To Earmark or Not To Earmark:
Elizabeth Mine Advisors Don’t Agree
By John Freitag

The Elizabeth Mine Community Advisory Group (EMCAG)  meeting held last Thursday at Barrett Hall in South Strafford spent the first part of the evening with the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and their contractors, primarily answering questions that have been raised about their plans to move between 200 and 300,000 tons of waste material from the oldest part of the site to the top of the largest tailing pile.

Touting their expertise on dealing with mine problems, they  attempted to assure people that potential problems with acid shock from this least-processed of all the material on site would not occur and that moving this much material to the top of the pile would not decrease stablility. Engineers once felt the large pile was in danger of collapsing, but the contractors felt that was not a danger, thanks to the work they had done in 2003 to buttress the pile.

The other major topic of the evening dealt with the question of funding. Project manager Ed Hathaway said that the project had received around $3 million in each of the last two years. In November he had indicated that he expected a similar amount this year. Now, however, he said it looks like there will only be a few hundred thousand dollars to continue design work and around $1 million to address the increased iron loading that resulted from their previous work and turned the river orange for much of the summer.

He said the reason for less-than-expected funding was that Superfund sites with threats to human health get priority and at this site, even though the river was discolored, there was no threat to human health.

At a November EMCAG meeting, Vermont Law School Professor Pat Parenteau suggested  that people concerned about the pace of the clean-up ask the Vermont Congressional Delegation to get funding ear-marked for the Elizabeth Mine. At last week’s meeting, two letters that had been sent to the Delegation in early January were distributed.

One, authored by Bob Walker and signed by members of the Elizabeth Mine Study Group, and the Selectboard chairs of Thetford and Strafford, asked for $26 million in funding.

The other, signed by Orange County Sen. Mark MacDonald asked for upwards of $22 million but left it up to the delegation whether to try to get the funds by "replenishing Superfund and following the Priorities allocation process or alternatively seeking a separate Congressional earmark."

The letter from Sen. MacDonald also asked that as Superfund comes up for reauthorization this year that various provisions be reviewed. Thought should be given about how the emergency provisions of the act are being used for long-term project like the Elizabeth Mine, as well as the need for assessment of how Superfund projects impact the overall environment.

The EMCAG itself is not of one mind on the earmark question. Some, including current Chair Tom Essex, are not in favor of using earmarks. After some discussion it was decided that Essex would draft a letter that would attempt to find a consensus position among the EMCAG members on the issue of seeking more funding.