OPINION: Correcting the Benishek push for construction of CR 595

By Jack Parker*

Recent articles in the Marquette Mining Journal and the Daily Mining Gazette, based on a press release from U.S. Representative Dan Benishek, are political in nature and contain errors from Mr. Benishek. I wish to set the record straight. All of the following statements can be verified -- but I doubt that anybody will want to do that.

Joblesssness. Michigan figures quote 9.3 percent for the state as a whole, 7.2 percent in the U.P, and 7.8 percent nationwide. Methinks that makes the U.P look good.

Benishek drew support from six other U.S Reps -- all from downstate.**

I submit that not one of the above knows the territory or the issues which cause the Federal Agencies to linger over their decision.

Remember -- the following statements are verifiable.

The original application for permits to mine was and still is a fraudulent and incompetent document which should have been rejected by MDEQ (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality) in 2006. They accepted it.

The applicable regulations, in Part 632, (available on line) stipulate stiff financial penalties and imprisonment for those who make false statements in the permitting process. That would include Kennecott management and attorneys; Foth, the producer of the document; MDEQ, who failed to regulate as prescribed by law; and perhaps those in court who ignored the evidence and supported Kennecott.

Kennecott proceeded with construction before the permitting process was completed, again with MDEQ collusion. They still do not have a permitted haul road. They still do not have a completed environmental impact study.

We are waiting for judgment of more recent appeals for justice, with reason to believe that the Feds will uphold the law.***

Much of the noise we hear supporting construction of 595 comes from businesses other than the (Eagle) mine which would exploit the resources of the region for profit. We might reasonably expect them to support the costs of building and forever maintaining the road.

No attention has been given to those who wish to preserve the limited wilderness. MDEQ ignores their responsibility to conserve those resources.

Kennecott openly plans to mine only the extremely high-grade ore, for six or seven years, abandoning ore-grade material which could extend the life of the mine, and jobs, by another 15  years. They used the same irresponsible approach at Flambeau, Wisconsin, and can be expected to repeat as they uncover additional ore bodies.

The Feds do well to hesitate to endorse a $5,000,000,000 fraud. Spectators should get the facts before they comment.

Editor's Notes:

* Visiting author Jack Parker is a semi-retired mining engineer and geologist, well respected for his practical experience in more than 500 mines around the world. Parker testified at a contested case hearing challenging the MDEQ mining permit for Rio Tinto-Kennecott's Eagle Mine on the Yellow Dog Plains. Click here to read about his reports concerning the potential instability of the mine.

** Rep. Benishek and six other U.S. Representatives from Michigan -- all Republicans from the Lower Peninsula -- recently sent a letter to Lisa Jackson, EPA administrator, to remove EPA objections to CR 595, a haul road for the Eagle Mine, projected to be built from the mine on CR AAA to Humboldt, Mich., site of a mill for processing copper and nickel from the ore. EPA objections are primarily based on impacts to wetlands and streams. Click here for the letter from the seven legislators.

*** EPA Region 5 in Chicago is expected to make a decision on the road by Dec. 1, 2012, after considering public comment from the Aug. 28, 2012, EPA hearing on CR 595 and written comments sent to them. Click here for Part 1 of our article on the Aug. 28 hearing. Click here for Part 2.

Letter: Truck Route alternative to CR 595 would benefit Marquette

To the editor:

The Marquette County Road Commission (MCRC) and Kennecott Eagle Minerals Co. (KEMC) provided the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with a list of Alternate Routes for a new road from the Yellow Dog Plains in northern Marquette County to US 41 in Humboldt. The cost of building whichever route that was to be used would be paid for by KEMC at a cost of $80,000,000 to $100,000,000. This list consisted of 4-5 different routes all in heavily wooded, wetland areas.

However, they did not include a route that utilizes the roads that already exist and would be improved to benefit our community directly. This route utilizes County Road 550, Forestville Road and US 41. This map of the general Forestville route was available at the Aug. 28, 2012, EPA Hearing on CR 595:

This map shows the Forestville Road (in green) and a suggested new truck route that would avoid congested traffic areas of Marquette. Click on map for larger version. (Map courtesy Daryl Wilcox, Powell Township supervisor)

KEMC researched and surveyed the Forestville route. They held meetings with the city and the townships about using this route if the Woodland Road doesn’t get approved. I imagine that one of the biggest reasons for not proposing this is the money KEMC would save hauling their ore to the Humboldt Mill. But another big reason for CR 595 is it allows them to operate "Out of Sight and Out of  Mind" of the general public. 

If the Forestville route were to be used there would be many benefits for the people of Marquette County. A truck route around north Marquette would stop any mining trucks from coming through the heavily populated City. Heavy logging coming from Big Bay and the limestone trucks that currently use Wright Street could use the Forestville route. Trucks going to the new Northern Michigan University Power Plant on the corner of Wright St. and Sugarloaf Ave. (up to 7 loads of wood chips per day) could use it. All the delivery trucks that go to WE Energies could use that route also.

This is a real solution for the truck traffic in north Marquette which has been a problem for the citizens of Marquette for a very long time. A Truck Route and an improved CR 550 would be a permanent for our community and our children and their children would benefit long into the future.

CR 595 is to be built as a Dead End Road ending at the KEMC Mine. The road from Powell Township to the mine, CR AAA, is a Seasonal Road which the MCRC has informed Powell Township that they would not maintain in the winter so that people who live along CR 550 could work at the mine. KEMC did say they would plow the road during the winter so the people on CR 550 could work at the mine as long as it was open. This was verbal commitment and currently no agreement is in writing. In a public meeting with the Powell Township Board, KEMC stated that once CR 595 is built there will be no commercial traffic allowed up to the mine from CR 550. This choice will bring serious economic harm to Powell Township, and that harm has not been addressed in any document or meeting of our county government.

$80,000,000 to $100,000,000 for a Haul Road to a mine that destroys more of what makes the UP special and will be gone within a short time or spend $80,000,000 to $100,000,000 to update our current roads and build a truck route that will be here for the rest of our lives and all of our children's and grandchildren's lives?

Don't let a Foreign Mining Company come in to the Upper Peninsula and tell us what is good or bad. Make up your own mind and support what you feel is right.  
Thank you,

Daryl Wilcox
Powell Township Supervisor
Resident of the UP and Marquette County

Editor's Note: Keweenaw Now received this letter today, Sept. 4, 2012. Mr. Wilcox stated some of these ideas during the Aug. 28, 2012, EPA Hearing on CR 595 in Marquette.

Stand for the Land: Kennecott haul road decision postponed

From Stand for the Land

Posted July 12, 2012

MARQUETTE -- The Marquette County Road Commission (MCRC), taking advantage of a new law that requires the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to extend a permit processing period at the request of the applicant, has set a decision deadline for October 1 of this year.*  If desired, the Road Commission may extend the time frame for review of the CR 595/haul road proposal to a year from the date the DEQ deemed the application to be administratively complete, which would be mid-January, 2013.

Although Engineer-Manager Jim Iwanicki of the MCRC has said there is no agreement with Rio Tinto for funding construction of CR 595, Eagle Mine president Adam Burley stated in an April 2011 letter that they wished to amend their agreement with the Road Commission by committing to pay for 595, adding that they would reconsider if construction had not commenced prior to May 2013.  Since there are no other identified funding sources, lack of support from Rio Tinto would leave the County with a $60-$80 million dollar tab that they couldn’t pay, effectively tabling the project. ...  Click here to read the complete article by Catherine Parker. 

* Click here to read about this new law.

National Wildlife Federation releases report comparing sulfide mining regulation in Great Lakes region

By Michele Bourdieu

MARQUETTE -- National Wildlife Federation (NWF) Attorney and Senior Manager F. Michelle Halley recently released a report titled "Sulfide Mining Regulation in the Great Lakes Region: A Comparative Analysis of Regulation in Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Ontario."

