Polymet Scoping Decision Comments
| DATE: | July 6, 2005 | |
| TO: | Randall Doneen, Principal Planner, | |
| Minnesota Department of Natural Resources | ||
| Jon Ahlness, Corps of Engineers | ||
| FROM: | Clyde Hanson, Co-Chair | |
| Mining Without Harm Campaign | ||
| Sierra Club North Star Chapter | ||
| 4038 Cascade Beach Road | ||
| Lutsen, MN 55612 | ||
| (218) 387-9081 | ||
| Formats: | Email MS Word attachment and mailed hardcopy | |
| RE: | NorthMet Sulfide Mine and Ore Processing Facilities Project | |
| Sierra Club Comments on Draft Scoping Decision Document and Scoping EAW |
These are the official comments of the Sierra Club, which has 20,000 of your friends and neighbors from all walks of life as members and volunteers in Minnesota and 750,000 nationwide. Our mission is to explore, enjoy and protect the planet. Dangerous types of mining and mineral processing new to Minnesota are proposed in the Superior National Forest south of Ely. They'll spew acid, toxic metals and mercury into our clean air and waters. Thousands of acres of wetlands vital to fishing, hunting, Duluth's water supply and Lake Superior fisheries would be at risk. Decisions affecting our communities will be made by foreign companies. After the mines play out, the perpetual costs of treating polluted waters and tending toxic wastes could fall on taxpayers because, sulfide mines are "reactive" or acid producing for thousands of years. Arrowhead citizens are working together to protect the people at risk of pollution-caused sickness and our wild heritage by asking the government and companies for Mining Without Harm. These comments are one step in our campaign.
Draft Scoping Decision Document Comments
The scope and depth of the environmental impact statement (EIS) for this proposed sulfide mine is critical to informed public debate and decision-making. Our comments are noted in red and sections of the draft scoping decision document are included below to provide context for our comments. Please call or email with any questions on interpretation or fact. Your close attention to our comments is appreciated.
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
1.1 BACKGROUND
The proposed project includes open pit mining operations with ore hauled to the processing facility on a largely existing rail line. Ore would be processed at a refurbished and modified taconite processing facility formerly known as the LTV Steel Mining Company plant. The hydrometallurgical process of flotation and autoclave leach facilities would be used with refurbished crushing and grinding facilities to produce copper metal and precipitates of nickel, cobalt, palladium, platinum, and gold. Precipitates are proposed for shipment off-site to third party treatment. The flotation process will generate flotation tailings that are proposed for disposal on top of a portion of an existing taconite tailings disposal facility. The hydrometallurgical process would generate some waste residue (quantify volume and chemistry) that is proposed for disposal in lined cells on top of the existing taconite tailings adjacent to the area proposed for disposal of flotation tailings. (Describe the hazards of the existing taconite tailings and how this new project would change the risks and environmental consequences)
1.2 SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENT
The DNR will engage the services of a consultant to assist in EIS preparation, however the DNR will retain responsibility for EIS content (please specify how will DNR assure the impartiality of the consultant when they are funded by the project proposer and DNR gets funding from mineral leases?).
The USACE is serving as co-lead agency in preparation of the EIS with the DNR. Although the mine site for the NorthMet project is located on USFS land, there is an existing mineral lease for the deposit. The USFS has determined that they do not have a federal action if the NorthMet project is developed in compliance with the existing conditions of the lease. (Document this decision in the EIS. Significant rare forest resources will be impacted directly as will the BWCAW, so the USFS lands, including those off the mine and plant site, would be impacts). The USFS is serving as cooperating agency in the EIS preparation with the USACE and DNR.
1.3 PURPOSE AND NEED OF THE PROJECT
PolyMet anticipates that optimized mining and processing operations would involve extracting and processing 32,000 tons of NorthMet ore each day. All mining activities must be conducted and sequenced as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible. In this way, the production of copper and other metals can remain competitive, not only within the United States, but also in the worldwide metals market. (Economic considerations must not be part of the purpose and need. These criteria would bias the EIS and preclude consideration of many project alternatives. This statement would make profitability maximization a rationale for not addressing environmental impacts. The purpose and need must be revised to focus on the public purpose and need, not the project proposer's purpose and needs. The public need is to achieve the functions of the mined metals that create quality of life, not to build a hoard of metals)
PolyMet would strive to operate the NorthMet project in a manner that is efficient and cost-effective, and that minimizes impacts to the environment (define "strive" and "minimize" as these are weasel words that sound good but mean nothing "on the ground"). The mining activities would also result in between 490 and 600 long-term jobs (Document these estimates in the EIS. Will the company guarantee that these jobs will be created if the project is permitted? If the jobs are not created, will the permits be declared void? These are higher estimates than the proposer presented at the public meeting. The EIS needs to document where the labor force will be from and whether it will be unionized or not. The proposal to share maintanence facilities with North Shore Mining and the companies' prospectus to potential investors that states that a "contract miner" will be used are evidence that this relationship is likely) in the Babbitt and Hoyt Lakes area, in addition to several hundred jobs during the one-year construction phase.
1.4 THE SCOPING PROCESS
Public review and comment on the Draft Scoping Decision Document will be conducted as prescribed MEQB rules part 4410.2100. (And meet NEPA law, rule and case law standards for an EIS. Please document these in the final scoping decision.) After public review and comment the DNR and USACE will consider the comments received and develop a Final Scoping Decision Document. A notice of availability will be published in the EQB monitor for this document. (Is there an appeal process for scoping decisions? Federal? State? We suggest getting feedback from stakeholders before finalizing the scoping decision document to minimize conflicts later in the process.)
2.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The MEQB rules require that an EIS include at least one alternative of each of the following types, or provide an explanation of why no alternative is included in the EIS (Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules, page 12): alternative sites, alternative technologies, modified designs or layouts, modified scale or magnitude, and alternatives incorporating reasonable mitigation measures identified through comments received during the EIS scoping and draft EIS comment periods. The alternative of no action shall be addressed
Minnesota Rules part 4410.2300, subpart G directs that an alternative may be excluded for the analysis in the EIS if "it would not meet the underlying need for or purpose of the project, it would likely not have any significant environmental benefit compared to the project as proposed, or another alternative, of any type, that will be analyzed in the EIS would likely have similar environmental benefits but substantially less adverse economic, employment, or sociological impacts." Selection or dismissal of alternatives will be documented in the EIS.
