US Senator and comedian Al Franken is one of PolyMet's staunchest supporters

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a strong critique of an environmental review of PolyMet’s proposed NorthMet mine, located outside of Hoyt Lakes, Minnesota, and is recommending the mine “must not proceed as proposed.”

According to the agency, PolyMet’s project “may have substantial and unacceptable adverse impacts on aquatic resources of national importance.”  The criticism comes months after a slew of state and federal politicians issued statements of support for the project, assuring the public and media the review was rigorous and the mine would not harm the environment.

In a December 9 support letter for PolyMet US Senator Al Franken told the state’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR) the project should be approved:

“Throughout this multi-year process, PolyMet has done their due diligence and has faithfully followed the law.  This includes providing all the necessary information for the draft environmental impact statement (EIS).  The resulting draft describes the many steps PolyMet will take to minimize environmental impacts.”

In a similar letter, US Representative Jim Oberstar urged the DNR to approve PolyMet’s project:

“PolyMet has earned my support from the outset because of its responsible, innovative approach to nonferrous mining and processing; the DEIS does an excellent job of describing the many steps PolyMet will take to minimize environmental impacts.”

Oberstar and US Senator Amy Klobuchar tried introducing a bill that would allow PolyMet to directly own 6,700 acres of the Superior National Forest.  The move would also eliminate requirements requiring consultation and cooperation with Native American tribes, under an 1854 treaty with the US government.  Because the proposed site, located on public land, is protected from strip mining by the Weeks Act, passed in the early 1900s, PolyMet will either need special legislation or an equally controversial land exchange with the US Forest Service in order to proceed with its mine.

And just last week State Representative Tom Rukavina claimed, in an interview, that “this mine as it moves forward will be the most environmentally sound copper nickel mine I think in the world.”

In a letter to the St. Paul District of the US Army Corps of Engineers, Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator for the EPA’s Midwestern district, said the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the project is “Environmentally Unsatisfactory-Inadequate” (the lowest rating possible) and would violate federal Clean Water Act requirements by contaminating ground and surface water with acidic mine drainage and mercury and destroy over 1,000 acres of high –quality wetlands.  According to the agency, plans to combat acid mine drainage are “inadequate.”

The letter notes that the DEIS failed to include information on financial assurance and was missing much information on the tailings basin’s projected stability, impacts to groundwater and surface water, and impacts to wetlands.

According to the EPA, “The project will result in unacceptable and long-term water quality impacts, which include exceeding water quality standards, releasing unmitigated wastewater discharges to water bodies (during operation and in the post-closure period), and increasing mercury loadings into the Lake Superior watershed.”

The EPA’s letter confirms criticisms coming from citizen groups and environmentalists that the project would destroy valuable wetlands and pollute groundwater and surface water feeding into Lake Superior.

“The EPA decision to rate the PolyMet DEIS as ‘environmentally unsatisfactory-inadequate’ confirms what our grassroots group has been saying for the past 5 years,” said Elanne Palcich, a retired school teacher from the Iron Range.  ”This type of mining cannot be done in the wetland environment of northeast Minnesota without polluting our waterways for centuries.  There is nothing in this DEIS that demonstrates how water contamination from acid mine drainage can be prevented.

Late in 2009 the Friends of the Boundary Waters listed some concerns on the group’s website:

Water leaching from the waste rock piles is expected to be contaminated for up to 2,000 years

The West Mine Pit will overflow at Mine Year 65 (45 years after expected mine closure), contaminating the adjacent Partridge River with sulfates and heavy metals

Groundwater at the mine site is expected to exceed water quality standards

Due to structural instability, the tailings basin has a “low margin of safety”

The Minnesota DNR hired Environmental Resources Management (ERM), based out of London, England to conduct the DEIS.

PolyMet plans to use this closed processing plant for its proposed NorthMet mine

In December, Al Trippel, an environmental consultant with ERM, 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 been actively involved in new mining proposals in the region for years.  Trippel acted as Aquila Resource’s representative throughout Michigan’s “Part 632″ statute and rules process, from 2004 through 2005 that crafted legislation regulating the metallic sulfide mining industry.  Trippel is currently on Aquila’s payroll, and was responsible for conducting baseline environmental studies necessary prior to submitting a mine application for the company’s proposed “Back Forty” project, located along the Menominee River, in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.  Aquila plans to submit a mining application for the project this year.