At a meeting preceding the Lake Superior Binational Forum meeting, "Mining Impacts and Lake Superior: A Basinwide Approach," in Ashland, Wis., last March, National Wildlife Federation (NWF) Attorney and Senior Manager F. Michelle Halley presents a summary of a recent NWF report on sulfide mining. The full report was published in March. (Photo by Keweenaw Now)

Halley, who edited the report, writes, "Water is the most important natural resource in the Lake Superior basin and the long-term value of fresh water far outstrips that of any mineral or any mine. Sulfide mining is well known for its negative impact on water. This report's analysis and the subsequent recommendations offer proactive steps to protect the water, people, and traditions of the Great Lakes Basin."*

Halley hosted a Webinar on the report on June 21, 2012. Before that, she presented a summary of the report at a meeting in Ashland, Wis., preceding the March 23, 2012, Lake Superior Binational Forum meeting, "Mining Impacts and Lake Superior: A Basinwide Approach."

In both presentations Halley emphasized the poor quality of sulfide mining regulation in all three states and Ontario.

"The neighboring states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, as well as the province of Ontario, operate independently of one another when it comes to permitting, regulating, and monitoring prospective mines," Halley says. "And yet water is not constrained by state borders and neither are pollutants. The environmental impacts of sulfide mining in one of these jurisdictions may reach well beyond its border. Federal oversight of permitting and monitoring new mines is severely limited, but sorely needed."*

Halley noted in the Webinar the names and locations of several sulfide mines in Michigan and Minnesota that are receiving permits or in the process of applying for permits to mine copper, nickel, gold and other metals whose recent increased demand and value has attracted multinational mining companies to the Great Lakes Region. She mentioned two Michigan mines that have already received permits from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality: Rio Tinto's Eagle Mine near Big Bay, Michigan -- already permitted and now under construction with mining projected to begin in 2014 -- and the Orvana Copperwood project located near the Porcupine Mountains State Park, only a few miles from Lake Superior, which recently received a Michigan Part 632 mining permit and is now applying for a wetlands permit (Part 303) and Inland Lakes and Streams permit (Part 301) and the air permit-to-install. A public hearing on these permits is scheduled for this Thursday, June 28, at Gogebic Community College in Ironwood.**

This map shows locations of proposed mines and potential deposit areas, some under exploration, in the Lake Superior Basin, as well as national parks, national forests and tribal lands. Click on map for larger version. (Map courtesy National Wildlife Federation)

A third project, Aquila's Back Forty near Menominee, Mich., Halley said, could be submitting a permit application this summer. In Minnesota, several areas are being explored and the North Met (Polymet) project may be the closest to being permitted. Right now they are revising their Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). In Wisconsin, Gogebic Taconite recently withdrew their project to mine the Penokee Hills with an open-pit mine that was connected to a failed move by the Wisconsin legislature to change the mining law; but changes in that law may still be forthcoming, Halley noted.

Halley also mentioned two mines impacting Native American reservations in the West. Impacts from the Zortman and Landusky open-pit gold mines in Montana included a 50,000-gallon cyanide spill, pollution of public water systems, poisoned fish and wildlife and contaminated Native American sacred sites. Pollution from the Silver Valley mines in Idaho's Coeur d’Alene River Basin, adjacent to the Coeur d'Alene Reservation, resulted in a 21-square-mile Superfund site and more than a billion dollars in damage.

This aerial photo of Rio Tinto-Kennecott's Eagle Mine near Big Bay, Michigan, shows Eagle Rock, an Anishinaabe sacred site, at right, which is now surrounded by the mining company's fence and is penetrated, at lower right, by the portal to the mine. Michelle Halley, representing NWF, has joined with tribal representatives in contested case litigation against Kennecott and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality that permitted the mine. In NWF's recent Webinar, Halley compared contamination of sacred Native American sites by mines in the West to this contamination of Eagle Rock. (Photo © and courtesy Jeremiah Eagle Eye. Reprinted with permission.)

Halley said she gave these examples just to point out that mines -- even what are considered "modern" mines -- can and do have very serious impacts on watersheds and may affect large areas of land.

Potential regulators of mining, she added, include tribes, local governments, state agencies and federal agencies.

"Tribes can be regulators," Halley said. "They can institute on reservations regulation -- It's normally called a TAS (Treatment as a State). That means that tribes can set their own water quality standards and air standards."

These regulations can apply to activities on the reservation and also activities off the reservation if they impact the reservation, she explained. Tribes have to go through a process with the federal government to obtain TAS status.

In a May 10, 2012, NWF press release on the report, Jordan Lubetkin notes, "Sulfide Mining Regulation in the Great Lakes Region also reviewed the role of tribal governments in the permitting process and found that jurisdictions failed to consider tribal perspectives or have denied meaningful tribal input into decision making. This is despite the fact that tribal entities have substantial land holdings and treaty rights across the Upper Great Lakes region."***

Local governments can be regulators as long as their regulations do not duplicate or conflict with state regulations, Halley explained. She encouraged representatives of local government to get involved in regulation.

NWF report ranks mining regulation in three states, Ontario 

This NWF report looks at three Great Lakes states and the province of Ontario as regulators. It compares these states in five areas: Regulatory Scope (what the state law says about what the agency should be doing), the Review Process (how thoroughly it is done), Enforcement, Program Resources (whether the agency has resources to monitor adequately), and Reporting and Official Statements (how monitoring information gets out to the public).

The research for the report included taking in all the info they could about these five areas in the whole region, surveying the laws, interviewing regulators from each of the states (and Ontario) and interviewing non-governmental groups.

"We really tried to get a broad view of how people view what's happening," Halley said.

Since Halley is involved in ongoing litigation related to Michigan laws, she felt it was inappropriate for her to conduct research for Michigan so NWF hired a temporary person to conduct the primary research for Michigan so it would be more objective. EcoJustice Canada did the Ontario research and rankings for Canada.

The rankings in the five categories were Good (little room for improvement), Fair (adequate or nearly adequate, but room for improvement) and Poor (failure to fulfill any or most of criteria for the category).

The report gives this summary of the rankings:

MICHIGAN: FAIR for two categories: Regulatory Scope and Reporting and Official Statements; POOR for the other three categories.

The report states, "Overall, Michigan lacks significant requirements for adequate regulation. Its laws are adequate, while acknowledging some major weaknesses like the lack of any siting requirements. Michigan’s largest weaknesses are Review Process (lack of stringent review of permit applications) and Enforcement. The failure in these areas is fueled by the lack of adequate Program Resources." (See pp. 6-7 of report for more detail on Michigan's rankings.)*

MINNESOTA: FAIR in all five categories.

"The law is adequate, but economic considerations appear to be a growing force resulting in legislative and policy changes designed not for environmental protections, but economic development," the report states.*

WISCONSIN: GOOD in two categories: Enforcement and Reporting and Official Statements; FAIR in the other three categories.

The report summarizes Wisconsin's enforcement thus: "The enforcement authority granted to Wisconsin’s DNR and to the public is the most extensive of any jurisdiction surveyed. It is marked not only by multiple opportunities and mandates for state enforcement actions, but also by open access for citizen participation in state enforcement actions and even direct citizen lawsuits against violators of the mining law. The one deficiency in this assessment category is the lack of a systematic monitoring scheme for the state to independently inspect and evaluate mining and reclamation activities."*

ONTARIO: FAIR/POOR in Regulatory Scope; FAIR in Enforcement and in Reporting and Official Statements; POOR in Review Process and in Program Resources.

"Ontario is in dire need of improving its laws (underway) and review processes. Of the upper Great Lakes region, Ontario is far and away the least equipped jurisdiction to regulate and facilitate public involvement in the establishment of new mines," notes the NWF report.*

"None of the states are adequately prepared to regulate this activity," Halley said. "At this point in Ontario the companies don't even need to obtain a mining permit at all."

During the Webinar, Halley did not address Ontario's issues in detail. She said she knew some people in Canada are working hard to address them. Halley noted the report's recommendations for all three U.S. states and some recommendations for individual states' issues.

