AUGUSTA, Maine — The Maine Department of Environmental Protection is preparing to hire an outside firm involved in the mining industry to help the agency carry out the first major rewrite of the state’s metallic mining regulations in two decades.
The contract with an outside firm is an outgrowth of legislation passed earlier this year that calls for a major update to the state’s mining rules and transfers all mining permit responsibilities to the DEP from the state’s former Land Use Regulation Commission. Legislative debate on the bill focused on Bald Mountain in Aroostook County, where landowner J.D. Irving has said opening a mining operation to recover the mountain’s gold, silver and copper deposits could create 700 jobs.
The DEP doesn’t typically go to outside firms for major help in writing regulations, but lawmakers directed the agency to do so in this case. Legislators set aside $500,000 to cover rulemaking costs, transferring $250,000 each from separate state funds meant to pay for cleanups of oil spills and hazardous waste sites.
Rep. John Martin, D-Eagle Lake, who sponsored the legislation, said the funds were intended to help the DEP hire “the best experts in the world to help them write the rules.”
A request for proposals the department issued during the summer asked for a firm with “recent and successful experience with metallic mining operations” to play a major role in rewriting state rules that set permit requirements for metallic mining. Those requirements will address environmental considerations throughout the mining process, along with restoration of the land after mining operations end, according to the request for proposals.
“The department didn’t have the in-house expertise that we needed to develop these rules in a way that was protective [of the environment] and a way that was most understanding of mining practices and processes,” said DEP spokeswoman Samantha DePoy-Warren.
Bids were due by late August, and DePoy-Warren said the department is finalizing negotiations with a qualified contractor. She didn’t say how many bids the department has received.
“We want to make sure we have those who are experts in this industry working with us to develop these rules on a practice that isn’t very common in Maine,” she said. “There’s not a lot of expertise in the department for this, and this process acknowledges it and seeks that expertise.”
Environmental advocates who opposed the mining measure earlier this year said the legislation didn’t receive the consideration it needed before both chambers passed it and Gov. Paul LePage signed it into law. They remain concerned that the rulemaking process could result in regulations that favor the mining industry and do away with critical environmental protections.
Nick Bennett, staff scientist at the Natural Resources Council of Maine, said he’s concerned about the prospect of a firm with mining industry clients winning the rulemaking contract and playing a significant role in writing the state’s mining regulations.
“What I fear that will lead to is rules written for the mining industry and not rules to protect Maine’s environment,” he said.
The Natural Resources Council recently had a Canadian environmentalist at its annual meeting who said it’s unlikely Bald Mountain, located northwest of Ashland and Portage, can be mined without contaminating nearby groundwater.
Bennett said a number of the DEP staff members involved in writing the state’s current mining regulations, which took effect in 1991, still work at the department and have the expertise to update the rules.
But the agency has undergone staff cuts since the early 1990s, so it makes sense to seek outside help in rewriting state mining rules, said Sean Mahoney, vice president of the Conservation Law Foundation Maine.
What’s critical, Mahoney said, is that the state end up with rules that require companies hoping to mine in Maine to prove they have the financial backing needed to clean up the site when mining operations are complete.
“Mines both in Maine and all over the country have more often than not resulted in environmental liabilities that require public funds, either state or federal, to clean up,” he said.
The firm that ends up with the rulemaking contract will report to DEP staff, and the mining rules will take effect only after going through the state’s formal rulemaking process, which involves public hearings, the state Board of Environmental Protection and approval by the Legislature, said DePoy-Warren.
“Everyone will have an opportunity to participate and to see firsthand that it is done right,” she said.
While Maine has a long mining history that dates back more than two centuries, there’s been virtually no metallic mining activity — mining for certain precious metals — in the state since the 1980s. The cleanup of one of those sites, Callahan Mine in Brooksville, is ongoing with the help of federal superfund money decades after mining activity there had stopped.
Since the state’s current mining regulations that established standards for accepting mining permit applications took effect in 1991, the state has received no permit applications.
During debate before the Legislature this spring, advocates for rewriting the state’s mining regulations argued that the rules stymied the development of a mining industry in Maine and that they were in need of an update.
“Things have changed so much in 20 years,” Martin said. “There are some things we know now that we would have written differently had we known what we know now, especially on environmental issues.”
But Mahoney doubts a new set of regulations will spur major mining activity.
