See our right-hand column for announcements and news briefs. Scroll down the right-hand column to access the Archives -- links to articles posted in the main column since 2007. See details about our site, including a way to comment, in the yellow text above the Archives.
Showing posts with label Superior Watershed Partnership. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Superior Watershed Partnership. Show all posts

Friday, May 31, 2013

Citizens voice concerns at second set of Rio Tinto community forums; video report on L'Anse forum

By Michele Bourdieu

During the May 15, 2013, Rio Tinto community forum in L'Anse, Mich., Keweenaw Bay Indian Community member Jeffery Loman (center, foreground, in hat), a former federal regulator, asks a question about water discharge from the Eagle Mine to groundwater and surface water. (Photos by Keweenaw Now)

L'ANSE, MICH. -- Rio Tinto recently held the second in a series of "Community Scorecard" forums in several Upper Peninsula locations affected by the company's Eagle Project, a copper and nickel mine still under construction near Big Bay, Michigan. The forums are intended to be held every six months to show the company's progress. The first community scorecard forums, allowing the public to vote on Rio Tinto's performance in five areas, were held in September 2012 in Baraga/L’Anse, Michigamme, Humboldt, Ishpeming, Marquette and Big Bay. Additional events with community scoring were held in Ishpeming and Marquette in October 2012.

Rio Tinto's Eagle Project Web site states the following purpose of these forums: "The Eagle Mine Community Scorecard allows community members to rate our performance in five areas you said are important. Those five areas are: environmental performance, local hire, safety, transparency and communication, and leave more wood on the woodpile."*

In May 2013 the second round of forums took place in Ishpeming, Humboldt, Marquette, L'Anse, Michigamme Township, and Powell Township (Big Bay).

Chantae Lessard (standing), principal advisor on communities and social performance for Rio Tinto Eagle Mine, explains the community scorecard voting procedure to attendees at the May 15, 2013, community forum in L'Anse, Mich.

Critics of the project have questioned the value of the Community Scorecard for several reasons. Save the Wild UP recently issued a press release questioning the scientific basis for the data presented at the forums and noting the small number of forum attendees.

"Rio Tinto portrays this data as scientific -- but that could not be farther from the truth," said Kathleen Heideman, vice president of Save the Wild U.P. "Their 'data' from the last round polled less than 300 people -- hardly representative of the 76,502 residents of Marquette and Baraga counties. It's a global mining corporation's idea of democracy: first they show slides about how great they are -- then we should click to indicate our agreement. That's meaningless. It's not voting."**

During the May 15 Rio Tinto forum in L'Anse, Geri Grant, left, Superior Watershed Partnership (SWP) senior planner, speaks about SWP's detecting uranium at the Eagle Mine site. SWP does independent monitoring of the Eagle Mine.

Mindy Otto, new Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve executive director, attended the May 22, 2013, community forum in Powell Township (Big Bay area).

"It seems to me that the scorecard process is another way for Rio Tinto to attempt to press their opinions on our community, but the effort is not actually working for them," Otto said. "As concerned citizens we need to be present at these forums and make use of them to expose the inadequacies. In all categories the largest percentage of people present at the meeting stated Rio Tinto is 'below expectations' in Powell Township."

Otto reported these scorecard results from the Powell Township vote:
Environmental Performance -- 39 percent said they were below expectations.
Safety Performance -- 40 percent said they were below expectations.
Local Hire -- 48 percent said they were below expectations.
(11 people laid off, 3 reassigned to other RT projects)
Transparency -- 48 percent said they were below expectations.
Leave More Wood on the Woodpile -- 67 percent said they were below expectations. 

Cynthia Pryor, Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve Sulfide Mining Campaign director, also attended the Powell Township forum and mentioned the high percentages of "below expectations" votes.

"The Powell Township forum had 21 voters with about 10-12 more folks from Rio Tinto. The message is still the same -- they continue to try to convince the public that they are doing everything above expectations," Pryor reported. "The bulk of the issues the public saw was the lack of transparency and only more gamesmanship relative to environmental permits, local hires and even safety. The Wood in the Woodpile continues to irritate those who attended -- as Big Bay wants and wishes are not being sought and what is an improved road to someone from away is a loss of our 'way of life' in northern Marquette County."

Powell Township resident Gene Champagne said he was unable to attend the Powell Township forum but had attended the May 14, 2013, Marquette forum. He found it disappointing.