Recommendations in common for the three states are these:

• Improvement in coordinating the efforts of the agencies responsible for different aspects of permitting, monitoring and enforcement of a mining project. "In some cases there's very little communication going on among those agencies," Halley said. 
• State or federally-conducted independent monitoring should be done regularly and be funded by the permittee.
• Tribes should have meaningful involvement in permitting and monitoring on the basis of being sovereign nations. Consulting with tribes is not enough. Information from tribes should be incorporated into agencies' decision-making.
• Mine plans should include such goals as workers' safety, long-term viability of the mine, economic plans for long-term community health, reasonable taxation, community priorities such as zoning, etc.
• Laws should require that public funds not be committed to a project that has not completed and passed environmental review.
• Penalties, royalties and fees should be used for regulation and remediation of nonferrous metallic mining -- not for other purposes.

Halley summarized these recommendations for Michigan:

1. Exploratory activity should be regulated and better monitored.
2. Environmental assessment should not be done by the applicant alone, but by the state. 
3. Lack of siting criteria is a major shortcoming. "As of right now, there is no place in Michigan -- no matter how unique, how pristine, how highly valued by the public -- that is not open to mining," Halley noted. "It's a serious -- probably the most critical -- shortcoming in Michigan's laws from a wildlife perspective."
4. At present, very long, cumbersome legal cases are needed to challenge a state's lack of enforcement. "Citizens should be allowed to initiate civil enforcement actions if the state is not taking sufficient action," said Halley, who has been involved in a lengthy legal case against Kennecott and the MDEQ concerning the Eagle Mine. 

Loopholes in Clean Water Act

Under federal enforcement, Halley pointed out that loopholes in the Clean Water Act (CWA) -- one of the Environmental Protection Agency's strongest tools -- allow waste materials from mines to be dumped into surface waters of the United States.

The original goals of CWA (in 1971), Halley noted, were "to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the waters of the US and to eliminate the discharge of pollutants into the waters of the US."

The use of any of river, stream or ocean as a waste treatment system was unacceptable.

In the mid-70s the EPA determined a zero discharge standard for some categories of mines was reachable and it was instituted, Halley added.

"If these same standards were still enforced today, the limitations would prohibit the hard rock mines from storing their untreated waste in waters of the United States," Halley said.

The first loophole is this: For about the last 20 years, agencies' rule changes determined that waste treatment systems are not waters of the U.S., Halley explained. This allows mines to impound rivers, streams, lakes, wetlands and dump untreated waste into the impoundments since they are not considered waters of the U.S. While the law originally applied to man-made waters, the interpretation changed in the 1990s and refers to other waters, not necessarily man-made.

During her presentation on the NWF report in Ashland, Wis., Michelle Halley points out the first loophole in the Clean Water Act, which allows mines to dump untreated waste into waters of the U.S. by impounding rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands. Click on photo for larger version. (Photo by Keweenaw Now)

The second loophole concerns the definition of fill, which allows toxic mining waste to be treated as fill and dumped into waters.

With this slide, Michelle Halley explains how the 2002 CWA definition of "fill" allows mining companies to dump toxic waste into waters of the United States. Click on photo for larger version. (Photo by Keweenaw Now)

According to Halley, simple rule changes could close these two loopholes in the Clean Water Act: First, agencies could go back to the original interpretation of a waste treatment system and allow waste disposal only in manmade waters. Second, agencies could revise the definition of "fill" to exclude waste disposal.

Those changes would make federal government's ability to regulate mining waste "astronomically" better than it is now, Halley concluded.

Lubetkin's article cites Tony Turrini, senior counsel at the National Wildlife Federation, on the role of the federal government in protecting waters of the Great Lakes region:
"'Where the states fall short of protecting the Great Lakes, the EPA should close the gaps,' said Turrini. 'But, it is not. In fact, EPA needs to fix loopholes in its rules that allow the dumping of millions of tons of mine waste into surface water.'"***

Lubetkin also cites reactions to the report from environmental leaders in Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Canada -- among them Chuck Brumleve, mining specialist for the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community; Brad Garmon, director of conservation and emerging issues at the Michigan Environmental Council; Scott Strand, executive director of the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, who expressed concern about a potential mining project near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area; George Myer, executive director of the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation; and Anastasia Lintner, staff lawyer with Ecojustice Canada.***

In conclusion, Halley said greater federal oversight is necessary to provide consistency across jurisdictions, assess cumulative basin-wide impacts, facilitate inter-agency coordinated review and monitoring, and provide much-needed technical resources.

The report calls especially for improvement in regulatory scope and enforcement at state, federal and provincial levels.

Notes:

* Click here for Michelle Halley's May 4, 2012, article introducing the NWF report on sulfide mining.  Click here to to download the full report, "Sulfide Mining Regulation in the Great Lakes Region: A Comparative Analysis of Regulation in Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Ontario."

** Click here for our announcement about the June 28 hearing on the Orvana Copperwood Project.

*** Click here for Jordan Lubetkin's article on the NWF report.

Updated: Stand for the Land: No U.P. license for Rio Tinto until they obey the laws

 Posted on Stand for the Land, June 2, 2012

MARQUETTE -- A series of letters recently published in the Marquette Mining Journal reflects ongoing and insistent objections to Rio Tinto’s activities in the Upper Peninsula, particularly with regard to the not-yet operational Eagle Mine Project.

Click here for excerpts from these letters and links to them on Stand for the Land.

Update: Click here to read the June 3, 2012, Guest Op-Ed by Gene Champagne of Big Bay in the Mining Journal: "Science, public relations are two different things."

Updated: Big Bay residents report on Rio Tinto AGM in London

By Michele Bourdieu

MARQUETTE -- Two Big Bay, Mich., residents concerned about air pollution from Rio Tinto-Kennecott's Eagle Mine went all the way to London -- to Rio Tinto's April 19, 2012, Annual General Meeting (AGM) with shareholders -- to request an independent, third-party air quality monitoring program for the mine.

During a rally preceding the Rio Tinto Annual General Meeting (AGM), Big Bay residents Cynthia Pryor (far right, holding sign) and Carla Champagne joined other groups who protested against Rio Tinto's projects and practices around the world, as well as their corporate sponsorship of the Olympic Games. Groups pictured here include the Utah Moms for Clean Air (with banner) and United Steel Workers Union members from Quebec (in orange shirts). See below for their comments at the AGM. (Photo © 2012 by Sallie Dean Shatz of www.shatziephotos.com. Reprinted with permission.)

When Cynthia Pryor of the Yellowdog Watershed Preserve and Carla Champagne of Concerned Citizens of Big Bay finally had their chance to speak at the AGM -- near the end of the question session -- the shareholders in the audience and the board members in the front of the large hall in Queen Elizabeth II Conference Center, just minutes before, had heard from a woman representing Utah Moms for Clean Air -- a Salt Lake City mother whose son had nearly died from asthma. According to Utah Moms, he is one of many children affected by air pollution attributed to Rio Tinto-Kennecott's huge open-pit Bingham Canyon mining operation near Salt Lake City.

That young mother, Alexandra Allred, was nearly in tears as she told the story of rushing her son to the hospital -- and of the many funerals of children she has attended in her community. Addressing both the shareholders and the company executives, Allred asked in a voice choked with emotion, "Can all of you please make a vow to me that you will put environmental issues in the forefront ... that you will become socially responsible for air quality and the environment -- not just where I live but around the world?"

Her request was answered with applause from the audience. Jan DuPlessis, Rio Tinto board chair, assured her he was sensitive to her "highly personal" question and was aware of the air quality problem in the Salt Lake City basin.

"I believe that Rio Tinto probably is the most responsible company in our sector when it comes to dealing with the environment," DuPlessis said.

They may not always get it right, he added, but they "will always try to do better."