Minerals Processing Corporation, a Minnesota company associated with Aquila, was recently denied a “conditional use permit” to explore for minerals in Carlton County, Minnesota.  In 2006 Kennecott (a subsidiary of Rio Tinto) was denied a similar permit in Aitkin County.  Kennecott sued the county and was supported by the Minnesota Court of Appeals.  The court complained that county commissioners were too “heavily influenced by public opposition” and argued that the public had no legal right to stop a mining project in Minnesota.  The company is now promoting the “Tamarack” copper and nickel project to investors.

According to a news release, PolyMet is viewing the EPA’s criticism as just another part of the process.

The Final EIS will likely incorporate many of the suggestions from the EPA and others that have been proposed during the public comment period. The intent of the draft EIS process is to use the comments on the DEIS to improve the proposed project that will be documented in the Final EIS. The Final EIS will be subject to public review before being declared “adequate” by the MDNR and receiving a “record of decision” by the USACE. Once the comments have been fully analyzed, the MDNR and the USACE will establish a timetable for completion of the Final EIS and subsequent permitting.

Similarly, in Michigan, Rio Tinto’s Humboldt Mill project received sharp criticism from the EPA and the US Fish and Wildlife Service in June 2009.  Yet, by January 2010, the agencies had retracted their opposition so long as Rio Tinto adequately monitors the pollution.

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.

Resolution Explores for Copper Outside Superior, Arizona; Photo courtesy Flickr

Rio Tinto, a company that has made its name exploiting public and indigenous mineral wealth for decades, is set to make off with an astounding $140 billion in publicly-held mineral rights, in Arizona, for what is expected to be North America’s largest copper mine.

On Wednesday, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee approved a land swap allowing Resolution Copper Mining (a joint venture between Rio Tinto and BHP-Billiton) access to 2,400 acres of the Tonto National Forest.  The area contains sites sacred to local Native American tribes and was previously protected from mining activities by the Eisenhower administration.

According to the Arizona Republic, in a deal reached between the Obama administration, Senate Democrats and Arizona Senator John McCain, the only thing standing in Resolution’s way is a federal environmental review that must be completed prior to the land deal.

An opponent of the deal, US Representative Raúl Grijalva has concerns with Rio Tinto’s human rights record and urges a full investigation before a land swap is considered.

US Representative Raúl Grijalva opposes Rio Tinto's land swap and condemns the company's human rights record

“(Rio Tinto) has as bad a record as you’ll find anywhere in the world, yet the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee (approved) a deal that would grant it another $140 billion in mineral rights currently held on public land,” Grijalva said in a prepared statement.

“We, as lawmakers, owe the public some due diligence before rushing to pass a bad bill in the name of job creation.  The economy cannot be jump-started at the expense of the labor, civil rights and environmental laws we hold dear in this country.”

“Voting to pass this legislation blatantly ignores Rio Tinto’s troubling human rights record,” Grijalva said, pointing to the Norwegian government’s recent decision to divest itself of approximately $890 million in Rio Tinto stock after deeming the company’s activities overseas “grossly unethical.”

“The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, by moving the legislation forward without greater consideration of Rio Tinto’s worldwide business practices, has done “a grave disservice to our taxpayers and abused Congress’ role as the guardian of public resources,” he said.

Grijalva  serves as Chairman of the National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Subcommittee on the House Committee on Natural Resources where he could block a vote on the bill.

Lake Superior Mining News has reported on Rio Tinto’s theft of public resources in the past.

In Michigan the company plans to mine copper and nickel from its planned Eagle Mine.  The multi-billion dollar project is partially located on public land and would use a rock outcropping sacred to local Native American tribes for its mine portal.

In Utah, Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon has criticized Kennecott Copper (wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Tinto) for exploring on prized public recreation land.

Similarly, mining companies in Minnesota have  found it easy garner political support for the use of public land in order to mine metallic sulfide deposits.

PolyMet’s NorthMet project will move forward if the company can gain access to roughly 6,700 acres of public land in the Superior National Forest.  US Representative Jim Oberstar and US Senator Amy Klobuchar have introduced legislation that would directly give PolyMet that land.

Duluth Metals and Franconia Minerals also have projects, located just outside the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, in Minnesota, that would rely on the use of the Superior National Forest.

