Rutland Herald

Solid waste fees a concern for mining industry

April 4, 2004
By BRUCE EDWARDS Herald Staff

Legislation that would place a one-year moratorium on potential solid waste fees paid by Omya Inc. and other mining companies is working its way through the Legislature.

Mining companies currently don't pay solid waste disposal fees on their mineral waste. But the fee issue arose when Omya recently sought an exemption on fees it might be required to pay should it be required to obtain a state solid waste disposal permit for its tailings site in Florence.

The legislation calls for a one-year moratorium on fees while the state Department of Environmental Conservation studies the issue. The fee moratorium bill passed the House and is now under consideration by the Senate Finance Committee, according to House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Marron, R-Stowe.

The 100,000 tons of mineral waste that Omya generates each year have been found to contain trace amounts of chemicals that are the byproduct of its calcium carbonate processing operation. Omya argued before the House Ways and Means Committee last month that if it's required to pay any solid waste fees and taxes at all, the fees should only apply to the contaminated portion of the tailings, which according to company, is less than 1 percent of the total annual waste tonnage.

At stake for Omya are potentially millions of dollars. Under Act 78, the state's solid waste law, the company would be required to pay a $6 per ton solid waste tax, a 75-cent per ton application tax, and a fee that could be imposed by the Rutland County Solid Waste District.

Omya officials were not available for comment last week, but in an interview on Vermont Public Radio last month, Omya spokesman Neal Jordan said assessing fees on the total amount of leftover marble material would be unfair. "As you can expect, earth materials are very dense and when you have a relatively small amount of contaminant, if you will, it's a very disproportionately small amount. And yet we would be taxed entirely on the amount of that earth material," Jordan told VPR.

While Omya argued that only the contaminated portion of its tailings should be subject to the state's solid waste fees, an environmental group has raised objections to the exemption.

Annette Smith of Vermonters for a Clean Environment said that taxing only the contaminated portion of Omya's 100,000 tons of mineral waste a year doesn't make any sense since chemicals, including tall oil and acetone, permeate the tailings waste that Omya has been dumping for 20 years.

"It's ludicrous that you can pay only on just the contaminated portion," said Smith, VCE's executive director.

Smith said such fees are needed to not only encourage recycling but to ensure that money is available for any cleanup and closure of contaminated sites.

While Omya's case triggered the debate over solid waste fees, the issue is also a concern for other mining operations.

"From the granite industry's standpoint, I don't feel that we're generating anything that needs to be further regulated," said John Castaldo, executive director of the Barre Granite Association.

Castaldo said granite sludge dumped at a site in East Montpelier is for the most part free of any chemicals. He said the only contaminates might be occasional petroleum residue or diamond saw pieces.

He said imposing disposal fees would only add to the financial burden of local granite companies.

Smith said while mining operations, like granite, slate and marble, don't have issues with contaminates in the quarrying process, "there are certainly relevant questions to be asked whether there are ways to encourage the recycling of just the rock."

VCE is also at odds with Omya over the issue of whether the company needs a solid waste disposal permit for its Florence tailings site.

In order to handle increased demand for its calcium carbonate product, Omya wants to expand its waste site and build a 32-acre above ground storage facility for its marble tailings.

DEC Commissioner Jeffrey Wennberg is reconsidering a decision he made in November that required Omya to apply for a permit. In making his decision, Wennberg cited state Health Department concerns about trace amounts of chemicals leaching into drinking water.

Omya officials, however, have maintained that no permit should be required because mining operations are exempt under state law and that the marble residue from its plant poses no health or environmental risk.

Smith has called for an independent study of the site to determine the safety of the groundwater.

Contact Bruce Edwards at bruce.edwards@rutlandherald.com.