HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 95-050-CCBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Grant County, Washington
A RESOLUTION OF THE GRANT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUPPORTING OKANOGAN COUNTY IN IT'S REQUEST FOR
AN INQUIRY INTO THE DELAY IN PREPARATION OF THE
DRAFT EIS FOR THE CROWN JEWEL PROJECT
RESOLUTION NUMBER 95- 50 -CC
WHEREAS, officials from all counties in eastern Washington State gathered
together at Sun Mountain, Okanogan County, Washington for the purpose of
education and briefings from the Washington Association of Counties' staff; and
WHEREAS, the County Commissioners from Okanogan County presented a history
of the delays in the development of a draft Environmental Impact Statement on the
Crown Jewel gold mining project in northern Okanogan County; and
WHEREAS, the Co -lead agencies in the development of the draft EIS are the U.S.
Forest Service and the Washington State Department of Ecology; and
WHEREAS, the following has been the schedule for the development and
completion of the draft EIS on this project:
1. The first draft EIS deadline was stated in the initial publication notice
as December, 1992.
2. By the fall of 1992 the applicant was advised not to expect a draft EIS
until the spring of 1993.
3. On April 15,1993 the agencies announced publicly that the draft EIS
would be ready by June of 1993.
4. In June, 1993 the applicant was advised that the draft would be out
in the fall of 1993.
5. In August of 1993 the deadline was changed to October, 1994
6. In August 1994 the deadline was changed to March 31,1995.
7. On March 31,1995 the deadline was moved to June, 1995.
WHEREAS, a representative of the forest service, who is involved in the
preparation of the EIS. has appeared at meetings related to this project wearing
an anti -mining shirt. And in addition, a representative of the Wildlife division of the
Forest Service has made public statements that this project will never receive
approval. The record indicates that the wildlife portion of the EIS has been studied
three separate times during this process; and
WHEREAS, as with any such document, a consultant was hired to prepare the draft
document. We understand that the consultant hired to prepare the draft EIS, a
company with considerable expertise in the preparation of such documents for
mining operations, has written several letters to the joint lead agencies, the Forest
Service and Department of Ecology, complaining that the continual unwarranted
delays in the release of a draft document could damage said firm's reputation in
the mining industry; and
WHEREAS, this concern by the consultant is warranted by the disclosure of facts
relating to a study of mining projects from April of 1988 to late 1993. During this
period the National Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management processed
draft EIS documents for 16 mining projects in an average of 13.5 months. There
appears to be nothing involved in the current proposal which could warrant a
process three times as long as the average; and
WHEREAS, the only difference between this project and those processed during
the above referenced project time frame is the presence of the Department of
Ecology as co -lead agency; and
WHEREAS, Okanogan County has a history of mining and resource development
and has determined that this project clearly fits within its customs and culture as
defined by a recent citizen report. The Commissioners of Okanogan County
believe that the time has come to investigate why the officials that were entrusted
with this project have totally failed that trust. Based upon the facts set forth above
the County Commissioners of Grant County support such an investigation so that
what has happened in this case will not be repeated on public lands in other
counties, and
WHEREAS, County officials recognize the need to protect the environment during
these types of projects and are directly responsible to the citizens who reside in
eastern washington, We desire to see as little disruption as possible to the natural
beauty of the region. However, the Okanogan County Commissioners have
reviewed the mitigation proposed by the applicant and believe that they have
provided sufficient safeguards to protect the environment. The draft, which sets
forth these mitigation proposals, should be published immediately so a comment
period can begin on these proposals;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE GRANT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. We fully support the request of the Okanogan County Commissioners
for a Congressional Inquiry into the performance of the U.S. Forest Service in the
preparation of the draft EIS for the Crown Jewel gold mining project in said
county.
SECTION 2. We fully support the request of the Okanogan County Commissioners
to the Governor for a State Inquiry into the performance of the Department of
Ecology in the preparation of the draft EIS for the Crown Jewel gold mining project
in said county.
