[Federal Register: July 27, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 145)]
[Notices]
[Page 39138-39140]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27jy01-33]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Stillwater Mining Company's Boe Ranch LAD Alternative, Removing
Production Cap, and Post-Closure Water Treatment, Stillwater County and
Sweet Grass County, MT
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice: intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service proposes to amend Stillwater Mining
Company's (SMC) Plan of Operation pertaining to production limits and
water treatment methods. Briefly, SMC is requesting Forest Service and
State approval to: (1) Construct a land application system (LAD) for
treated mine water coming from the East Boulder Mine to its Boe Ranch
property, approximately seven miles to the north; (2) remove the
production cap for the East Boulder Mine; and, (3) develop a post-
closure water treatment plan for adit water and tailings impoundment
water that would be discharged into the East Boulder River and Mountain
View creek using structures and conveyances, and percolation ponds to
discharge into groundwater.
The Forest Supervisors have the authority for regulating all
activities and uses of National Forest System lands. The Cluster
National Forest Supervisor and the Gallatin National Forest Supervisor
will decide whether to approve Stillwater Mining Company's amendment to
their approval Plan of Operations, as detailed in the Proposed Actions,
or whether to approve an alternative to the Proposed Actions. The
Forest Supervisors also have the ability to prescribe mitigation
measures as conditions of approval.
The areas involved in these proposals include: federal land
administered by the Gallatin National Forest and Montana Department of
Environmental Quality for the East Boulder Mine and Custer National
Forest and Montana Department of Environmental Quality for the
Stillwater Mine; State Land, administered by the Montana Department of
Natural Resources and Conservation; private land, administered by the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality for the Boe Ranch property.
Thus, the USDA, Forest Service, as a cooperating agency with the
Montana Departments of Environmental Quality and Natural Resources and
Conservation will participate in the preparation of an environmental
impact statement (EIS).
The EIS will disclose the environmental effects of the proposed
actions. The Stillwater Mining Company has submitted the following
proposals to the Forest Service and the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality and Montana Department of Natural Resources and
Conservation:
--Construction of a new road for access from the East Boulder Road to
the Boe Ranch LAD site. The adit water would be stored on the Boe Ranch
LAD site in a constructed storage pond before being applied using one
of three different disposal methods: (1) Distribution through a center
pivot irrigation system; or, (2) using enhanced evaporation sprayers
around the storage pond; or, (3) using snow makers upstream of the
storage pond.
--Removal of the ore production cap of 2,000 tons of ore per day at the
East Boulder Mine.
--Development of a post-closure water treatment plan for the East
Boulder and Stillwater Mines that will describes how mine water will be
managed until it meets non-degradation standards and can then be either
percolated to groundwater or conveyed and discharged into the East
[[Page 39139]]
Boulder River and Mountain View creek.
The Directors of the Montana Department of Environmental Quality
and Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, the
Gallatin National Forest Supervisor, and the Custer National Forest
Supervisor are the officials responsible for approving these proposals.
DATES: A public meeting will be held in Absarokee, MT on July 18, 2001
and in Big Timber, MT on July 19, 2001 in order to identify issues to
be addressed in this environmental analysis. Written comments
concerning the scope of these proposals must be received by August 20,
2001.
ADDRESSES: Written comments concerning this analysis should be sent to:
Patrick Plantenberg, Department of Environmental Quality, Environmental
Management Bureau, PO Box 200901, Helena, MT 59620-0901, FAX (406) 444-
1374; and/or Pat Pierson, Beartooth Ranger District, HC49, Box 3420,
Red Lodge, MT 59068; and/or Lars Halstrom, Big Timber Ranger District,
PO Box 1130, Big Timber, MT 59011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions about the proposed action
and EIS should be directed to Patrick Plantenberg. MT-DEQ, (406) 444-
4960; and/or Pat Pierson, Beartooth Ranger District (406) 446-2103;
and/or Lars Halstrom, Big Timber Ranger District, (406) 932-5155.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Action
Stillwater Mining Company's Water Management Plan was approved on
June 28, 1998 for land application disposal (LAD) of treated mine
waters on Gallatin National Forest lands. SMC's new proposal would
transport treated mine water through a pipeline in the East Boulder
Road from the East Boulder Mine to their Boe Ranch property,
approximately seven miles to the north. SMC believes the new location
would better suite for a LAD system because of its windier, drier, and
warmer environment that would increase evaporation of the treated mine
water through an irrigation system and through evapotranspiration of
rangeland plants. The purpose of this action is to provide additional
operating flexibility, optimize treatment and disposal options, and
allow mine water to be beneficially used in an agricultural setting.
Removal of the production cap at the East Boulder Mine is also
proposed. SMC's current permitted production cap is 2,000 tons of ore
per day. SMC argues that removal of the production cap would have no
environmental impact to other surface resources. The East Boulder
Mine's production would still be controlled by other permit constraints
and requirements for air quality, water quality, water treatment
capacity, and impoundment size. An increase in production would trigger
changes in employment, etc. This would trigger a change to the Hard
Rock Impact Plan, which would have to be approved before the action
could be put into place. The purpose of this action is to allow SMC
flexibility in production as changes occur in the market and grade of
the ore encountered.
Previous Environmental Analyses for Stillwater's Nye operation have
analyzed and approved operational water management plans during the
life of the mine. However, long-term, post-mine closure water
management has not been previously considered. When post-closure audit
discharge water no longer requires treatment in order to meet water
quality non-degradation standards, it is proposed that audit water will
be discharged into the East Boulder River and Mountain View Creek
through the use of structures and conveyances and tailings impoundment
water be discharged to groundwater through percolation ponds.