"There were between 40 and 50 present at the Marquette Forum with the majority of attendees being RT (Rio Tinto) employees or contractors," Champagne said. "Only 17 people were unaffiliated with RT and able to vote. Unfortunately, the process varied little, if at all, from the last forum. RT cites all of the wonderful things they have done for the environment (as an example) and then asks people to grade their performance. RT then has a discussion after the vote where data that the general public may not be aware of is talked about. At the last forum, I asked that the format be changed to have the discussion first, then the grading. This suggestion, obviously, fell upon deaf ears."

However, at the May 15, 2013, community forum in L'Anse, Rio Tinto responded to members of the public who requested that questions and comments from the audience be allowed before each vote rather than after the vote as was done in September 2012. Discussion was allowed before the vote and questions and suggestions welcomed after each vote.

On the Rio Tinto Eagle Web site, the company defends this type of forum as unique and states their expectation that the number of attendees will increase and the scoring will become more reliable as they add more opportunities for the public to evaluate their performance.

"To our knowledge no other mining company has introduced a tool that allows the community to regularly rate their performance, which is then made public," the Web site states.*

Video Report: May 15, 2013, forum in L'Anse

The forum normally begins with a presentation by one of the Rio Tinto Eagle Project staff members giving a summary of the project so far, noting the Eagle Project activities and progress in the previous six months. Here is a video clip from the introductory presentation by Matt Johnson, Rio Tinto Eagle Mine government and community affairs manager, at the May 15 forum in L'Anse:

Matt Johnson, Rio Tinto Eagle Mine government and community affairs manager, begins the May 15, 2013, Rio Tinto Community Forum in L'Anse, Michigan, with an overview of the history of the Eagle Mine and a description of the mine site, located near Big Bay, Michigan. (Videos by Keweenaw Now)

Johnson also pointed out how far the company has drilled from the portal under Eagle Rock, the sacred Ojibwa site now fenced off on the surface, towards the ore body located under the Salmon Trout River. [Click here for a second clip of Johnson's presentation, in which he shows diagrams and photos of the drilling progress.]

Work at the Humboldt Mill is now on hold, Johnson noted. In the following video clip, he gives a brief history and description of the mill and explains Rio Tinto's plans for depositing tailings (mine waste) in the pit at the site, which still contains tailings from previous mining companies:

Rio Tinto's Matt Johnson speaks about the Humboldt Mill and its tailings pit during the May 15, 2013, Rio Tinto Community Forum in L'Anse, Michigan. Johnson said further work on the mill is presently on hold. It is intended to be used for processing nickel and copper ore from Rio Tinto's Eagle Mine. 

Joe Derocha, Humboldt Township supervisor, recently told Keweenaw Now he is aware that Rio Tinto's global office has directed that they postpone some parts of the Eagle project, including a hold on work at the Humboldt Mill; but he is quite happy with the cleanup Rio Tinto has done there so far.

"They've done some fantastic work with the cleanup," Derocha said. "That's a big thing for us."

Environmental Performance raises questions at L'Anse forum

At the May 15 forum in L'Anse, a number of concerns were expressed particularly in the area of environmental performance.

In this video clip Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC) member Jeffery Loman asks about Rio Tinto's core storage and about discharge of treated wastewater to groundwater and surface water:

During the May 15, 2013, Rio Tinto Community Forum in L'Anse, Michigan, Jeffery Loman of KBIC asks questions concerning Rio Tinto's storage of cores and about discharge of water from the Treated Wastewater Infiltration System (TWIS ) of the Eagle Mine to groundwater and surface water.

Jessica Koski, KBIC mining technical assistant, asked questions about the length of Rio Tinto's monitoring of the tailings disposal at the Humboldt pit, the effects of climate change, and potential future financial responsibilities should pollution such as acid mine drainage occur. Kristen Mariuzza, Rio Tinto Eagle Project environmental and permitting manager, replies to her questions in this video clip:

Jessica Koski of KBIC asks questions about the tailings facility at the Humboldt Pit -- whether the water treatment plant will remain after operations cease, whether the facility will be able to withstand potential increased flooding that could be caused by climate change and how long Rio Tinto will continue to monitor the site and assume responsibility should acid mine drainage occur. Rio Tinto's Kristen Mariuzza replies.

