Skip to main content

Idaho Mining Company Agrees to Pay $1.4 Million Penalty

WASHINGTON – The Department of Justice and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that P4 Production LLC, a mining and phosphorus processing company wholly-owned by Monsanto and operating near Soda Springs in southeast Idaho, has agreed to pay a $1.4 million civil penalty for alleged Clean Water Act violations at its South Rasmussen Mine. In addition to the penalty, P4 will spend an estimated $875,000 on monitoring and to prevent pollutants from entering local waters.

“The Justice Department and the EPA are committed to enforcing the Clean Water Act to reduce pollution from mining and mineral processing operations,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice. “Clean water is essential for human health, as well as for healthy livestock, fish and wildlife. Today’s settlement agreement will make Idaho’s waters cleaner by preventing selenium and other hazardous pollutants generated by P4’s mining operations from entering local creeks and wetlands.”

“Today’s settlement resolves a long-standing hazard to fish, wildlife and the environment in southeast Idaho,” said Edward Kowalski, director for EPA's Seattle Office of Enforcement and Compliance. “Selenium pollution is a serious problem in this part Idaho, and this enforcement action by EPA is one part of the long-term effort to clean up the phosphate patch.”

According to the complaint, P4 allegedly discharged wastewater containing high concentrations of selenium and heavy metals from a waste rock dump at the mine without a required permit. Further, P4’s unpermitted discharges - which contained selenium levels far above Idaho’s state water quality standards – allegedly polluted a nearby wetland and an unnamed tributary of Sheep Creek, as well as downstream waters that drain to the Snake River.

Phosphate mines in the area, including the South Rasmussen Mine, are known to contain high levels of selenium in their waste rock. Rainwater and weathering allow the selenium to leach from the waste rock piles and enter nearby surface water. Sheep, horse and cattle deaths in southeast Idaho have been linked to selenium contamination of plants. Selenium in high concentrations can be toxic to a variety of fish and wildlife and is also known to bio-accumulate, and affect organisms in the aquatic food chain. Monsanto uses phosphate from the South Rasmussen Mine to manufacture Roundup.

Under the terms of the consent decree, P4 will pay the U.S. $1.4 million and it agrees to:

Continue collecting selenium-contaminated leachate from the waste rock pile and prevent leachate from entering nearby creeks and wetlands until such time as the company either obtains an National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit, or it undertakes a restoration of the waste rock dump under another state or federal order.

Perform downstream monitoring for a period of five years to ensure that selenium-contaminated water is no longer leaving the site.

The settlement is part of EPA’s enforcement initiative to reduce pollution from mining and mineral processing operations. Mining and mineral processing facilities generate more toxic and hazardous waste than any other industrial sector, waste that when not properly managed, can impact surrounding communities and pose a serious risk to public health and the environment. To reduce these risks, EPA is working to ensure mining and mineral processing industry compliance with environmental laws.

The settlement was lodged today in the U.S. District Court of Idaho. There will be a 30-day public comment period during which the United States will accept comments on the settlements before it is presented to the court for entry.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...