Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mining Tailings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill to update tailings law spotlights independent review panels and public safety
Summary
HB 699 would make targeted changes to Montana's 2015 tailings law (SB 409), including clarifications on independent review panels (IRPs) and an exclusion for facilities under 50 acre‑feet. Industry and conservation groups largely supported the changes; DEQ also endorsed the bill.
Representative Bill Mercer opened House Bill 699 by describing the 2015 statute (Senate Bill 409) as an innovative framework for managing tailings storage facilities and said experience over the past decade revealed areas for improvement.
Mark Thompson of Montana Resources described technical aspects of tailings storage, including slurry management, embankment containment, and the need to protect against flood and seismic loads. He said the bill refines the definition of regulated tailings facilities and retains an exclusion for small facilities that store 50 acre‑feet or less, which he said was modeled on Montana's dam safety threshold.
Support for HB 699 was broad: Betsy Baxter (Northern Plains Resource Council) and Derf Johnson (MEIC) said the bill modestly improves oversight, expanding IRP coverage to additional tailings technologies and emphasizing on‑site IRP inspections and failure‑modes analysis. Industry representatives, including Matt Vincent and Heather McDowell (SVP legal, Stillwater), said Montana's IRP framework has been a global model and that modest changes will help attract qualified panelists and strengthen oversight without reducing required expertise.
DEQ's Dan Walsh testified the agency supports HB 699, saying it improves clarity and protectiveness for tailings impoundments regulated under the Metal Mine Reclamation Act. Questions focused on technical thresholds, IRP member qualifications, and the availability of qualified experts as the Global Tailings Standard increases global demand for panelists.
After an extended series of proponents and informational testimony, Representative Mercer closed the hearing; there were no opponents recorded in the room during the hearing.
