Speaking of permit, 4-27 response is back up.
I converted the PDF image to text, full unedited verbatim 4-26-20 email response to Sarah Starostka at NDEE (in case it comes down again):
From: Clark Haberman <cghaberman@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 12:30 PM
To: Starostka, Sarah
Subject: Re: Elk Creek - Response to Comment: Availability of Public Records #97622/097-00022
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Ms. Starostka:
I hope you are well and dealing with any adversity associated with the pandemic.
1: The staff at NDEE have been professional in dealing with me. As an outsider, my questions might seem ambiguous to those working diligently to complete the permitting process in a timely manner.
2: My comments are written on four different sheets due to the complexity of the mining project. The first sheet addresses the fact sheet; the second covers the permit drafted for public comment; the third sheet is short and to the point; the fourth sheet addresses mostly legal questions, concern for up-front financial assurance, and questions dealing with the entire process that Elk Creek Resources mentions in their Feasibility Plan. All along, my concern hinged on areas dealing with the total impact of this project. My approach is to ask questions to get answers which should stimulate the department to a closer look at the project holistically.
3: The comment sheets two and three, when I went into the public records portal for this facility did not appear, but the fourth in the set did. I resent comment sheets 2 and 3 as they are more definitive. Paper can get lost and I wanted to make sure those aforementioned sheets were on record.
4: My concern is best expressed toward and centered on PM2.5. The only place I found in the draft permit was PM2.5 associated with NESHAPS, which is very good. But in reviewing the Feaslibily Plan, and specifically, the lack of a fugitive emissions plan (lack thereof such plan) for the sizeable tailings piles. That concern prompted a call to EPA Region VII about their involvement in this application. HV air quality sampler use around the plant footprint is not clear. The lack of clarity and EPA The conversation with Ms. Scott was helpful.
5: My concern remains with the permitting process sequencing for this proposed facility. If the company obtains the construction permit and then applies for the operation permit, they will have to have test runs on ore extracted from a stope. Should this be the future accepted flow process to ramp up the ore body mining and it doesn't pan out, might the company walk away? If that worst-case scenario occurs, this should require up-front financial assurance covered under the law and regulation promulgated thereunder.
Thank you for your communication regarding access to all the records submitted by the applicant.
Respectfully,
Clark Haberman 4-26-2020
