Environmental, conservation groups question Eagle Mine's request to lease 40 acres of state land near Yellow Dog River headwaters

By Michele Bourdieu, with information from Save the Wild U.P. and the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR)

This recent aerial photo shows the southwest corner -- marked with an x -- of the 40-acre proposed mineral lease for Eagle Mine LLC. Environmental groups are concerned about the location of the lease, since it is near the headwaters of the Yellow Dog River and includes wetlands. (Photo © and courtesy Jeremiah Eagle Eye. Reprinted with permission.)

MARQUETTE – The Eagle Mine LLC, owned by multinational conglomerate Lundin Mining, is seeking a new mineral lease from the State of Michigan for 40 acres of public land (NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 8, T50N, R29W, Michigamme Township, Marquette County) in the Escanaba River State Forest.

The Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) announcement of Lundin’s mineral rights lease application was published on Sunday July 26th, 2015, commencing a legally required 30-day public comment period. Since then the comment period has been extended another month -- to Sept. 25, 2015.

The targeted land lies three miles west of Eagle Mine’s ore body, and south of the Triple A road. Ecologically, the land ranges from from jack pine and blueberry bushes to inundated wetlands known as the Anderson Creek swamp, critical headwaters of the Yellow Dog River.

Yellow Dog Headwaters, Anderson Creek Panorama. (July 31, 2015, photo © Steve Garske, courtesy Save the Wild U.P.)

Botanist Steve Garske commented on the pristine ecosystem in the area of the proposed lease.

"Much of this land is relatively undisturbed conifer swamp and pristine shrub-sedge meadow," Garske explained. "These headwaters flow into the Yellow Dog River. If Lundin can drill and potentially locate a sulfide mine here, they can do it anywhere. We need to tell the DNR that headwaters are too special to be mined."

The DNR lease review acknowledges the Headwaters of the Yellow Dog (Anderson Creek) and notes the possible presence of endangered species and a special conservation area. DNR Fisheries staff recommended "Stipulation 15" be included, minimizing surface disruption. Fisheries staff also recommended no development in the southern half of the 40-acre parcel, noting, "The south portion of this 40, particularly the southwest portion of this 40, is the headwater water system for Anderson Creek, which is the headwaters of the Yellow Dog River."

This photo looks southeast near southwest corner of the proposed 40-acre corner in Section 8. Photo © and courtesy Jeremiah Eagle Eye. Reprinted with permission.)

However, the lead reviewer, Don Mankee, DNR Forest Resources Western U.P. district supervisor, said he is not including Stipulation 15 (concerning "Limited Surface Disturbance") because it refers only to oil and gas drilling.

In a Sept. 17, 2015, email reply to Keweenaw Now, Mankee wrote, "As lead (reviewer), my recommendation is consistent with local Biologists to recommend Development with Restrictions for the parcel in question. When such a recommendation is made in our review system database, reviewers have a list of 69 frequently used stipulations they can choose from to aid them in the process. It is important to note that the vast majority of mineral review using this system is for oil and gas leasing in the lower peninsula of Michigan. As such, some of the stipulations are specific to oil and gas reviews, and do not apply to this particular review for a potential metallic mineral lease. That is the case with stipulation 15. This does not mean the Fisheries review is being ignored. It simply means that my review as lead, included the stipulations applicable to a metallic mineral lease."

George Madison, DNR Fisheries biologist, said in a Sept. 18 email to Keweenaw Now that he believed Mankee's email explanation "was very clear about this topic."

Mankee, who included only Stipulations 16 (Threatened or Endangered Species Habitat) and 49 (Best Management Practices) told Keweenaw Now his recommendation was consistent with that of Fisheries, but he wouldn't make a separate recommendation for the southern half of the 40-acre parcel because the classification has to refer to the whole 40-acre parcel.

Mankee said the review includes implications a metallic mineral lease would eventually have on the surface.

"We recommend that any development on the surface be restricted," Mankee said. "I can only speak for my area of expertise, which is as a land administrator for the Forest Resources Division."

Multiple reviewers noted the presence of Headwaters, but recommended a "development with restrictions" classification. 

