BLM pledges to work cooperatively to get project done in timely manner

WINNEMUCCA —  Coeur Rochester’s General Manager Cindy Jones went before the Humboldt County Commission on Sept. 8 to get their support in the company’s efforts to restart mining operations, which she claimed might be hampered by BLM paperwork.  The company wants to restart mining operations while the price of minerals makes it profitable, but she fears the BLM’s requirement the company complete an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement)  will delay the process.

Coeur Rochester: Jones explained she went before the commission to elicit their support because the issue is largely economic:  the price of minerals makes it advantageous to mine now.  She noted unemployment in Pershing County is currently more than 11 percent and restarting operations could put as many as 200 people back to work, and the company could operate for another 5-7 years.  She also noted approximately one-third of the workforce could potentially come from Humboldt County, and that she herself lives here.  The company hoped to restart early in 2010 and begin construction on a new heap leech pad by spring.  The company ceased active mining operations in 2007 and are now in residual leach with approximately 30 employees.  At the height of mining, they employ more than 200 local workers with an annual payroll of approximately $23 million, Jones said..

An EIS, Jones argued, is a lengthy process that would mean the company could not restart mining operations and mineral prices won’t be this high forever.  She stressed the company isn’t trying to get out of their environmental obligations.  She said the company hoped to show the BLM an EIS wasn’t necessary; that is, the project of constructing a new heap leach pad should only have required an EA (Environmental Assessment) to address environmental impacts.   Jones explained the advantage to an EA is the mine hires and manages the contractor in charge; with an EIS the company pays for the contractor who is managed by the BLM.  She commented, “We’re better contract managers than the government, we push quicker on dates and deadlines.  We pay for both, so it’s not like we’re not trying to get out of paying.”   Jones said, “(The BLM) claim they’ll do it in a timely manner, but their historical record is not good as far as the EIS goes.”   As an example, Jones noted the EIS for the mine’s closure plan, which was supposed to take 18 months, she claimed, but is still in the works.  Jones pointed out the company isn’t asking for anything new, they’re not expanding, and they’re within the boundaries approved in the Plan of Operation amendments.  Jones submitted a document to SPJ  that clarified an EIS is indeed committed to by the company for the ultimate closure plan for Rochester.  She stated this was going to happen, the only question is if the additional five or so years of jobs would continue while the EIS was undertaken.

In addition to the Humboldt County Commissioners, Jones is also going before the Pershing County Commissioners to make them aware of the ongoing issue.  Can the commissioners help?  Jones said, “I don’t know, if you don’t ask you won’t get anywhere.  So we’re asking.”  She added, “We feel like we’ve been good stewards of the land and bringing incomes into the two counties.  We’re not doing anything  different, there’s no new process, everything’s been evaluated:  So why an EIS?”

Bureau of Land Management: BLM District Manager Gene Seidlitz was on-hand during the meeting with the Humboldt County Commissioners, and he took the time to pledge cooperation between the company and the government in order to get the EIS completed in a timely manner.  However, the issue of the EIS v’s the EA was not fully discussed.

In an interview with SPJ, Seidlitz took the time to explain there were discussions on the new heap leach pad between Coeur Rochester and the BLM .  He commented, “However, when it was discussed in a previous EA it was never addressed … from the direct, indirect and a cumulative impact.”  Supervisory Geologist Ken Loda added the proposed leach pad was identified but eventually dropped without further analysis of the environmental impact.

Representatives from the BLM explained that Coeur Rochester has been moving forward throughout the previous permitting on EA’s alone; that there has never been an EIS.

Jeff Johnson, the Humboldt River Field Office manager, expanded and said, “We’re doing an EIS because (since) this mine has been in operation … all of the permitting has been done through EA’s.  Based on the level of disturbance, environmental impacts, including the potential for acid rock drainage generation, and some unknowns, based on current environmental impacts at the site, the BLM has determined there are significant impacts and because there are significant impacts we’re doing an EIS.”  Johnson added that in addition to the significant impacts, there are significant cumulative impacts, as well, that have occurred over time in the area.

Seidlitz had previously explained when it comes to EIS v’s EA, significant is the operative word.  If there has been significant disturbance, or if there’s the potential for significant impacts, it kicks in the need for an EIS.  

While the BLM gives every appearance of sticking to the need for an EIS, Seidlitz reiterated his commitment to completing the project in a timely manner.  “We do understand that time and timing is an issue.”  He explained there are three parties involved in the process:  the applicant or industry, the BLM, and the consultant.   “With all three of those parties working hand-in-hand, focused and committed, it has proved to be successful, not only in this district but in others within the state.”

There is good news for Coeur Rochester.  Several years ago the company started the process for an EIS for closure and expansion at the same time; however, the company later stopped the plan for expansion.  According to Seidlitz, “…some of that information is readily available and somewhat current (from the earlier EIS).”

Seidlitz declined to speculate on how long the EIS might take, reiterating it depends on the focus of the three parties involved.  He concluded, “We will commit all resources at our disposal for a successful project.”