The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) says the decision to subject Intrepid Potash Inc.’s HB Solar Mine Project in the Carlsbad area to a lengthy environmental impact statement (EIS) had nothing to do with the comments entered about the project by five oil and gas companies, conflicting with earlier assertions by the company (GM Jan. 12, p. 11). “This decision was not reached because of some comments provided by an oil and gas company,” Hans Stuart, spokesman for the state BLM office, told Green Markets.
Stuart reported that while it was working on an environmental assessment (EA) in the last six months, BLM warned Intrepid that the extent of work could involve an EIS. “They’ve been on notice for quite some time that the EIS may be required because of the scope of the project,” Stuart said. He said the BLM had completed 50 percent of the EA when it concluded that more studies were needed about the environmental impacts of solution mining due to potential impacts on fresh water aquifers, surface land use impacts, surface features resulting from subsidence, and concurrent development of oil and gas operations, as well as to human health and safety both above and below ground.
The proposed Intrepid project would encompass a total area of 45,190 acres, of which 38,330 acres are public lands. The proposed underground flood zone affects 4,180 acres and the disturbed surface area is about 807 acres, with 520 acres devoted to evaporation ponds and 186 acres for new pipelines and haul roads. In addition to approval of the mine plan, the BLM would be considering about 12 miles of new rights-of-way and 40 miles of new pipelines.
Stuart said Intrepid aims to dissolve columns remaining in the worked-out Eddy underground potash mine by injecting a saturated brine solution at the rate of 2.8 million gallons per day, and then pump the solution back up into the ponds. “These are activities not previously used in the area,” Stuart stated, noting that the existing Secretarial Order for the Secretary’s Potash Area (SPA) has not considered this methodology for mining and its effect on concurrent development by the oil and gas industry. BLM’s Carlsbad office said a joint comment from five oil and gas companies was received from their attorney on Nov. 6, the last day of the comment period. “They weren’t submitted after the deadline (as Intrepid has implied),” Craig Cranston, lead mining engineer, reported. He said this was the only written comment, although verbal statements were received during two public meetings in Carlsbad in September, where Intrepid presented the technical aspects of the project and answered questions.
Intrepid, which insists that potash solution mining is a widely used and accepted technology, had maintained that BLM received no response during the 30-day comment period established after the two public meetings, and that the oil and gas company “thereafter submitted objections based on alleged environmental impacts.”
Intrepid opted not to identify the oil and gas company when contacted recently. However, Cranston identified five companies, represented by Artesia attorney Mary Lynn Bogle, as Devon Energy Production Co., Oklahoma City; Yates Petroleum Corp. of Artesia; Bass Enterprises Production Co. of Houston; Plains Exploration and Production Co., Houston; and Occidental Petroleum Co., Los Angeles.
Intrepid has reason to fear the reprisal of oil and gas companies. According to its SEC filings, it said that as of June 30, 2008, it has protested approximately 24 additional APDs (application permits to drill) in the Potash Area on or near its BLM and State of New Mexico potash leases that have been submitted by various oil and gas operators. It said at the time that these protests did not involve any claims against Intrepid. Intrepid said the proposed drilling presents an unacceptable safety hazard to its underground potash operations.
In particular, Intrepid said it had recently intervened in a proceeding before the New Mexico Oil Conservation Division in support of the division’s denial of the APD for the Laguna State “16” Well No. 2, proposed by Fasken Oil & Ranch Ltd., which would be located on state lands approximately half a mile from the workings of the Intrepid’s North Mine.