Monthly Archives: November 2016

SWUP’s Final Comments on Aquila Resources Mining Application

Posted on by

Save the Wild U.P., along with many regional environmental organizations and The Menominee Tribal government submitted extensive public comment on Aquila Resources mining application in February, 2016, including a red-flag review completed by the Center for Science in Public Participation. The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) received thousands of comments on the dangers posed by an open-pit sulfide mine on the banks of the Menominee River; so many in fact, that they sent an extensive list of 197 questions to Aquila Resources requesting answers to issues surrounding financial assurances, water treatment plant design, potential harm to state and federally listed species of plants and animals, to name a few. Aquila responded to these questions, offering explanations and justifications of their original answers in the mining application, but no solutions to the significant issues raised by concerned citizens. Save the Wild U.P. had issue with the fact that the answers provided by Aquila resources were inadequate and that the mining application was never edited or revised to reflect the concerns raised by environmental organizations, Menominee Tribal leaders and the Center for Science in Public Participation, so we submitted further questions and concerns to the DEQ during the most recent public comment period.

Here is an example of some of SWUP’s most pressing concerns regarding the mining application, but you can read them in full by clicking here.

“Save the Wild U.P. strongly objects to the State’s proposed “decision to grant a Mining Permit” to the Aquila Back Forty project in the absence of a publicly reviewable Wetland Permit application—

  • The mine proposal conflicts with federal policy protecting wetlands. Based on a review of the draft Wetland Permit, now rescinded, this mining project will result in the direct destruction of regulated and unregulated wetlands, resulting in the impairment and degradation of surface and groundwater.
  • It would irreversibly harm a globally significant and state-endangered oak-pine savanna area.
  • It would harm endangered, threatened and special concern species, including sturgeon, mussels, the Northern Long-eared Bat, dwarf milkweed and the Pitcher’s thistle.
  • It is not in the public interest, would impair tribal resources, and would result in an uncalculated loss of ecological services.
  • Aquila Back Forty wetlands destruction and NPDES-related water quality impairments will have adverse impacts on freshwater fisheries, aquatic life, wildlife, human health and welfare, environmental justice and special aquatic sites.

We formally request that the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality reject the Aquila Back Forty Mining Permit Application and EIA as misleading and inadequate. We ask that the Michigan Department of Natural Resources reject the proposed land exchange of Escanaba State Forest lands for the Aquila Back Forty project. We further request that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency veto and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers deny any Section 404 permit that would allow Aquila Back Forty to degrade the Menominee River and the riparian corridor through industrial wastewater discharges and/or wetlands destruction.

We request specific responses to these comments, submitted November 3, 2016, and to the extensive written comments our organization originally submitted on February 16, 2016.”

SWUP Critical of Back Forty’s NPDES Permit

Posted on by

Save the Wild U.P. has submitted extensive written comments to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), concerning Aquila Resources’ application for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permit. In their comments, SWUP outlines numerous objections to the proposed NPDES permit, noting that the discharges pose significant threats to Menominee River. The Back Forty mine proposal would construct an open-pit sulfide mine, mill and tailings basins on the banks of the Menominee River, and treated industrial discharges would be piped to the Menominee:

  • The NPDES permit proposes to use the Flambeau Mine as an example of non-polluting mine, and a model for post-closure remediation. This is a dangerous comparison —  the Flambeau Mine received multiple Clean Water Act violations, had no on-site milling operations, left behind no permanent tailings on the surface, and used no cyanide on the site.
  • The permit fails to provide a longterm treatment plan for acid leachate that will be produced closure produced during Postclosure years; it appears that leachate production will require Perpetual Care.
  • Permit fails to analyze health risks and impacts on communities who rely on fishing for subsistence, including risks from toxic heavy metals, arsenic, methylmercury, use of cyanidation, and acid mine drainage.
  • Permit fails to adequately consider alternatives to minimize environmental harm or reduce polluted seepage from permanent waste facilities.
  • The mine proposal conflicts with federal policy to protect wetlands, and circumvents cumulative review. As of November 2016, there is still NO Wetlands Permit to review in conjunction with this NPDES permit — even though a large portion of the “authorized discharges” will be contact water produced as a result of dewatering (groundwater and wetlands drawdown) at the Back Forty site.
  • The NPDES permit fails to fully evaluate pollution risks to drinking water, fisheries, and threatened species (particularly freshwater mussels).
  • The NPDES permit would harm endangered, threatened and special concern species, including sturgeon, mussels, river fingernail clams and snails. Species-specific limits were not included in the permit. Multiple pollutants have no limit — “Report Only.” 
  • Aquila Back Forty water quality impairments would have adverse impacts on freshwater fisheries, aquatic life, wildlife, human health and welfare, environmental justice and special aquatic sites.
  • The lack of an integrated permit review process, as was promised by the DEQ in January 2016, has frustrated and compromised the work of those offering technical comments on Aquila’s permit.
  • The pollution authorized by this permit IS NOT in the public interest, it degrades the Menominee River, will impair tribal resources, and will result in an uncalculated cumulative loss of ecological services.

To read SWUP’s full comments, click here.

Al Gedicks Letter to Orion Finance: No Social License for Aquila

Posted on by

November 1, 2016

Mr. Oskar Lewnowski, CIO
Orion Mine Finance Group
1211 Avenue of the Americas
Suite 3000
New York, NY 10036
Dear Mr. Lewnowski,

I am writing in regard to Orion’s 19% investment in Aquila Resources’ Back Forty metallic sulfide deposit in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. Recent events have highlighted growing opposition to the project that may be of great interest to your shareholders.

