Clarification from LSP's Johanna, with steps we still need to do

Bonita, Jane, and all (please forward to the rest of your list),   I just want to clarify that the EQB vote yesterday was specific to one company's project only. The EQB (Environmental Quality Board) will be the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the mines proposed by Minnesota Sands, LLC. This includes 11 proposed mines in 3 counties, Winona, Fillmore, and Houston, and the EQB is taking over this EIS because the counties asked them to. We don't know what will happen if other cases come up of a single company wanting to mine in more than one county. As Jane mentioned, the EQB also discussed the final report on the silica sand issue, prepared by EQB staff. The report is available online here: http://www.eqb.state.mn.us/resource.html?Id=33124. It does note many areas where further research is needed, but unfortunately, there aren't any requirements built in for that research to actually be done. So, yes, we absolutely need to keep telling Governor Dayton and the legislature that we need (1) a statewide moratorium, to provide time for (2) in-depth state level research and study (such as a GEIS) which will be used to develop (3) strong state-level regulations. Johanna Rupprecht Policy Organizer Land Stewardship Project Lewiston, MN 507-523-3366 jrupprecht@landstewardshipproject.org Date: Thursday, March 21, 2013 4:13 PM Subject: Fw: Dayton, moratorium, EQB Dear Friends and Neighbors,   Jane's summary contains points we can use in writing our Fillmore County Commissioners, and tells why the EIS is required. Wishing you well, Bonita Dear Bonita and all, I attended the meeting of the Environmental Quality Board  (EQB)  yesterday. They voted to be the advisory/ regulatory board for sand mining companies that work in more than one county. They presented a preliminary study of silica sand mining to serve as  basis for future regulation.  They repeatedly said and wrote in the study that there were at least 8 major areas where there just had not been enough research or research-gathering to do proper regulating.  This means they need at least a year's moratorium to do this detailed research. This study that we saw should be available to the public by calling Bob Patton and the MN Pollution Control Agency.  I returned home that evening only to discover that Gov. Dayton has decided to vote against a moratorium! We must inform him (and the legislature) that a year's moratorium is essential for proper study and consequent regulation of this new industry. (The EQB  agreed that silica mining was hugely different from construction sand mining.) -- Jane Skinner Peck Adjunct Professor,  Dance and Theater Dept.  Winona State University JPeck@winona.edu revels@janepeck.com