The Scoping EAW rules require the alternatives to be considered in the EIS to be listed in the Scoping EAW. 4410.2100.Sub 6 E. This has not been done for all types of alternatives and mitigations in the draft.
NEPA also requires a "hard look" at a wide range of alternatives.
Add an acknowledgement that lower risk of environmental damage is a significant and different environmental benefit compared to the project as proposed.
2.1 PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE
The EIS will describe the proposed project and the potential environmental and socioeconomic effects outlined in Section 3.0.
2.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The EIS will describe the expected condition if the proposed project is not developed, with respect to the potential environmental and socioeconomic effects outlined in Section 3.0. It is important to document and quantify the economic activities (recreation, biological research, forest productivity, biodiversity, real estate, etc.) that would be harmed by the proposed project. It is important to document the proposed hiring policies of the project proposer as it is likely the "contract miner" would be a non-union company already operating in the area. Such a company can be expected to screen out past union members from jobs at the proposed project, thus making employment for unemployed LTV unlikely. This would make the no action alternative more like the action alternatives in terms of socioeconomic effects.
2.3 SITE ALTERNATIVES
The MEQB rules allow the RGU to exclude alternative sites if other sites do not have any significant environmental benefit compared to the project as proposed, or if other sites do not meet the underlying need and purpose of the project. The MEQB's Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules lists a number of factors for the RGU to consider when deciding whether alternative sites would meet the underlying need for or purpose of the project. (What does NEPA rules and case law say about site alternatives?)
The DNR and USACE do not propose to evaluate alternative mine pit or processing plant sites for this project. An alternative mine site would not meet the underlying need or purpose of the project. (Why not examine other sites? "Site" is a fuzzy word. Would different pit locations or boundaries reduce impact on the river or wetlands? What if other mine locations in the rift region (Tech Cominco, Birch Lake) have a lower environmental impact than this site? How can socio-economic impacts be evaluated if the feasibility of other sites is not analyzed? Shouldn't the RGU be deciding between alternative mine sites to best meet the purpose and needs of the State of Minnesota? The relative environmental risks of all three proposed mines should be compared in the EIS so the RGU can make a decision with full context and alternatives.) The mineralization of the desired elements within a geologic deposit dictates the location of the mine. An alternative processing plant site would not likely have significant environmental benefits over the proposed site due to the proposed usage of an existing plant site.
The EIS will evaluate the suitability and benefits alternative tailings basin and waste rock stockpile locations. Although specific alternatives have not yet been identified the following locations are under consideration. The Scoping EAW rules require the alternatives to be considered in the EIS to be listed in the Scoping EAW. 4410.2100.Sub 6 E.
In-Pit Rock Disposal
Off-site Waste Rock Disposal —
Placement of waste rock in existing taconite mine pits in the area
such as those owned by Cliffs Erie (formerly LTV). Is the proposed
placement next to the pit and the river an alternative to be examined
in the EIS?
Tailings Basin (option 1, in-pit) — Placement of tailings in existing taconite mine pits in the area such as those owned by Cliff's Erie (formerly LRV)
Tailings Basin (option 2) — Placement of tailings on currently undisturbed land adjacent to the existing Cliff's Erie (formerly LTV) tailings basin.
Maintenance Shops (option 1) — Construction of new maintenance shops at the proposed NorthMet mine site.
Maintenance Shops (option 2) — Develop an agreement with Northshore Mining Company for equipment maintenance at their existing facilities associated with the Peter Mitchell Taconite mining operation, which is in relative close proximity to the proposed NorthMet mine.
2.4 TECHNOLOGY ALTERNATIVES
2.4.1 Mining Techniques
The DNR and USACE do not propose to evaluate alternative mining technologies. The proposed project uses the conventional technology that has been used in other mining operation. Other mining processing techniques would likely have no significant environmental benefit over the proposed techniques. (Mining techniques do have different environmental impactsunderground vs open pit for sulfide mines have different acid mine drainage and wetland impacts. Not evaluating mining technique alternatives would make this a mitigation plan and not an EIS. Decision makers in the RGU need to know the full picture of alternative ways to mine and maximize protection of the environment. Dust and haze impacts are other considerations impacted by location and technique. It would be arbitrary and capricious not to examine alternative mining techniques in an EIS of a mine.)
2.4.2 Ore Processing
The DNR and USACE do not propose to evaluate alternative hydrometallurgical technologies. The proposed project uses the newest technology that has been used in other mine processes and does not include cyanide leach or other older technologies that have significant environmental effects. Although there are impacts that will need to be analyzed for the proposed hydrometallurgical process, other processing technologies would likely have no significant environmental benefit over the proposed technology.
Just because a technology has been used, does not mean it is acceptable in Minnesota only a dozen miles from a popular national wilderness. Alternative hydrometallurgical technologies must be considered for the EIS not to be arbitrary and capricious.
Cyanide leach processing must be studied as an alternative because if the proposed technology is not economic the proposer would demand to use older technologies to recover sunk costs and meet profit promises to investors and earn their personal bonuses. Remember the promises of zero discharge taconite tailings ponds owners that now want to discharge into trout streams.
The DNR and USACE do propose to evaluate alternative ore beneficiation technologies. The EIS will evaluate the suitability and benefits associated with alternative floatation of tailings. The following alternative technologies have been identified for consideration.
Floatation (option 1) — Selective floatation
Floatation (option 2) — Segregation of rougher tailings and cleaner tailings
Floatation (option 3) — Manage floatation process to maintain environmentally acceptable Sulfru content in tailings.
What about toxic metals in waste? In Fugitive dust? In Water discharge?
This list of alternatives is narrow and incomplete. Expand the list and describe the environmental issues of beneficiation alternatives.