In the following video clip, Rio Tinto staff field questions on uranium found by Superior Watershed Partnership (SWP, an organization doing independent monitoring at Eagle Mine) at the Eagle Mine Temporary Development Rock Storage Area at the mine site in March 2013. Geri Grant, SWP senior planner, adds that SWP, when they found the uranium, also tested the water treatment plant to be sure uranium was not being discharged into the TWIS:

Questions on uranium found by Superior Watershed Partnership (organization doing independent monitoring at Eagle Mine) at the Eagle Mine Temporary Development Rock Storage Area in March 2013 are answered before the audience is asked to vote on Rio Tinto's Environmental Performance.***

Catherine Andrews of Friends of the Land of Keweenaw (FOLK) asked Rio Tinto staff if they had proof of a liner that never leaked, but they were unable to give her a definitive answer. She said she had asked that question at the first L'Anse forum six months ago and they had said they would try to find the answer. Kristen Mariuzza noted management of the amount of water and monitoring would prevent leaking, and uranium is removed in the water treatment plant. [Click here for the video clip with this discussion.]

The results of the community scorecard vote on Environmental Performance at this May 15, 2013, L'Anse forum (with 19 people voting) were as follows: Exceeds expectations, 32 percent; meets expectations, 11 percent; below expectations, 42 percent; and need more information, 15 percent.

Following the vote, Jim Hahn of Skanee noted one problem with the vote on environmental performance is that one vote is expected to cover multiple environmental issues. [Click here for the video clip with this discussion.]

Jeffery Loman also asked whether the uranium finding was really a  "non-event" since it was not considered a contaminant of concern in the state permits. Mariuzza pointed out the amount of uranium detected was less than the 3 parts per million national average. While the amount in the sump exceeds drinking water standards, it is contained and then removed from the water in the water treatment plant, she explained. [Click here for a video clip with this question.]

Safety, Local Hire receive satisfactory votes at L'Anse forum

In the category of Safety, Rio Tinto reported only three injuries in the past six months. Results of the vote were positive: exceeds expectations, 40 percent; meets expectations, 35 percent; below expectations, 15 percent; and needs more information, 10 percent. One member of the audience commented this safety record would be envied by other companies.

In the category of Safety, Rio Tinto received a high approval, since only three minor injuries occurred in the past six months.

Questions on Local Hire indicated people would like more detail on the actual numbers of people hired from the local area, including those hired by contractors working for Rio Tinto. In this video clip Chantae Lessard presents employment numbers and percentages; and Jessica Sandstrom, Human Resources coordinator for the Rio Tinto Eagle Mine, clarifies the statistics:

Audience members at Rio Tinto's community forum in L'Anse ask questions on details of local hire statistics before voting in this category of the company's community scorecard.

Results of the vote on local hire at the L'Anse forum show considerable satisfaction: exceeds expectations, 30 percent; meets expectations, 55 percent; below expectations, 15 percent; needs more information 0 percent.

Transparency, Leave More Wood on the Woodpile raise concerns

During a discussion preceding the vote on Transparency and Communication, Doug Welker of Friends of the Land of Keweenaw (FOLK) asked if more detailed information on Rio Tinto's future plans to remain in the area could be made available to the public (information on mineral rights, cores, etc.) In the following video clip, another audience member notes his experience in asking questions about core samples at the Keweenaw Copper exploration site near Gratiot Lake in Keweenaw County. Welker also asked if more geological information on the mineralogy of the rock surrounding the ore body could be made public. Rio Tinto's Kristen Mariuzza noted very detailed information on this mineralogy is available in the air permit, if not the mining permit:

At the May 15 L'Anse forum Doug Welker of FOLK asks for more transparency from Rio Tinto on their future plans, mineral rights and mineralogy.

Results of the vote on transparency were as follows: exceeds expectations, 39 percent; meets expectations, 17 percent; below expectations, 33 percent; needs more information, 11 percent.

The last category for the vote, "Leaving More Wood on the Woodpile," refers to positive contributions the mining company believes it is making for the economic benefit of the local communities. Among these are their "Accelerate U.P." program to help entrepreneurs start new businesses in the area, 12 miles of new or improved roads and 30 miles of electrical power lines. The company also wants, in the future, to set aside land they've purchased, which will not be used for mining, but for use in "the areas of biodiversity, recreation and culture."

