According to EPA statistics, PolyMet’s “draft environmental impact statement,” (DEIS) is incredibly incompetent.  Less than 0.4% of all such reviews obtain such a bottom-of-the-barrel rating.

Disturbingly, PolyMet’s amateurish DEIS was conducted by a firm working with Aquila Resources to develop a zinc-gold mine on the Menominee River, in Michigan.  In December Al Trippel, an environmental consultant with Environmental Resources Management, gave a presentation on PolyMet’s DEIS that outlined environmental concerns related to the review as well as unrelated information claiming the project would benefit the regional economy.  Trippel has worked with Aquila as a consultant since at least 2004 and conducted studies necessary for that company’s own environmental impact statement.

From the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness (March 5):

Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency gave the PolyMet mine draft environmental impact statement the lowest possible rating the agency can assign such a document. Citing incomplete work and unacceptable pollution, the EPA assigned the project its “Environmentally Unsatisfactory – Inadequate” rating.

The rating highlights the extraordinary threats represented by the mine to clean water. The agency does not assign such ratings very often. In the past 23 years, the EPA has reviewed 11,834 EISs and gave the rating it gave to PolyMet to only 41, or 0.3 percent. In the upper Midwest region, the agency gave the rating to just 0.2 percent of the 844 EISes it reviewed.

Yesterday, PolyMet released a statement seeking to control the damage the EPA’s rating has done to its credibility. Unfortunately, the company included a statement in their press release that is blatantly false:

“The EPA’s rating of the draft EIS as unsatisfactory appears to have been based on the ‘proposed project’ without  consideration of alternatives or mitigations discussed in the document.”

This is false. In page two of the EPA’s letter, the agency states:

“This rating applies to the Proposed Action, the Mine Site Alternative and the Tailings Basin Alternative.”

There is no way to excuse such a misleading statement as PolyMet has made. Rather than offering specific details that respond to the EPA’s criticisms, the company has chosen only to muddy the waters.

Not many are getting the message.  A recent editorial in the Minneapolis Star Tribune supporting PolyMet’s controversial NorthMet project claims that environmental laws are strong and are vigorously enforced.  Only four days after the Tribune’s confident editorial, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a strong critique of the environmental review of PolyMet’s project, giving it the lowest possible rating, “environmentally unsatisfactory-inadequate,” and recommending the mine “must not proceed as proposed.” According to the EPA, PolyMet would destroy hundreds of acres of “high quality” wetlands, pollute ground and surface water of “national importance” with acidic mine drainage and dump mercury into Lake Superior.

From Duhigg’s, “Rulings Restrict Clean Water Act, Foiling E.P.A.”:

Thousands of the nation’s largest water polluters are outside the Clean Water Act’s reach because the Supreme Court has left uncertain which waterways are protected by that law, according to interviews with regulators.

As a result, some businesses are declaring that the law no longer applies to them. And pollution rates are rising.

Companies that have spilled oil, carcinogens and dangerous bacteria into lakes, rivers and other waters are not being prosecuted, according to regulators working on those cases, who estimate that more than 1,500 major pollution investigations have been discontinued or shelved in the last four years.

The Clean Water Act was intended to end dangerous water pollution by regulating every major polluter. But today, regulators may be unable to prosecute as many as half of the nation’s largest known polluters because officials lack jurisdiction or because proving jurisdiction would be overwhelmingly difficult or time consuming, according to midlevel officials.

“We are, in essence, shutting down our Clean Water programs in some states,” said Douglas F. Mundrick, an E.P.A. lawyer in Atlanta. “This is a huge step backward. When companies figure out the cops can’t operate, they start remembering how much cheaper it is to just dump stuff in a nearby creek.”

To read more, please visit the New York Times.  Read the rest of Duhigg’s articles on this subject by clicking HERE.

Satellite map of Rio Tinto's planned Humboldt milling facility; Photo courtesy Google Maps

One day before a hearing on the company’s proposed 22-mile haul road, Rio Tinto is announcing it has obtained all state permits for its planned Humboldt milling facility.

