A proposed surface mine expansion in Thurston County (projects 2024104732 and 2023103604) deserves closer public attention — not only for what it is, but for where it is proposed.
This is not a minor or temporary project. The proposal would expand existing mining operations into a floodplain near the Skookumchuck River, including excavation below the water table. The scale and design of the project suggest that mining in this area could continue for many years, potentially decades.
That means long-term industrial activity in a setting that is inherently dynamic and environmentally sensitive.
The location raises serious concerns. The site sits within a mapped floodplain and is directly connected to the Skookumchuck River, surrounding wetlands and shallow groundwater.
Nearby homes rely on private wells. In this type of system, groundwater and surface water are not separate — they are interconnected. If contamination occurs, it is unlikely to remain confined to the project site.
Flooding is also a key factor. The applicant’s own materials acknowledge complex flood behavior in the area, including flow patterns observed during major storm events. While the proposal relies on modeling to suggest minimal impact, real-world flood conditions can behave unpredictably, particularly in areas where water already moves across the landscape.
Equally concerning is that key elements of the review process are not yet complete. The project still requires federal Endangered Species Act coordination, and it involves changes to mapped floodplain conditions that require FEMA review.
Approving a project of this scale before those processes are fully resolved raises questions about whether the full risk has been adequately evaluated.
This is also not a new operation. It is an expansion of an existing mine with a documented compliance history that includes spills, monitoring deficiencies and outdated management plans. When a proposal relies heavily on future compliance and monitoring to prevent harm, past performance becomes highly relevant.
This issue is not about being “for” or “against” mining. It is about whether this specific location — with flood risk, shallow groundwater, proximity to the river and nearby homes — is appropriate for expanded industrial activity.
Decisions like this shape a community for years to come. They affect water quality, public safety, property values and quality of life. When uncertainty remains at this scale, and when the potential consequences extend beyond a single property, the standard for approval should be high.
At a minimum, this proposal warrants deeper scrutiny and a fully resolved review process before any decision is made. This project is still open for public comment.
Dr. Megan M. Schill
Centralia