“What drove that wasn’t the regulations, it was the markets,” he said. “It is not something where, with new regulations, you’re going to have this industry booming in the state of Maine.”
Hire a mining company to help you write the laws regarding mining? Doesn’t this seem like a conflict of interest?
Why do they have to have an “out of state” company write it. Is there nobody in the State of Maine capable?
Not entirely sure. Seems counter-productive to “jobs in Maine” rhetoric.
It must signify that Lepage has now run out of relatives.
Nothing in this Lepage (mis)administration is considered a conflict of interest. One would need to have some values, morals, ethics first and all are disgustingly lacking w/Lepage and his crew.
John Martin democratic project.. now lets talk conflict of interest George Hale Sitting gamming comissioner having the casino sponsor his radio show. thats a conflict AG Mills said wasn’t a conflict. this was durning the Baldacci years,, There are plenty more conflicts from back then that was OK with liberals because liberal were the ones doing it.. Maingal there will be no mining bald mountain.. the people can and should put a stop to it.
Hello Pushedtheredbutton..glad to see you here and agree completely “we the people’ have to put a stop to it.
Where do we start ? What do we join around as a common course of action?
I am advocating a hault to the RFP so we can make sure it was nt steered to mining industry insiders.
I am also advocating a cyanide heap leach process ban in Maine Law that will supersede all this insider trading nightmare train that just keeps rolling on. ( There is only one process to extract gold from ore, cyanide heap leach processing and it has been known since1999 that this process cannot be made safe enough to use near any water resources)
What do you think? What other common causes can we rally around?
EDIT: October 29 12:56 Have just today acquired and quickly skimmed the RFP (DEP were very very helpful) and I see no bias in it at all..it is a very open invitation seeking the very broadest input. I don’t see any description of any outreach or any placement in professional journals outside of Maine which might have caught the attention of a broad audience though. Dr. Moran, for example, who I referenced in other posts here, hadn’t seen it and wasn’t aware of it .
I suppose we could hire someone that doesn’t know anything about mining and what goes into it. Then again, who knows what they might miss.
Cheesey I have no problem with bringing in experts to assist in formulating the rules. I am also familiar with how RFP’s can be written so that only one company is able to comply. I hadn’t read about a shortage of good egological or geological engineers either. But even if there is a shortage of experts in those fields doesn’t a half million dollars to assist in formulating the rules sound a bit steep to you. It certainly does to me.
This is all bogus.
Does anyone remember how the tea party Republicans and their poster boy Tea Party Paul spent the better part of the last two years screaming ” WE ARE BROKE”? Funny thing about this being BROKE thingy is that it only applies when it comes to something the radical right isn’t in favor of, you know silly things like helping grandma buy the drugs that keep her alive. To spend a half MILLION DOLLARS to write rules for mining, up until now an industry that hardly exist in Maine, is insanity. Let’s be real, this bill was written by Democrat John Martin who just happened to owe the Irving Family a lot of money. Who will be the primary beneficiaries of the legislation? Da Da….the Irving Family. What a shocker that is. Special interest legislation is a reality in politics. But to spend $500 Thousand to hire a firm to write the rules is nuts. Why not just copy the Federal regulations for free. Or might they just be a bit too difficult for the Irvings to abide by?
In all fairness, the federal regulations aren’t site specific. As you know, Maine has an unique environment in terms of geology, ecology, and politics. Copying the Fed. regulations for free, though it may offer great starting points, wouldn’t cover all the bases Maine needs covered.
That may be true, but it seems that this is more of an attempt to taylor the regs to help the special interest then it is to adapt to the unique geology and ecology that you mentioned. The political aspect shouldn’t be a consideration in formulating the rules. I am a mechanical engineer and I am aware of the cost of experts but $500 Thousand can buy a mountain or two of experts. Remember Joshua “WE ARE BROKE”. Well at least supposedly.
Hello again..so glad you are on this.
I agree we all have to do everything we can to make sure this RFP has not been steered to industry insiders ( the article suggests it has). Please see my further comment on this below.
The entire premise on which this notion that modern mining is safe is false. There is only one process(cyanide heap leaching) for extracting the trace amounts of gold that now exist in Maine and throughout the world and after devastating disasters from this process world wide many nations have banned it ( and so have several states in the U.S.. In response the mining industry has adopted a “best practices code” that they are promoting as “safe mining” all over the world.