2.4.3 Wastewater Treatment
The DNR and USACE do propose to evaluate different wastewater treatment technologies for the mine site and ore processing facility. A significant portion of the EIS will analyze the wastewater quality from the project. Although specific alternatives for wastewater treatment have not been identified at this time, the wastewater analysis will be used to develop types of treatment technologies that would be suitable given the wastewater characteristics that require treatment. The range of alternatives needs to be identified in the scoping process, as do the design goals. The public cannot be assured of a examination of a full range of alternatives if they are not specified in the Scoping EAW. The Scoping EAW rules require the alternatives to be considered in the EIS to be listed in the Scoping EAW. 4410.2100.Sub 6 E.
The cost of treating wastewater needs to be forecast for the expected time treatment is needed.
2.5 MODIFIED DESIGNS OR LAYOUTS
A Technical Design Evaluation Report is needed for design failure mitigatation response — if the mine starts producing acid mine drainage that will require temporary or permanent treatment. The cost of permanent active treatment mitigations must be documented in the EIS.
A Technical Design Evaluation Report is needed for noise and odor impacts on neighbors and users of public lands and waters around the proposed mine. This needs to include actual testing to measure the level and reach of the impacts.
A Technical Design Evaluation Report is needed for post-mining reclamation.
2.5.1 Mine Pit
The DNR and USACE do propose to evaluate a modified design or layout for the mine. A final mine plan has not been developed for the NorthMet mine. As the understanding of mineralized zones within the deposit increases, this information will be used to evaluate suitability and benefits of alternative mine pit layouts. The existing information suggests that the following alternative may be considered.
Mine Pit Backfill (option 1)
Setbacks from open water and groundwater recharge areas must also be considered in developing more mine pit alternatives.
The alternative of not opening the pit closest to the river must be studied in the EIS.
The alternative of underground mining should be studies in the EIS to minimize waste rock and allow underground storage of toxic metal and acid waste.
2.5.2 Waste Rock Stockpiles
The draft scoping decision document is less specific than the first internal draft. The alternative of off-site placement mine pits or back in the proposer's pit have been deleted. We want to see them analyzed in the EIS.
(first internal draft below)
The EIS will address alternative designs and layouts for waste rock
stockpiles. A portion of the waste characterization analysis will
be used to develop alternatives for stockpile segregation and design
measures to prevent impacts from water run-off. Location and design
alternatives will also be developed to minimize wetland impacts and
assist in mine site reclamation activities. The following stockpile
alternatives have been identified for potential consideration.
Stockpile (option 1) — This option would look at alternative barriers to be placed under reactive waste rock stockpiles. Examples include, synthetic liners of various thickness and material, alternative barrier technologies, low permeable soils, or using existing site characteristics such as bedrock to act as a barrier.
Stockpile (option 2) — This option would look at placement of stockpiles inside mine pits. This could be done either in wet or dry pits.
Stockpile (option 3) — This option would look at segregation of stockpiles based on potential to cause environmental impacts. Degree of reactivity and particle size of waste rock are parameters that can be used to segregate stockpiles.
Stockpile (option 4) — This option would look at the incorporation of material into stockpiles to reduce the reactivity of the stockpile. Examples of the types of material include limestone, tailings, bauxsol, microencapsulation products, or organic material.
Stockpile (option 5) — This option would look at alternative dimensions for stockpile design, such as shape, height, slope, and spacing. This option could be combined with reclamation alternatives described below for consideration of long-term land use plans.
Placement of waste piles at least 1,000 feet from wetland or water bodies must be analyzed in the EIS. Movement of underground water at the Ladysmith mine on the Flambeau River has reached the river. The response? The state increased the "forgiveness zone" around closed mines so the river is within the zone — now no clean-up response will be required by the government and acid is flowing into the river.
Hydrologic studies of the bedrock under the waste piles must insure that there are no breaks that will allow seepage. Studies of a watertight perimeter wall attached to bedrock are needed in the EIS.
Mine Site Reclamation
This section was in the internal draft and was deleted from the published draft. We think mine site reclamation potential outcomes is part of evaluating the environmental impact of a mine.
The EIS will address alternative reclamation designs and layouts. Alternatives will be evaluated based on the likelihood of reclamation success, minimizing long-term maintenance, and mitigation of mine pit and stockpile impacts. The following options have been identified for potential consideration.
Reclamation (option 1) — This option would evaluate either complete or partial backfill of the mine pit with stockpiled materials.
Reclamation (option 2) — This option would evaluate sub-aqueous disposition of tailings and/or waste rock with various organic or inorganic covers.
Reclamation (option 3) — This option would evaluate different cover types and dimensions (i.e. liners, soil type, thickness) for capping stockpiles.
Reclamation (option 4) — This option would consider long-term land use in design and location of various mine components. Examples of land use consideration could be wildlife habitat, recreation, and local community planning objectives.
Impacts of the reclamation process must be evaluated. Moving waste rock creates air pollution from the materials and equipment and exposes reactive material to water and air and exposes the area to exotic plants.
Continuous reclamation must be analyzed in the EIS — pay as you go reclamation reduces the public financial risks and environmental impacts.
2.5.3 Ore Transportation from Mine to Processing Plant
The DNR and USACE do not propose to evaluate alternative designs and layouts for ore transportation from the mine to the processing plant. The proposed project includes using existing railroads with construction of a railroad spur at the mine site and approximately one mile of new railroad to connect the railroad that serves the mine site to the railroad that serves the ore processing plant. Alternative designs and layouts would not be likely to provide significant environmental benefit over the proposed project.
But the proposed transportation does have environmental impacts — fugitive dust with toxic metals and fibers, burning of fossil fuels, wildlife habitat fragmentation and direct impacts, etc. It is premature to eliminate transportation alternatives from the EIS. The best way to reduce pollution is not to create it. Alternative designs and layouts can reduce pollution.
2.5.4 Ore Processing Plant
The DNR and USACE do not propose to evaluate alternative designs and layouts for the ore processing plant. Alternative designs and layouts would not be likely to provide significant environmental benefit over the proposed project that makes use of an existing processing plant that would be refurbished and modified. Agree, unless the design requires discharge into a river which is already polluted.
2.5.5 Wastewater (see 2.5.8 below)
Tailings Basin (formerly 2.5.5)
Tailings basin alternatives need to be analyized in the EIS because of the interaction with exisiting taconite tailings, large volumes of material, toxic metals, fibers and acids in the ponds.