At the very end of the question period DuPlessis took a question from Cherise Udell, also of Utah Moms for Clean Air. Udell said Salt Lake City has been cited by the conservative Forbes magazine as being the ninth most toxic city in the U.S., and it gets an "F" grade year after year from the American Lung Association.

"Rio Tinto," Udell stated, "is the number-one point-source emission in Utah and responsible for about 30 percent of the air pollution. This is a liability for you shareholders."

Tom Albanese, Rio Tinto chief executive, blamed the air pollution on their subsidiary Kennecott's vehicles as well as automobile traffic in the Salt Lake Valley. He said Rio Tinto is committed to reduce emissions "from Kennecott" with "extended light rail" and to begin converting vehicles from gasoline to natural gas.

That statement might make Marquette residents wonder why Rio Tinto's subsidiary Kennecott, after obtaining for the Eagle Mine a permit based on their original plan to haul the ore by rail, has since been allowed to change that plan to a haul route through Marquette (for an estimated nearly 50 trucks a day, each way) -- unless their alternative, CR 595 through the woods, should be approved by the federal agencies that have twice opposed it because of potential impacts to wetlands and streams.

Rio Tinto-Kennecott's Eagle Mine near Big Bay, Mich. The portal to the mine is at right, where it enters Eagle Rock, a sacred Ojibwe site. Click on photo for larger version. (Photo © and courtesy Jeremiah Eagle Eye. Reprinted with permission)

When Carla Champagne of Big Bay made her request for an independent, third-party air quality monitoring program for the Eagle Mine, Albanese spoke directly to the audience to assure them that air pollution near Big Bay was merely "particulate dust" that would be the equivalent of 15 wood-burning home heating units. He told Champagne Rio Tinto would fund and set up an air quality monitoring body to include representatives from the community, NGOs and probably academia.

"That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about an independent, third-party air quality monitoring program," Champagne said. "If you're paying for it you're going to get the results you want. I would recommend -- and to all the shareholders also -- that instead of spending all that money on public relations you put that money where it can actually do something for the people of my community. You can afford it."

Champagne and Pryor gave a brief report on their trip to Rio Tinto's AGM at an April 30 meeting of a coalition of environmental groups in Marquette. Keweenaw Now recorded some of their comments.

Carla Champagne of Concerned Citizens of Big Bay tells members of a coalition of environmental groups in Marquette about speaking to Rio Tinto executives and shareholders concerning the need for an independent, third-party air quality monitoring program for Rio Tinto - Kennecott's Eagle Mine. (Videos by Keweenaw Now)

Gene Champagne, Carla's husband, who also attended the Marquette coalition meeting, said he and other Big Bay residents have noticed significant air pollution from the mine.

"Currently, as they drill the tunnel, they are venting everything out the mine portal," Gene Champagne said. "We have no idea what is in the exhaust other than you can get a nauseating whiff of diesel fumes while standing on the AAA Road on some days. The exhaust fan is powered by a diesel generator. This is especially true if the wind happens to be blowing around."

Powell Township approves resolution for air quality monitoring

On Tuesday, May 22, 2012, Powell Township, which includes the Big Bay area, passed a resolution for the kind of air quality monitoring program Carla Champagne requested of Rio Tinto at the London AGM. The resolution states, in part, "...in response to Citizen’s concerns, we the Powell Township Board do ask that the Environmental Protection Agency and or the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality develop an Air Quality Monitoring program in our region, with monitors installed at present and future mine sites, within the community of Big Bay, and at any other sites in Powell Township that these agencies deem appropriate. We ask that the EPA and or the DEQ designate air quality scientists to monitor and maintain this air quality program; ask that the mining companies cover all the costs for the implementation and on-going support for this air quality monitoring program; and that all data and information be available for citizen review."

Meeting with Albanese after AGM

After the AGM, Cynthia Pryor and Carla Champagne met with Tom Albanese, Rio Tinto chief executive, to discuss several issues. Pryor expressed objections to Kennecott's recent air quality permit application (for the Eagle Mine), which requests removal of the air filter controls from the Main Vent Air Raise. This Air Raise, which will be used as the only exhaust for all the underground mine workings, is a 65-ft. stack located within 150 feet of the Salmon Trout River (under which the ore body lies). The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is reviewing this permit application and has already asked Kennecott to make some changes.* According to an April 20, 2012, article in the Marquette Mining Journal, a public hearing and public comment period will be scheduled before the DEQ makes a final decision on the air permit, possibly this summer.**

View of the Salmon Trout River, not far from the Main Vent Air Raise, which will be used as the only exhaust from the Eagle Mine. Kennecott's ore body (copper and nickel) is under this trout stream. (Keweenaw Now file photo)

Cynthia Pryor noted the trip provided an opportunity to meet with Richard Solly and other members of the London Mining Network (LMN) -- an alliance of human rights, development, and environmental groups working to expose supporters of unacceptable mining projects.

Pryor also mentioned the Greenwash Gold 2012 action: LMN has promoted voting for Rio Tinto in the Greenwash Gold 2012 "competition" to vote for the worst corporate sponsor (the others are BP and Dow Chemical) of the London Olympic Games. Metal for the 2012 Olympic medals will come from the company’s Bingham Canyon (Kennecott) mine in Utah and its Oyu Tolgoi mine in Mongolia -- both of which threaten human health.***

Here is an excerpt from Pryor's report on the London trip to environmental coalition members at their Apr. 30 meeting in Marquette:

Cynthia Pryor of the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve speaks about attending Rio Tinto's London AGM to representatives of several local environmental groups at their coalition meeting in Marquette on April 30, 2012.

As Pryor and Champagne pointed out to coalition members, people affected by Rio Tinto's mining projects came to the AGM from various parts of the world to express their concerns. The entire AGM Web cast can be viewed on the Rio Tinto Web site.****

Here are some more highlights of the AGM question period -- more than two hours of open comments, mostly in opposition to Rio Tinto's policies and projects.

Mongolia: Oyu Tolgoi mine threatens water supply

Mongolian activist Zanaa Jurmed, Director of the Center for Citizens’ Alliance in Mongolia, questioned Rio Tinto's claim that they are training thousands of Mongolians to work in their Oyu Tolgoi copper and gold mine in the Gobi Desert.

"You might train hundreds of workers but not thousands," Jurmed said.

She was also concerned about the lack of rules to protect Mongolian women from sexual harassment by Chinese workers.

"We have a zero tolerance policy towards sexual harassment," Albanese replied.

Jurmed's main concern, though, was Rio Tinto's depletion of water resources. She accused Rio Tinto of not disclosing their social and health impact statement. According to the London Mining Network, the mine will use enormous quantities of water in a desert region and the company has failed to demonstrate the availability of sufficient water needed for the mine as well as the population.

"Are you going to do a cumulative risk assessment?" Jurmed asked, noting the danger that the water supply in the Gobi region could run out.

Albanese defended the company's plans to use groundwater from a deep, saline aquifer not suitable for humans or animals and said the company will supplement surface water.

A second speaker supported Jurmed's claims, referring to a report from USAID (United States Agency for International Development) on potential environmental impacts of mining projects in Mongolia on water, air quality and habitat fragmentation. The report also mentions the challenge of water availability in a desert environment with many herders. It gives details on the Oyu Tolgoi mine and the company's plans to use deep aquifers they claim will not connect with more shallow water sources used by herders.

According to the report, "Mining companies state that there is no communication between the shallow and deep aquifers; however, if pressed, there is no proven evidence in the public domain to validate their claim."*****

DuPlessis cut this speaker off, refusing to take more questions on Mongolia.

"We are very proud of our engagement in Mongolia," he said.

Union Workers locked out in Quebec

Criticisms and questions also came from a representative of the locked-out United Steel Workers from Alma, Quebec. Albanese claimed the union's demands for hiring more workers were excessive and there was evidence of vandalism and sabotage at the plant -- hence, the lock out. Denying the vandalism, the union spokesman said he was just asking Rio Tinto to go back to the table and negotiate.

