Kennecott mine documents online

by: Eric B.

Fri Mar 09, 2007 at 15:54:13 PM EST

The crux of the report, according to the executive summary, is that additional study of the proposed mine's stability and safety is necessary.

The Scaled Span analysis conducted clearly indicates that stability of the proposed Eagle crown pillar should be a concern, although this concern has not been raised within the conclusions of the Eagle Project Geotechnical Study. Considering the sensitive nature of the hydrological environment surrounding the Eagle project, further detailed analysis should be conducted to fully understand the expected short- and long-term crown pillar subsidence and hydrologic stability.

The omission of this report, critical of the project, has raised suspicions that at the very least the Kennecott mine application slid through the approval process on skids greased by a pro-mine atmosphere within the DEQ's Geological Survey Division.

Earlier today, this is what Hugh McDiarmid, spokesman for the Michigan Environmental Council, said to me in an e-mail exchange(gotta go below the fold to see:

We also believe that Mr. Fitch, and his subordinates who operate under his leadership, have from the beginning of this process created an atmosphere where the agency is not critically examining the merits of the application, but actively working to help rationalize ways that the mine's shortcomings might be excused. Shoehorning inconvenient square facts into the law's round holes, and allowing numerous conditions on preliminary approvals is not how the mining law was intended to be applied, but that has appeared to be the case here.

Was the omission of the report intentional? We don't know. It surely is suspicious, however, that among the reams of paperwork generated over the course of several years, the "missing" paperwork happens to be a report that is critical of and potentially damning for Kennecott. At best, it seems that the pro-mine atmosphere within the Geological Survey Division contributed to a mindset that would think it was OK to hide this document. It also raises the question of whether other documents, studies or analyses have been ignored during this process.