At a December public hearing on the mill, Keweenaw Bay Indian Community geologist, Chuck Brumleve, noted that the DEQ’s approval of the Humboldt Project was opposed by both the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Reading from an EPA statement, Brumleve reported that the agency is “concerned the currently proposed project may have significant adverse impacts on the ecosystem.  We object to the issuance of a permit for this project.”

Brumleve said that the US Fish and Wildlife Service requested “that the MDEQ not issue a permit for the proposed work.”

Ignoring the strong criticisms, the DEQ’s director of the Office of Geological Survey, Hal Fitch, claimed that approval of the Humboldt Mill project “hasn’t been a controversial issue.”

Rio Tinto says it will clean up the Humboldt site.  One staunch supporter of the company, Marquette County Commissioner Deb Pellow, claimed that the “reuse of the abandoned industrial site is an outstanding opportunity for environmental clean-up with the cost borne by Kennecott.”

“At the end of the mine’s life the site and surrounding area will have to be reclaimed to establish a self-sustaining ecosystem that does not need ongoing care,” said Pellow.

Brumleve disagreed and said that while “we’re all in favor of” reusing old industrial sites, “instead of creating news ones,” Rio Tinto’s application makes clear, in at least two sections, that they are not required to leave the site cleaner than it currently is, nor do they intend to do so.

Quoting from Rio Tinto’s application, Brumleve said “the final land use of the reclaimed area of the Humboldt Mill site will remain as restricted industrial uses consistent with [Rio Tinto's] acquisition of the site.”

“They apparently do not intend to remediate these conditions,” said Brumleve.

PolyMet plans to purchase this processing site; reportedly, Cliffs would maintain a roughly 7% stake in PolyMet's proposed NorthMet project

Three groups today announced their intent to file a lawsuit against Cliffs Erie, a subsidiary of Cliffs Natural Resources, for ongoing water pollution from previous taconite iron mining at three sites on Minnesota’s Iron Range.  PolyMet Mining Co. plans to utilize two of the sites in order to dispose of wastes from its proposed metallic-sulfide NorthMet project.  As part of a purchase agreement, Cliffs would maintain a roughly 7% stake in the project.  The other Cliffs site, at the old Dunka Mine, is closer to Franconia Minerals and Duluth Metals’ proposed sulfide projects.

A news release issued by the Center for Biological Diversity noted that, “according to Cliffs Erie’s own monitoring reports, there are numerous ongoing violations of water-quality laws relating to management of the former LTV tailings basin. PolyMet’s proposal for its copper-nickel mine is to pile its own tailings waste on top of those from a former taconite mine that are still polluting.”

The Center for Biological Diversity, Save Lake Superior Association, and the Indigenous Environmental Network filed a formal notice letter today that acts as a “prerequisite to filing a citizen enforcement action under the Clean Water Act.”  The Save Lake Superior Association, a grassroots citizen group, proved instrumental in holding the Reserve Mining Co. to account for dumping iron mining waste into Lake Superior from 1955 into the 1970s.  The pollution introduced asbestos-like material into the lake and harmed fishing in the area.

From today’s Center for Biological Diversity news release:

“Before the state even considers the approval of a new wave of mining in northeastern Minnesota, it should first require the mining companies to clean up the pollution from past taconite mines,” said Marc Fink, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. “As we all learned as kids, you should clean up one mess before making another one.”

The LTV basin, located six miles north of Hoyt Lakes, was used for taconite tailings from the 1950s until 2001. The unlined basin is the source of numerous seeps and discharges of polluted wastewater into groundwater and surface waters, which eventually reach the Embarrass River.  For the proposed NorthMet mine, PolyMet proposes to process more than 225 million tons of ore at the LTV processing facility, and use the same LTV tailings basin already known to be leaking.

“While past mining has already polluted these waters, the proposed heavy metals mining would bring severe new threats of pollution to these waters, which ultimately flow into Lake Superior at the Duluth harbor,” said Le Lind of the Save Lake Superior Association. “This new threat includes sulfuric acid runoff and higher levels of mercury in waters that are already impaired.”

In addition to the LTV site, the groups intend to file suit to stop ongoing pollution at the Dunka mine site, which is close to where Duluth Metals has plans for a copper-nickel mine adjacent to the Kawishiwi River, and where Franconia Minerals proposes a copper-nickel mine at the bottom of Birch Lake. Both the Kawishiwi River and Birch Lake flow into the Boundary Waters.