SECTION 3. That these agencies should not use these investigations as an excuse
to further delay this project, but on the contrary, they should be instructed to
devote the necessary resources to publish the draft EIS by June 1995 and
complete the permitting process by the end of January 1996.
Dated this 24th day of April, 1995
ATTEST:
, All `
Clerk of Board
t
,Chairman
GRANT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Grant County, Washington
1
2
Q-
3 A RESOLUTION OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT
4 MEETING OF THE WASHINGTON STATE
5 ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES SUPPORTING
6 OKANOGAN COUNTY IN IT'S REQUEST FOR
7 AN INQUIRY INTO THE DELAY IN PREPARATION
8 OF THE DRAFT EIS FOR THE CROWN JEWEL PROJECT
9
10
11 WHEREAS, officials from all counties in eastern Washington State have gathered
12 together at Sun Mountain, Okanogan County, Washington for the purpose of education
13 and briefings from the Washington Association of Counties' staff, and
14
15 WHEREAS, 'the county commissioners from Okanogan County have presented the
16 meeting with a history of the delays in the development of a draft Environmental Impact
17 Statement on the Crown Jewel gold mining project in northern Okanogan county; and
18
19 WHEREAS, The co -lead agencies in the development of the draft EIS are the U.S.
20 Forest Service and the Washington State Department of Ecology; and
21
22 WHEREAS, the following has been the schedule for the development and completion of
23 the draft EIS on this project:
24
25 1. The first draft EIS deadline was stated in the initial publication notice as
26 December, 1992.
27 2. By the fall of 1992 the applicant was advised not to expect a draft EIS until
28 the spring of 1993.
29 3. On April 15, 1993 the agencies announced publicly that the draft EIS
30 would be ready by June of 1993.
31 4. In June, 1993 the applicant was advised that the draft would be out in the
32 fall of 1993.
33 5. In August of 1993 the deadline was changed to October, 1994.
34 6. In August 1994 the deadline was changed to March 31, 1995.
35 7. On March 31, 1995 the deadline was moved to June, 1995.
36
37 WHEREAS, a representative of the forest service, who is involved in the preparation of
38 the EIS, has appeared at meetings related to this project wearing an anti -mining shirt. In
39 addition, a representative of the Wildlife division of the -Forest Service has made public
40 statements that this project will never receive approval. The record indicates that the
41 wildlife portion of the EIS has been studied three separate times during this process; and
42
43
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT — Page 1 of 14
44 WHEREAS, As with any such document, a consultant was hired to prepare the draft
45 document. We understand that the consultant hired to prepare the draft EIS, a company
46 with considerable expertise in the preparation of such documents for mining operations,
47 has written several letters to the joint lead agencies, the Forest Service and Department of
48 Ecology, complaining that the continual unwarranted delays in the release of a draft
49 document could damage said firm's reputation in the mining industry; and
50
51 WHEREAS, This concern by the consultant is warranted by the disclosure of facts
52 relating to a study of mining projects from April of 1988 to late 1993. During this period
53 the National Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management processed draft EIS
54 documents for 16 mining projects in an average of 13.5 months. There appears to be
55 nothing involved in the current proposal which could warrant a process three times as
56 long as the average; and
57
58 WHEREAS, The only difference between this project and those processed during the
59 above referenced project time frame is the presence of the Department of Ecology as co -
60 lead agency; and
61
62 WHEREAS, Okanogan county has a history of mining and resource development and
63 has determined that this project clearly fits within its customs and culture as defined by a
64 recent citizen report. The commissioners of Okanogan County believe that the time has
65 come to investigate why the officials that were entrusted with this project have totally
66 failed that trust. Based upon the facts set forth above the elected county officials of
67 Eastern Washington support such an investigation so that what has happened in this case
68 will not be repeated on public lands in other counties; and
69
70 WHEREAS, County officials recognize the need to protect the environment during
71 these types of projects and are directly responsible to the citizens who reside in eastern
72 Washington. We desire to see as little disruption as possible to the natural beauty of our
73 region. However, the Okanogan County Commissioners have reviewed the mitigation
74 proposed by the applicant and believe that they have provided sufficient safeguards to
75 protect the environment. The draft, which sets forth these mitigation proposals, should be
76 published immediately so a comment period can begin on these proposals;
77
78 NOW, THEREFORE, THE EASTERN DISTRICT MEETING OF THE
79 WASHINGTON STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES DOES RESOLVE AS
80 FOLLOWS:
81
82 SECTION 1. We fully support the request of the Okanogan County Commissioners for a
83 Congressional Inquiry into the performance of the U.S. Forest Service in the preparation
84 of the draft EIS for the Crown Jewel gold mining project in said county.
