THE LIMITED ROLE OF GEOLOGY IN SITING SILICA SAND MINES IN NORTH-CENTRAL ILLINOIS: LESSONS LEARNED

The extraction of geologic resources requires the expertise of geoscientists to determine where resources are located, whether they are recoverable, and how best to extract them. The equally important questions of whether mining or drilling is appropriate in a given location and, if so, how to minimize the environmental impact also involve questions within the expertise of geoscientists; however, the inclusion of geoscience perspectives in these areas may not be required or requested. In such cases, geoscientists should consider seeking inclusion by contacting local governing authorities as well as proponents and opponents.

In Illinois, the permitting process for an “aggregate mine” (which includes all surface mines for any minerals other than coal) requires application to the local governing body (county or city) for zoning approval followed by application to the state Department of Mines and Minerals for approval of a mine reclamation plan. Other government agencies may need to be consulted regarding threatened and endangered species, wetlands, and wastewater discharge. Although the local zoning board and/or the city or county board may have little technical expertise on which to base their decision, only the local governing body has broad authority to approve, modify, or deny the request to mine.

Case studies of two recently proposed mines located less than three miles apart will be used to illustrate the process. The two proposed mines will extract “silica sand” from the St. Peter Sandstone in LaSalle County in north-central Illinois; the sand will be refined and marketed as “frac sand.” Both mines were proposed for properties currently zoned as agricultural. One of the mines applied for a special use variance from the county while the other mine applied for annexation to a small town. In each case, adjacent residents organized in opposition and hired legal counsel. Extended hearings were held where proponents and opponents presented their cases to the local zoning boards. In the first case, a geologist hired by the proponents presented a report and testified on a broad range of topics regarding the proposal. In the second case, a geologist hired by the opponents testified regarding the nature of the overburden. In neither instance did the local board have its own experts evaluate the merits of the project.