“These are historic tribal lands where the tribes retain treaty rights, and many tribal members are deeply concerned about additional pollution to fishing streams and sources of wild rice,” said Marty Cobenais of the Indigenous Environmental Network.

Cliffs Natural Resources operates iron ore mines in Minnesota and Michigan, including the Empire and Tilden mines, in the Upper Peninsula.  Cliffs’ Michigan operations are currently leaching illegal amounts selenium into surrounding groundwater and surface water that is in violation of federal and state water quality laws.

by Eartha Melzer, Michigan Messenger 

A member of the Summer Cloud drumming group performs during a 2008 ceremony at Eagle Rock

Two days before the DEQ ceases to exist and a week after its director stepped down, DEQ moved to wrap up a long standing fight over permits for a planned nickel sulfide mine by concluding that only buildings may be considered “places of worship.”  

A rock that is sacred to Anishnabe people need not be considered when issuing a mining permit because state law only recognizes buildings as places of worship, the Department of Environmental Quality announced Thursday.   

This decision cleared the way for DEQ to finalize permits for a mine planned for public land on the Yellow Dog Plain northwest of Marquette. 

The resolution comes at a time of great tumult for the department. Director Steven Chester resigned last week, and the department is slated to come under the leadership of DNR director Rebecca Humphries when it is rolled into the new Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment on Jan. 17.   

For seven years the Kennecott Eagle Minerals Company, a subsidiary of London-based Rio Tinto, has been trying to develop the mine project. The company promised hundreds of construction and mining jobs but has faced opposition from groups that are concerned that acid drainage from the mine will damage the nearby Salmon Trout River and Lake Superior.  

The National Wildlife Federation, Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, and the Huron Mountain Club together filed an administrative appeal of DEQ’s 2007 approval of mining and groundwater discharge permits for the mine.  

Eagle Rock, photo courtesy Yellow Dog Summer

 Over the course of more than a year the groups described numerous mine safety and environmental concerns. They also argued that the DEQ had failed to properly consider the impact of the mining on traditional Native American uses of the area, including the collection of medicinal plants and the use of Eagle Rock in religious ceremony.  

On Aug.18 2009 DEQ Administrative Law Judge Richard A. Patterson recommended that the Kennecott permits “be allowed with the exception that provision be made to avoid direct impacts to Eagle Rock that may interfere with the religious practices there on.”  

State mining law requires that “Residential dwellings, places of business, places of worship, schools, hospitals, government buildings, or other buildings used for human occupancy all or part of the year” be taken into account when permitting a mine. 

“Kennecott and, as a consequence, DEQ, did not properly address that impact on the sacred rock outcrop known as Eagle Rock as a place covered by Part 632 Rules,“ Patterson wrote in his review of the case.   

“…[T]he excavation and drilling in the immediate area of Eagle Rock and fencing it off will materially affect its use as a place of worship,“ he wrote. “This should in some manner be accommodated , and would best be done so by relocating the adit and access to the mine to a location that would not interfere with that function.” 

On Nov. 6 2009 DEQ Director Chester remanded the case back to Patterson and asked that he expand on his discussion of the religious significance of Eagle Rock and DEQ’s responsibility for places of worship under state law.  

 Chester promised to issue a final decision on the permits after receiving the supplemental analysis from Judge Patterson.   

Just two weeks ago the DEQ still expected to wait to decide on the permits until hearing from Patterson.  

A Dec. 29 Marquette Mining Journal article on the potential effect of DEQ restructuring on permits for the Kennecott mine reported:   

“[DEQ spokesman Bob McCann] said he had no indication when Patterson might provide the additional information so a final decision can be made on the contested case.” 

In an interview Thursday afternoon McCann denied that the timing of the decision had anything to do with the impending restructuring of the department.   

“We were hoping to have this done in December,” he said. 

McCann said that DEQ senior policy advisor Frank Ruswick reviewed the documents filed and decided DEQ could issue a final order without a modified proposal from Judge Patterson.   

“Michigan mining law references buildings that are places of worship,“ McCann said. “Eagle Rock doesn’t fit into that under Michigan mining law, therefore it doesn’t apply in this case.”  

