Article Photos

Article Links

» Video Exclusive

Check out video of the EPA discussing the project in Video Exclusives!

MARQUETTE - Sensing the depth of controversy surrounding a proposed Kennecott Eagle Minerals Company mine on the Yellow Dog Plains, officials with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have taken some unprecedented steps.

Among them, the agency held a series of three public information sessions in Marquette Wednesday, hoping to make clear the confines of the EPA's role in the Kennecott project.

"The EPA role in this process is looking at the treated water infiltration system, under the underground injection control regulations, which are part of the Safe Drinking Water Act," said Steve Roy, EPA Region 5 geologist. "Our primary mission - our mission entirely - is the protection of underground sources of drinking water.

"Because the authority for the EPA is limited to the Safe Drinking Water Act in this case, we do not have authority over the mine itself or the wastewater treatment plant that will be built - is proposed to be built - to process the water coming out of the mine."

Kennecott needs a federal underground injection control permit for portions of its project. There are three components of the proposed mine that involve disposal of fluids underground:

= The planned septic system for the disposal of sanitary waste. This does not require an individual permit, but is authorized as long as the company complies with federal regulations.

= The treated water infiltration system requires an individual permit. The proposed system is a large drainfield for the disposal of treated wastewater from the mining operation.

The EPA calls this a Class V industrial wastewater disposal well. The fluids must be treated to meet or exceed drinking water standards before they can be discharged through the infiltration system. Kennecott applied for this permit and EPA is reviewing the application.

= Kennecott may need a second UIC permit from the EPA if it injects water into the mine as part of closing the mine. The company needs to submit more information about this proposal before the EPA makes a determination. If EPA concludes a permit is necessary, the company will have to apply for and receive a permit.

By the end of the year, EPA officials anticipate reaching a draft decision on Kennecott's permit for the treated water system. At that point, a 60-day period for public comment is expected.

Roy said EPA decisions require a 30-day minimum for public comment and that period is usually sufficient. But given the controversy over the Kennecott project, and the upcoming holiday season, EPA officials have planned 60 days for comments. Additional time could be requested by the public.

Before a final decision is issued on the permit, the public comments must be compiled and analyzed.

"It could be up to six months, depending on the complexity and the number of comments we receive," Roy said.

Roy said no timetable is in place for determining whether Kennecott will need the second permit for the closing of the mine.

Michelle Halley, an attorney with the National Wildlife Federation, which opposes the mine, said such a permit for reflooding the mine is important.

"The EPA has a legal obligation to protect drinking water. They have taken the first step by requiring a permit for the treated water infiltration system. Now, the second step is to regulate water quality in the reflooded mine itself," Halley said.

Halley said by Kennecott's own admission, water in the reflooded mine would exceed drinking water (pollution) standards.

"This water has the potential to move out of the reflooded mine and pollute other groundwater and surface water. Allowing reckless pollution of groundwater is illegal and ought not be allowed," Halley said.

In a news release Wednesday, Kennecott Eagle Mine General Manager Jon Cherry reiterated the company's faith in its mine.

"We have every confidence in the integrity of our projects, in terms of their adherence to state and federal laws and permitting requirements, and also in terms of their importance to the future of this region, its economy, and its families," Cherry said.

Halley said she thought the EPA did a "great job answering the public's questions" Wednesday.

"I think the public seemed very grateful to have the opportunity to come and learn exactly what the EPA's role here is," Halley said. "Even though their role is fairly limited, it's a very important role and people need to understand it."

Kennecott officials did not attend the sessions Wednesday, with company spokeswoman Deb Muchmore saying the mining company's role was limited in the EPA permit process.

"The applicant's role is to submit their field data, study information, all of the background information the agency needs to conduct its review," Muchmore said.

More information is available on the EPA permit at: www.epa.gov/region5/water/uic/kennecott