Comments from the DNR's Forest Resources Division in their review of the lease request state the following: "There is the potential for the occurrence of  Narrow-leaved gentian within this parcel. Proper protocol for this species must be followed. In addition, the swamp/marsh to the south of this parcel is the headwaters for the Yellow Dog River. Proper BMPs (Best Management Practices) must be applied to protect the riparian area along the southern edge of this parcel."*

Environmental groups, including Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP), have expressed concern about potential development for mining in this 40-acre parcel.

"There was a 'no development' recommendation on the southern half of the parcel --the section of this parcel that contains the headwaters of the Yellow Dog River," said Alexandra Maxwell, SWUP executive director. "Save the Wild U.P. demands that the parcel review be revised by DNR staff before any decisions on the mineral lease be made and that these revisions and recommendations be transparent and accessible to the public."

Maxwell also questioned the DNR's role, which should include protection of public lands.

"When will Michigan realize that public lands belong to the public, not private corporations?" Maxwell asked. "It (the area of the proposed lease) is 1.5 miles from the McCormick Tract Wilderness and the Yellow Dog Wild and Scenic National River, and surrounded by historic sites like the Nels Andersen homestead, the Bentley Trail, and the Bushy Camp. Eagle Mine is targeting our communal history."

Yellow Dog Headwater area of proposed mineral lease. (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, National Wetlands Inventory data). Click on image for a larger version. (Image courtesy Save the Wild U.P.)

"This land is part of a sensitive wetlands complex of more than a thousand acres," said Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP) President Kathleen Heideman. "Headwaters are where rivers are born! Headwaters are simply not compatible with sulfide mining."

Gail Griffith, emeritus professor of Chemistry at Northern Michigan University and SWUP board member asks why the State bothers to write a land management plan for this section of the Escanaba River State Forest.

"Michigan regulators obviously believe that mining exploration is always the most desirable land use -- in every situation, no matter how it undermines or jeopardizes our public land, water, forestry, wildlife and fisheries!" Griffith said. "What is the purpose of a public comment period, if no one at the DNR listens to public comments?"

In a recent brief interview at Michigan Tech's Great Lakes Research Center, DNR Director Keith Creagh told Keweenaw Now the DNR would be looking at public comments on this lease:

Keith Creagh, Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources director, answers questions from Keweenaw Now on the potential Eagle Mine mineral lease near the headwaters of the Yellow Dog River. Creagh was visiting Michigan Tech's Great Lakes Research Center on Aug. 13, 2015, with Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder. (Video by Allan Baker for Keweenaw Now)

Karen Maidlow, DNR Minerals Management property specialist, said the DNR welcomes comments from the public up to the new deadline of Sept. 25, 2015.

"The public may be aware of valuable resource information to assist us in making an informed decision about the lease classification," Maidlow said. "All our lease does is give them permission to explore and develop state-owned metallic minerals."

The lease does not include surface use or development, she added.

"They would have to get a special surface use lease to lease state-owned surface," Maidlow explained. "The lease in and of itself does not grant all the permission needed to mine."

While Maidlow noted she did receive some comments asking for a public hearing, the DNR would not hold a public hearing based only on this lease request.

"A hearing would be held if an ore body is found and the company wants to mine it," Maidlow said. "The DEQ (Department of Environmental Quality) would hold the hearing and the DNR would participate if any of the parcels to be mined are state-owned."

Gene Champagne of Concerned Citizens of Big Bay questioned a mining lease in an area that is mostly wetland -- besides being the headwaters area for the Yellow Dog River.

Eyeball Falls on the Yellow Dog River is less than a quarter of a mile from the area of the requested lease for 40 acres in Section 8. (Photo © and courtesy Jeremiah Eagle Eye. Reprinted with permission.)

"Why are they even considering an exploration permit?" Champagne asked. "Will there be a public hearing? Why is the DNR acting as a real estate agent for Lundin/Eagle and ignoring the future of our grandchildren -- the health and well-being of our grandchildren?"

Dave Allen, Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition (UPEC) board member, also expressed concerns about the pristine habitat found on these 40 acres.

"We at UPEC are against this new mineral lease," Allen said. "The parcel contains Anderson's Creek, headwaters of the Yellow Dog River, a rather precious stream and prime brook trout habitat, very rich in good macroinvertebrates -- benthic bugs like caddis, flies, mayflies and others -- and clean water."