National Wildlife Fund attorney Michelle Halley decried DEQ’s move as “an effort to push this through before [Rebecca Humphries] becomes the director of the decision making body.” 

Halley said that she finds it “totally illogical” that DEQ would request an opinion from an administrative law judge and then make a decision on the permits before receiving it, adding that her clients intend to appeal DEQ’s decision in circuit court.  

Kennecott responded to DEQ’s final approval in statement saying that it plans to begin clearing the mine site and constructing a water treatment facility this year.  

“Today’s decision by the State is great news for our project and a community and region that has been anticipating the job opportunities and economic contribution our project will trigger,” Rio Tinto / Kennecott Eagle Minerals General Manager Jon Cherry, said in the statement. “Permitting this project has been a very rigorous process that has enabled Kennecott to develop an exceptionally responsible design and approach to mining in the 21st Century in Michigan.” 

Kennecott said that it aims to begin production of nickel and copper from the mine in 2013.   

The Michigan Environmental Council called DEQ’s final approval “disappointing and inappropriate.” 

“Strong Michigan laws were written specifically to protect Michigan’s waters, including the Great Lakes, from toxic byproducts this mining will create,” MEC Spokesman Hugh McDiarmid Jr. said in a statement. “It is unfortunate that the state has chosen not to fully enforce these laws in the permitting process.” 

To read more from Eartha Melzer, please visit Michigan Messenger.

The decision comes during a time of transition for the agency.  Steven Chester resigned from his post as head of the DEQ three week’s ago and was temporarily replaced by Deputy Director Jim Sygo.  Today’s news release issued by the DEQ does not indicate who, at the agency, made today’s decision.

According to DEQ press secretary, Bob McCann, Jim Sygo “delegated” decision-making authority to Frank Ruswick, DEQ Senior Policy Advisor, who ”conducted the review of the case and made the decision to sign the final order.”

The DEQ had earlier approved Rio Tinto’s mining application in December 2007.  The decision was appealed in a lengthy contested case hearing.

In an August 2009 recommendation, Administrative Law Judge Richard Patterson stated that Rio Tinto and the MDEQ “did not properly address the impact on the sacred rock outcrop known as Eagle Rock” and suggested moving the mine’s entry portal away from the rock.  During the contested case , DEQ lawyers argued that Eagle Rock is not a place of worship because it is not a constructed building, such as a Christian church or a mosque.

In November, then DEQ Director Steven Chester requested that Judge Patterson clarify his position on the one stipulation that wasn’t fully in Rio Tinto’s favor.

Today’s DEQ decision affirms the agency’s opinion that Eagle Rock is not a legitimate place of worship, as defined under Michigan mining law, and that the religious rights of area Native Americans are irrelevant in the Eagle Mine case.

Apparently not under consideration is that the DEQ’s coordinator for review of the Eagle Mine application, Joe Maki, admitted, under oath, that neither he or his team followed a central tenet of Michigan’s “Part 632″ mining law in recommending approval of Rio Tinto’s project.

In September 2008 Steven Chester further placed the agency’s regulatory ability under question when he confessed, “We simply don’t have the kind of funding we need to adequately implement the laws we’re required to implement.”

Swept under the rug are comments made by the state’s commissioned rock mechanics expert, Dr. David Sainsbury,  that the company’s mine plan was “technically antiquated, sloppy and equivalent to high school level work.”  Sainsbury also insisted that the DEQ kept relevant local geological information out of his reports and repeatedly said that Kennecott’s conclusions regarding the ability of the mine to not collapse “are not considered to be defensible” and does “not reflect industry best practice.”

Michigan’s machiavellian contested case process is interesting in that the DEQ makes the final decision on whether or not the agency, itself, appropriately followed applicable law.  So, while Director Chester made a decision in 2007 to approve Rio Tinto’s mining application, oddly enough it is Chester who was expected to make a final decision on whether or not his earlier approval followed the law.

The DEQ will no longer exist as an agency as of January 17, when it will be re-combined with the Department of Natural Resources to form the Department of Natural Resources and Environment.  The new agency will be headed by the DNR’s current director, Rebecca Humphries.

