Mining Regulators: Indifference Versus Protection

Kristina Nelson: Superior Winter ~Enlarge

In one of those curiously timed anouncements - right before a long holiday weekend -the USEPA announced on Friday that Kennecott Eagle Minerals does not need a key federal permit to begin mining opertions in a pristine and sacred area of Michigan's Upper Peninsula.

This is the region where the State of Michigan, following the use of dubious procedures at best, and against the wishes of local citizens, has allowed Kennecott to begin a controversial mining operation.

In fact, Kennecott had already withdrawn its federal permit application saying that the permit granted by the Michigan was all it needed.

In a letter to Kennecott as reported by The Mining Journal, the EPA's Assistant Administrator for Water, Peter Silva, said he agreed with Kennecott that a federal permit was not required. Silva did go on to say that the EPA would work with the state of Michigan to determine if any future federal involvement was necessary.

The balance of the letter contained more softball language urging Kennecott to "consider all viewpoints" as it goes forward with the project, hardly regulatory language.

Commenting in The Mining Journal article, the National Wildlife Federation's (NWF) attorney Michelle Halley said "The EPA's decision is disappointing and legally flawed." NWF is the lead environmental group opposing the approval of Kennecott's mining plan.

At least we have a clear understanding of what to expect from Michigan and the federal government concerning this controversial mining initiative - not much. Michigan's regulators treated Kennecott like a customer and the USEPA basically looked the other way.

There is a concept in criminal law called depraved indifference.

Paraphrasing, it basically says that when one's conduct is so "deficient and lacks a sense of moral concern," that person can be just as liable as someone who intentionally causes harm. "Depraved indifference focuses on the risk" not the result.

If the Kennecott mine becomes an environmental disaster, what we will have witnessed is an indifference exhibited by Michigan's mining regulators and the USEPA.

I know, it's criminal vs. civil law and not being a lawyer I shouldn't toss around terms when I'm not qualified to use them.

But I'm trying to make a moral and ethical point here, not a legal one. Morally and ethically, the Michigan regulators and the USEPA have an obligation to protect our natural resources, not put them at risk.

And how's this for irony. As the EPA detaches from the Kennecott endeavor, it continues to pass out millions of dollars to restore the Great Lakes including Lake Superior. 

Maybe it should set aside some of that money for cleanup and remediation in case something goes wrong in the Kennecott mine operation.

Or does it expect the disenfranchised Upper Peninsula citizens to bear that burden?

gw

Links

The Mining Journal article

http://miningjournal.net/page/content.detail/id/545901.html?nav=5006 

EPA Administrator Silva's letter to Kennecott

http://miningjournal.net/pdf/news/545901_1.pdf