SMC has submitted proposals to amend its plan of operations in
accordance with Federal and State regulations. The General Mining Law
of 1872 grants all U.S. citizens the right to explore, develop, and
produce mineral resources on Federal lands open to mineral entry. SMC
currently operates the only economically viable platinum/palladium mine
in the western hemisphere and accounts for five percent of world
production. Thirty-five percent of U.S. consumption of platinum/
palladium is accounted for by the automotive industry in catalytic
converters, required as a result of the Clean Air Act of 1990; 32
percent by electronics; nine percent is used for medical/dental
purposes; six percent by the chemical industry; and 18 percent is used
for a variety of purposes, based on their chemical inertness and
refractory properties (USDI, 1991).
The purpose of this environmental analysis is to disclose the
environmental effects of Stillwater Mining Company's proposals
described above, and, cumulative effects of other potential activities
within the Stillwater Complex will be considered in this analysis
Forest Plan Direction
The proposals are within two National Forests, Montana State land
and private land. The applicable direction of each Forest Plan is as
follows.
Custer National Forest
The area involved in the post-closure water treatment proposal for
the Stillwater Mine is within Management Area E as described in the
Custer National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1986). The
management goal for Management Area E is:
``To facilitate and encourage the exploration, development, and
production of energy and mineral resources from the National Forest
System lands. Other resources will be considered, and impacts will be
mitigated to the extent possible through standard operating procedures
and, on a limited basis, through special lease stipulations necessary
to manage key surface resources. Energy/mineral development will not be
precluded by these resource concerns within legal constraints. Efforts
will be made to avoid or mitigate resources conflicts. If the
responsible official determines that conflicts cannot be adequately
mitigated, she/he will resolve the conflict in accordance with the
management goal and, if necessary, in consultation with affected
parties.'' (Forest Plan, pg. 58)
Gallatin National Forest
The area involved in the post-closure water treatment proposal and
the lifting of the production cap at the East Boulder Miner lies within
Management Areas 8 and 12 as described in the Gallatin National Forest
Land and Resource Management Plan (1987). The management goals for
minerals in Management Areas 8 and 12 are to:
``Provide for orderly and environmentally acceptable exploration
and development of minerals, oils and gas, and geothermal resources.''
(Forest Plan, pg. II-1) ``Forest-wide standards established for these
proposals will be monitored for compliance with approved operating
plans and management area direction.'' (Forest Plan, p. II-24, 11,a,5)
``Meet State water quality standards and maintain channel stability.''
(Forest Plan, pg. III-24, 4.)
State and Private Lands
The Boe Ranch LAD proposal is located on SMC's ranch property and
Montana State land under the jurisdiction of State laws and regulations
for land management decisions.
Preliminary Issues
The Forest Service and Department of Environmental Quality and
Department
[[Page 39140]]
of Natural Resources and Conservation Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) have
preliminarily identified two potential issues to consider in the
environmental analysis. These issues have been identified due to the
possibility that the existing environmental conditions may change as a
result of the proposed activities. The potential issues include long-
term surface and groundwater quality and long-term surface and
groundwater quantity. Aspects related to these issues that likely will
be considered in the analysis are: operation and maintenance of the
long-term water management system; effectiveness of long-term water
treatment; management and monitoring systems (including LAD) to avoid
violations of water quality standards; modifications to existing
Montana Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems (MPDES) at the Nye and
East Boulder sites; long-term discharge from tailings impoundment under
drains and from tailing impoundment caps; length of required long-term
treatment to meet water quality standards; maintenance of water system
pipelines at the Hertzler and Boe Ranch sites; and, effects (e.g.,
shorter mine life, employment level changes, Hard Rock Impact Plan
amendment, and impoundment Stages 2 thru 5 construction schedule) of
lifting the production cap at the East Boulder site.
Preliminary Alternatives
--No Action
--Proposed Action
--An alternative to the Boe Ranch proposal would be use of the
permitted proposals for water treatment entirely on the Gallatin
National Forest as originally planned and leaving the production cap at
2,000 tons of ore per day.
--Proposed Action with Appropriate Mitigation
EIS Availability
The draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) is expected to be
available for public review by mid-February 2002. After a 45-day public
comment period, the comments received will be analyzed and considered
by the Forest Service and Montana Department of Environmental Quality
and Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation during the
preparation of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS). The
FEIS is scheduled to be completed by the end of May 2002. The
regulatory agencies will respond to the comments received in the
FEIS.The Custer National Forest Supervisor, the Gallatin National
Forest Supervisor, and the Directors of the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality and the Montana Department of Natural Resources
and Conservation are the responsible officials for the EIS and will
make decisions regarding this proposal considering the comments and
responses, environmental consequences discussed in the DEIS, and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The decision and reasons
for the decision will be documented in a Record of Decision.
The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will
be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes
the notice of availability in the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers
notice at this early stage of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, commenters
and reviewers of environmental impact statements must structure their
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is
meaningful and alerts the agencies to the reviewers' positions and
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435U.S.
519,553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at
the draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may
be waived or dismissed by the courts. Wisconsin Heritages, Inc, v.
Harris, 490 F.Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court
rulings, it is very important that those interested in this proposed
action participate by the close of the 45-day comment period so that
substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest
Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to
them in the final environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as
possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or
chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy
of the draft environmental impact statement or the merits of the
alternatives formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may
wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for
implementing the procedural provisions of the national Environmental
Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
Dated: May 30, 2001.
Nancy T. Curriden,
Forest Supervisor, Custer National Forest.
Dated: June 1, 2001.
Rich Inman,
Acting Forest Supervisor, Gallatin National Forest.
[FR Doc. 01-18754 Filed 7-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 2001/07/27 EST