Wilderness mine in high court
HELENA – Opponents of a proposed copper and silver mine beneath Montana’s Cabinet Mountains Wilderness asked the Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday to force more regulatory review of a water permit for the operation.
A group of conservationists and environmentalists argued that a discharge permit granted by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality faced insufficient review.
The Rock Creek mine in northwestern Montana, proposed by Revett Minerals Inc. of Spokane, has yet to open and faces hurdles other than the disputed discharge permit. The company has said it hopes to open the mine by 2011.
The state told Supreme Court justices during oral arguments Wednesday that it has followed the law in establishing the discharge permit. A DEQ lawyer said further review is still taking place for the project as a whole.
Claudia Massman said in order to start mining, Revett will have to post a bond large enough to ensure cleanup of the mine if the company abandons it.
Lawyers for the conservationists said there is no way to tell if the bond will be sufficient for the water discharge of the mine because the public was not able to investigate the issue enough.
The mine will release millions of gallons of tainted water once it digs a hole under the mountains. The flow of water will continue forever, argued Jack Tuholske, representing the interest groups.
He said the DEQ’s review for the water discharge permit failed to answer basic questions, such as proving that water treatment methods will work and protect downstream fish from potentially acidic runoff.
Water would flow from the mine into the Clark Fork River and eventually into Idaho’s Lake Pend Oreille.
“If you dig the hole, it is going to release this torrent of water,” Tuholske told the justices. “We have a legacy in this state of pollution caused from mining.”
Massman said the DEQ followed the law, and resisted the assertion that the agency’s decision has constitutional implications that the court needs to look at.
She said past mining problems in the state, where defunct mining operations left their waste to the state for cleanup, have been a “wake-up call” to regulators who will make sure that doesn’t happen in this case. “The company is supposed to post a bond that is going to provide perpetual treatment,” Massman said.
It can take the Supreme Court months to rule in such cases. A lower court has already ruled in favor of the DEQ.
Massman compared the discharge permit to that given to a city for its wastewater treatment plant, a type of discharge that can also continue forever.
One justice resisted that comparison, noting cities stick around forever and have a record of cleaning up their waste.
“That is not the case with mining companies,” said Justice James Nelson.
The mining operation also has fought a challenge arguing that the mine would be harmful to grizzly bear recovery in the area. It has agreed to help with bear recovery and purchase land to provide habitat for the animals.