Prior posts have noted the litigation that has been involved in the Coeur d'Arlene gold mine tailings case from Alaska. As noted, the 9th Circuit ruled in favor of plaintiffs while the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the mine on the permit issue.
Now, however, EPA is asking the Army Corps of Engineers to take yet another look at the matter. In a letter dated July 14, 2009, according to press accounts, EPA acting Deputy Regional Administrator Michael Gearheard has requested an eight-month review process, which would prevent work on the mine from taking place this summer. According to the press accounts, Gearheard said that new information had come to light since the last time the Corps looked at Coeur's disposal of mine tailings, and that the Corps was therefore legally obligated to analyze it. For example, a 2004 environmental impact statement specified a 2,000 ton a day operation, but the actual mill capacity is about 1,250 tons. Of greater import, I would think, is that Coeur apparently excavated an area near the lake and exposed some sulfide-bearing rock, which resulted in unauthorized acid rock drainage; apparently prior environmental assessments have failed to take the potential for acid drainage into account [California's Sierra Mountains have a number of old mines with horrendous acid-drainage problems, a problem that is proving most difficult to assuage]. EPA’s position in the past has been that disposal of the tailings on land, which is more costly but is the preferred method of environmentalists involved with the permitting of the operations at the site, may have less environmental impact than the in-lake disposal method favored by the mine.
As I frequently tell clients, it often pays to try and work things out with regulatory agencies because in the long run you often save money. Coeur decided to fight, and though it won the permit battle, it still is at risk of losing the war. Stay tuned.