In 2006 the Superior Watershed Partnership (SWP) published the Salmon Trout River Watershed Management Plan which included the recommendation to "prohibit sulfide-based mining" (Page 41).

"Since the Salmon Trout River and Yellow Dog River are both high quality systems and share a common watershed boundary the SWP recommendation to prohibit sulfide-based mining would hold true for both watersheds," explained Carl Lindquist, SWP executive director. "The potential impacts to groundwater, surface water and Lake Superior are simply too great."

Chip Truscon, SWUP board member, compared Eagle Mine's exploration of new sites to a spreading cancer.

"When Eagle Mine's drill rigs go after new sites, they call it 'progress.' I call it Stage 4," Truscon noted. "When a cancer patient develops a malignant growth some distance from the primary tumor, we say the cancer is spreading, or metastasizing. It's bad news, with a poor prognosis for the environment."

Mankee said he is willing to speak to citizens who question the potential lease.

"I would welcome the folks who are concerned about (the Yellow Dog headwaters) to visit us, and we're available to answer questions," he said.**

According to SWUP, in 2014, Eagle Mine made a similar request, seeking mineral rights to a parcel of public land along the Yellow Dog River. Together, Save the Wild U.P., Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve and the Michigan League of Conservation Voters called on the State of Michigan to hold a Public Hearing on that 2014 proposed lease. The groups asked the DNR to deny Eagle Mine’s mineral lease request, stating, "Metallic mineral lease of this land would serve only the short-term goals of Industry (...) once again, the State of Michigan seems wholly incapable of serving the public trust." In response, the DNR sent out form letters, and approved the lease without notifying the organizations or individuals who requested a hearing.***

Public comments on the lease request should be sent by Friday, Sept. 25, by email to Karen Maidlow at the Michigan Department of Natural Resources: maidlowk@michigan.gov, or mail your comments now to Karen Maidlow, Property Analyst, Minerals Management, DNR, P.O. Box 30452, Lansing, MI 48909.****

Notes:

* Click here for the 2009 Best Management Practices (BMPs) manual used by DNR and DEQ (Department of Environmental Quality). (See Ch. 5, beginning on p. 13, on Riparian Management Zones, and Ch. 12, beginning on p. 47, for Wetland BMPs.)

** Don Mankee's office is in the Baraga DNR Office, 427 US-41 North, Baraga, MI 49908. Phone: 906-353-6651.

*** See our Oct. 31, 2014, article on the 2014 Eagle Mine mineral lease request near the Yellow Dog River.

**** Note that public comments can also be made to DNR during the meeting of the Western UP Citizens Advisory Council, which meets tonight, Sept. 21, in the chalet at Porcupine Mountains Wilderness State Park. Click here for info.

Eagle Mine seeks new mineral lease near Yellow Dog River, continues exploration

By Michele Bourdieu, with information and maps from Save the Wild U.P., state agencies and Eagle Mine

The Yellow Dog River, part of which is designated a National Wild and Scenic River, is located near Lake Superior. Concerned citizens say a new mineral lease application by Eagle Mine could jeopardize its water quality. (Keweenaw Now file photo)

MARQUETTE -- The Eagle Mine LLC, currently owned by international mining conglomerate Lundin Mining, is seeking a new mineral lease from the State of Michigan for 40 acres of land (NE 1/4 SE 1/4, Section 13, T50N, R29W, Michigamme Township, Marquette County) beside the Yellow Dog River, a federally-recognized National Wild and Scenic River with a status of "excellent" water quality.

This map shows the area of the mineral lease (40 acres) requested by Eagle Mine. A recreational trail runs through the parcel. The Yellow Dog River is just south of it. (Map courtesy savethewildup.org)

According to documents obtained by grassroots organization Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP), Michigan's Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has known about this application since July.* The DNR's announcement of Lundin Mining’s mineral rights lease application was first published on Monday Oct. 20, 2014, commencing a legally-required 30-day public comment period.**

SWUP recently found that just one month after Lundin’s Eagle Mine submitted the July 9, 2014, letter of interest to Michigan's DNR, the DNR Fisheries Division's 2003 recommendation of "Non-development" was changed to "Development, with no restrictions" -- in August of this year.