Rio Tinto, which also issued a press release today claiming that, with final state approval, the company would begin constructing the mine this year, with production expected to commence in 2013.  Legally, the company must still obtain amendments to its mine plan, submitted to the DEQ, as well as permits from the Environmental Protection Agency before it can mine.

Click HERE to read the DEQ’s final decision.

Baraga County Mine Inspector, Don Carlson, expressed concern that fugitive dust leaving the proposed mill site could affect worker’s health and the health of their families since he has not seen an adequate plan to both capture and dispose of the fine material.  Carlson also highlighted Michigan’s poor economy – Baraga County has one of the nation’s highest unemployment rates - and said that any mining jobs need to be performed by union workers, citing the closed White Pine Mine as a good example of how workers could be treated.

“When this company comes to the area are the area people going to be hired or are the companies going to bring the people from other areas,” questioned Carlson.  “We have an influx in Michigan of no jobs, people being laid off every day, all these types of things and these workers aren’t being able to go and get a job, a union job, with these companies.”

Rio Tinto, a notorious anti-worker company has drawn the ire of union workers around the world and is currently attempting to bust Local 30 of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, AFL-CIO, at the company’s large open pit Borax Mine, in California.

Chris Mofatt, a Marquette County prison worker and lifelong Upper Peninsula resident said, “I don’t oppose mining, I don’t oppose jobs, but I do oppose liars and I think that Rio Tinto and the DEQ are not credible.”

“Rio Tinto’s track record is poor,” said Mofatt.  “They want to come in here and do the same thing in the UP they’ve done in other countries. I oppose that.  Michigan deserves better than that and we’re not getting it right now.  Our corporate government wants to run an eighteenth century industry down the throat of twenty-first century enfranchised Americans. . . we deserve better and so does everybody in the world because we have twenty percent of the fresh water.”

According to Keweenaw Bay Indian Community geologist, Chuck Brumleve, the DEQ’s approval of the Humboldt Project is currently opposed by both the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service.  Yet, in an interview with WLUC-TV6, the DEQ’s director of the Office of Geological Survey, Hal Fitch, claimed that approval of the Humboldt Mill project “hasn’t been a controversial issue.”

Reading from an EPA statement, Brumleve reported that the agency is “concerned the currently proposed project may have significant adverse impacts on the ecosystem.  We object to the issuance of a permit for this project.”

Brumleve said that the US Fish and Wildlife Service requested “that the MDEQ not issue a permit for the proposed work.”

Brumleve expressed concern if toxic materials enter into the Middle Branch of the Escanaba River, already contaminated by high selenium levels coming from Cliff’s Natural Resources’ Empire and Tilden iron ore mines.

“The Escanaba River watershed is one of the Upper Peninsula’s major watersheds,” said Brumleve.  Any discharge “will ultimately affect the Escanaba River and discharge into Lake Michigan.  The Escanaba River already has a number of fish advisories.”

At a previous Humboldt Mill hearing, in February, Ely Township resident and miner, Stephen Johnson, said that he lives along the Escanaba River and has seen fish die off.

“Since the thirty years I’ve lived here I’ve seen the Middle Branch of the Escanaba deteriorate as a quality watershed,” Johnson said.  “We used to have brook trout galore in it some thirty years ago and I’m not aware of anybody catching a brook trout down by my residency in the last fifteen years.”

Marquette County Commissioner, Deb Pellow, read a statement in support of Rio Tinto’s milling plans, saying that the “reuse of the abandoned industrial site is an outstanding opportunity for environmental clean-up with the cost borne by Kennecott.”

“At the end of the mine’s life the site and surrounding area will have to be reclaimed to establish a self-sustaining ecosystem that does not need ongoing care.” [to view Pellow's public comment, see video below]

Indirectly countering Pellow, Brumleve said that while “we’re all in favor of” reusing old industrial sites, “instead of creating news ones,” Rio Tinto’s application makes clear, in at least two sections, that they are not required to leave the site cleaner than it currently is, nor do they intend to do so.

Quoting from Rio Tinto’s application, Brumleve said “the final land use of the reclaimed area of the Humboldt Mill site will remain as restricted industrial uses consistent with [Rio Tinto's] acquisition of the site.”

“They apparently do not intend to remediate these conditions,” said Brumleve.