A fisherman docks his boat on Perch Lake, no longer a proposed Rio Tinto exploration site; May 2009 GC

“I would like to think the public opposition that formed, when residents were finally indirectly informed of Kennecott’s application, was a major factor in Kennecott’s decision,” said Richard Sloat, lifelong resident of Iron County.

According to Gale Stowell, Bates Township Zoning Administrator, the township has a strong zoning ordinance that places certain restrictions on mining and exploration.

“If anyone came to do mining in our township they would have to have a public hearing.”

At a hearing, local residents would likely be concerned that exploration or mining could pollute lakes, rivers and local groundwater.  Iron County has been dealing with mine contamination for years.  Acid drainage from the Buck and Dober mines, which produced iron ore, continues to pollute the Iron River.

Bates Township has a history of questioning potentially dangerous mining practices on public land.  In 1980, the township, along with Houghton County’s Portage Township and Baraga, Delta and Charlevoix counties adopted a resolution opposing the leasing of state land for uranium exploration and mining.

Scenic Perch Lake and its surrounding public land is prized by cabin owners, anglers and hunters; May 2009 GC

Nearly thirty years later Kennecott’s exploration project on scenic Perch Lake drew not only the ire of local citizens but a strong critique from Forest Service staff analyzing the application.

In a May 5 letter, Barbara Van Alstine, the ONF’s Kenton District Ranger, noted that discussion with Forest Service personnel coordinating review of Kennecott’s exploration application, indicated that certain sensitive sections in the proposed project area would have to be “dropped from consideration. . . due to concerns regarding wildlife, heritage, old growth and botany resources.”

The letter noted that public comment played a deciding factor in excluding the most sensitive areas from consideration.

However, later that month, the Kenton District was notified by the BLM that parcels could not be removed from consideration without changing the Ottawa National Forest Plan or using a “formal withdrawal process via Congress.”

Did Kennecott halt the project due to Forest Service skepticism, township and public opposition or a strong zoning law?  Mining companies are often reluctant to attribute the cancellation of projects to public or local government opposition.

While Bates Township officials expressed concern with Kennecott’s exploration activities, Gale Stowell isn’t sure exactly why the company dropped its plans.

Richard Sloat suggests that the answer may be related to the vibrant public opposition to Kennecott’s proposed Eagle Mine, in nearby Marquette County, currently “deferred” and stalled for years.

“Why would Kennecott want to launch another public relations campaign in another region of the U.P.?,” questioned Sloat.

Kennecott, and a joint venture project of Bitterroot Resources and uranium giant Cameco still have exploration proposals on public land pending with the Forest Service for five other areas in the western Upper Peninsula of Michigan.

Sticker distributed before meeting by Rio Tinto's Senior Advisor for Government and Community Relations, Chantae Lessard

West Ishpeming, Michigan - Last week Rio Tinto’s head spokesperson for the proposed Eagle Mine, Deb Muchmore, informed AP that she is the new spokeswoman for a “citizen” campaign:  Citizens to Protect Michigan Jobs.  Today’s public meeting regarding Rio Tinto’s proposed haul road, for the mine, featured public comment from a number of current and potential Rio Tinto employees, many sporting pro-road stickers passed out by Chantae Lessard, Senior Advisor for Government and Community Relations for Rio Tinto.

The organizing effort paid off for the company with a large turnout in support of the project and, as is the case at any meeting concerning the proposed mine, jobs were a main talking point among Rio Tinto supporters with high unemployment, locally and statewide, cited as an incentive to approve the road plan.  Details of perceived employment benefits were not outlined.

While advertised as a “multi-use” road that would benefit the logging, gravel and tourism industries, and only incidentally the mining industry, the road, as designed, goes from the proposed Eagle Mine to the proposed milling facility, in Humboldt, the project will not get off the ground if Rio Tinto can’t use it as part of its mining operations and the company is paying the entire $50 million cost to build the new road.

On September 29, Rio Tinto’s chief operating officer for the haul road project, Ken Wooley, insisted that the road was not specifically for the proposed Eagle Mine:  “The road is not tied to the mine. This is truly a multi-use road.”

At today’s meeting, Mark Holmes, a concerned citizen, said , “As of right now it [the road] has nothing to do with the mine – although in the future it might have.”

However, the Marquette County Road Commission was not sure if the road would move forward regardless of whether the Eagle Mine would go in or not.  Darryll Sundberg asked Rio Tinto’s lobbyist and community relations manager, Matt Johnson, “is this road going to be built whether or not the mine goes through?”