As SWUP indicated in their Oct. 22, 2014, article, restrictions were added.

SWUP notes, "DNR retains restrictions on the property for a recreational trail, endangered plants, and 'neotropical migrants' including Kirtland’s warbler."***

According to Karen Maidlow, DNR property analyst in Minerals Management, "In September 2014, DNR Field Staff and the State Historical Preservation Office reviewed the parcel for lease classification. Based on the field review, the recommended classification is Leasable Development with Restrictions. The restrictions are Limited Surface Disturbance, Recreational Trails, and Threatened and Endangered Species Habitat." ****

DNR corrects public notice: lease to include restrictions

A corrected public notice, including the lease classification, "development with restrictions," was published today, Oct. 31, 2014, since the notice in the Marquette Mining Journal on Oct. 20 did not include that classification. The new 30-day public comment period has a deadline of Dec. 1, 2014.*****

According to an earlier notice included in a document sent to Save the Wild U.P., "A development with restrictions classification allows for use of the surface for metallic mineral exploration, development, or production under specific lease conditions and stipulations."**

Three stipulations (restrictions) are listed to be included in this lease:

15:
To limit surface disturbance, any wells to be drilled on the leased premises shall be drilled from a single surface area that is acceptable to and approved by the Lessor. The Lessee shall submit a proposed development plan for the leased premises including a proposed surface area, access routes and pipeline corridors, with due regard to surface features, the relative location of other operations in the area, and applicable regulatory requirements.  The Lessee may not drill any well on the leased premises without first obtaining an approval from the Lessor. Approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. If Lessor reasonably determines that production on adjacent land creates the probability of drainage of oil and/or gas from State mineral land, additional surface locations may be considered.

16:
All other provisions of this lease notwithstanding, it is understood that no exploration or development work shall be conducted on this parcel without specific authorization from the Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division.  No operations shall be conducted until written instructions for the proper protection of any threatened or endangered species or their habitat are issued.

19:
All other provisions of this lease notwithstanding, it is understood that no well site shall be located closer than 660 feet to any recreational trail without obtaining the written consent of the Lessor and contacting the local Department trails coordinator.******

The mineral rights lease does allow for exploration and development.

Maidlow told Keweenaw Now any development work would require more than the lease. Permits would be required, e.g., from the Department of Environmental Quality and, if necessary, from local units of government.

"Our lease is for the metallic mineral rights. It's not a surface use lease," Maidlow said. "They have the right to use the surface, but not to put a facility on the surface."

Dan Blondeau, Eagle Mine senior advisor, Communications and Media Relations, said Lundin Mining Co. has applied for this mineral lease in order to do exploration, in particular, geophysical studies.

"The sale of Eagle included land and mineral rights within a roughly 8 mile by 3 mile block," Blondeau said. "However, the purchase did not include every parcel within that area. This lease would help us fill-in gaps (of mineral rights) inside the block."

However, Blondeau added that Eagle has only applied for the lease of the 40-acre parcel. They do not yet have a plan for exploration activities there.

"As part of our commitment to the community, we continue to explore for mineral resources," Blondeau said. "Exploration conducted in accordance with this lease would help us better understand the geology near the Eagle Mine."

Eagle Mine also has a metallic mineral lease (Lease number 595, 482.12 acres) in Section 18, in Champion Township, to the east of the 40-acre parcel in Section 13.

This map shows parcels leased from the State of Michigan in Section 18 (dark green), east of and contiguous to the 40-acre parcel in Section 13. Eagle Mine holds a metallic mineral lease on 482.12 acres in Section 18 (Lease number 595). They also hold a Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Wetlands permit for exploration in some sections of Michigamme Township (blue markings north and south of Yellow Dog River represent wetlands -- see below). To see more details of this area go to the DNR's GeoWebFace map. Move the map to the general area; then, by checking items to the left of the map, you should be able to see the location of the Eagle Mine, the Yellow Dog River, DNR ownership, lease numbers, etc. (Map courtesy Karen Maidlow of DNR)

Keweenaw Now was not able to determine whether Lundin is doing exploration in Section 18.

"Due to market sensitivities we do not divulge specific exploration information," Blondeau said.

Eagle Mine would not do exploration without permission of the rightful property owner, he added.