Have you seen the recent headlines about the recent public hearing that brought over 350 people to the Stephenson high school to voice their concerns about Aquila’s mine permits on October 6, 2016? These headlines reflect deep public dissatisfaction with the proposed mine after the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality gave preliminary approval for the permits for the Back Forty project.

“Strong Feelings Erupt at Back Forty Mine Hearing” Peshtigo Times, 10/12/16

“Battle Lines Drawn in Fight Over U-P Mine” wsau.com 10/7/16

“Emotions about mine run hot” Eagle Herald, Marinette/Menominee 10/8/16

Or are your shareholders aware of the recent demonstrations and public forums organized by the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin and their supporters protesting the failure to consult the tribe about the violation of sacred sites within the Back Forty mine footprint?

“Menomonee Nation holds rally against Back Forty sulfide mining project” News from Indian Country, October 2016

“Mine plan troubles tribe” Wisconsin State Journal, 10/23/16

I suspect you may be unaware of the significant community opposition to this proposed mine because Aquila’s CEO, Barry Hildred, has misrepresented the local community in an October 3, 2016 presentation before mining industry professionals at the recent Precious Metals Summit and in statements to the local media.

When asked whether there was any opposition to the Back Forty project, Hildred said, “The opposition tends to be small. These were the same groups that opposed the Eagle mine [in the U.P.]. They’re not well-funded and there are no national groups challenging the permit.” (http://www.gowebcasting.com/events/precious-metals-summit-conferences-llc/2016/09/15/aquila-resources-inc/play/stream/20256)

“There are no bad surprises”

When asked whether Aquila had done its homework to insure that there would be no bad surprises for the project, Hildred replied, “There are no bad surprises.”

No bad surprises? Just a week before Hildred assured his audience of broad community support for the project, the Marinette County Board, by a 28-0 vote, adopted a resolution that “strongly opposes Aquila’s Back Forty metallic sulfide mine and urged the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality to deny a permit for the Back Forty project.” Aquila Resources was invited to address the board before the vote but declined to send a representative to the meeting.

The resolution (see the Eagle Herald story on 9/21/16 enclosed) cited concerns over long term leaching of acid-producing wastes into the groundwater and the river, the risk to human health and the environment in Wisconsin as well as Michigan, the threat to the sturgeon population in the Menominee River and the irreversible loss of significant cultural resources of the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, including Native American gravesites.

A company that cannot or will not defend its project before elected officials in a community that draws its drinking water downstream from the proposed mine has no social license to operate.

On October 25, an Environmental Protection of Air and Water Quality resolution was stricken from the agenda by the Menominee County Board of Commissioners to prevent a public discussion of concerns about the Back Forty proposed mine.

As the extensive news reports, letters to the editor, op eds, and feature articles in environmental and Native American publications assembled in this packet demonstrate, the characterization of the opposition as “small” and “composed of the same groups that opposed the Eagle project” is wildly inaccurate. Over 2,000 members of the public wrote to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality to express serious concerns about the Back Forty project. Thanks to a Freedom of Information Act request, we know that 98 percent of all signatures and comments opposed the project (see report by Save the Wild U.P. enclosed).

While the individual citizens, groups and Indian tribes opposing this project may not be well-funded, this does not mean they are incapable of exercising considerable political influence over the permitting process and whether this mine will ever be built.

If you doubt the power of organized local opposition to defeat controversial mining projects I urge you to Google the defeat of Exxon’s Crandon, Wisconsin project in 2003, Aquila’s Lynne project in Oneida County, Wisconsin in 2012 and Gogebic Taconite’s Penokee Hills project in Iron and Ashland Counties in Wisconsin in 2015. All three cases involved Indian tribes and grassroots citizens groups organized against destructive mining projects.

Barry Hildred may know a great deal about financing mining projects but he appears to know very little about what mining risk analysts like Ernst & Young have termed the “social license to operate” (SLO). According to Ernst & Young, the fourth greatest risk to mining investors comes from “ignoring community voices and their environmental and public health concerns. Mining projects that generate protests and civil unrest are bad for business.” (Top 10 Business Risks Facing Mining and Metals, 2016-2017, p. 4).

“The mining world has changed dramatically,” wrote Wayne Dunn in a special report to The Northern Miner, a Canadian mining industry newspaper. “Projects can be stopped dead by local people and communities, dashing shareholder’s hopes and often destroying executives’ careers. Project management has become exponentially more complex as social issues no longer take a distant backseat to technical issues.” (90:28, 9/3/04, p. 6).

The term “social license to operate” emerged in response to a perceived threat to the mining industry’s legitimacy as a result of environmental disasters in the late 1990s. The Fraser Institute, a mining industry think tank in Vancouver, British Columbia says the social license to operate “refers to the level of acceptance by local communities and stakeholders of mining companies and their operations.” It “is based on the idea that mining companies need not only government permission [or permits] but also ‘social permission’ to conduct their business. Increasingly, having an SLO is an essential part of operating within democratic jurisdictions, as without popular support it is unlikely that agencies from elected governments will willingly grant operational permits or licenses.”
(http: www.miningfacts.org/Communities/What-is-the-social-licence-to-operate/).

The Fraser Institute warns that “the lack of an SLO is associated with social conflict, loss of machinery due to vandalism, higher financial costs, increased difficulties in hiring skilled labour, costly delays of mine operations, and possible mine shutdowns due to community opposition to the mine.”

Serious concerns about the mine permit application have also been raised by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that have forced Aquila to withdraw its wetland permit because it failed to identify regulated resources on the project site and within the proposed impact area. That permit application will need to be resubmitted.

Please review the extensive documentation of community opposition in this packet and make your own judgment about whether this project has a social license to operate.

Sincerely,

Al Gedicks, Executive Secretary

Wisconsin Resources Protection Council