85
86 SECTION 2. We fully support the request of the Okanogan County Commissioners to
87 the Governor for a State Inquiry into the performance of the Department of Ecology in the
88 preparation of the draft EIS for the Crown Jewel gold mining project in said county.
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT — Page 2 of 14
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
SECTION 3. That these agencies should not use these investigations as an excuse to
further delay this project, but on the contrary, they should be instructed to devote the
necessary resources to publish the draft EIS by June 1995 and complete the permitting
process by the end of January 1996.
Dated this day of
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT — Page 3 of 14
1995.
Dave Schulz, Chair
Spencer Higby, member
Ed Thiele, member
p Ae
v
O
ia_ P rese nted To
-0, -AA
Dave
Washington State Department of Ecology
and
United States Forest Service
**RECORD OF ACHIEVEMENT**
Battle Mountain Gold / Crown jewel Project
DRAFT EIS DEADLINES
1. The first draft EIS deadline was in the initial publication notice as December 1992.
2. By the fall of 1992, BMGC was told not to expect a draft EIS until spring of 1993.
3. On April 15, 1993, the agencies publicly announced a draft EIS by Jena of 1 aaR
4. In June 1993, BMGC was told the draft would be in the fall of 1993.
5. In August 1993, the deadline was announced as October 1994.
6. In August 1994, the deadline was changed to March 31, 1995.
7. Now on March 31, 1995, the deadline has been moved to June 1995
OKANOGAN COUNTY BOARD OF CO ISS NERS
Edwin E. Thiele Spencer W. Higby
OW
OKANOGAN COUNTY
RESOLUTION 37-95
Five County Joint Resolution
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPOINTMENT OF TRUSTEE OF THE
NORTH CENTRAL REGIONAL LIBRARY
WEREAS, the Okanogan County Board of Commissioners, expressing confidence in the ability
and qualifications of John Whitecar, do hereby appoint him to fill the unexpired term of Shirley
Coffin for the years 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 (RCW 27.12.190), representing Okanogan
County on the Board of Trustees of the North Central Regional Library, comprised of Chelan,
Douglas, Grant, Ferry and Okanogan Counties. This term expires December 31, 1999.
DATED at Okanogan, Washington this JfLTday of/11
1995.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OKANOGAN, WA(SHINGTON/J
ATTEST: Dave Schulz, Chairman
Brenda J. White, Jerk of the Board
Spencer W. Higby, M
17, '-
Edwin E. Thiele, Member
DATED at IlenatcheeWashington this 3rd day of April 1995.
ATTEST:
_e_�
�the
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CHELAN COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Chaian
'.� .004Z
Member
ABSENT
Member Tal GREEN
EZA
DATED at, Washington this day of 1995.
1
ATTEST:
Clerk of the Coard `
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DOUGLAS COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Member
DATED at 91 at., Washington this I %� day of 1995.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FERRY COUNTY, WASHINGTON
t _
ATTES'f. t' ,� ' ' Chairman
Clerk of th&JBoard -? Me er
Member
DATED at Okanogan, Washington this day of 1995.
ATTEST:
/L �
Clerk df TBeard
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
GRANT C ASHINGTON