Eagle Mine has both a surface lease and a metallic mineral lease on the nearby Section 12, where the present Eagle Mine facilities are located. The facilities appear to be about a mile or a mile and a half from the Section 13 parcel.

SWUP, concerned residents, oppose lease request

Save the Wild U.P.’s president Kathleen Heideman is outraged about the lease request because of the proximity of the Yellow Dog River.

During a brief talk preceding the Oct. 25, 2014, benefit concert by folk/jazz singer-songwriter Claudia Schmidt (center), Kathleen Heideman, Save the Wild U.P. (SWUP) president (right), speaks about the recent mineral lease application by Eagle Mine that could impact the nearby Yellow Dog River. At left is Linda Rulison, Friends of the Land of Keweenaw (FOLK) president, who spoke about FOLK's concerns for "places too special to mine," illustrated in the bulletin board of photos at right. The concert, a benefit for both SWUP and FOLK, attracted a large turnout, filling the Orpheum Theater in Hancock. (Photo by Keweenaw Now)

"It’s alarming that the State of Michigan is seriously considering this mineral lease request," Heideman said. "The land in question is only one hundred feet from the Yellow Dog River’s 100-year floodplain, which means the land is vulnerable to extreme flooding events (King and MacGregor Environmental, Inc., 2011). For me, that’s a giant neon sign spelling R-I-S-K-Y: sulfide ore and water are a dangerous mix! Also, the DNR’s Wildlife staff identified the land as habitat for the Kirtland’s Warbler, a state and federally listed Threatened and Endangered species."

In a recent press release / article on their Web site, SWUP encourages concerned citizens to demand a public hearing and a transparent, democratic evaluation of the proposed lease.***

However, according to Maidlow, the DNR would not hold a public hearing on a mineral rights lease. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) would coordinate a public hearing if the mining company submits a plan for a mining permit. The DNR would attend the hearing since state land is involved.

Joe Maki, DEQ mining specialist, said Eagle Mine has not applied for any mining permits outside of those they have for the existing Eagle Mine.

"This new parcel (subject of the lease request) is not included in any mining permitted activity that Lundin has right now," Maki said. "If an ore body was identified in that area and they wanted to mine that deposit, then mining permits would be required and a public hearing would be included."

The DEQ has in the past held public information meetings before a mining permit application is received, but such a meeting would not be considered a public hearing, he explained.

"Unless they apply for a permit, we don't hold a public hearing," Maki added.

Cynthia Pryor of the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, a resident of the watershed and and dedicated environmental watchdog, warned that additional mining would threaten the Yellow Dog River's water quality.

Cynthia Pryor of Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve speaks about water quality during the question session preceding the March 25, 2014, DEQ Public Hearing on re-issuance of the Groundwater Discharge Permit for the Eagle Mine near Big Bay, Mich. The mine is now operational. (File photo © and courtesy Jeremiah Eagle Eye)

"Mining activity on this land poses a direct threat to the Yellow Dog River: land disturbance, drilling contamination, groundwater impairment, surface water pollution, you name it," Pryor said. "The DNR needs to reconsider their classification of the property's restrictions. Given the river’s proximity, this land is absolutely too sensitive to allow mining development."

Attorney Michelle Halley is not surprised by Lundin's application to lease more minerals.

During the March 25, 2014, DEQ Public Hearing on re-issuance of the Groundwater Discharge Permit for the Eagle Mine, attorney Michelle Halley speaks about the need for a (federal) Clean Water Act permit for Eagle Mine. (File photo © and courtesy Jeremiah Eagle Eye)

"Save the Wild U.P., the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, and others have known that Eagle Mine is just the beginning of a regional mining development strategy," Halley noted. "In the long term, the public will pay a high price for mining projects performed with inadequate permitting, monitoring and enforcement."

According to SWUP Director Alexandra Thebert, "Leasing mineral rights means drilling, and drilling can quickly lead to a new mine. We must ensure that the enormous liability of mining on State-owned land isn’t a burden shifted to taxpayers while increasing the profits of a foreign mining company."