Some forum attendees questioned the value of Rio Tinto's infrastructure "improvements."  Note the comments in this videoclip:

During the Rio Tinto Community Forum in L'Anse, Rio Tinto's Chantae Lessard explains the company's "Accelerate U.P." program to help entrepreneurs. Doug Welker of FOLK questions the value of Rio Tinto's infrastructure if local communities will have to to maintain it after the company leaves. Jim Hahn of Skanee questions the appropriateness of the title, "Leave More Wood on the Woodpile" since, while wood is a sustainable product, mining is unsustainable.

Gene Champagne of Powell Township, who lives quite close to the Eagle Mine, also commented on Rio Tinto's infrastructure claims.

"The electric lines never went to Big Bay and it can easily be debated if this was even an improvement," Champagne said. "I live in Big Bay and see no real improvement in the amount of black-outs I have experienced at my house. Alger-Delta had worked on the system-switching problems back in 2005, or so, and did not require any new upgrades. The only difference in electric service has come from the brush below the wires being cleared along 550, which Alger-Delta should have been doing all along. Not one more kilowatt of electricity comes into Big Bay as a result of Kennecott’s ill-gotten permit.****

Champagne noted also that most people in Big Bay do not look at the roads used by the mine as improved, but rather the opposite.

"They look like some freeway or drive through an urban park downstate," he notes. "Some locals who have lived in Big Bay their entire life will not travel out 510/AAA anymore because of the way it looks and the speed of the traffic as a result."

Results of the L'Anse forum vote on "Leave More Wood on the Woodpile" were these: exceeds expectations, 38 percent; meets expectations, 17 percent; below expectations, 28 percent; needs more information, 17 percent.

At the end of the forum, Jeffery Loman suggested Rio Tinto consider leaving technological infrastructure to improve Internet access and cellphone reception in the local area. Here are his comments:

At the May 15, 2013, Rio Tinto Community Forum in L'Anse, Jeffery Loman, Keweenaw Bay Indian Community member, makes a suggestion on Information Technology improvements Rio Tinto could leave for the community after they finish mining.

After the forum in L'Anse, Jessica Koski of KBIC commented to Keweenaw Now on Rio Tinto's attitude toward Eagle Rock, the sacred Ojibwa site they use as the portal to their mine.

"I think it's complete negligence or ignorance on Rio Tinto's part that they don't acknowledge the different Native American perspectives on the meaning and significance of our sacred lands," Koski said. "Despite their fence, from our perspective Eagle Rock is not separate from the mining site and the surrounding area. Viewshed is part of assessments of sacred sites as historical resources."

Val Gagnon, a doctoral student in social sciences at Michigan Tech, who is studying environmental and energy policy, also spoke after the forum about her impressions of the scorecard.

"I just think that the whole idea of the scorecard is that they're just one piece," Gagnon noted. "They show it as several pieces (fitting together like a puzzle), but in reality there a lot more pieces. I think the puzzle is important to use, but the environment is larger than what they show. Environment and human health are very strongly connected. The environmental scorecard doesn't seem to include people in the environment."

Dan Blondeau, Rio Tinto advisor for communications and media relations, said "roughly 115 people voted" in this round of community forums.

"We had more attendees but not everyone participated in the voting." he added.

Rio Tinto update:

Rio Tinto recently announced their contractor Redpath Mining has completed its contract for pre-operations underground work  at the Eagle Mine -- over two miles (3.7k) of underground tunnels, reaching approximately 800 ft. (244 m) below the surface at the deepest point.

Redpath had 40 employees working on the project. Of these, 21 are local.

"These people now have specialized skills that can be used at other projects or for future mining at Eagle," said Dan Blondeau, Rio Tinto advisor for communications and media relations. "Eagle will request bids for the mining during operations, the remainder of the surface facilities at both the mine and mill, and the ore transportation. In addition, the Marquette County Road Commission will start work on upgrading the existing roads."

Notes:

* Click here to read more about the Community Scorecard Forums on the Rio Tinto Eagle Web site.

** See "Upper Peninsula citizens skeptical of Rio Tinto 'Community Forums.'"

*** Click here to read about Superior Watershed Partnership's independent monitoring of the Eagle Mine and their findings about uranium at the mine site.

**** See our Feb. 22, 2011, article, "Concerned citizens file contested case: Kennecott Eagle Mine," concerning the electric power issue.