Pryor reported 14 representatives of the Quebec Steel Workers attended the AGM.

"The Quebec Steel Workers were told to go back home and be reasonable and the company would meet with them -- which was met with outrage by the workers," Pryor said.

Pebble Mine threatens salmon of Bristol Bay, Alaska

Albanese also heard from representatives of tribal groups, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Earth Works -- who questioned Rio Tinto's partnership with the Anglo American mining company in the Pebble Mine project near Bristol Bay, Alaska -- a proposed open-pit mine to be located at the headwaters of the largest, possibly the last, salmon fishery in the world.

Jason Metrokin, president/CEO of Bristol Bay Native Corp., noted 54 percent of Alaskan voters and more than 80 percent of Bristol Bay residents oppose the project because of the risk to the salmon habitat. Joel Reynolds of NRDC said he had a million petitions from around the world asking Rio Tinto to withdraw from the project. He said he had brought 150,000 of them with him to present to Rio Tinto. Bonnie Gestering of Earth Works said her organization was in support of the native peoples and fishermen opposed to the Pebble Mine and asked Albanese to consider the results of an EPA study on the suitability of large-scale mining in the Bristol Bay watershed.

Both DuPlessis and Albanese replied they were not in favor of an open-pit operation in Bristol Bay. However, Albanese said he was interested in an underground ore body in that area, which would require 10 years of exploration.

On April 20, the day after the AGM, Cynthia Pryor visited Ian Collard of the United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office, American Directorate and presented the history of the Eagle project. She mentioned issues including Rio Tinto-Kennecott's disregard of law, collusion with and corruption of state and local government, Indian Rights and treaty violations, the desecration of Eagle Rock as a sacred site. She also told Collard about issues of water quality, air quality and good science.

Pryor learned that Collard had been to the U.P. as a boy scout and was familiar with the beauty of the place. Noting the reputation of British companies in foreign countries is important, he said he would share a copy of their discussion.

Carla Champagne commented on meeting and hearing from people all over the world at the AGM and noted a similarity in Rio Tinto's reactions to their concerns.

"One of the things that struck me was that Rio Tinto acts the same -- everywhere they go," Carla said. "It's just their degree of corruption that changes. People from Mongolia, people from West Papua New Guinea, people from Canada -- the United Steel Workers that were locked out -- they're all treated the same."

Notes:

* Click here to read Kennecott's application for an air quality permit on the DEQ Web site.

** See "Kennecott wants mine air permit revised," by John Pepin of the Mining Journal.

*** Click here to read about Rio Tinto and Greenwash Gold 2012. Read about the London Mining Network on their Web site.

**** Click here to watch the Web cast of the Rio Tinto 2012 AGM in London.

***** Click here to read the USAID report on the Oyu Tolgoi mining project in Mongolia.
Update: See also Carla Champagne's Letter to the Mining Journal posted today, May 23: "Monitoring Needed."

Letter to EPA: Comments on CR 595 road proposal

Editor's Note: The following letter, dated Apr. 6, 2012, was sent to the Watersheds and Wetlands Branch of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5, Chicago, Ill., during the public comment period on the Marquette County Road Commission's permit application for the proposed CR 595, a haul road for the Rio Tinto-Kennecott Eagle Mine.

These observations do not deal with the details of road planning and construction and the environment -- but with the underlying fundamentals, essentially that the applicant, Kennecott Eagle Mining Corporation, is not and never has been negotiating in good faith.

We, a small group which evaluated the application for mining permits, initially for the National Wildlife Foundation but without sponsorship when NWF funds ran out in 2008, have found and reported that the application document was, and still is, unacceptably ill-conceived, erroneous, deceitful and fraudulent.

It is strange, but true, that we have presented the evidence to the regulating agency (MDEQ), to the courts and to all legal authorities up to the State Attorney General, then the U.S. Attorney General, then the FBI, and all simply said, "No thank you. End of conversation," and all refused to even investigate the charges. We have the proof.

Since the operations went underground in September 2011 MSHA entered the picture, being held specifically responsible for Mine Safety and Health Administration. We handed them proof of two specific allegations: That the mine design was based upon incorrect and falsified design data and that the mine design, if followed, would be unstable and might well collapse without warning (as did the Athens iron mine near Negaunee, MI, despite the 1800 ft. thick crown pillar) and as did the Ropes gold mine near Ishpeming.

NB: Sainsbury, the technical expert hired by MDEQ to evaluate the mining aspects of the application, testified that he was told by MDEQ to delete those "case histories" from his report. That surely should have raised a red flag over the permitting proceedings. But it did not.

At this time MSHA tells us that in Metallic Mining law their mandate is to deal with unsafe operations as they show up, but not preemptively. In Coal Mining law they do have power to evaluate and allow or reject planned activities. Judging from the Athens mine collapse events we will have to wait for the Eagle to collapse then send in an investigative team or two, much as we did at the two recent major coal mine disasters in Utah and W. Va.

This attitude fits the generally recognized pattern within the industry -- which is to "Do anything and to say anything to get the permits -- then make changes as necessary." Law 632 requires supported amendments for each of these changes, unless the DEQ deems them to be "insignificant" -- which is what the DEQ usually does -- without the required public hearings and input. To me, a plain old engineer, that looks like collusion.

The Federal agencies have some degree of independence and in the earlier evaluation of a haul road displayed it by declaring that the name "Woodland Road," or "Wetland Road," was deceptive in that a simple truck count or tonnage count would show that haulage of ore from mine to mill was/is the primary purpose for building it, and if there were no mine then no new road would be built.

The deception continues. Behind the scenes Kennecott deals with local authorities and induces them to get state funds to help with the haulage roads, and still they have no permitted route. Incidentally 632 requires that ALL mining-related permits be in hand before other mining-related activities begin. That ruling has been ignored, or defied, since Day One, by extension of power lines, for example.

As evidence of gross deception Kennecott continues to soothe local objections by sticking to their original story that the mine will produce an average of 1500 tons/day, i.e thirty 50-ton truckloads per day. The locals appear to have accepted that proposition. But the Humboldt Mill is being constructed to handle not 1500 but 10,000 tons/day. Obviously they intend to mine more, not thirty but two hundred round trips per day. That, of course, would make a lot of difference -- first to their claim to be open and transparent in their dealings with the public -- thence to the degree of opposition aroused. Revelation of the truth could sink the project.

That intentional opacity is again demonstrated in their refusal to answer all questions about the most basic questions concerning the design of a new road -- How much traffic per day? How heavy the loads? What speed limits, gradients, vertical and horizontal curves? Trucks do not have to go 55 mph! Think about noise, dust and accidents.

For what length of time will the haul road be needed? 

More specifically -- how many years would KEMC mine at the Eagle prospect? If, as planned, they take only the high-grade ore ($1,000/ton) they could do it in five or six years; but if they mined more responsibly they could recover an additional billion dollars worth of $150 ore and extend the life of the mine another 15 years. That would be much more desirable from our point of view.

The numbers are in the application.

They do not disclose their intentions directly but the corporate (Rio Tinto) business plan is to seek out and operate only projects which will be profitable through times both thick and thin -- which implies that they will take only high-grade -- as they did at the Flambeau mine in Wisconsin. Is it to be a 5-year life? Or 20 years?

Another question which they avoid -- although you asked it for "Woodland Road" -- is this: "How many other destinations will the haul road serve?" How much additional environment will be disturbed? I am reasonably sure that they have strong, if not conclusive, indications from their airborne and other exploration efforts. But that, of course, is called proprietary information. Behold the cloak.

Conclusion: I believe that all road-planning to date has been based on intentional deception, and should therefore be thrown out, and that KEMC should be required to start again, specifically without deception, thus displaying their vaunted openness and transparency. If the facts are not forthcoming there should be no new road. (Say anything to get the permits!)