Johnson said that “depending on whether or not the mine goes in” Rio Tinto would have to consult with other partners in the project to decide whether or not the road should move forward.

Adrian Baker, from Big Bay, told the commission that while the Pledge of Allegiance was spoken at the beginning of the meeting,  “this country was not founded on catering to British business interests.”  Baker showed the audience that Marquette County will actually lose tax money with Rio Tinto’s plan to build a new road, rather than use existing roadways, to much laughter from the audience.

One man, claiming to represent “the tourism industry” said that Lindberg & Sons, the contractor planned to build Rio Tinto’s road, has “been building state and federal highways for years.  I can’t imagine that they couldn’t build a quality road that would meet the county road commission’s specifications.”

According to an expose by the New York Times, Lindberg & Sons is one of few known violators of the federal Clean Water Act in Marquette County.

Safety concerns weren’t addressed at the meeting.  According to a confusing statement on Rio Tinto’s website, the company believes that using existing roadways would be safer for the public than building a new road:

“Ore-carrying trucks, familiar to area residents, would likely follow the AAA and County Road 510 to County Road 550 to area rail connections, which would then transport the ore to existing offsite processing facilities. Use of existing truck routes will help ensure public safety and minimize burden on area roads.”

Jackie Koski, Humboldt Township trustee assured the commission that the township was in full support of Rio Tinto’s project, while Deb Pellow and Bob Struck indicated that the Marquette County Board was also in full support of the project.

Michigamme Township supervisor, John Olson, expressed his township’s support of the project.  A visibly agitated Olson said that it is “ironic” that mine opponents drove to the meeting in metal cars and noted that he saw “two people” talking on cell phones outside of the meeting hall.

“How do they get here if they don’t use mining projects to get here,” said Olson.

According to Rio Tinto’s John Meier, the company plans to fill in wetlands to construct the road over the Yellow Dog River, Mulligan Creek, Wildcat Canyon Creek, the Dead River, Voelkers Creek, Koops Creek, Second Creek and the Middle Branch of the Escanaba River.

Marquette, Michigan – Despite the global economic downturn, debt-burden and deferment of its keystone Eagle nickel project, Kennecott Minerals is pushing forward with new prospecting activities on public forest land in the western Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Joining the fray is a Canadian junior exploration company, Trans Superior Resources, which is quietly continuing the search for uranium and metallic minerals.

The on applications submitted for mineral prospecting on approximately 2,160 acres of public forest land in Baraga, Gogebic, Iron and Ontonagon counties.Ottawa National Forest (”Ottawa”) is accepting public comment

According to Lee Ann Atkinson, with the Lands and Minerals division of the Ottawa, Kennecott and Trans Superior’s applications are currently in a “scoping period” with no formal end to public comment. Once the Forest Service completes an environmental assessment for the projects, the public will again be invited to comment during a 30-day period.

Atkinson said that she is not sure when the comment period will begin for the environmental assessment.

Kennecott is pursuing three separate project areas located within the Ottawa. According to a Forest Service scoping letter, the company is looking for “all base and precious metals and other precious and semi-precious minerals”. The 640-acre “Watersmeet” parcel is located roughly four miles southeast of Watersmeet; the 200-acre “Haight” parcel is located roughly 8 miles northwest of Watersmeet; and the 395-acre “Bates” parcel is located on Perch Lake, roughly 20 miles north of the town of Iron River.

Kennecott has been trying to open the nickel-copper- precious metals Eagle Project mine, on the Yellow Dog Plains, southwest of Big Bay. The company has other metallic sulfide prospects, including exploration near the Huron River and on the L’Anse Indian Reservation.

Kennecott Exploration; Photo courtesy Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve

On February 12, 2009 the company announced that development of the Eagle Project is now “deferred until market conditions recover.” Australian media had been speculating, since May 2008, that “permitting delays and the collapse in the nickel price could mean this. . . project gets shelved.”

Kennecott has yet to obtain complete mining and surface use lease permits from the State of Michigan as well as mining permit amendments for its ore haul road and electricity plans for the mine. To open the Eagle Project, the company must secure an underground injection permit from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) before it can proceed with mining activities.

Kennecott is a wholly-owned subsidiary of London, England-based Rio Tinto.