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Concerned citizens, groups oppose Rio Tinto's modified air permit for Eagle Mine

By Michele Bourdieu

MARQUETTE -- Snow and icy roads on March 12, 2013, prevented many concerned citizens from attending the MDEQ (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality) public hearing on Rio Tinto's Permit to Install (PTI) application for Rio Tinto Eagle Mine LLC’s proposed modifications to their nickel and copper mining facility near Big Bay, Mich. The modifications include eliminating on-site ore crushing, adding an enclosed aggregate storage building, and eliminating the fabric filter dust collector, along with other changes.

Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve says air quality concerns dominated hearing comments

The Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve (YDWP) reported recently that about 60 people attended the hearing, held at Northern Michigan University, and nearly all who spoke during the comment and question and answer sessions were opposed to the permit modifications, especially because of concerns about air quality.

View of the Salmon Trout River. Rio Tinto is drilling toward an ore body of copper and nickel located under this trout stream. The Main Ventilation Air Raise is located very close to the river. (Keweenaw Now file photo)

In an article on their Web site posted March 13, 2012, YDWP states, "Although public questions were well articulated and based on the documents provided, the panel was not able to answer all questions satisfactorily. The experts evaded questions related to water stating they were not water quality experts. One main topic of discussion was the proposed plan to eliminate the fabric filter dust collector or Bag House on the MVAR (Main Ventilation Air Raise). In other words, the main vent for all underground operations will not have a filter at all if this permit is approved by the DEQ."*

MDEQ: Fabric filter for mine exhaust not required

The MDEQ fact sheet on this application states the following:
"Any emissions produced by underground activities would be vented through the MVAR (Main Ventilation Air Raise). Components of mine exhaust would be mine heater combustion products and particulate generated by vehicle travel; drilling; blasting; underground ore and development rock handling; and backfill material handling.

"The original air permit for the Eagle Project required a fabric filter system to be used on the MVAR. Note that this fabric filter was not required in order for the emissions from the MVAR to meet state and federal standards. Rio Tinto agreed to install a fabric filter as a result of comments received during the public comment period.

"Rio Tinto submitted PTI application 50-06B proposing no fabric filter on the MVAR exhaust. The MVAR emission estimate for this application does not include a fabric filter but does account for the design changes (elimination of underground screening, rock breaking, and the ore pass) and dust suppression systems, such as water sprays, that will be used to reduce emissions from underground ore and development rock handling. As noted in the modeling discussion, the emissions from the MVAR meet all state and federal requirements without a fabric filter. It should also be noted that the wet conditions in the mine are not expected to be conducive to generating significant amounts of particulate emissions."**

Concerned citizens request air filter, question modeling

Comments from concerned citizens -- some who attended the hearing and others who were unable to attend but sent written comments -- indicate considerable dissatisfaction, not only with the attitude of MDEQ officials, but also with Rio Tinto's plan to eliminate the fabric filter dust collector they had included in their previous (2007) permit in response to public comments and with Rio Tinto/MDEQ dependence on questionable modeling as a basis for modifications to the project.

Jeffery Loman, Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC) tribal member, attended the hearing and spoke during both the question-answer period and the official public comment period. Here are some observations he shared with Keweenaw Now:

"I would like to thank the MDEQ for their question and answer session and public hearing. The conversations at these events were telling in that it is obvious that MDEQ's executive management has allowed or otherwise indicated to its staff that it's appropriate for their technical staff to regulate Rio Tinto as Rio Tinto sees fit. The technical staff, and not senior management, ran these public meetings and answered 98 percent of all questions. This is a sign of ill-informed and possibly even weak leadership. The technical staff demonstrated their lack of experience in mining operations and even a fundamental misunderstanding of Michigan law. Statements like 'there aren't many baghouse filter systems being used at mines' and 'it is Rio Tinto's ore and we relied entirely on Rio Tinto to decide what chemical analysis to perform and their laboratory results and other data' are extremely troubling. MDEQ will experience endless challenges and increasing distrust unless it changes this dynamic and starts telling Rio Tinto what to do instead of the other way around."

Big Bay resident Carla Champagne of Concerned Citizens of Big Bay also addressed MDEQ officials at the hearing. She shared the following notes for her comments with Keweenaw Now:

"This permit to install is completely inadequate as to the protection of the air of Marquette County," Champagne says. "The MVAR is the major source of mine emissions. These emissions will be created by vehicle travel, drilling, blasting, ore and development rock handling, backfill material handling, and mine heaters. No testing of those emissions will be done until production reaches 1660 tons per day or 12 months. Then only the emission rate will be tested."