The EIS will consider alternative designs and layout for the tailings basin and reactive residue facility. The following options have been identified for potential consideration.
Tailings basin (option 1) — This option will evaluate the suitability and benefits of using a liner to contain the tailings basin. This option could be considered in conjunction with the different locations for the tailings basin.
Reactive Residue Facility (option 1) — This option will evaluate the specific location of the facility on the existing tailings basin with consideration of the hornfels that are located in that basin.
Reactive Residue Facility (option 2) — This option will evaluate the potential for development of water separation and off-site disposal of residue at an existing permitted facility.
What about alternatives to tailings basins? Using dewatering and entombment of waste? Baking it into ceramics? What about processes that don't use water? Creative solutions are needed, not just incremental changes to past solutions (with a bad track record).
The issues of the existing fibers, mercury and other toxic metals in the taconite tailings need to be analyzed in the EIS. Permanent management of the past waste on the LTV site needs to be part of the tailings alternatives examined in the EIS.
A lined tailings pond needs to be analyzed, the unlined ponds described in the EAW are risky and not acceptable.
The EIS needs to analyze a groundwater monitoring program for the mine, waste piles and tailings ponds.
2.5.6 Wastewater
The EIS will consider the suitability and benefits of alternative designs and layouts for wastewater treatment. The following options have been identified for potential consideration.
Wastewater (option 1) — This option would evaluate pretreatment of reactive runoff at the mine site and discharge to the City of Babbitt or the City of Hoyt Lakes existing POTWs.
Wastewater (option 2) — This option would evaluate the pretreatment of tailings basin/process water and discharge to the City of Hoyt Lakes existing POTW.
Wastewater (option 3) — This option would evaluate the usage of mine pit dewatering as a source for make up water to the processing plant and a single wastewater treatment plant located near the tailings basin. This option could be evaluated in conjunction with Wastewater (option 2).
2.6 SCALE OR MAGNITUDE ALTERNATIVES
The DNR and USACE do not propose to evaluate alternative scale or magnitude of the project. The location and orientation of the NorthMet deposit combined with the infrastructure requirements to mine and process the ore are such that alternative scale/magnitude would likely not have significant environmental benefits compared to the proposed project.
The above statement is absurd and is not substantiated by the EAW. The amount of acid drainage and leached toxic metals is proportional to the size of the mine and scale of operations. The carrying capacity of the environment could easily be exceeded by a large project concentrating pollutants in one air or watershed. Economic considerations must not restrict alternative development for the EIS or the RGU will not be adequately informed. The cost of fixed infrastructure does not dictate whether an alternative has significant environmental benefits. Most infrastructures would be built proportional to the scale permitted. The existence of large ore processing plant (LTV) in the area does not justify excluding scale alternatives from the EIS. The EIS must analyze scale or magnitude alternatives (smaller than the proposed project) in order to be adequate.
The EIS needs to examine timing alternatives — the best project for the state may be one that does not start up until prices are higher than currently forecast (inflation adjusted). Such higher real prices would allow more environmental mitigations, smaller scale, and higher quality operations.
2.7 INCORPORATION OF MITITGATION MEASURES IDENTIFIED THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENTS
The EIS will consider all mitigation suggested through public comment. Those mitigation measures that warrant consideration as described in MEQB rules part 4410.2300 subpart G and NEPA will be fully evaluated and recommended as warranted. Those mitigation measures that were identified but not carried forward for analysis will be discussed briefly as well as the reasons for their elimination. How can mitigation measures be dismissed before the mine plan is done, the waste rock characterized, and hydrology studies completed? Potential solutions should not be rejected so early in the process. Consider our comments on the alternatives sections above also as mitigation measures identified through public comments.
Other Mitigations for analysis in the EIS:
- Public education on metal mining and processing social and environmental costs to reduce metal use.
- Design standards to increase the lifecycle of products with sulfide metals.
- Increase in recycling to reduce demand for metal mining.
- Research and development of alternatives to metals associated with sulfide deposits — like fiber optic cables instead of copper, steel jewelry instead of gold.
- Limiting sulfide mining in MN to the one site with the lowest environmental impact.
- New regulations to lower environmental risks and gain faster and more significant compliance when failures occur.
- Holding the permit to mine until the project proposer can document that another sulfide mine has a) operated for 10 years with no impacts and b) been closed for 10 years with no acid mine drainage.
- Personal guarantees of environmental performance by the project's engineers, just like the engineers have made a guarantee that the hydrometallurgical equipment will perform as specified.
- Require ISO 14001 certification of the proposer's compliance with the air, water and mining permits with review by public stakeholders.
- Rapid response conditions added to the permit to mine so pollution is stopped and cleaned up quickly and not delayed by company appeals or litigation.
- Watertight perimeter wall around waste rock and tailings ponds attached to bedrock with monitoring wells.
- An independent stormwater permit is needed and stormwater design standards must be very conservative, for 10-20 year storms.
- Monitoring of stormwater runoff for a baseline, during and after mining.
- Immediate closure and reclamation of the old LTV tailings ponds.
The highest of the federal or state EIS standards must be followed.
The public must be given an opportunity to submit mitigation measures after the engineering is more advanced and the waste characterization studies results reported. At the draft EIS stage, it is too late.
3.0 EIS ISSUES
Issues have been identified and described in the Scoping EAW and are categorized below by significance and amount of additional analysis required in the EIS. Mitigation measures that could reasonably be applied to eliminate or minimize adverse environmental effects will be identified in the EIS. Define "reasonably" and "minimize." Whose definition will be used by the EIS team? RGU?
3.1 Topic has been adequately analyzed in the Scoping EAW. Topic is not relevant or so minor that it will not be addressed in the EIS. The Scoping EAW will be appended to the EIS for reference; the relevant EAW number is provided in parents () after each topic.
Land Use (Item 9) Mining is a confliciting land use with the public use of federal forests. This needs to be covered in the EIS
Water-related land use management district (Item 14) Water recreation impacts are significant and must be part of the EIS. Recreational use of the Partridge River could be lost due to acid and toxic metals pollution.
Water surface Use (Item 15)
Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions (Item 19a) This is all about geologic hazards and soil impacts. Rare wetland soils will be lost forever if the mine is developed.
