VIRGINIA — The regulation of an oxidized sulfur compound has become a major flashpoint in recent weeks here on the Iron Range, and the ongoing debate drew several hundred people to an open house and comment session hosted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency on Sept. 3.
For many at last week’s gathering at the Iron Trail Motors Event Center, Minnesota’s strict “wild rice” sulfate standard for wastewater discharges and the MPCA’s newfound interest in enforcement of the pollution rule pose an existential crisis for the region’s taconite industry.
While focused on Keetac now, many of the mine workers, area politicians, and union leaders who spoke here expressed fear that enforcement efforts will soon target other mines, other businesses, and communities across the state, while doing little to address the acknowledged problems facing wild rice in the state.
On the other side were nearly as many folks, including several former mine workers and union representatives, who argued that it was time for the region’s mining industry to clean up a pollution problem that’s gone largely unaddressed for decades. In addition to concerns about wild rice, supporters of enforcement cited the connection between sulfate and the methylation of mercury, which has allowed for the accumulation of the toxic heavy metal in the tissues of area fish.
Despite the sharp divide in views, the tone and behavior at the event was remarkably respectful. Prior to the start, Katie Pratt, director of the state’s Office of Collaboration and Dispute Resolution, laid out ground rules that called for respect for all speakers, and no cheering or booing — and the enormous, standing room-only crowd complied admirably with her request.
Prior to questions and comments, the MPCA’s Courtney Ahlers-Nelson provided a PowerPoint presentation laying out the history of the state’s wild rice sulfate standard and its enforcement, or lack thereof, along with the MPCA’s decision to finally enforce the standard in two new permits issued to the Keetac facility in Keewatin, which produces about six million tons of taconite pellets annually.
The agency has also denied, on a preliminary basis, a request by Keetac for a variance from the standard, although the agency is taking comment through Sept. 22 ahead of a final decision on that request.
Discharges from the plant’s tailings basin flow into Hay Lake, a small lake located a few miles downstream that has traditionally supported a robust stand of wild rice.
Ahlers-Nelson noted that the federal Environmental Protection Agency, which has ultimate authority over the provisions of the Clean Water Act, had sent a letter to the MPCA back in 2022 that effectively ordered the state agency to begin enforcing its pollution standard for discharges that impact wild rice waters. The state’s tribal governments and some environmental groups have also pressured the agency to begin enforcement of the standard.
While the wild rice standard, which applies only to discharges into waters containing wild rice, is 10 milligrams per liter, Ahlers-Nelson said the actual standard established in permits is likely to be different, depending on the volume of discharge and the size and composition of the receiving water. The Keetac permits, for example, include a discharge standard of 14 mg/l on average, with a daily maximum of 24 mg/l.
Many of those at the hearing urged the MPCA to loosen its standard, arguing that it was based on a 1973 law premised on field observations from the 1940s. The state Legislature had commissioned the MPCA back in 2015 to conduct new studies in hopes of providing a scientific basis for amending the standard. Those studies generally confirmed the value of the 10 mg/l standard while also demonstrating that other factors can play a role in determining how much sulfate ultimately affects wild rice.
However, when the MPCA tried to enact a new variable standard in 2017, based on several criteria, the proposal was shot down by an administrative law judge as unconstitutional.
Since then, the MPCA has slowly moved forward with efforts to enforce the existing standard, despite continuing opposition from many in the Legislature.
Comments from the audience
Several northeastern Minnesota lawmakers spoke at the Sept. 3 hearing, and all urged the MPCA to back off its enforcement efforts.
DFL Sen. Grant Hauschild was among the most strident in making that argument.
“Right now, we have 630 steel workers laid off, many of them in this room, and global steel competition could not be more strong,” said Hauschild, sounding angry. “So, right now is the worst possible time to finally enforce a rule from the 1970s. It’s outdated, unproven, and uncertain if the technology even exists for us to actually meet the standard.”
He added that the enforcement of the standard across the state could cost “many billions of dollars.”