Trans Superior is also pursuing three parcels, totaling 920 acres in an attempt to locate “nickel, copper, cobalt, platinum, palladium and associated minerals.” All are located just east of Prickett Lake and roughly 8 miles southwest of the town of Baraga. The company had previously obtained federal uranium prospecting permits from the Ottawa for exploration activities adjacent to the Sturgeon River Gorge Wilderness as well as for locations east and northeast of Lake Gogebic. The new Prickett Lake projects are immediately to the northeast of the Sturgeon Wilderness.

Trans Superior’s parent company, Bitterroot Resources, claims to own mineral rights to over 360 square miles in Baraga, Houghton, Iron and Ontonagon counties. In addition to its federal mineral leases within the Ottawa forest, Bitterroot has also obtained “leases or prospecting permits” with the State of Michigan and private land owners.

In 2003, Bitterroot began a 780 square mile joint venture agreement with uranium mining giant Cameco in efforts to locate a high-grade uranium deposit. Bitterroot cited Kennecott’s success in locating the Eagle ore deposit as the impetus behind its accelerated exploration. The company had previously been involved in a joint venture with Kennecott to explore for nickel, copper, platinum and palladium in the Upper Peninsula.

Federal mineral permits are approved and administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The Ottawa National Forest’s role is to conduct environmental analyses, in cooperation with the BLM, at the project locations, in addition to receiving public comment on the proposed exploration activities.

• Comments on Kennecott and Trans Superior’s exploration proposals should be addressed to:

Susan Spear, Forest Supervisor

Ottawa National Forest

E6248 E. US 2

Ironwood, MI 49938

Phone: (906) 932-1330

E-mail: comments-eastern-ottawa@fs.fed.us [put "Comments on Federal Minerals in the subject line]

• Comments can also be directed, orally, or hand-delivered to Ms. Spear’s office. Office hours are: 8am to 4pm, Central Time, Monday through Friday (excepting federal holidays)
• Information on the projects can be found at http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/ottawa/forest_management/projects/minerals/hardrock/index.htm

For additional information, contact Lee Ann Atkinson at (906) 932-1330, ext. 308, or e-mail leeannatkinson@fs.fed.us

Salt Lake County, UT – Once more, Kennecott has gotten its way with the public’s land. This time it is in Salt Lake County, Utah.

For over a year, the company has been attempting to continue prospecting on two, large, public recreation areas, despite intense public and political opposition.

In an agreement reached between the Salt Lake County Council and the company, Councilman Joe Hatch says the process was rushed and that Kennecott behaved in a threatening and arrogant manner.

According to Hatch, “Their tone and manner and everything is, ‘we are gonna grind you up and bury you and spit you out…you have nothing to stand on and we’re gonna do everything in our powers to defeat you.’”

Fellow council member Jenny Wilson agrees with Hatch, and says the county was afforded only a few hours to review the agreement before voting on it and wasn’t able to consult with attorneys.

In 2007, the company filed 70 mining claims on a large swath of land the county was in the process of purchasing for public open space. The 1,700 acre Rose Canyon Ranch, located in the southern Oquirrh Mountains, is largely used for hiking, biking and horseback riding. In a move broadly supported by local residents, the county purchased the pristine mountain parcel for $8.7 million.

However, because of antiquated mining laws, the county does not own subsurface mineral rights to the property.

The Stock Raising Homestead Act of 1916 allowed homesteaders to privatize land considered to have no value except for livestock grazing and the growing of forage for cattle. These homesteaders held surface rights to the land, while the federal government retained mineral rights. Because the federal government owns mineral rights, the 1872 Mining Law applies, allowing any person or corporation to trespass, prospect, file a mining claim and a plan for a mining operation without the landowner’s permission.

In the nearly one hundred years since the Homestead Act was passed, the US public has cultivated an impressive appreciation for the recreational and conservational value of land once considered virtual wasteland, due to its relative insignificance for large-scale industrial use.  Mining laws have failed to keep pace with these and other sweeping societal and environmental changes.

The county initially allowed Kennecott to prospect. As the work dragged on, and the county wasn’t adequately informed of the company’s work schedule, Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon felt “duty-bound to protect the investment” in the property and informed Kennecott that the county would not grant the company access without Bureau of Land Management (BLM) approval. In July, after Kennecott suggested it would land helicopters at the site, Corroon said the county would charge the company with trespassing if it continued prospecting. The county then petitioned the BLM for mineral rights to the tract to prevent future exploration.