Champagne adds that anything could be spewing out the the MVAR at 50 mph for a whole year and residents would have no way of knowing what was coming out.

"All figures saying the metals and sulfides are below criteria are based on modeling," Champagne notes. "Modeling at this mine has already proven to be wrong. The sulfate levels in part of the TDRSA (Temporary Development Rock Storage Area) have been three times the predicted levels. Did modeling show there would be arsenic in the drinking water? What about the fact that Rio Tinto is going to be asking for changes in one of their water permits because of higher than expected levels of some contaminants? Was that a modeling error also?"

This Temporary Development Rock Storage Area (TDRSA) is for all rock removed from the Eagle Mine underground that is not considered ore. The facility features a multi-layered liner, leak detection system and sump pump to collect water which will be treated by the water treatment plant. All development rock is to be returned underground as fill. (August 2012 file photo by Keweenaw Now)

Noting that fugitive dust was a problem at Rio Tinto/Kennecott's Flambeau mine and other sulfide mines, Champagne says, "The dust suppression systems suggested in this permit need more explanation other than just spraying things down with water and paving some roads. Is the water they are going to be using for this spraying the arsenic- contaminated well water? Are they going to be spraying that 8.6 acres of uncovered storage piles?"

Like Loman, Champagne told MDEQ officials they should be telling Rio Tinto what to do, not the reverse.

"You need to require this company to prove their modeling numbers are accurate with real data. A filter on the MVAR is one way. If there are better ways, great, require Rio Tinto to use them. Relying on modeling when real data can be obtained is unacceptable when dealing with this type of historically toxic mining," Champagne says. "They will monitor the air at that mine site and/or coming out of the MVAR if you require them to. The reasons for the promise Rio Tinto made to put a filter on the MVAR have not changed significantly enough for them to break that promise."

Catherine Parker of Marquette, who also spoke at the March 12 hearing, addressed both MDEQ and Rio Tinto in her comments, noting that Michigan's Part 632 mining law requires the applicant to demonstrate that its operation will work and will not pollute the environment.

"Kennecott (Rio Tinto's subsidiary) agreed to install a filter system in their mine ventilation stack in response to public concern about particulate matter emissions, but they could not demonstrate that it would work as planned," Parker said. "Humid, corrosive air exiting at gale force was more than their baghouse could handle, and they knew it. I suggest they re-design it."

Parker asked, "Does Rio Tinto have detailed information about the chemistry of the rocks they’re working with, and if so, have they shared it?  Elevated sulfate levels in the TDRSA last July, and more recently, arsenic in the drinking water, demonstrate that things do not always go according to their plans."

Parker, like others who criticized the modeling, gave this example: "Another serious problem with the modeling for the amended MVAR is that climate information was plugged in from a Sawyer/Green Bay database with added observations from the Munising Airport. There are many microclimates in Marquette County, and as a frequent traveler from the city of Marquette to the Yellow Dog Plains, I’ve learned to be prepared for something quite different from what I left in my front yard. What about prevailing winds, for example? It seems impossible to accurately forecast deposition into soils and water without accurate meteorological information."

Gene Champagne of Concerned Citizens of Big Bay shared some of his written comments to MDEQ concerning this permit.

Like Parker, Gene Champagne comments on the weather data as problematic because of its source, adding that weather data from Rio Tinto's own weather station at the Eagle mine, operating since 2007, is the data that should be used.

"The weather on the Yellow Dog Plains, as far as the extremity in temperature and precipitation can be significantly different, even from that in Big Bay a mere 10 miles away," he notes.

"Computer modeling has a bad reputation, especially in the mining industry, for being overly optimistic, unreliable, and even deceptive," he writes. "The modeling will spit out information based upon the the data inputted. This is can be a 'garbage in - garbage-out' proposition."

Gene Champagne also questions data that indicates sulfides are in the 30 percent range. Kennecott's original permit, he says, "states that the sulfides in 1,477,00 metric tonnes are greater than 80 percent; between 30 percent and 80 percent in 2,573,000 metric tonnes; and less than 30 percent in ore that Rio Tinto has no intention of extracting. This could actually be considered a fraudulent application and rejected on those grounds alone."

He calls for collecting two years of baseline air data before operations begin without a fabric filter.

