The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20211115_W-SnowdonNovember 15, 2021 Good evening Mining Commission. I want to personally thank each of you for making the trip to Gaston County. Welcome. My name is Warren Snowdon and our family owns 5 Pines Farm at 611 Aderholdt Road. We are a certified tree farm and a 4th generation family farm of nearly 200 acres. We are a farm that sells carbon credits on the National Carbon Exchange for our trees and have a rich history of recognition for conservation efforts on our land. Yes, we are for the environment, that's why we have particular concern about this mining permit application. For reference, (attached handout) we are located adjacent to the east pit and share 1,007' of property line to the south, 3,004' shared property line to the west along a pristine spring fed branch, 3,164' to the north along Beaverdam Creek. That's a total of 7,175' of shared property line or about 1.3 miles, with most of it being the center line of creeks. Today these creeks are clear, pristine, healthy. We want to keep them this way. We as humans, we all need three things to survive — clean water, clean air, and food. This proposed project will impact all of those vital concerns to the public and to our farm and we have grave concerns about this large-scale hard rock mining operation. Included in the mining application is Piedmont Lithium's HDR dated January 25, 2019 Technical Memorandum — Aquifer Test. I'm sure you, like me, read the conclusion recommending additional testing noting the Hydrology report dated July 2, 2019 was based on an aquifer test conducted in 2018 (appendix H). All these reports are based on a smaller mining footprint which today has nearly doubled in size. As noted in this report, it is clear since 2019 Piedmont has known that there would be offsite impacts to drinking wells. As members of the Mining Commission, you know that data is critical to accuracy of the model and inaccurate data produces inaccurate models. Let me provide you with a few excerpts from that report that clearly demonstrate impact to the public — specifically to me. Note that year 1 impacts are across the pristine branch onto our property which is nearly 500' offsite. Year 2 the water impacts of this proposed mine are over 1,000' away from the east pit, across Aderholdt Road. By year 5, our well is drawn down 15-21' and our spring fed pond is dry. You'll note that more than 35 off -site neighboring drinking wells not owned by Piedmont that are outside the mine area are impacted. By year 10, the contours for 15-21' draw down are clearly well across Aderholdt Road. By year 13, the storyline continues to get worse with our property continuing to be impacted onto our east parcel across Aderholdt Road. Over the life of Piedmont Lithium's 20 year mine, never do we get our drinking water back! Never! And we have never once been contacted to discuss these known impacts to our water. How is that being a responsible and good neighbor? But back to the data, it should be pointed out that our family's drinking well is not even shown on the model submitted in the Appendix H to the application. Neither is the Young's well, or the Carpenter's well, nor the Frank's well, nor the Patterson's, nor the Carpenters, nor Hastings. How many other critical drinking wells for our citizens were not included in Piedmont Lithium's application submittal? It should reason that in the absence of municipal water in this area, every dwelling should have at least one operable potable water well, many have more. Many new homes have been constructed in the area since 2018 and the data Piedmont Lithium is using for all their models included is simply not accurate. A new complete hydrology report including a cone of depression by an independent reputable firm must be completed to the benefit of all the surrounding citizens, one that includes all onsite and