In retaliation, Kennecott officials announced in September, that they would begin prospecting on 80 acres of county-owned Yellow Fork Canyon, a piece of land that, along with Rose Canyon and another parcel, gives county residents a nearly 4,000 acre recreation area.

Following the recent agreement with the company, Corroon acknowledged that, currently, mineral rights have precedence over property owner’s rights and that the county would likely lose a potential future BLM decision on the issue even if it denied Kennecott exploration access.  Corroon maintains that the agreement does allow the county to deny an actual mining plan.

Mayor Corroon and Wendy Fisher, executive director of Utah Open Lands, have no regrets over the purchase of Rose Canyon Ranch and hope that Kennecott finds nothing of value in the area.

“This land is intended to be for the citizen’s use and enjoyment,” Corroon said. “We’d like to see it remain that way.”

Kennecott owns and operates the nearby Bingham Canyon Mine. The site is considered the second most toxic active mining operation in the United States.

Double-Standards in Michigan

Kennecott’s coup, in Utah, is reminiscent of the mining industry’s current public land grab in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, with companies utilizing both federal and state public land for its exploration and mining activities. In order to pursue its interest in mining metallic ore underneath the Salmon Trout River, on the Yellow Dog Plains, Kennecott has obtained a state surface use lease which allows the company to fence off and occupy 120 acres of public land until 2042. Eagle Rock, which is considered sacred to the nearby Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC), is located on this public land.

The Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA) requires the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to “protect and conserve the natural resources of the State,” “prevent and guard against the pollution of lakes and streams within the State” and protect fish and game. The DNR also acknowledges that, under the public trust doctrine, the agency is responsible for protecting all wildlife “in trust for the benefit of the people of Michigan.” Wildlife potentially affected by Kennecott’s proposed operations include the federally-listed and endangered Kirtland’s warbler, the threatened Canada lynx and gray wolf as well as the rare coaster brook trout.

KBIC, in an effort to continue utilizing Eagle Rock for traditional ceremonial use, applied for a land use permit, through the DNR. The DNR denied the request because “permits may be issued” only “when the duration of the use of the…property is one year or less” and “the DNR does not typically issue open-ended permits for use at any time of the applicant’s choosing since the desired use may conflict with other users.” The DNR expressed concerns that KBIC’s ceremonial use might have “potential impacts to the resources” and that it could “conflict with other approved uses and activities in the vicinity.”

Current laws have been criticized for giving mining companies considerably more elbow room than public citizens and tribal nations.  The DNR does not consider Kennecott’s multi-decade lease to conflict with other uses, including public recreation and traditional ceremonial use, or to warrant substantive and independent investigation into its potential affects on endangered and threatened species or KBIC’s internationally-recognized treaty rights, considered the highest law of the land.

Aquila hosted “guest speaker” Al Trippel, an environmental consultant with Environmental Resources Management (ERM), based out of London, England. Trippel acted as the mining company’s representative throughout Michigan’s “Part 632″ statute and rules process that crafted legislation regulating the metallic sulfide mining industry. Trippel is currently on Aquila’s payroll, conducting baseline environmental studies necessary prior to submitting a mine application.

Aquila consultant, Al Trippel; Photo courtesy Teresa Bertossi

Aquila’s advertisement for the presentation, in the Menominee County Journal, noted that the meeting was being held “in response to public requests for unbiased, educational, fact-driven information from an expert.”

Teresa Bertossi, Marquette County resident, claimed that publicity surrounding the event showed a lack of “integrity” at Aquila. According to Bertossi, the advertisement did not disclose that Trippel works for the mining company and, in order to be truly unbiased, the company should “have brought in a university professor or a scientist that does not work for Aquila” to present information.

“I think all of us are biased”, responded Trippel. “I think all of us have a perspective and bias that may have to do with…who we work for.” Trippel insisted, “The work that I do is unbiased.”

According to Trippel, the presentation was intended to introduce local residents to the basics of acid rock drainage and how it can be prevented from occurring in a mining operation. Trippel listed both mining projects that have generated significant acid runoff as well as mines that he considers to have operated without significant acid drainage problems. “Mining’s legacy is both good and bad,” said Trippel. “There’s very definitely bad mining legacy from historic mining operations and, in some cases, from current ones.”