"Air emissions and data need to be collected for a year past the 1,660 tons per day average before the fabric filter is removed," Gene Champagne writes. "If the fabric filter is allowed to be removed from the current permit, then 24/7 air monitoring needs to be in place before mining operations begin. Placement of air monitors should be decided by the DEQ with assistance from the EPA and encompass the most likely places for worst case scenarios as well as for capturing fugitive dust along the transportation route." 

Jessica Koski, mining technical assistant in the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community's (KBIC's) Department of Natural Resources, was unable to attend the hearing, but sent a
letter to MDEQ stating several concerns, beginning with the tribe's rights to hunt, fish, trap and gather on traditional lands ceded to the United States under the 1842 Treaty of LaPointe.

"The Eagle Mine project and associated infrastructure, including the permitted release of air emissions that will extend within and beyond the fence line, are located within this ceded territory," Koski writes. "Fugitive dust and uncontrolled air emissions will adversely impact tribal members more so than the general public due to subsistence living practices and the exercise of treaty-reserved rights. The proposed changes pose disproportionate health risk particularly to tribal members who gather and consume plants and wildlife nearby, and those who continue to visit our sacred place within the mine's fence line, Migi zii wa sin, Eagle Rock."

Eagle Rock, the Anishinaabe (Ojibwa) sacred site, is now surrounded by a fence. The decline tunnel blasted under the Rock to access the ore body is at right. (August 2012 Keweenaw Now file photo © and courtesy Steve Garske)

Koski's letter requests several actions from the MDEQ, including these:

1) Require controls on the MVAR (main ventilation air rise) stack and request that Rio Tinto reconsider including a fabric dust collector, which was included in the original permit and expected to capture 99 percent of all emissions.

2) "We ask for proof that their models are correct, including review and analysis of the models and any further modeling, by the Environmental Protection Agency air quality staff," Koski notes.

She also recommends installation of air quality monitors at the site for the life of the mine.

In addition, Koski expresses concern that the present air permit application does not look at potential environmental health effects of nickel, copper and particulate matter deposition predicted for areas beyond the fence line of the mine, including the Salmon Trout River, the Yellow Dog Watershed and the communities of Big Bay and Marquette.

3) Koski reminds the MDEQ that, according to Michigan's Environmental Justice Plan of 2010, MDEQ's review of projects should identify disproportionate adverse health effects on minorities, including tribal communities and members. She notes also that this Plan indicates state environmental regulators should consult with tribes on environmental justice matters when their decisions may impact tribal members' health and environmental well being.***

Superior Watershed Partnership: Applicant must demonstrate Best Available Control Technology

The Superior Watershed Partnership (SWP), which is conducting independent monitoring of the Eagle Mine, recently submitted comments to MDEQ on the air permit application, including the following statements:

"Per State Air Regulations, the applicant must demonstrate that it is installing the Best Available Control Technology (BACT) in order to assure that the area will continue to meet the NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Applicant is to identify all air pollution control options available, feasibility, effectiveness and why each represents BACT. AQD (Air Quality Division of MDEQ) is to verify applicant's determination of BACT and review BACT determinations for similar facilities in Michigan and nationwide."

"...There is no documentation contained within the permit that demonstrates a review or recommendation of Best Available Control Technologies."

"MDEQ has proposed a one-time stack test of the MVAR after peak production has been reached. The SWP questions the accuracy, relevance and significance of any one-time test. The Clean Air Act National Stack Testing Guidance issued by USEPA requires that Rio Tinto be able to demonstrate that it can 'continuously comply.' How will MDEQ ensure continuous compliance from a one-time test?"

"The proposed stack test will only use AQD Method 5 to test for particulate emissions. A host of other methods are readily available and would provide relevant data concerning emissions from the MVAR.

"Additionally, the draft permit fails to specify what happens if the proposed test exceeds limits to PM (particulate matter) emissions."

SWP includes a list of recommendations should MDEQ approve this permit.****

Parker summed up the critical response of the public to Rio Tinto's current air permit application, as follows: "We, the public, have not withdrawn our request for a filter on the main exhaust system at the mine. We are not interested in degrading our water and air sheds to levels that are acceptable to state and federal agencies. We want a system that is guaranteed to work, and an air monitoring system at the mine site beginning yesterday -- a demonstration that Rio Tinto’s operations will not pollute, impair or destroy our natural resources."