offsite aquifers before you even consider this mining application. Any review or decision of this application presented as fact by Piedmont Lithium would be a complete disservice to this commission, our state, and our local citizenry as it is simply not accurate or based on true and complete data. As mentioned, my family shares the centerline of the unnamed branch with Piedmont along our western property line. The Catawba River Keepers and others have surveyed that creek finding pristine water and also ideal natural habitat. We will share 2,900' along a babbling unnamed branch along our western property line adjacent to the east mine. At the north end of our property on both banks is a flat floodplain that often holds water. The report references onsite wetlands #2 and #4-8 will remain dry through 20 years and maybe permanently. Our land is immediately adjacent to wetland #2 and mirrors it with the same topography. How can Piedmont submit an application to this commission without even considering the offsite impacts to our immediately adjacent wetlands that will definitely be impacted and possibly even going dry? What about our spring fed pond? How will PL protect our pond from going dry? We are also very concerned about Beaverdam Creek. We will be the first property impacted downstream of Piedmont's discharge. Today even without a 11500 acre pit mine that will have to be dewatered following rainfall, after it rains Beaverdam Creek rises roughly 10' to overflow its banks and floods our planted field with several feet of water. What will happen when Piedmont Lithium decides to discharge their own water after a rain event? The mining commission is well aware that one inch of rain collected on one acre of land equals 27,154 gallons. If we multiply that out with a 1,500 acre mine and the average rainfall in our area of 47.5 inches, that's almost 2 billion, yes 2 billion gallons annually, that Piedmont will have to release annually into Beaverdam Creek past our property. For reference, the city of Gastonia Long Creek WWTP that discharges into the South Fork River, only treats 5 billion gallons annually. What type of protections will I have that Piedmont Lithium will properly treat and discharge clean water into the creek? Remember, I own to the centerline of the creek so how are they going to keep 2 billion gallons of water on their side of the creek? What chemicals and residuals will end up in my planted fields and how will that impact the cows and milk fed with the silage out of that bottomland? I can't live without clean air, nor can my neighbors. In speaking with NC Air Permits department, there was no air permit included with this miningapplication with the only assumption it would be included with th e air permit for the pp the chemistry plant. Our land is immediately to the east of the east mine pit and the prevailing winds are often west to east. How can the dust from b lasting, crushing,, movement of the materials on and off the conveyors not be addressed? Our are crops for silage for GarMac Dairy. What ha w p used happens when our fields and crops receive dust which ends up in the dairy cows and then in the milk for school children across area? Has that impact been taken into consideration to rev our what study was presented that addresses off site air/dust impacts? I believe the Commission deserves to understand ALL the impacts of this mine, including air/dust, before any serious consideration of this application. pp on. Piedmont Lithium's application should be denied based on your own Department's criteria that such an operation will "#2) have undulyadverse effects on potable groundwater supplies and our wildlife, or fresh water #3) that the operation will violate standards of air quality, surface water quality, or groundwater quality that have been promulgated by the Department and #4) that the operation will constitute a direct and substantial