Small aggregate mining sites back in business

A ruling last week by the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission has cleared the way for so-called mom and pop aggregate mines to open up shop again outside the Willamette Valley.

The small mineral and aggregate mine sites were forced out of operation in October 2002 when a state Land Use Board of Appeals decision invalidated a Conditional Use Permit process for smaller, non-significant sites on farmland. The move, later affirmed by the state Court of Appeals, left county planners, miners and aggregate workers in a bind.

But on Friday, the CUP process was reinstated after the LCDC amended rules governing small mineral and aggregate mine sites.

While the move doesn't solve everyone's problems, it is expected to bring some relief to county planners, miners and aggregate workers who found themselves in a bind two years ago.

Before the 2002 decision, significant mining sites - those with more than two million tons of aggregate in the Willamette Valley or one million tons outside the valley - were approved through the state's Goal 5 process. Smaller, non-significant sites were OK'd by counties through the CUP process. When that process was invalidated, however, smaller sites - mostly outside the Willamette Valley - went out of operation.

As you get outside the valley, it is more common to see these smaller sites - what you'd call 'mom and pop' sites - than the mega- pits you see outside of Salem and Portland, said Bob Rindy, an LCDC policy development specialist. A lot of regions are dependent on small sites.

LCDC's new rules not only allow for the approval of non- significant aggregate mines on farmland, but also allow for the permitting of sites that have aggregate materials that do not meet the base rock standards of the Oregon Department of Transportation.

Construction costs for ODOT rose after the appellate ruling, Rindy said, because the department had to import concrete from other regions when working outside the Willamette Valley. Aggregate is an ingredient in concrete.

With hauling costs being what they are, the ability of someone to open up a small mine near a project in a more remote area of the state keeps down the cost, he said. ODOT was a big proponent (of LCDC's rule amendments). This will result in a more competitive price.

County planners in outlying regions were concerned that construction would come to a halt because of a lack of mines. With the amended rules, they'll be able to grant CUP's to smaller mines and get some projects back on track. In places like Malheur County, where a handful of highway projects are taking place, this is a big deal, said Carl Judy, chairman of the county Planning and Zoning Commission.

The state has quite a few projects going on out here, Judy said. With the process the way it was, we were at a standstill with opening up mining and gravel sites.

LCDC appointed a workgroup of farmland, mining and ecological representatives that met earlier this year to advise the department on its rule amendments. Because of a diverse array of interests, not every group got what it wanted - including the mining industry.

I'm not sure this fix really fixed the problem, said Scott Erickson, president of Quality Concrete in Woodburn. For things like cinder use, this didn't 100-percent solve all problems.

Erickson, who served on the workgroup, said the rule amendments create a draconian process and cater too greatly to farmland owners, who he said were over-represented on the panel.

The farming representatives on the board worked to keep mines off their land, Erickson said. He's perplexed by the groups' inability to see things on more similar terms.

Everybody's heart is in the right place, and we all want to protect our own industry, he said. But the irony is that we're both land-use-sensitive industries that should be working together. We have the same issues as small businessmen who are trying to keep development from wiping out our national resources. Our common goals are so overwhelmingly the same, but it seems that we fight each other all the time.

Nevertheless, the farming industry didn't get the results it wanted, either, Rindy said.

The farm bureau wished that these rules had been more restrictive, he said. They are understandably concerned that a lot of the best rock in this state is under the best farmland. The commission did agree to restrict mining on the best farm land, but they didn't go to the point of restricting all of it.

Rules governing aggregate mining could change again later this year. The Oregon Consensus Program, an operation that assists in resolving policy disputes, has convened a group at Portland State University that seeks a more holistic solution, said the group's moderator, Greg Wolf.

The group will meet through the end of 2004 and hopes to provide Gov. Ted Kulongoski with its findings at that time, Wolf said.

The League of Women Voters' Liz Frenkel, an environmental advocate who sat on the first workgroup and is also on Wolf's panel, said LCDC's rule amendments don't protect high-value soils enough. But she's cautiously optimistic that the rules will be amended again.

I'm discouraged and disappointed. But it's hard to know what's going to happen. Things could change after Wolf's panel announces its findings, she said.

The new aggregate mining rules don't frustrate everyone, however - they suit Malheur County just fine, Judy said.

We needed the ability to permit larger sites conditionally to expedite the process and we needed the ability to mine non-standard ODOT sites, said Judy, who also served on the workgroup. We're pretty happy.

Copyright 2004 Dolan Media Newswires
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.