Another PolyMet permit gets bounced

From an MCEA press release. To my non-lawyer eyes, the court seems to be saying, and not for the first time, "we know what you a-holes are trying to pull, and it ain't happening."

Today, the Minnesota Court of Appeals remanded the PolyMet air pollution permit back to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The Court found that the MPCA did not evaluate whether the air permit was a “sham permit” that does not accurately reflect the size and scope of PolyMet’s proposed mine. Notably, the Court of Appeals has rejected every PolyMet permit that it has reviewed...

The Court found that MPCA did not adequately respond to evidence presented by MCEA about plans to expand the proposed mine. The decision remands the permit back to the agency to consider whether a stronger permit that includes the best available technology to limit air pollution is required. The air permit is issued under the Clean Air Act, and the proposed mine cannot operate until it has a valid permit. 

PolyMet/Glencore permitting scandal erupts

From last week.

After months of stonewalling, the federal Environmental Protection Agency has released staff comments that the agency had prepared for the state-issued water quality permit for PolyMet Mining. The release came on the same day that the agency was required to respond to a lawsuit over access to the comments, filed by Water Legacy and other environmental organizations.

The comments are potentially devastating to efforts by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to defend the water quality permit they issued to PolyMet late last year. That permit has been the subject of ongoing litigation by tribal governments and environmental groups. - MinnPost

Clearly, after you've clicked and read the article, something very iffy has gone down. At this point, “corrupt” certainly seems apt. As for words like “criminal” and “felonies,” I don’t know, yet.

MN-08: Stauber hits the ground working hard for Big Sulfide Mining

To be fair, too many politicians in Minnesota, from both parties, don’t have their heads right on this either. But since I live in MN-08, and now have to endure the humiliation of Republican representation in the U.S. House for one of only a few times in my life (by the luck of the draw I’ve almost always lived in blue districts), damn right I’ll be picking on Pete.

(Jan. 14), Congressman Pete Stauber (MN-08) introduced H.R. 527, the Superior National Forest Land Exchange Act of 2019. This bipartisan legislation provides legal certainty by codifying the land exchange between PolyMet Mining, Inc. and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) into statute. The legislation will move PolyMet one step closer to responsibly developing the NorthMet ore body located in northeastern Minnesota. This is Stauber’s first bill introduced as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. - stauber.house.gov

From the sane, rational side of the issue, in a press release emailed Tuesday:

Today, the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA), along with the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness, the Center for Biological Diversity, and the Sierra Club, filed legal challenges to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s permits for the PolyMet sulfide mine proposal. 

In their challenge to the air permit, the conservation and environmental groups describe how MPCA repeatedly ignored evidence that PolyMet has engaged in a bait and switch scheme.  In its air permit, PolyMet agreed to limit the amount of ore processed daily to keep its emissions of particulate matter under certain levels and to avoid having to install the best available emission control technology. However, PolyMet has already signaled that it intends to process ore at a much faster rate, resulting in significantly increased emissions. PolyMet should be required to install the best air emission technology available prior to construction, not avoid this vital Clean Air Act review through sham permitting. - MCEA

Crunch time for PolyMet

You probably saw that PolyMet/Glencore got some of their permits from the state. It’s important to bear in mind that they still have plenty more to get. The way they got their permits so far is messed up - especially if they ultimately get away with it.

First, Minnesota’s Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA) has argued PolyMet is planning to build a dramatically bigger mine than it has actually proposed. The second is that some disputes over the project — such as questions raised about the safety of its tailings dam intended to store waste — should be subject to review from an administrative law judge...

Based on financial information submitted by PolyMet through Canadian disclosure laws, however, the MCEA contends the mining company wants to build a mine at least double in size. Copper-nickel mining has long-term risks for the environment, including the creation of acid that can leach heavy metals into water.

“It is very rare for a regulatory agency to say no to an expansion,” Aaron Klemz, a spokesman for the MCEA, told reporters Thursday. “This is a very common technique for the mining industry — to get their camel’s nose under the tent and then come in with the actual proposal.” Klemz’s organization has a pending lawsuit challenging the decision to not review a larger mine in the Court of Appeals. - MinnPost

Moreover:

Paula Maccabee, WaterLegacy Advocacy Director and Counsel expresses concern that the DNR has allowed PolyMet to put up much less financial assurance than required by law to protect taxpayers:

“It would be very troubling if the DNR was allowing PolyMet to circumvent the rules and low-ball financial assurance to make PolyMet’s economically marginal sulfide mining project appear financially feasible.” - WaterLegacy

So, we’ll see.