Cynthia Pryor, Big Bay resident and former executive director of the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, outlined other deficiencies.  Pryor said that contingency plans required under Michigan law for a ‘spill prevention control plan’, ‘pollution incident prevention plan’ and monitoring of surface water sediment and fish tissue, as well as designs for “liners, covers, leachate collection systems [and] tanks” were not included in the application.

“Those designs should have been a part of the application,” said Pryor.  “In order to demonstrate that you’re going to be capable of doing something, you should have the design available for people to look at, for you to evaluate and for us to comment on.”

Pryor said the DEQ failed to request additional information from the company regarding designs for a water treatment plant, as well as a containment wall to prevent toxic tailing waste from entering into area wetlands and the Middle Branch of the Escanaba River.

“If it is not done, if it is not there, then your job is not done and neither is theirs,” said Pryor.  “It is the law. . . the application, therefore, is not complete.”

The DEQ’s Hal Fitch maintained that Rio Tinto has met all requirements.

“We’ve looked at it, at every aspect of it,” Fitch said.  “The requirements, the statute, and our rules and we feel that it meets those requirements and with those revisions and provisions Kennecott has provided us.”

Richmond Township supervisor William Luetzow joined supervisors in Humboldt, Republic and Michigamme townships in offering “one hundred percent” support of Rio Tinto’s proposed milling facility.  Luetzow, likely among the minority of American citizens that trust politicians, said that he resented public comments suggesting that Michigan politicians were corrupt and working on behalf of Rio Tinto’s interests.

“It was brought up twice here that politicians are corrupt or they’re part of this Kennecott thing.  I truly don’t understand that because politicians are voted by the people, for the people,” said Luetzow.

Some Rio Tinto supporters attacked local opponents as “anti-mining” and opposed to jobs.  James Sodergren claimed that, “many of the folks who make up the anti-mining group are not residents.  I’m certain that they have spent millions and continue to spend more in their effort to stop mining in the UP” and Deerton resident, John Hongisto, claimed that Rio Tinto opponents were “telling lies about mining and Kennecott.” [see video below]

Later public comments countered the claim that Rio Tinto opponents were opposed to mining or jobs.  Big Bay resident and schoolteacher, Gene Champagne, said, “You hear a lot of talk about jobs tonight.  Yes, we need jobs in this area.  Who in their right mind is against jobs?”

Champagne said that he does not belong to an environmental group and that Rio Tinto’s own actions led him to not trust their mining plans.

“In the time that I’ve been opposing I’ve never heard one person in the opposition, in so-called environmental groups, say one thing about being anti-mine or anti-jobs,” said Champagne.

Champagne called the approval process a “farce” and said that, while “we need the jobs here, nowhere in the law does it say that it has to provide jobs to get a permit.”

“The law says it does have to protect the safety of the workers and the safety of our environment,” said Champagne.  “The DEQ needs to follow the law.”

A couple comments in support of reopening the Humboldt Mill were seemingly heartfelt and compelling, especially considering that Michigan currently has the highest unemployment rate in the country.

Jay Mathews, with the local carpenters and millwrights union, said that his family has a long history of working in the mines and construction.

“It’s been our heritage for four or five generations,” said Mathews.  “All of my family has been supported by mines or by the jobs that came around with the mines.”

Mathews said that his sister worked for the Republic school system and lost her job when Cleveland Cliff’s eponymous mine closed.

“When they closed the schools, she was out of a job, said Mathews.  So it’s not just the mine workers that work, it’s everybody around.  It’s a big picture that we need now, as far as the economy goes.”

For other local coverage, read Johanna Boyle’s article, at the Marquette Mining Journal.

To view documents related to the proposed Humboldt Mill project, or to comment on the project by 5pm, Tuesday, December 29, 2009, visit the Michigan DEQ’s Web site.

By Eartha Jane Melzer, Michigan Messenger

Upper Peninsula lawmakers are railing against a ballot measure to create standards for uranium mining, claiming that no uranium ore has been discovered in Michigan. However, a Canadian uranium mining company says it’s found uranium in the U.P., scientists have warned that its uranium exploration could harm groundwater, and the Western Upper Peninsula Health Department is warning that residential wells in several counties already have elevated levels of the radioactive metal.