Monday, March 18, is the final deadline for submitting written comments on this air permit (Permit to Install Application No. 50-06B). Click here to find links to more information and to submit comments on line.

Notes:

* Click here to read the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve article on the March 12, 2013, hearing.

** Click here for the MDEQ Air Quality Division's Fact Sheet on this permit application.

*** Click here to read Jessica Koski's letter to the MDEQ concerning this permit.

**** Visit the Superior Watershed Partnership Web site to learn about their monitoring program for the Eagle Mine. Their comments to MDEQ should be posted on their Web site soon.

Monday, December 03, 2012

Superior Watershed Partnership seeks public input at Town Hall Meetings to introduce Community Environmental Monitoring for Eagle Mine

MARQUETTE -- The Superior Watershed Partnership (SWP) is hosting a series of town hall meetings to introduce the Community Environmental Monitoring Program (CEMP) that will conduct an on-going, independent assessment of the Rio Tinto Eagle Mine and report findings to the public.

Under the cooperative agreement announced in October, Rio Tinto is providing the Marquette County Community Foundation with funding ($300,000 annually) to establish and oversee an independent program to conduct environmental monitoring related to mining operations. SWP staff will coordinate and implement the program working with universities, contractors and EPA - approved laboratories to evaluate the Eagle Mine, the Humboldt Mill and transportation routes.

At Rio Tinto's Sept. 26, 2012, community forum in L'Anse, Simon Nish, Rio Tinto director of community communications and external relations, explains the company's agreement with the Superior Watershed Partnership and the Marquette Community Foundation for independent monitoring of the Eagle Mine. (Video by Allan Baker for Keweenaw Now)

Monitoring will include verification of Rio Tinto's permit requirements for air quality, groundwater, surface water, wildlife, plant life as well as additional monitoring of other potential impacts. The CEMP is also designed to accept third party funding to expand monitoring if needed.

SWP/CEMP Town Hall Meetings are distinct from previous community forums held by Rio Tinto. Members of the public, community organizations, tribes and others are encouraged to attend to learn more about the program, ask questions and provide recommendations for additional monitoring. Anyone who is unable to attend can provide feedback by calling the SWP at (906)228-6095 ext.20 or on-line at cempmonitoring.com.

Additional town hall meetings will be held quarterly in 2013 to report to the public and seek additional input.

The following community forums will be held from 7 p.m. to 8 p.m. this week:

Monday, Dec. 3: Humboldt Township Hall -- 244 CR FAF, Champion
Tuesday, Dec. 4: Powell Township School -- 101 Deutsch Ave, Big Bay
Wednesday, Dec. 5: Baraga Best Western Hotel -- 900 US 41, Baraga
Thursday, Dec. 6: Lakeview Arena -- 401 E. Fair Ave, Marquette

Friday, July 20, 2012

Updated: Stand for the Land: One of our Warriors passes

From Stand for the Land
Posted July 20, 2012

Todd Warner of Marquette, Michigan, formerly of Minnesota, age 50, passed away Wednesday, July 18, 2012, after a brief battle with cancer. He was one of our Warriors and a kind soul.  He will be badly missed.

Todd attended Macalester College in Minnesota and earned a Masters of Geology at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. He was Director of Natural Resources at Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC), in Baraga, Mich., where he lived out his passion for conservation and protection of natural resources.

One of the many projects Todd established was the KBIC Youth Conservation Corps (YCC) with the Superior Watershed Partnership. He believed it was vitally important that young adults learn the importance of protecting the natural environment. Memorials preferred to the Todd Warner memorial fund, c/o Superior Watershed Partnership, 2 Peter White Drive, Presque Isle Park, Marquette, MI  49855. Funds will support scholarships to KBIC youth.

Link to donate on-line:  http://www.superiorwatersheds.org/online.php

Link for information about the Youth Conservation Corps (YCC):  http://www.superiorwatersheds.org/youthconservation.php

The family will host a celebration of Todd’s life at 1 p.m. on Saturday, Sept. 22, at 421 E. Crescent Street, Marquette, MI.
(Update: address correction)
Condolences may be sent to:
The family of Todd Warner
c/o Katy Tharaldson
3320 Highcrest Rd. NE
St. Anthony,  MN 55418

Please click here to post comments on Stand for the Land.

Photo: Todd Warner. (Photo courtesy family of Todd Warner)