Traffic (Item 21) The Mesabi Nugget plant proposes a huge amount of truck traffic to haul in ore until its rail facilities are developed. This is a cumulative traffic impact that is very significant to public safety, local quality of life, and pollution.
Vehicle Related Air Emissions (Item 22) Diesel excavators and trucks running 24/7 for 20 years has significant air impacts. Fossil fuel powered machines are one of the major sources of greenhouse gases and smog.
Visibility (Item 26) Visibility from a recreational stream is of critical importance. The proposed waste piles and risk of acid mine drainage damages would certainly creat visual impacts to public uses of the public waters adjacent to the mine. The EAW does not support this decision that blasting, hauling, crushing and processing millions of tons of sulfide rock with fibers would not impact visibility. It is premature to exclude visibility from further analysis.
3.2 Significant impacts are not expected but information beyond that in the Scoping EAW will be included in the EIS.
3.2.1 Cover Types (Item 10)
The EIS will discuss potential impacts from changes in cover types as well as provide additional detail on timing of cover type changes and post reclamation cover types. Forest impacts will be significant. The EIS is to look at all human caused impacts to the environment, not just mining impacts. Human forest impacts in the project area from logging, ATVs, and development are very significant. The relevant scale of analysis is the NE and NC regions and the ESC section there as used by the Minnesota Forest Resources Council.
3.2.2 Fish and Wildlife Resources (Item 11a)
The EIS will discuss potential impacts to fish and wildlife habitats. This discussion will make use of existing studies that are appropriate for identification of the potential impact. Examples of studies that may be used include The Copper-Nickel Study Plots and previous work in the area completed by ENSR who?. The EIS will also discuss potential mitigation for impacts to fish and wildlife habitat. Primary studies on Wolf and Lynx habitat impacts are rare species are needed. Rare biodiversity areas identified by MCBS and rare plants and animals surveys at the appropriate seasons are necessary.
3.2.3 Threatened and Endangered Species (Item 11b)
The EIS will evaluate potential impacts threatened and endangered species. Existing information will be evaluated and additional information collected if necessary to support state and federal regulatory requirements for threatened and endangered species. Potential mitigation strategies and alternatives will be evaluated to prevent and minimize any identified impacts. Name the strategies in the Scoping EAW & Decision document. Include Boreal Owl and Lynx impacts and cumulative impacts.
3.2.4 Erosion and Sedimentation (Item 16)
Details of excavation activities and prevention of erosion on Cell 2W will be developed during EIS preparation. Scoping EAW and scoping decision must reference state standards and design goals for stormwater and sulfide mining.
The entire mine site and tailings ponds will be subject to erosion and will be a source of sedimentation.
3.2.5 Air Emissions (Item 23)
The EIS will include descriptions of air emissions sources, potential control technologies and any impacts to Class I and Class II areas including haze.
The EAW states in the air section (page 119+) that "evaluation of air quality impacts for PM10 would be deferred until the air quality permit application and/or EIS." This should be covered in the EIS. This modeling is needed to inform the RGU of the impacts of the project.
There needs to be public involvement in the scoping of Class I air modeling. It is not sufficient to consult only with Federal Land Managers. To do this would be to circumvent the EIS public scoping process. The air permit application must be part of the EIS.
A BACT analysis will by completed for PM10 and sulfuric acid mist. MACT analysis will be required for some sources after case by case determinations have been made. This must be done before the EIS is final.
The EIS will verify that this AERA (define) truly represents worst case. This verification will include the following analysis:
Conduct source-specific air dispersion modeling of those units that could influence the final risk estimates, specifically focusing on the risk drivers from the AERA (crusher/grinding operations and Hydromet plant; nickel and nickel compounds, hydrogen chloride, NO2, manganese, other toxic metals, asbestiform fibers, mercury, cobalt, zinc, VOC, lead, CO, SO2, NOx, cadmium, chromium, beryllium, arsenic, antimony, phosphorus, selenium, barium, boron, copper, vanadium, hafnium and tellurium, crystallized silica (from the limestone)) and/or conduct a quantitative sensitivity analysis of the critical sources using the new design parameters (location, height, exit velocity, emission database) to determine if the overall risks calculated in this AERA are still conservative estimates. This list is missing the noted materials that impact human health. The other chemicals used in process should also be examined for spill dispersion.
The EIS will also contain a Class I and Class II increment analysis for air emissions from the project. Fibers? Mercury?
The EIS needs to discuss the release of mercury and alternative to minimize such releases by air or water.
3.2.6 Odor and Noise (Item 24)
The EIS will include additional information on potential sources and verify PolyMet simulations and assertions that were include in the EAW. Operational and structural mitigation to prevent potential impacts will also be discussed. This could be big for the neighbors.
Noise impacts to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness from mining equipment and blasting need to be directly tested in summer and winter as part of the EIS to calibrate models and inform the RGU. The forecast audible noise in the BWCAW would significantly harm that resource, not to mention other public lands and stream recreation in the area, and local residents. 121 dB mine truck noise is the same as thunder, jet plane (at ramp) or an ambulance siren. The wilderness is only 20 miles away and the expected level of human cause sound there is zero.
The smell of H2S and Xanthate could make the plant a poor neighbor, but this is downplayed in the EAW. The EIS needs to get more specific. The lack of air pollution controls on the copper removal process is a concern.
3.2.7 Archeology (Item 25)
The EIS will verify the location of Knot Camp to avoid disturbance. The historical significance of the Cliffs Erie plant site will be evaluated and mitigation proposed if warranted. The EIS will also provide additional information on areas of unknown potential for containing archeological resources. Any resources identified will be discussed and mitigation to prevent impacts will be proposed. What about field surveys? A mine would obliterate the history on the site. A complete site survey is needed for the EIS.
3.2.8 Compatibility with plans and land use regulations (Item 27)
The EIS will evaluate mineland reclamation strategies to develop those designs that are most compatible with surrounding land uses and local community goals. This is federal land and reclamation must meet the goals of the nation's citizens, not just locals. How will it implement the plan for the Superior National Forest?