I would not be surprised if the original transportation plan would have been the best -- if they were mining only high-grade ore -- to truck it to a railhead close to Marquette and ship trainloads direct to refinery. No Humboldt mill was needed. There is still doubt concerning that 10,000 tpd operation -- and tailings disposal. (Some day somebody will discover that a large tailings pond would have to be built in the wetlands there. Another surprise!) Try this one: "Why was the multi-million dollar monumental Bridge to Nowhere built on CR510 in 2006 forward. The motive? Ask for a photograph of the finished product.

Respectfully submitted,

Jack Parker, Mining Engineer
Baltic MI 49963

Two Big Bay residents to address air quality concerns at Rio Tinto London meeting Apr. 19

BIG BAY, MICH. -- Two Upper Peninsula women are traveling to London, England, to attend the Rio Tinto Annual General Meeting taking place April 19, 2012.

Carla Champagne of the grassroots citizens group Concerned Citizens of Big Bay and Cynthia Pryor of the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve plan on attending the Rio Tinto AGM meeting for two reasons: 1) the lack of air monitors at or near Rio Tinto / Kennecott's Eagle Mine and 2) Rio Tinto / Kennecott's intention to remove air filter controls from the Main Vent Air Raise of the Eagle Mine.

"Air Quality is of prime importance to the people and community of Big Bay," states Carla Champagne. "We are directly downwind; and no one -- including Kennecott and the DEQ (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality) -- knows what is currently in the air coming from this mine, or, even more importantly, what will be coming from the mine once they are in full operation. There are no air monitors either at the mine or anywhere near Big Bay. We will be asking the Rio Tinto Board of Directors and their shareholders for a comprehensive air quality program to be installed in the region -- a program that will be regulated by the DEQ, monitored by DEQ-approved third party scientists -- and all costs paid for by Kennecott."

Cynthia Pryor considers this meeting an opportunity to express outrage at Kennecott’s new Air Quality application to remove the air filter controls from the Main Vent Air Raise, which will be used as the only exhaust for all the underground mine workings of the Eagle Mine.

"This 65-foot high stack sits within 150 feet of the Salmon Trout River," Pryor said. "We worked hard to get the air filter included as part of Kennecott’s original Air Quality permit as they intended the mine exhaust to be vented directly to the air. Now, they are back pedaling and want this air filter to be removed. We are vehemently opposed to such a notion, and we wish to make this clear to the Rio Tinto Board."

Rio Tinto filed their new Air Quality permit March 20, 2012; and the DEQ Air Quality Division is currently evaluating it. Public hearings for this application have been requested for Big Bay and Lansing. The application is on the DEQ website at http://www.deq.state.mi.us/aps/AppsOfInterest.shtml.

Democracy activist addresses road controversy in Marquette County

By Jon Saari, UPEC (Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition) Board Member

MARQUETTE -- Phil Bellfy is one savvy activist who is not afraid to take on City Hall. He’s done it in East Lansing for the past four and one-half years, largely on his own in the name of good government. His forthcoming book title says it all: How to Fight City Hall, and Win: One American Indian's Odyssey Through the World of Eminent Domain, Tax Fraud, Tax-Increment Financing, and High-Stakes Development.

It took Bellfy six hours to drive from Sault Ste. Marie to Marquette on a wintry day in late February. He had been invited by the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition (UPEC) to talk about eminent domain, which has surfaced as an issue in a battle over a new proposed road in western Marquette County. This 22-mile road would link the Kennecott Eagle Mine with the Humboldt mill, but it is being touted less as a private haul road and more as a great public benefit.

The road would ostensibly provide a needed alternative to the present designated mine haul road, which runs eastward towards Big Bay and then south along CR 550, traveling near the population centers of Marquette, Negaunee, and Ishpeming before arriving at the mill. But opponents argue that the proposed CR 595 would change and endanger an undeveloped wild area that is the Headwaters Country for six Lake Superior streams, and that it is falsely being presented as a road with predominantly public benefits.

The Marquette County Road Commission filed the application for the new road (CR 595) in October, 2011, pressed by the County Commission, the City of Marquette, and most townships.

Despite the political push all the way to Lansing and Washington D.C., the Road Commission has declined to use one tool in its toolbox, the hammer of eminent domain (condemnation of private land), that would have allowed it to establish an alternative route through the Mulligan Plains.

This map shows several alternatives being considered for the potential CR 595. The dotted line (running north-south near center of map) is the route through the Mulligan Plains, which includes private land protected by a conservation easement held by The Nature Conservancy. Click on map for larger version. (Photo of map by Keweenaw Now, reprinted with permission from Steve Casey, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, from his March 5, 2012, presentation at the Houghton Keweenaw Conservation District meeting.)

To Bellfy, it is immaterial that the private land in question is protected by a conservation easement held by The Nature Conservancy, except that TNC is a powerful organization with deep pockets. The reason the Road Commission is hesitant, says Bellfy, may not be their respect for conservation values or environmental sensitivity, but the near certainty that they would lose the case in court.

Since a famous 2005 US Supreme Court case, in which Suzette Kelo, a small homeowner in New London, CT, lost her home to a private developer for the "public good" of a higher tax base, some 44 states have tightened up their standards for eminent domain. Michigan revised its Constitution in 2006 in a referendum supported by 80 percent of the voters.

A mere claim of "public use" is now insufficient in eminent domain cases; the condemning government body must prove in court that the preponderance of benefit accrues to the public.

It must also prove that the "public necessity" is of the "extreme sort, ... limited to those enterprises generating public benefits whose very existence depends on the use of land that can be assembled only by the coordination central government alone is capable of achieving." This quote is taken from the famous County of Wayne v. Hathcock case, decided by the Michigan Supreme Court in 2004. This quote from the Supreme Court decision is the language that eventually found its way into the Michigan Constitution via that 2006 referendum.

Public authorities have become wary of the high scrutiny that a court test of eminent domain now requires. Translated into the CR 595 case, the preponderance of use of this proposed road is for the private advantage and financial benefit of a multinational mining conglomerate, Rio Tinto, with a sideways nod to its public benefits for commerce, recreation, and emergency services. Alternative routes abound (including the already designated haul route), and the Road Commission would have a very hard time making the case in court that a "public necessity of the extreme sort" requires that this new road be built.

Bellfy says that flimsy cases are often created by public bodies collaborating with vested interests, whether it is the city of East Lansing working with a developer, or by extension the County of Marquette collaborating with a mining company. The best tools activists have are the Freedom on Information Act (FOIA) and the Open Meetings Act (OMA); the former reveals discussions and documents that are sometimes incriminating, and the latter sets standards -- that are often flaunted -- for conducting the government’s business in public.

Bellfy’s visit helped local activists understand that vigilance and complaints are not enough. Opponents need to go on the offensive, to request documents through FOIA, and use the OMA to challenge the actions of "public bodies" where the public’s business is really being conducted behind closed doors. And for that, activists also need friends who are lawyers conversant with the often intricate and hidden world of legalese and power.

Phil Bellfy’s analysis from inside the game of politics was an eye-opener to many in the audience who heard him that late evening in February. He illustrated how good-government activists have tools and opportunities to get in the game themselves. Many can’t wait to see his book in print.

Author's Note: Phil Bellfy is a White Earth Anishinaabe, active in the Great Lakes region as an educator, author, and professor. He commutes between his rural home near Sault Ste. Marie and work sites downstate. He will be returning to Marquette on March 31, 2012, to speak on indigenous environmental ethics at the UPEC-sponsored Celebration of the U.P.*

*Click here to read about the March 30-31 UPEC celebration and to see the schedule of presentations to be held in Marquette at three locations: the Peter White Public Library, the Federated Women's Clubhouse and the Landmark Inn. All events are free and open to the public.

From Stand for the Land: O’dewe’igan Negaunee Giishik

Posted on Stand for the Land
Feb. 23, 2012
Reprinted with permission

What is occurring across our territory is overwhelming and way bigger than a single mine or a road, and the approval of this road under the disguise of the Marquette County Road Commission represents the road to destruction, just as the ancient Anishinaabe prophecies teach. We are the new people. Humanity has a choice. Anishinaabe people have an obligation.

