unique cultural and natural resources. For more information visit: savethewildup.org, e-mail info@savethewildup.org, or call (906) 228-4444.

Keweenaw Bay Indians’ Fight Against Michigan Mine Detailed in Series

Posted on by

By ICTMN Staff November 11, 2012

StandForTheLand.com

Sacred Eagle Rock is now surrounded by barbed wire.

As Kennecott Eagle Minerals lurches toward completing its plan to begin mining copper and nickel from tribal lands in Michigan’s remote Upper Peninsula beginning in 2014, the fight on the part of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community of the Lake Superior Band of Chippewa is far from over. Continue reading →

CR595 decision delayed again

Posted on by

EPA needs more time to review 400-plus comments from public

September 29, 2012
By JOHN PEPIN – Journal Staff Writer (jpepin@miningjournal.net) , The Mining Journal

HUMBOLDT – Rio Tinto officials said Friday a deadline extension until December on whether the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality will issue permits necessary for building Marquette County Road 595 will not affect the company’s pledge to fund the $82 million roadway – if construction begins by spring.

“We’re going to adhere to the current plan,” said Dan Blondeau, Rio Tinto advisor for communications and media relations in Humboldt. “We remain committed to funding County Road 595 if the road can be permitted and construction can begin by spring 2013.”

The proposed new 21-mile, north-south County Road 595 would run from County Road AAA in Michigamme Township to U.S. 41 in Humboldt Township. Among the uses and benefits cited for building the road include providing a more direct route for Rio Tinto (Kennecott) to truck ore from its Eagle Mine on the Yellow Dog Plains to its Humboldt Mill processing center in Humboldt Township.

Article Photos

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality officials record public comments during a hearing in August at Northern Michigan University on a Marquette County Road Commission permit application for the proposed County Road 595. A Monday deadline for a DEQ permitting decision has been postponed until Dec. 1, with EPA officials needing more time to review comments from the meeting and an associated public comment period, which closed Sept. 4. (Journal photo by John Pepin)

Marquette County Road Commission Engineer-Manager Jim Iwanicki authorized the DEQ in a letter Thursday to extend the permit decision deadline until Dec. 1. A permit decision was scheduled to be rendered by Monday.

Iwanicki said Thursday’s deadline extension was provided after consultation with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency officials, who said they needed additional time to review and consider more than 400 comments received during an Aug. 28 public hearing in Marquette and a public comment period that ended Sept. 4.

“The DEQ really needs the answer from the EPA so they can do their final bit of work,” Iwanicki said.

In January, the road commission applied for a wetlands fill permit for the road-building project from the DEQ under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Sections 301 and 303 of the Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act.

Under an agreement, the DEQ can issue permits on behalf of the federal government, unless the EPA objects. In April, the EPA filed an objection, after consulting with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The basis for the EPA’s objection is the presence of feasible alternative routes with fewer aquatic impacts, impacts to aquatic resources with the project are significant and proposed mitigation would not sufficiently compensate for impacts.

Since the objection, road commission officials have worked to try to rework the proposal to satisfy the EPA’s concerns. In late August, a new proposal was announced for mitigation that would preserve 1,576 acres, including 647 wetland acres, near the McCormick Wilderness.

In addition, the road commission originally proposed filling 25.8 acres of wetlands and constructing 22 stream crossings in the building County Road 595. The county now plans to fill 24.3 acres of wetlands, replace 19 steam crossings and build seven others.

Last week, after a review of the changes, the DEQ urged the EPA to remove its objection to the project.

If the EPA maintains its objection, the DEQ has 30 days to issue a permit addressing the objections or deny the permit. After that, authority to issue a Clean Water Act permit would fall to the Corps of Engineers. The application process would restart.

If the EPA withdraws its objection, the DEQ could issue the permit and work on the project could begin.

The DEQ was initially scheduled to make a permit decision in July, but under a new law that took effect June 14, applicants can authorize the DEQ to extend permit processing periods up to a year. In this case, that would be mid-January for the road commission.

In July, Iwanicki extended the deadline until Oct. 1 to provide more time for application review.

But in authorizing that extension, Iwanicki said discussions with Rio Tinto indicated that beyond Oct. 1, the possibility of funding for building the road from the mining company would likely be lost. Rio Tinto needs to finalize its transportation plans in line with its Eagle Mine production scheduled to begin in 2014. The road is expected to take roughly two years to build. Rio Tinto would use existing roads until County Road 595 was finished.

Blondeau said Friday the Oct. 1 deadline for a permit decision “was not a drop-dead date.”

Rio Tinto, local groups establish environmental monitoring program

Posted on by
September 13, 2012
By JOHN PEPIN – Journal Staff Writer , The Mining Journal

MARQUETTE – Formal agreements signed this week between Rio Tinto, the Superior Watershed Partnership and the Marquette County Community Foundation have created a new independent community environmental monitoring program for the Eagle Mine, Humboldt Mill and associated transportation routes. Continue reading →

County board frustrated by mine tax plan

Posted on by
August 21, 2012
By JOHN PEPIN – Journal Staff Writer (jpepin@miningjournal.net) , The Mining Journal

MARQUETTE – Members of the Marquette County Board were angered and frustrated last week after state officials failed to match their revenue expectations for a proposed state severance tax on non-ferrous mining operations, including the Kennecott-Rio Tinto Eagle Mine. Continue reading →