3.2.9 Infrastructure (Item 28)
The EIS will include an evaluation of wastewater treatment alternatives that propose to use existing Hoyt Lakes or Babbitt POTWs. If any of these alternatives are deemed suitable for further evaluation, the EIS will include details about existing plant capacity and discuss options for increasing capacity and meeting NPDES permit conditions.
Discuss Impaired water status of the streams that might be discharged to.
The EIS will also include additional detail on the electrical line and substation associated with the mine site. Potential impacts will be identified as well as mitigation of alternatives to prevent or minimize impacts. And on the pollution impacts of the power generation and coal mining or nuclear power required by the proposed project.
3.2.9 Other — Asbestiform Fibers (Item 30)
Additional testing for asbestiform fibers is proposed to occur as part of the Pilot Plant Processing study, and the results of these tests will be included in the EIS. If the results of these tests are consistent with current understanding of the NorthMet deposit, no additional analysis or mitigation will be developed.
The EAW's assertion that there is "uncertainty in the public health community" on asbestiform fibers health impacts is spin. The industry is working hard to create confusion so that this public health risk is not regulated. Industry funded research is being used to shape the debate and create the illusion of uncertainty. Such public relations should be kept out of the EIS.
There is no data in the EAW that supports the assertion that fibers won't be an issue for the proposed mine. The lab tests only reported no asbestos but there is no data reported on the relative amount of asbestiform fibers compared to the rock of the Peter Mitchell Mine that threatens the health of Silver Bay residents. The discussion of cleavage fragments is a diversion and is speculative.
We understand there is data from the 1970s on fibers in the sulfide rock of the proposed mine. The proposed scope of work on fibers is far too thin. Small amounts of fibers cause direct human illness. The scoping decision document must state the primary studies proposed if asbestiform fibers are found and at what level they are "significant."
3.3 Potentially significant impacts may result; information beyond what was in the EAW will be included in the EIS.
3.3.1 Physical Impacts on Water Resources (Item 12)
Avoidance, minimization and mitigation of potential wetland impacts will be evaluated as part of the EIS. The EIS will also discuss the suitability and feasibility of various wetland mitigation strategies. Additional detailed wetland delineations will be included for the first five years of proposed mining activity. Wetlands must be delineated for the entire 20 year mining project for the EIS to inform decision makers.
Estimates of water discharges from the mine site and tailings basin will be development and these estimates will be used to identify any significant impacts with respect to changes in magnitude, duration, and timing of flow. A Level One Rosgen Stream Classification will be completed for the Partridge River down to Colby Lake to identify any portions of the river that may be sensitive to changes in flow. Monitoring and mitigation of geomorphology impacts will be discussed if potential impacts are identified.
3.3.2 Water Appropriations (Item 13)
Mine Site — The amount of water that must be discharged to dewater the mine pit is a significant issue that will be included in the EIS. In order to better estimate this amount of water the following information will be included in the EIS.
- Design and effectiveness of diking and trenching to prevent surface run-off into the pit.
- Estimates of direct precipitation into the mine pit
- Results of unconsolidated sediment hydrology study
- Results of phase I and phase II hydrogeology study of the NorthMet Deposit including potential water to enter the pit from the Virginia formation.
- Development of a water balance model includes the different sources of water to estimate pit dewatering discharges with consideration of seasonal changes and pit size.
This information will be used to identify any water quantity impacts from the pit dewatering discharge and will also be used to identify the potential for other water impacts that are related to water quantity. Because this water is likely to have come into contact with exposed ore, it could be reactive and need appropriate treatment. The amount of water potentially needing treatment will be an important consideration in the EIS.
The failures of past efforts to predict reactivity and flows of polluted surface, seepage and groundwater in other mines needs to be discussed in the EIS as a risk factor. Our peers report models doing a poor job predicting water quality. The EIS must discuss the track record of the models used so the RGU is properly informed of the margin of error and needed safety factors to compensate.
Processing Plant and Tailings Basin — The EIS will use the results of the pilot plant process and existing information on the LTV tailings basin to develop a water balance model for the processing plant and tailings basin. The EIS will provide additional information on water quantity from the processing plant and tailings basin, including the redesigned seepage collection system. The following information will be used in the water balance model:
- Estimates of the amount water that too high in dissolved solids and needs to be discharged from the reactive residue facility
- Water generated from the flotation tailings
- Water collected at the base of the existing tailings basin
- Makeup water needed for the processing plant
3.3.3 Surface Water Runoff (Item 17)
The EIS will include surface water quantity and quality impacts as well as alternatives and mitigation to prevent or minimize impacts. Additional detail will be developed for surface water runoff systems that handle non-contact and non-reactive runoff. Characterization of non-reactive runoff will also be estimated to ensure the suitability of treating this runoff source as non-contact runoff.
Haul roads and the rail line grade (dust) must be assumed to be reactive runoff.
The EIS will include information on the quality and quantity of existing water bodies and any potential for changes to these parameters from all aspects of the mining project. Estimation of hydrologic and chemical balances in the Mine Site during normal operations and after closure and the potential effect of discharges on receiving water biota will need to be evaluated in the EIS.
3.3.3 Wastewater (Item 18)
Estimates of the quantity and quality of industrial wastewater generation from the mine site, processing plant and tailings basin will be included in the EIS.
The following studies and information will be developed as part of the EIS to better understand potential wastewater impacts, as well as to develop alternatives and mitigation as appropriate.
Mine Site
- Waste characterization study preliminary results (the 52 week results must be part of the EIS for sulfide mines)
- Pilot Plant Process Testing
- Phase I and II Hydrogeological Evaluation
- Hydrogeological Investigation of Unconsolidated Surficial Deposits
- Effectiveness of mine site water management systems
- Existing water quality data from other sources such as AMAX test shaft, Copper-Nickel Study, and other mining operations.
- Treatability studies for reactive runoff
- Underground Flows into the Partridge River from the mine site and the tailings ponds need field studies and analysis in the EIS.
Plant-Tailings Basin
- Tailings Basin/Plant Water and Water Quality Management Approach, including effectiveness of the tailings basin seepage collection system.
- Existing water quality data from tailings basin seepage
- Processing Plant and Tailings Basin Water Balance and Chemical
Budget
- Chemical budget, modeling of the Tailings Basin seep and pond chemistry requires the following inputs:
- MetSim Model developed by PolyMet. MetSim Model has been developed, will need to be run in conjunction with water balance and projected pond water chemistry.
