New “Reclamation” Plan Proposed for Montana Tunnels Mine

(May 2008)

The recent high price of gold has prompted the Montana Tunnels mine near Clancy to apply for an expansion of its mine to extend the life of the operation.  The mine has been in existence for many years, but because it isn’t a cyanide-leach mine, it has been largely ignored.  The Department of Environmental Quality recently released a draft environmental impact statement on the mine’s expansion, and the attention paid to Montana Tunnels may be about to increase.

The company asked for an expansion of the pit, which, by itself, would probably not be of great concern.  However, in the process of expanding the pit, Apollo Gold (the owner of the mine) is going to destroy a section of Clancy Creek.  Also, the expansion of the pit will create more waste rock and necessitate increasing the size of the waste rock piles.  This will bury Pen Yang Creek, and require increasing the size of the tailings impoundment.

Apollo proposed piping Clancy Creek around the pit, but in the EIS DEQ correctly recommended that Apollo create a new stream channel instead.  DEQ erred on a number of other issues, however.

One is acid drainage.  The rock at the mine contains sulfide.  This is typically the harbinger of acid mine drainage.  DEQ and Apollo have conducted a number of tests on the rock and claim that acid generation will not occur.  But they don’t state this conclusion definitively.  The EIS says that if acid drainage begins then contingency plans will be developed to deal with it.  Once rock begins to generate acid, however, it’s too late for contingencies.  The EIS should have specifically planned for this eventuality.

The second issue DEQ erred on is reclamation.  As has been written repeatedly in Down to Earth, Montana’s Constitution says, in Article IX, Section 2: “All lands disturbed by the taking of natural resources shall be reclaimed.”  The question is, as always, what constitutes reclamation.

At Montana Tunnels, DEQ decided reclamation means that after mining is completed, the pit will be allowed to fill with water for the next 200 years.  The quality of the water may be good, but the EIS doesn’t say so for sure.  It is claimed that the pit will provide some utility to humans or the environment, as required by law, because birds and bats “could use the pit lake as a drinking water source and feed on flying insects attracted by the water.”  This, DEQ concludes, constitutes reclamation.

Finally, DEQ did not, as MEPA requires, examine any reasonable alternatives to Apollo Gold’s proposed plan.  DEQ simply presented an alternative plan for Clancy Creek.  It did not address such potential alternative actions as:  different methods of pit reclamation including, potentially, backfilling the pit; contingencies for acid mine drainage; or requiring underground operations.

DEQ’s draft EIS, while containing some useful information, does not meet the requirements of MEPA or Montana’s Constitution.  MEIC will work to ensure that this mine doesn’t ultimately share the same polluting fate as so many others in Montana.