This road should not be a discussion.
This road should not be paid for by taxpayers.
This road should not come before re-building and fixing existing roads.
This road should not be built…. period.

Rio Tinto should not invest their money in this road and or the Eagle project. This proposed road will be a waste of time, effort and resources. It is in fact a haul road for Rio Tinto.

O’dewe-igan negaunee giishik means "mother earth's heartbeat right before sunrise." Negaunee means leading, or right before…. Ishpeming means after, or up there. We are sitting right now on ceded territory…Native land… Anishinaabeg land.

Please study the US constitution. The United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall have Power . . . to regulate commerce . . . with the Indian Tribes." No mention of "State" control.

Please study the 1836 and 1842 treaties -- they also refer to us as a Nation. The Indians stipulate for the right of hunting, gathering, trapping, cultural practices on the ceded territory, with the other usual privileges of occupancy, until required to remove by the President of the United States… I don’t think that has happened yet, has it?

Please understand that the Eagle Project and this haul road are both illegal. If you agree with the Eagle Project and agree with this haul road being built, you are guilty as well.

Read the Anishinaabe 7th Fire Prophecy. This road and the Eagle Mine represent the Path of Destruction. (Mishomis Book Chapter 13.)

The Anishinaabeg are a nation, not a state. We’re not supposed to be discussing our lands and way of life with the states. We’re only supposed to discuss these issues with the federal government.

If you are a true human being you will understand this truth. Stop assisting, stop aiding and abetting. Stop violating our land and our way of life.

Start inviting us to your table so we can discuss these matters. We are the true stewards of this land; our women are the keepers of the water. We offer to let you use it, walk about it as you please. Just respect it; you can’t do anything you want on our land.

Free, Prior, and Informed Consent, from the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples -- this means you need our approval, and you don’t have it…and you don’t listen.

What’s taking place is wrong.

We as a people are not against "jobs." We are all for "jobs" when it/they are done right, when it respects all people's views…our views, our concerns. We are strongly against desecrating our land, our Mother Earth. We feel disrespected that the State of Michigan will not listen to our just pleas.

Everybody, please, do the right thing. Follow the proper path.

The fact that the billion-dollar ore deposit at Eagle symbolizes a baby is pretty significant. It represents the womb of Mother Earth. The Anishinaabe people have prophecies telling of this time when humanity must choose between two paths. Look at all of the destruction happening to the entire Earth. Eagle Rock is a shining example of this choice….spiritualism or technology/destruction? Sacred Site or Mine Portal?

Miigwech.

Dave Mayo
Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Tribal Member
for O’dewe’igan Negaunee Giishik

Headwaters News: EPA Talks Jobs and Regulation

By Teresa Bertossi
Posted on Headwaters News Feb. 12, 2012
Reprinted and slightly updated with permission

MARQUETTE -- While citizens around the country fight to sustain their livelihoods, corporations have stayed one step ahead by exercising control over regulatory agencies and gutting, altering, and writing the very laws that regulate their operations.

From jobs to natural resources and elections, the regulatory system is increasingly being criticized for serving the interests of corporations, a concept supported at private sector economic development group Operation Action U.P.’s annual meeting. Themed "Jobs vs. Regulatory Burden," the meeting featured a panel representing the mining industry, as well as a keynote presentation by Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Great Lakes Region 5 Administrator, Susan Hedman.*

Promotional materials set the stage for the meeting, featuring an image of two boxing gloves, one representing the regulator, and the other the regulated corporation. However, had it been a real boxing match, it would have ended with a technical knockout shortly after Hedman’s presentation, as it became quite obvious that a majority of regulations today are not so much a burden to industry, as a service providing business security.

Hedman Addresses Legacy Contamination, Deregulation, Job Creation

Hedman’s presentation addressed two situations: the first included cases where contamination occurred because there were no regulations in place -- frequently the case with the legacy of contamination in Great Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs); the second included locations where regulations were not adequately protective from the beginning. Hedman also demonstrated that environmental standards have helped to drive job creation in the U.S.

Hedman provided the audience with a tour of five AOCs that are found in the U.P. An AOC is a designated geographic area that shows severe environmental degradation. The five U.P. areas include the Menominee River, Torch Lake, Manistique River, the St, Mary’s River, and Deer Lake. Money for cleaning up these toxic legacies and controlling invasive species will come from Great Lakes Restoration Initiative funds -- the largest investment in the Great Lakes in two decades.**

Susan Hedman, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Great Lakes Region 5 administrator, speaks at Operation Action U.P.’s Jan. 27, 2012, annual meeting, themed "Jobs vs. Regulatory Burden," at Northern Michigan University. (Photos © and courtesy Teresa Bertossi)

In addition to legacy contamination clean-up Hedman also addressed deregulation issues. She cited the July 2010 Enbridge oil spill in the Kalamazoo River, near Marshall, Michigan -- the largest inland oil spill in Midwest history. Hedman added that there is a need in the region for company incentives and regulations to upgrade aging pipelines, including lines running near Lake Michigan in the UP.

"EPA doesn’t regulate pipelines," said Hedman. "We just clean up the spills when they happen."

She noted a comment by the Canadian Minister for the Environment, who observed during a meeting with EPA that if pipeline maintenance were funded as it is in Canada, pipeline companies would have real incentives to maintain pipelines.

"I don’t want to clean up any more of these spills," Hedman said.

Hedman also spoke about the new (December 2011) Federal Mercury and Air Toxics Standard that, for the first time, will require all coal-fired power plants in the United States to reduce mercury emissions. She explained also how the recent implementation of the Cross State Air Pollution Rule, under the Clean Air Act, would help control power plant emissions and contamination from one state to another, because of public health concerns.***

Hedman explained that money spent on emissions reductions for power plants has served to provide high quality American jobs associated with the creation, assembly, installation, operation and maintenance of pollution control equipment. She also gave examples of job creation in renewable solar and wind energy projects facilitated by restoration of brownfield sites.

"I’ve been talking about the enormous costs that we’ve incurred to restore the environment so that we can drink the water, eat the fish, go swimming and breathe the air without getting sick," concluded the Administrator. "At this point I think it should be clear that I completely reject the premise that environmental standards are a regulatory burden that interferes with job creation. And the evidence that I have just presented demonstrates that environmental standards actually can help to drive job creation."

Considering promotion of the event as combative, Hedman surprisingly faced little criticism and few questions from the crowd. Although Greg Andrews, U.P. representative to Governor Snyder, did comment on his concerns for cormorants in the region -- a question Hedman deferred to a different agency (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). Most criticism of Hedman came the night before at a meeting of citizens, environmental groups and tribal representatives.

Tribes and Environmental Groups Accuse EPA of Failure to Act on Citizens’ Behalf

EPA Region 5 Administrator Hedman meets with tribes and environmental organizations on Jan. 26, 2012, in Marquette.

Perhaps Hedman’s knockout presentation was fueled by the heavy criticism she received the night before. While in town, EPA also attended two other meetings. Headwaters was not allowed to attend the meeting with road commissioners about a proposed mine road but was invited to a roundtable discussion with tribes and environmental groups.

The overall atmosphere of the roundtable discussion was one of citizen frustration with federal and state regulatory agencies. Participants commented that despite numerous efforts, including various communication efforts with the EPA, their concerns remain unaddressed on new mining in the region.

As Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC) President Chris Swartz explained, "The lack of federal programs for mining in Michigan leaves tribes vulnerable to the interpretation of Michigan laws by Michigan agencies alone."

Michigan is only one of two states with delegated authority to oversee most of the EPA programs, eliminating some tribal consultation requirements.

KBIC and Lac Vieux Desert informed the EPA that there was a heightened expectation by the tribes that EPA and other federal agencies exercise federal responsibilities and trust obligations directly by reviewing and critically commenting on mine-related permit applications in Michigan.