physical hazard to public health and safety or to a neighboring dwelling house." Again, NC Mining Commission we thank you for your time this evening as the scope and scale of this proposed mine is significant and impactful to our family and our neighbors. This is not a typical small scale aggregate mine like you might regularly see in our state. Knowing that we have roughly 1,100 citizens per square mile who call this area of Gaston County their home, I'd therefore request that much more work and due diligence needs to take place around this issue of water quality and quantity that Piedmont Lithium is proposing. I'd request that this NC Mining Commission require Piedmont Lithium to complete a larger definitive hydrology impact study before any mining permit is considered and that this Mining Commission and Gaston County complete a separate independent definitive hydrology impact study and compare the findings. It should also speak to the impact of wells not only by the dewatering of the mine, but also the impacts from the blasting activities. There has to be more investment by Piedmont Lithium and others on behalf of the citizens in this area to ensure the safety of the citizens and the environment. Thank you for your time and commitment to adhere to your NC Mining co mmission mission statement which is "to protect the environment and citizens. I would now like to request my comments be made part of the public record. Thank you. Warren Snowdon 5 Pines Farm, LLC 611 Aderholdt Road 704.965.1178 lt(2f4v (=3 rb Fpw Q um • N�n.pv N11• .. p4n-Y 7 Pry r )41 Fp CNwas Rw it DoY w {pi � 4rwure Y GROUNDWATER YODEL DOMAIN T' -C1 � .r i�a C.* fiYCt PIEDMONT �4A r4� V' 1h'.41 Viw �%N ��rrM Otiea .- r Ss� M Is Y�•�v.r��H�l �•�l�wM�R • 1 P+i+MM .•.�Mr. �.LL. Yr tw.ts�o4.. __ —.. . 1 • 1 Does not include our shared branch along our western prop line Ya.w s , .coc . .. .q. P L, UW1 ,.mas.[• WS wl m •:.a.. ,h •w..i. %L 00- fs.w ev w. w, d.•..rw f ircWND Q�r...., C3 R 1\\n-wf P.. • 'nlfl (qM V.uYYMtM.h IY•w..•m.. rn Ahn . f.•.A,rrw L er«.•as.. _n.. kwva Tn(uWT 8.r..wl.. L,w fi r Cu.A.v.t. ,�. �...... .. •.� ram.... LOCATION OF STREAM REACHES T PIEDMONT lb 2 8fiy�8 6 ^ �o '40cc ,4Ui A2 832 8374 $1 .. C,:. ,BZJ� 61$t34g 2,p C M., _0 a 754 7 i,� ?4p T53.738 NCO O1 .l �M .,� PCI w4J (..a1Y. aw lt«NO C=) CV"".. Q aL (>Na..twl J.V��fM 5 Pines Farm _Wetlands �.. •w r �..r. ?? NEW ONMWbO r1NUl & T PIEDMONT 3 Inaccurate " Data - s� ' Missing h d t� Wells • 111)o M. MA v.r r w�.l • f..Y NKV w l yv. • 1 F,l Q W.30 OUM.. • Q ]r. .•9'M/ ,Aq • Nc.P.>•M.h .nc.n.+\.�1 [>.p«. 771rH Q $mlr.wtl M.11.0 W .4M • • r. w>.... r. t r.� w. L •�f i... �•�....errres.r • 'P11 ^� N. SITE AND RECEPTOR WELL S LOCATION MAP �. i/ 1.NMf f.f R09U Wham T qr - - FEZ - PIEDMONT fw.w M ia• Yr n [s• r... np..p. w�..ese c {Kwq[ ) 0 • • • re /1 f 7- - -: 01WAk U6060M •V4 PVmec Pts QSvn.ssrd Wed Ps Ans r r • 14MAPWF .VrN • MODEL PREDICTED DRAWDOWN FROM DEWATERING YEAR 1 T s....'4.,, Nsrt . ur.x PIEDMONT FN f....r >" 1 , �/•�f.M1y1b'� �1C 1ti 111►': M I ', a�alAlMY 5 Pines Lewd =� a � • Aw.pa wr. n � ;' Y -,4 I • ,k.fNCM 6rrFYY Wrn '— ! �+ . - ffliYVr MODEL nstEalcTEo opawooww ..� -. FROM 6EWATERINf, YEARS 14-I0 Ss.w Yrn lr?.as,l+I• �aq tr..v ♦bra.. r`�ri uv var PIEDMONT FN 5 • 5 Pines t•9wa Farm O>..., .` 111 .. tiA� •1• - 1 1 �� •J•nI•••tl Yn•• 1'w.Yr • 1 • 4•t K•u was f l•weM f+nw•r W.rl • llWIXt PREDICTED DRAWDOWN FROM DEWATERING YEAR 13 1 rr.•^+•«••�� •. u:f PIEDMONT FN • 5 Pines Farm k _ I x jfl trwr. MOOEI PREDICTED DRAYfDGVM FROM DEWMTERWO YEARS 0.10 • PIEDMONT :.�rM�M. a.•ri.....::4. :rr rw. tYI�.1. r 3 :5 Pines L.ynd F—I Farm QL• •4Nb C1� QYnINtlY�l R.4� • "Mtn•c. wK. " MODfI PRE DtCTEDDRAWOOWN FROM DEWATERING YEAR ] T PIEDfAON" Z PP 6v�iX i�- TCom S v It1tS Fi42i'`'! it 5 Pines ' - Farm L•ynd �/ I`' • b...b Mb �� •: � r..ow.. rti. aarr r• • , MOM POWDICM ORAVADOM • ��.'� •o�F�-n � - PIEDMONT I—