- Tailings leaching kinetics. From ongoing waste characterization studies for new Process Plant tailings and existing taconite tailings.
- MetSim modeling and tailing leaching kinetics results delivered as part of NPDES permit application.
- Conceptual treatment design and tests capacity of design to meet expected water quality goals. Synthetic laboratory water which has the expected chemical composition of seep and pond water will be created for the test.
Other Issues
- Existing Environment of receiving waters
- Biological monitoring (fish, mussels, and invertebrates)
- Existing water quality parameters that do not meet standards
- Mercury
- 1.3 ng/L water quality standard for discharge when rainfall exceeds this standard
- Methylization of mercury due to increased sulfate concentrations
- Bioaccumulation of toxic metals and human health hazards is another issue that the EIS needs to examine.
3.3.4 Solid Waste (Item 20)
The characterization, handling, and facility design of waste materials will be a significant issue addressed in the EIS. The three components of the project that will be the major focus of this discussion will be waste rock from the mine site, tailings from ore beneficiation process, and reactive residue from the hydrometallurgical processes. Below is a brief description of materials and issues that will be included in the EIS on each of these components:
Mine site waste rock:
- Amounts and composition of non-reactive waste rock, reactive waste rock, and lean ore
- What chemical composition of waste rock will be the cutoff between non-reactive and reactive waste rock
- What sulfide levels will create acid mine drainage
- Are there other constituents of concern in this material
- Details and effectiveness of the Grade Control Program
- Details and alternatives for reactive waste rock stockpile design
Ore beneficiation process tailings:
- Characterization of tailings
- Suitability of disposal on existing unlined tailings basin Risky… will cost the public to clean up later.
- Physical suitability of existing and new tailings for construction of tailings basin
- Evaluation of alternative designs and locations needs to be in the EIS
Hydrometallurgical processes reactive residue:
- Characterization and quantities of residue
- Design of reactive residue facility
- Suitability of reactive residue facility on existing tailings basin Cell 2W
Results from the Pilot Plant Processing study and the Waste Characterization Study will be used in conjunction with existing data to generate and characterize the above-described material. The Pilot Plant Processing study will generate tailings and reactive residue from a sample of the NorthMet Deposit using a laboratory scale version of the proposed ore beneficiation and hydrometallurgical processes. How will we know the results will be the same at scale? The Waste Characterization study is a long term study that would continue after the completion of the EIS. This study makes use humidity cell test of the NorthMet Deposit and Tailings to determine the reactive or non-reactive nature of the materials. These test are long-term tests that are proposed to be run for 52 weeks. Preliminary information from the humidity cell tests will be available for inclusion in the EIS after 20 weeks. Various methods to speed up potential reactions and comparisons with existing data will be used to determine the suitability of the 20-week preliminary results. Wait and do it right.
3.3.5 Cumulative Effects (Item 29)
A combination of qualitative and quantitative analyses will be used in the EIS to identify cumulative effects to six different resource areas identified in Table 29-1.
These are not adequate. All cumulative effects from all human caused sources must be identified.
Loss of wildlife habitat from air pollution, water pollution, and direct footprint.
Loss of wetlands to migratory bird range.
BWCAW impacts for air, water, wildlife, recreation.
Water quality changes to the St. Louis River, Bay and Lake Superior.
Lost of wildlife population viability due to forest management, development and pollution
Table 29-1 Proposed cumulative effects analysis
| Cumulative effect issue | Geographic boundary | Past, present, and reasonable foreseeable actions |
|---|---|---|
| Air concentrations in Class II Areas | Hoyt Lakes Area |
|
| Class I Areas PM10 Increment | Class I Areas within 250 kilometers of the project |
|
| Loss of wetlands | Partridge River Watershed/ECS ecological classification system section (s) Northern Superior Uplands ECS |
|
| Wildlife Habitat Fragmentation | Laurentian Highlands and Nachwauk Upland subsections of the Northern Superior Uplands Ecological Section |
|
| Streamflow and Lake Level Changes | Partridge River, Colby Lake, and Whitewater Reservoir |
|
| Water Quality Changes | Embarrass River, Partridge River, Colby Lake |
|
3.3.6 Other Reclamation (Item 30)
The EIS will evaluate the proposal with consideration to achieving DNR policies for mineland reclamation and meet NEPA standards. Alternative designs and layouts will also be evaluated to determine the most feasible reclamation strategy. The three criteria that will be used in this evaluation will be protection of natural resources, minimization of long-term maintenance, and eventual land use objectives.
3.3.7 Social, Economic, and Employment
The EIS will include a discussion on social, economic and
employment impacts to the East Range Area Multi-Jurisdictional
Community. This analysis is being conducted as a separate study,
but the results are proposed to evaluate indirect and cumulative
effects in the East Range due to an increase in mining activity
in that area.
This project area is too small. The relevant market
is the entire Arrowhead, as employment losses in recreation would
occur at that scale. The cities near the mine are in the Duluth
metro labor market.
The social impact assessment must also evaluate the failure of the IRRRB to prepare the area for a post-mining economy. Instead it has spent its funds on lowering taxes for the current generation. A 20 year mine life and a 200,000 year reactive life create a huge burden on future generations. The generational shift must be discussed in the EIS.
The impact of the mine on the local economy must use new input/output matrix coefficients for this technologies of this proposed mine so the effect are accurate. Negative economic impacts also must be estimated, including the value of wilderness, clean water, wildlife and their existence values. Not everything of value is bought and sold in the market economy.
The social analysis needs to estimate the number of currently unemployed people that have the skills and physical capacity to work in which mine jobs. If there is no impact on current unemployment, then the social benefits are the project are limited if not negative.
4.0 IDENTIFICATION OF PHASED OR CONNECTED ACTIONS
There are no phased or connected actions associated with this project.
The energy required is a related action. Bringing precipitate processing on-site is a related and foreseeable project whose impacts need to analyzed in the EIS.