Michelle Halley, an attorney for the National Wildlife Federation, explained that was involved in battling the proposed Eagle Mine in Marquette County for nearly a decade and expressed her frustration with the EPA and the legal system.

"The legal challenge route is not a good solution. For one thing, most organizations and people don’t have the resources to do it; and even in this case, when we have had ample resources, the results have been abysmal quite honestly," said Halley.

Mining Company Panelists Satisfied with State Mining Laws

A panel of mining representatives ended the Operation Action U.P. meeting. Speakers included Adam Burley, President of Rio Tinto Kennecott Eagle Minerals; Dave Anderson, Director of Health, Safety, Environment and Government Relations for the Orvana Resources’ proposed Copperwood Project; and Mick Lawler, Senior Mine Manager for HudBay Minerals Inc.’s proposed Back 40 project.*

Panelists representing Rio Tinto, Orvana, and HudBay mining companies participate in the Jan. 27, 2012, Operation Action U.P. annual meeting at Northern Michigan University.

Although speakers expressed some regulatory concerns including business uncertainty, "hysteria" over mercury contamination, and the cost of water treatment systems, they were mostly pleased with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and the State’s new nonferrous metallic sulfide mining regulation, colloquially known as "Part 632."

“I certainly don’t see regulation itself as a burden," said Rio Tinto's Adam Burley. "I’ve worked in many parts of the world, particularly in Africa, where lack of regulation, or particularly lack of enforcement of regulation, can lead to dire consequences. So I certainly see the value in regulation. I think the engagement that we had with respect to Part 632, the non-ferrous mining legislation, was as I understand a very broad engagement process which related the views of a range of stakeholders, including those that oppose and support mining in itself; and out of that was born a very stringent piece of legislation which we're proud to be able to comply with and go above and beyond many of those requirements."

Anderson also expressed his approval of the Part 632 process and the Michigan DEQ.

"The DEQ is a fantastic organization and I have nothing negative to say about them whatsoever," said Anderson. "I think Michigan is moving to get its reputation back on track…I think 632 moving forward was a good thing."

Headwaters asked Anderson if he had changed his mind or if the venue had only changed; at a meeting with citizens and environmentalists in Alberta, Mich., in December 2010, Anderson had lamented the weaknesses in federal and state regulations, including Michigan’s mining law.

At that time Headwaters had quoted Anderson as saying, "The U.S. is a long ways behind in environmental protection…The fact that the Clean Water Act was originally intended to end discharges to surface water obviously has not reached its goal and we basically, like 632 did, we created a process to allow these things to occur." ****

In this 2012 interview, Anderson expressed to Headwaters a new-found confidence: "Aside from the EU [European Union], the standards in the United States and the water quality standards of Michigan are much more stringent than other [sic] third world countries," Anderson said. "And, I think our country has the ability and the intelligence and the regulations that make it done safely."

Mick Lawler, of HudBay, also supported Burley and Anderson’s optimism in Michigan’s new mining law: "You know, investors demand the very best so there’s no way you’re gonna mine irresponsibly in an unsustainable fashion, because investors just demand that you do, and that’s why management systems are set up and followed and Part 632, although strict, we have no issue with it what-so-ever."

Mining Companies Influence Regulations Throughout the Great Lakes

There are a number of regulatory changes taking place in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan to stream-line application processes and improve tax incentives for mining and timber interests, so it should come as little surprise that the mining panelists had few complaints about the regulatory system, state mining laws or the EPA.

In Wisconsin a contentious mining bill, recently passed by the State Assembly, would move 40 percent of tax revenue from impacted communities and add it to state coffers, likely to help alleviate a projected $143 million in budget shortfalls. The bill would also include a law to cap the total amount of fees paid to the state at $2 million.

In Minnesota, there are plans to introduce legislation for a federal to state land exchange that would result in the loss of many tens of thousands of acres of national forest land and would help companies circumvent federal environmental laws in the Superior National Forest.

In Michigan, State Representative Matt Huuki and State Senator Tom Casperson, both Republicans, worked to implement Public Act 113, preventing local governments from zoning against mining projects. Plans are in the works to revamp the structure of taxes for mining companies that local governments and citizens worry will take much needed money from schools and communities closest to the mine.

But some communities and governments, such as the City Council in Duluth, Minnesota, are finding ways to fight back, transitioning from regulating corporate harms to stopping them by asserting local governance. Duluth recently passed a resolution supporting a constitutional amendment taking a stand against corporate personhood.

Notes:

* Click here for Operation Action U.P.'s Web site. Click here to see a video of Susan Hedman's presentation at their Jan. 27, 2012, meeting. It begins about 20 minutes into the video. Click here for presentations by the panel members from mining companies.

** Click here for a map of the Great Lakes Areas of Concern.

*** Click here to read about the Cross State Air Pollution Rule.

**** Click here for the Dec. 3, 2010, Headwaters News article about Anderson's presentation on the Orvana mine.

Opinion: Thoughts on Kennecott tactics

By Jack Parker*

1. In the permitting process since February 2006 Kennecott has simply denied all wrongdoing, including fraud and endangerment of life, limb, property and environment, but without bothering to show that our evidence was incorrect.
2. In that stance they were backed by Rio Tinto and enabled by MDEQ, consistently.
3. With the help of MDEQ they were granted permits, not following Part 632 of Michigan Mining Law; and they have forged ahead with mine construction, illegally, with supreme confidence and arrogance.
4. It would seem that they had been guaranteed that all permits would be issued, without a shadow of a doubt.
5. The Courts have consistently backed Kennecott, as if they too were in on a conspiracy. Even the Michigan Attorney General, Bill Schuette, declined to investigate and prosecute, which is his job.
6. The general public is not well informed because the media are controlled by the business interests.
7. The Feds do not intervene because permitting is under State Law. MSHA is now on the scene because part of the operation is now underground. That may give us some fresh professional leverage on the fraudulent mine design issue -- the design is such that collapse is predicted.**
8. So it seems that Kennecott is pushing toward a fait accompli -- a "done deal" -- for which a reversal of all permits would be politically and publicly difficult.
9. What comes to mind now is that Kennecott, with help from MDEQ, may be blustering mildly and continuing with construction for just a few more months -- at which time the Michigan Statutes of Limitation (6 years for fraud) will have run out, leaving them free to do as they please.
10. Under a different heading, "Judgment," the limit is 10 years, renewable for a further 10 years.
11. Do you suppose that their plan is to run down the clock?
12. Will we prevent that happening? Tempus fugit …

Editor's Notes:
* Keweenaw Now guest writer Jack Parker of Baltic, semi-retired mining engineer / geologist, specializes in practical rock mechanics.

** Jack Parker has published two reports on the instability of Rio Tinto-Kennecott's Eagle Mine. See our Dec. 6, 2010, article, "Mining expert Jack Parker says Eagle Mine likely to collapse."

Letter: "Legislators needed foresight" on severance taxes

HOUGHTON -- In a letter to the editor of the Daily Mining Gazette, published on Dec. 5, 2011, Calumet resident Paul Campbell comments on the Nov. 28, 2011, Detroit Free Press article, "Will mines get state's riches for a paltry sum?" -- the second in a two-part series on the Rio Tinto-Kennecott Eagle Mine near Marquette.*

Campbell says, "I was surprised. In reading further, I find our Lansing legislators' lack of foresight either overlooking or ignoring "Mineral Severance Taxation" extremely disturbing. The long documented mining history of the Upper Peninsula shows a unique area full of mining minerals. Years ago, our legislators should have passed severance taxation laws to help boost the economy."

Campbell includes a link to a map showing how Michigan ranks among states that impose severance taxes on natural resources. Click here to see the map.

"We as citizens and taxpayers should demand to know why the State of Michigan has ignored severance taxation on our precious minerals, our natural resources," Campbell writes.

Click here to read the rest of this letter on MiningGazette.com.

* Click here to read the Detroit Free Press article "Will mines get state's riches for a paltry sum?"