St. Louis County Commissioner Mike Jugovich, who called Keetac the first of many dominos to fall, accused the MPCA of turning its back on the Iron Range and said the region would be “a barren wasteland” if the standard is enforced.
“This is imperative,” he said. “Everyone from Sleepy Eye to I-Falls, get ready, sit down, and buckle up because you are going to be affected by it.”
State Sen. Keri Heintzeman said the science behind the standard is far from clear cut.
“We do know today that other factors, like water depth and competing vegetation, can matter as much or more than the presence of sulfate in the water,” she said. “Why on earth is a regulatory agency forcing a flawed standard into a permit, especially when there is no proven, affordable technology to meet it?”
Others took issue with many of those claims.
“There’s a false argument that we can only protect mining jobs or the environment, but not both,” said Mike Overend from Cohasset. “However, there is a real and cost-effective solution to the sulfate problem that can protect both the mining jobs and our water. The Clearwater Biologic Company of Babbitt has proven technology to remove sulfate from water using natural bacteria. The technology can be rapidly put into place at the scale needed to address the sulfate problem.”
Mike Moleska, a retired taconite miner and union president from rural Hibbing, said he’d heard similar claims of doom and gloom by the industry in the past that efforts to modernize or reduce pollution would cost jobs, and he suggested many in the audience were being used by the mining industry to pressure the MPCA to back down.
“Your enemy is not a tree hugger, environmentalist, or some far away hippie lawyer. Your enemy is the fear the company stoked in you to get you to do their dirty work,” he said, arguing that pollution control generally creates more jobs than it eliminates.
Virginia area native Sue Overstrom stressed the importance of cleaning up sulfate because of its link to the methylation of mercury.
“I have a cabin on Lake Vermilion, and I love to fish,” she said. Overstrom, who cited her family’s long history in mining in the region, said she now works with the Duluth-based Northern Lakes Scientific Advisory Panel, which has tracked sulfate pollution from the Minntac plant all the way to Crane Lake and beyond. “While I appreciate the MPCA’s efforts to control sulfate pollution, we must avoid delay.”
Other supporters of enforcement cited the recent acquisition of U.S. Steel by Nippon Steel. As part of that agreement, Japan-based Nippon made guarantees against plant closures through at least 2035. But that agreement would only apply to U.S. Steel facilities on the Iron Range. Two facilities owned by Cleveland Cliffs, Minorca and Northshore, are currently on extended layoff, and mine workers and union representatives who spoke at the hearing said they’re concerned the prospect of future sulfate enforcement could prevent those operations from reopening.
Will the standard impact municipal wastewater plants?
Opponents of enforcement of the wild rice standard have been consistent in their warnings that the rule could pose unrealistic financial burdens on communities across Minnesota where discharges from wastewater treatment facilities could exceed the standard.
But during her presentation, Ahlers-Nelson noted that the federal rules allow for variances for publicly owned facilities if compliance would pose a significant financial burden. Whether the standard would even apply would depend on whether a facility discharges into a designated wild rice water.
If so, she said, the facility would likely be required to monitor for sulfate as part of their next permit renewal, and only after that would the agency consider whether any sulfate control was required. If control was required, the municipality could request a variance from the standard if the cost of control per customer exceeded two percent of the municipality’s median household income.
Ahlers-Nelson said the law requires a different calculation for private entities, based on profitability. If an analysis confirms that the company will remain profitable after paying the cost of the pollution control, it is considered affordable, and the company would not be eligible for a variance based on economics.
The MPCA cited the U.S. Steel’s reported profits over the past three years, which have ranged from $384 million to $2.524 billion. With an annualized cost of approximately $50 million to construct and operate the pollution controls required, the MPCA has determined that enforcement is affordable for the company.
You can learn more about the permitting process for Keetac and submit comments by Sept. 22 at https://www.pca.state.mn.us/local-sites-and-projects/keewatin-us-steel-keetac.