5.0 EIS SCHEDULE (TENTATIVE)
| June 2005 | Scoping EAW comment period (includes public meeting) | |
| July 2005 | Final Scoping Decision Document | |
| December 2005 | EIS Preparation Notice Published | |
| June 2006 | Draft EIS issued for public review (includes public meeting) | |
| December 2006 | Final EIS Issued | |
| March 2007 | EIS Adequacy Determined |
The public meeting needs to allow citizens to learn from each other's comments and questions. The court reporter technique was a failure at the Hoyt Lakes meeting on the scoping EAW. A court reporter scares more people than raising your hand and asking a question.
6.0 SPECIAL STUDIES OR RESEARCH
6.1 Waste Characterization Study
Waste Characterization will be conducted on samples of waste rock material from the NorthMet Deposit and from sample tailings that will be generated from pilot plant testing of the NorthMet Deposit. Waste characterization is a long-term study that would continue after environmental review is complete and even into mining operation. Because the study is an ongoing process decisions need to be made as when information can be used to inform environmental review and permitting activities. The NorthMet Waste Characterization is proposed to generate preliminary information for use in the draft EIS after tests have been run for 20 weeks.
Waste characterization has several components that are described generally below:
- Characterization of mass (amount of waste)
- Physical Characterization (particle size distribution)
- Characterization of mineralogy (composition)
- Dissolution testing (Humidity Cell Testing)
The results of this study are proposed to provide information about the reactive or non-reactive nature of waste rock and tailings that would be generated from NorthMet Mining Operations. This information can be used to develop plans and design systems that prevent impacts to natural resources. What if the 20 week studies are wrong and reactions occur later?
6.2 Wastewater Treatability Studies
Results from the pilot plant testing and the waste characterization study will provide information on the quality of water that the mine and process will likely generate. With this information samples of water will be generated that simulate the wastewater that will require treatment. These samples will be subject to various wastewater treatment technologies. The water will be tested again to determine if the treatment technology was successful in generating water that can meet water quality standards. This information will be used to plan and design for wastewater treatment technologies or alternatives to prevent impacts to natural resources. What if the studies are wrong?
6.3 East Range Multi-Jurisdictional Community Readiness Assessment: Employment, Economic and Social Impacts (See comments above. This is the wrong scale of analysis)
A quantitative assessment of cumulative employment and economic effects will be performed. Background information on employment and the economy of St. Louis County and the East Range will be summarized:
- Historical population trends by county and major population centers since 1970*
- Historical employment trends by county since 1970*
- Historical tax revenue trends by county since 1970*
- Summary of historical economic activity (major industries, major sources of employment) by county since 1970*
- Summary of population, employment, tax revenue and economic activity in 2002 (the baseline year)
- Negative impacts of pollution and loss of wetlands on recreation economy.
* Approximate date. Actual historical data will be collected based on availability of primary sources and the economic/fiscal impact model used for the assessment.
Impact analyses will be completed through input-output mathematical modeling to estimate employment impact, output impact and value added measures in terms of total (direct, indirect and induced) impacts for the construction period, operations period and closure period. Analyses will also assess impacts to State, Local and Federal taxes and royalties.
This income and employment analysis had better be better than IMPLAN with an 8.0 multiplier for mining. The EIS must document the assumptions used in the model and the disclose the date(s) primary firm to firm purchase data was collected and a discussion of whether this still reflects industrial purchasing patterns as air freight, the internet, off-shoring, etc. have reduced the need for local suppliers).
The models must also be used to estimate the negative economic effects of the proposed mine on existing and future recreation, land development and other sectors that need clean air, clean water, and peace and quiet. To assume there are only positive impacts would not be logical.
Resources for the EIS: Lost Landscape and Failed Economies: The search for a value of place by Thomas M. Power, (Island Press, 1996) the chair of the economics department at the University of Montana, Missoula. See figure 2-4, "The instability of income from extractive industries compared with the rest of the economy," page 36 (non-extractive real income has risen steadily when extractive income had wide swings and a decline and then flat trend.) Silver Valley, ID is a case study in the book where traditional economic analysis. The town of 3,000 gained a 500 employee mine, later the mine reduced operations by 80% over six years. The models predicted the economic base of the town would collapse, but this did not occur. Non-mining personal income increased slightly as the mine greatly downsized, and then held remarkably steady (figure 4-1, page 91). Mining did not play the dominant economic role that is usually assumed.
World copper supply is variable based on price. Large mining and processing capacity is idled when prices fall. When they rise, the capacity is brought back online. It is reasonable to expect that the proposed copper mines in Minnesota will follow this pattern. The social impacts of this to payers of unemployment insurance, the workers, their families and the community need to be considered in the EIS.
General Comments:
- The 404 permit application should be made an appendix of the EIS.
- The draft air and water permits should be made part of the EIS
- The EIS needs to examine the chemical composition of proprietary process chemicals used in mineral processing — MIBC, PAX, Flex 31, WW 1752 and any others for human health and environmental impacts. This includes inactive ingredients used as fillers.
- Financial assurance needs to be part of the EIS. The RGU needs to know if catastrophic accidents (terrorism, earthquakes, landslides, floods) would be covered by the financial assurance, or whether only "reasonable foreseeable events" are to be covered by the funds.
- The water quality of the resulting pit lake must be studied to determine its quality.
- Hydrological connections between the area's pit lakes needs to be studied and understood. Will the proposed sulfide mine pollute the Dunka Pit? Others?
- Bedrock under tailings pond and waste piles must be flood tested to determine if it is watertight
- Will the cone of depression around the pit drain adjacent wetlands?
- See the new Forest Service Guidelines on mineland reclamation. The have good standards and have good guidelines for financial assurance. Most reclamation liability will be created in the first year of operation.
- The "holding costs" of the facility in case of bankruptsy need to be included in the financial assurance — treatment plants, security, and maintenance would be needed for years before the site is reclamed. And these funds need to be available very quickly as mining companies have closed with as little as one hour notice.
404 Permit Public Hearing Request
The Sierra Club requests the Corps of Engineers hold a public hearing on the wetland related permits for the proposed PolyMet sulfide mine. Please notify us of the time and location of the hearing.
Notifications and Public Record
Please make this comment memo part of the public record and notify
us of any meetings, publications and participation opportunities
around or about this proposed project, at the address on page one.
End of comments.