Trippel explained that acid drainage only occurs when three substances come into contact: sulfides, water and air. Removing one or more of these ingredients precludes the possibility for acid generation. According to Trippel, a mining operation can avoid acid mine drainage problems by preventing sulfide ore from contacting groundwater and surface water through the use of liner systems and water treatment facilities. If the problem cannot be contained, a company can “minimize the amount of acid rock drainage that would be created,” “minimize its potential to seep into the ground” or clean up the mess “if the designs intended to avoid and minimize the impact weren’t good.”

In response, one local resident commented that Trippel brought up “some pretty big ‘ifs’.”

Acid rock drainage commonly occurs at mining operations that encounter certain sulfide deposits, primarily those containing iron pyrite which, when it contacts air and water, forms sulfate. Recently, the government of Norway, one of mining giant Rio Tinto’s largest shareholders, divested its $890 million stake in the company, citing major concerns regarding extensive acid mine drainage at the company’s Grasberg Mine, in West Papua. In explaining its controversial move, Norway’s Council on Ethic’s referred to acid mine drainage as “one of the most serious mining-related environmental problems across the world.”

Trippel introduced Kennecott-Rio Tinto’s Flambeau Mine, in Rusk County Wisconsin, as an example of a successful metallic sulfide mine that has not created acid drainage. According to company documents, elevated levels of iron, manganese and copper in groundwater flowing into the Flambeau River are expected to occur, above baseline levels, for at least another 4,000 years. Levels of sulfates are expected to continue for over 3,000 years.

Bertossi took issue with hailing Flambeau as a successful operation. Kennecott-Rio Tinto and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources data “show that there is acid rock drainage as well as high copper levels and high manganese levels,” said Bertossi. “But it’s under the mine site and, based on the statute in Wisconsin, they can pollute groundwater beneath the mine to any limit.”

Lake Township supervisor, Bob Desjarlais, commented that the majority of Trippel’s list of “good” mines began operations in the 1800s when there was very little enforcement of mining operations. “These mines must have been rather low in sulfides that if you consider them to be fairly good mines that they could be open in the 1880s and 1927, I mean long before EPA regulations came out on acid rock drainage,” said Desjarlais. “So, how can we say these are significant mines without significant acid rock drainage when they probably didn’t have any to begin with.”

Trippel maintained that the intent of his presentation was not to compare his listed mines that he considered successful with either the Kennecott-Rio Tinto’s Eagle Project or the Back Forty project.

Road sign in Menominee County, near Aquila Resources' "Back Forty" project; Photo courtesy Teresa Bertossi

Trippel also introduced the White Pine Mine as an example of a deposit containing high sulfides that was mined without creating reported acid mine drainage. However, according to sources familiar with operations at White Pine, acid mine drainage was never expected to occur at the facility because the ore was located in a copper sulfide deposit and was surrounded by natural calcium-containing buffering agents. Orvana Minerals Vice President of Corporate Development, Bill Williams, recently told the Marquette Mining Journal that ore found within the White Pine deposit is classified, under Michigan law, as “nonreactive.” According to Williams, Orvana has found “no obvious indications” that the deposit contains iron pyrite, which could cause acid drainage.

Aquila’s Back Forty Project consists of a “massive sulfide” gold-zinc deposit near the Menominee River, outside of Stephenson, Michigan. The ore body extends under the river, which is shared with neighboring Wisconsin, possibly introducing purview under that state’s metallic mining requirements, which are more stringent than Michigan’s.

The company plans to use a cyanide leaching process to extract gold from the deposit.

Aquila’s stock is currently worth less than one US dime, per share [as of this writing], and the company is looking to form a joint-venture partnership with a larger mining firm in order to extract and process the ore. According to Aquila President, CEO and Director Tom Quigley, the company will be “looking at a variety of partnerships” if Aquila lacks access to sufficient capital. The company projects a total cost of between 120 and 140 million dollars needed to open the mine.

Quigley said that Aquila has solicited a resource assessment from Toronto-based SRK Consultants and will announce the results by early January. Aquila has been pursuing a preliminary economic assessment and expects Trippel’s baseline environmental studies to be finalized in time for the company to submit a mining application by late 2009. Aquila has also been relocating its drill cores from a field office, in Daggett, to a new building south of Carney.

Aquila Resources' new drill core storage building; Photo courtesy Teresa Bertossi

According to Quigley, the economic downturn is “something that could potentially impact our progress and development” and Aquila may have to layoff staff and postpone some “development activities.” According to some local citizens, the company has already layed-off its lead geologist.