Alexandra Thebert, Save the Wild U.P. director, speaks about the Eagle Mine at the Amnesty International offices in London, England, on Apr. 15, 2013. She also spoke during former Eagle Mine owner Rio Tinto's Annual General Meeting (AGM) for shareholders in London on Apr. 18, 2013. (File photo © Amy Scaife and courtesy Save the Wild U.P.)

As for exploration drilling, it does not need an actual Part 632 mining permit at the exploration stage, but the company has to follow DEQ rules under Part 625, the Mineral Well Act.

According to Melanie Humphrey, geological technician in the DEQ Marquette Office, these rules for exploratory drilling require the company to file a report (drill logs). Humphrey also inspects the drilling sites.

Humphrey noted the company would need to have the lease and then submit an exploration plan to the DNR before her DEQ office could make comments on their plan.

"I haven't had any notification or anything about drilling in that area," she said.

Eagle Mine holds permit for wetland exploration

Eagle Mine does hold a DEQ General Permit for seismic survey exploration activities under Part 303 Wetlands Protection (of NREPA, the Natural Resources Environmental Protection Act, 1994, PA 451 as amended). The permit, issued Aug. 21, 2014, is for properties in Michigamme Township (Marquette County): T50N, R29W, Sections 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14.

The permit authorizes the following exploration activities: "Complete seismic exploration survey in wetlands. This includes completion of 4" diameter x 10' deep (max) hand-augured borings and associated firing of 354-g charges in wetlands, resulting in a total, overall wetland 'dredge' and subsequent fill volume of 38.0 cu. yds. over a total  area of 102.6 sq. ft."

"All the work is going to be completed by hand and on foot," said Virginia (Ginny) Pennala, DEQ Water Resources Division, Marquette Office.

The permit also includes conditions for protecting a state threatened species, Narrow-Leaved Gentian (Gentiana linearis) and nesting migrant birds in the area.

Jon Saari, SWUP vice president, points out that these public lands belong to the public and adjoin an even larger area of public land.

"This is not an isolated parcel of surplus land," Saari said. "It adjoins another 840 acres of contiguous State Land on the Yellow Dog Plains."

Gene Champagne, Concerned Citizens of Big Bay, sees a pattern of deception and creeping industrialization of the Yellow Dog Plains.

Gene Champagne of Concerned Citizens of Big Bay speaks about local residents' concerns during the March 25 DEQ Public Hearing on re-issuance of the Ground Water Discharge Permit for Eagle Mine, which is located near Big Bay, Mich. (Keweenaw Now file photo)

"Clearly, mineral leasing leads to surface operations -- and the land under consideration in this proposed mineral lease is only half a mile from the freshly-paved Triple A road," Champagne noted. "We renew our call for a federal corruption investigation concerning the State’s failure to regulate Eagle Mine, fraudulent permitting, bait-and-switch electrical infrastructure, the steamrolling of road upgrades, and total disregard for cumulative environmental impacts."

SWUP encourages concerned citizens to send comments to Karen Maidlow, Property Analyst, Minerals Management, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, at maidlowk@michigan.gov, while copying info@savethewildup.org, since the organization is maintaining an independent analysis of comments received. Comments regarding the mineral rights lease can also be mailed directly to Karen Maidlow, Property Analyst, Minerals Management, DNR, P.O. Box 30452, Lansing, MI 48909.

Notes:
* Click here and see the July 9, 2014, letter from Eagle Mine to MDNR on p. 1 of the document.

** Click here for the notice included in this document on p. 7. The public notice published in the Marquette Mining Journal on Oct. 20, 2014, is slightly different. It did not include the paragraph on "development with restrictions."

*** Click here and see the comments concerning restrictions on p. 3 of the document.
Click here for the article by Save the Wild U.P.

**** According to Karen Maidlow, DNR property analyst in Minerals Management, each division is responsible for reviewing the parcel for lease classification based on their field of expertise. She explains the review as follows: "Although Fisheries Division review was development, the Field Coordinator takes all the comments from all the reviewers to determine a final classification (the official recommended classification), which occurred in September. The official recommended classification is Development with Restrictions. The classification did NOT change from August to September. The reviewers are given time to do their review and only when all reviewers have completed the review does the field coordinator determine the final classification. This did not occur until September."

***** Click here for the Corrected Public Notice.

****** Text of stipulations courtesy Karen Maidlow of DNR.