In a statement this week, Sen. Mike Prusi (D-Ishpeming), Sen. Jason Allen (R-Traverse City), Rep. Mike Lahti (D-Hancock), Rep. Steve Lindberg (D-Marquette) and Rep. Judy Nerat (D-Wallace) accused sponsors of a proposed 2010 ballot measure on mining of talking about uranium mining in order to scare people and destroy the mining industry.

“No ‘uranium mining’ activity has ever existed,” the lawmakers stated, “nor has any uranium ore been discovered, in our state.”

However, according to a July 2009 financial report from Bitterroot Resources Ltd., a 17-hole uranium exploration drilling program concluded last December “identified several areas which warrant additional exploration.” The company said it spent $717,403 on Michigan uranium exploration in the first nine months of 2009.

On the sections of the company website devoted to its Upper Peninsula uranium exploration Bitterroot states that early drilling “encountered a 0.6-metre interval containing 75 ppm U, including two 0.12-metre intervals containing more than 100 ppm U. These intervals are significant as they confirm that uranium-bearing fluids have been mobile within the Jacobsville Basin.”

The presence of uranium in this area is also known to local health officials. The Western Upper Peninsula Health Department has issued a uranium advisory.

“Scattered drinking water sources in the Western Upper Peninsula have been found to contain uranium in amounts that exceed the federal Maximum Contaminant Level,” the health department states. “The source of the uranium may be the shale deposits that run inconsistently through the Jacobsville Sandstone formation. Water supplies with radioactivity have been found in Baraga, Gogebic, Houghton, Keweenaw, and Ontonagon Counties.”

The department states that uranium-laced water may be associated with kidney damage and cancer and that people with wells constructed in the Jacobsville Sandstone formation should have their water tested for uranium.

Last year the National Forest Service granted permits for uranium exploration in the Ottawa National Forest and spokeswoman Lee Ann Atkinson told Michigan Messenger at the time that 50 test wells were authorized.

During the public comment period on this uranium exploration proposal by Trans Superior Resources, a subsidiary of Bitterroot Resources Ltd., Todd Warner, natural resources director for the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, noted that the company’s plan to bury drill cuttings on Forest Service land could result in radioactive compounds leaching into area groundwater.

“If a uranium ore body is disturbed in its natural geological setting, radium and polonium will inevitably be released into our environment,” Warner wrote in comments entered into the record. “The Forest Service has not noted that any additional or added precautions or testing is being required due to the potential or likely presence of uranium, radium, polonium and other radioactive elements.”

Because of the risk of chemical reactions that can cause minerals to contaminate the water supply, metallic mining requires permits from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, said Hal Fitch, director of the agency’s Office of Geological Survey. But due to what Fitch called “a weakness in the statute,” exploratory mineral wells in the rocky western half of the Upper Peninsula are exempt from permit requirements.

In the case of the uranium test wells in the national forests, the DEQ will visit and observe operations after being voluntarily contacted by the mining company, Fitch said.

The Michigan Save Our Water Committee says U.P. lawmakers are mischaracterizing their proposed ballot initiative.

“We are not talking about banning future uranium mining,” said spokesman Duncan Campbell. “We don’t have any regulations covering uranium, all we are asking is that we have some regulations to cover uranium.”

Read more of Eartha J. Melzer’s articles at Michigan Messenger.

Michigan Senator Mike Prusi was one of five politicians to issue a statement attacking a proposed mining ballot; Photo courtesy State of Michigan

State senators Mike Prusi and Jason Allen, as well as state representatives Michael Lahti, Steven Lindberg and Judy Nerat issued the  statement claiming the proposal attacks the Upper Peninsula’s (U.P.) economic interests.

Perhaps using erroneous information from mine supporters, the politicans claim that the ballot’s focus on uranium mining is a scare tactic as ” no ‘uranium mining activity has ever existed, nor has any uranium ore been discovered, in our state.”

A joint venture between Bitterroot Resources and uranium giant, Cameco, continues to actively search the U.P. for uranium deposits.

Dishonestly, the politicans claim that the ballot proposal would “BAN any future mining.”  The ballot proposal affects only “Part 632″ Michigan mining law, which regulates only nonferrous metal mining.