Here’s what a true , recognized global expert has to say about this industry code:
“most of what has been proposed by industry and governments in regard to cyanide management misses the mark. These “codes” or regulations fail to address the issues that are of most concern to the public. Issues such as protecting land resources, communities,and water resources. Arguably, current “code” and regulatory proposals amount to greenwashing in that they
give the appearance that governments and mining companies are addressing environmental
issues, when in fact they are not.”
more and link in my post below.
Further and over riding is the question of why we would take such great risks for a product that has no social value..is not essential to our economy our security, our defense. It’s used only for ornamentation. here’s a wonderful NY Times article considering this over riding public policy issue.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/international/24GOLD.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
When we face serious policy issues like this in Maine, issues with potentially enormous consequence to all Mainers, we can learn a lot from the experience and advice of others..other states and other nations. I don’t get the sense that DEP referred to this global experience and expertise in writing this RFP.
I would like to see this RFP put n hold until we the people can review it and decide whether it is money to industry insiders or really seeking the worlds best expertise independent if the industry lobby.
EDIT: October 29 2012 Today, with speedy and very courteous help from DEP I was able to acquire a copy of the RFP and skim it. No bias..very open but also I spoke to folk who are experts and who would have been extremely valuable to the state and they had no knowledge of it so I am not sure DEP placed it in journals and publications experts would have seen. That is an issue to me.
That’s a fox in a hen house.
Let the people vote on it.
Sure, but first let’s do everything we can to restrict their right to vote. See anything wrong with it yet,red?
Mining officials interpreting mining regulations? What’s next? Teenagers setting the speed limit?
I think we should all take a look at that RFP and see if it is directed to and received response from firms like Dr Robert Morans’ who is the worlds leading expert on mining or whether it is drawing on and has been steered to the “International Standards” promoters who are really mining industry owner advocates ignoring some well documented aspects of the persistence of non remediable hazards to water systems.
That will determine whether the end product of this ill advised program of de regulation produces a responsible legal framework for metal mining in Maine or opens the door to exploitation from which our northern watersheds may never recover.
Here’s the problem.
What is left of gold in Maine and elsewhere in the world to mine are almost microscopic traces..about 1/3 ounce per ton of ore. It takes three tons of ore to extract 1 ounce of gold. There is only one economically feasible method for separating these traces of gold from the ore and that is to crush the ore and pour a cyanide solution over it which chemically combines with the gold and from which the gold can be separated in a later stage of the process.
The international standards were developed as a “best practices” model by mine owners in response to world wide cyanide heap leach bans. These practices have been falsely advanced, as they were in promoting Maine’s disastrously irresponsible legislation, as “making mining safe”
Here is Dr Moran’s analysis of what is wrong with the code promoted by mining interests as a model of safe mining practices:
http://bankwatch.org/documents/decodingcyanide.pdf
This quote sums it up:
““ the “code” draft (UNEP/ICME,2002) reflects, predominantly, what is best for industry, not the interest of the environment or the public.”
Even the USGS has independently confirmed the gaps in this so called “safe practices” international standards created and promoted by the mining industry emphasizing that these problems are more acute in cold climates like ours..
“ Most scientists agree that cyanide decomposes in sunlight and isnot dangerous if greatly diluted. But a study by the United States Geological Survey in 2000 said that cyanide can convert to other toxic forms and persist, particularly in cold climates.”
I beg all Mainers to call on their legislators to not allow any expenditure of scarce public funds to contract with mining industry insiders to promote their own unsafe and unwise agenda for Maine.
I beg all Mainers to not even wait for this foolishness and to begin right now to call for an absolute ban on cyanide heap leaching. That will pretty much end the whole discussion and all interest in mining Bald Mountain for Gold. It us the only safe path for Maine.
Lindsay Newland Bowker, CPCU, ARM Risk Manager, NYC Environmnetal Protection ( 1986-1998)
Listed As National Expert in Environmental Risk Management and Constuction Risk Management ( CPCU National Directory of Insurance Experts) throughout my tenure at NYCDEP)
EDIT: October 29,2012 DEP was very speedy and super courteous in getting a copy of the RFP to me this morning and on quick skim I see no boas..very open invitation but experts I have spoken to didn’t see it listed anywhere and had no knowledge of it so that is an issue. I still think it should not be awarded until it has public review and a plan to reach the bradest possible audience of experts.