This just in from West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin’s press office:
Gov. Joe Manchin released this statement about his meeting tomorrow in Philadelphia with EPA officials regarding mining permit for Consolidated Coal Company:
“We will continue to pursue every chance we have to be upfront and to meet firsthand with the EPA officials who are making recommendations about mining in our state. With this meeting, we are seeking a clear and concise answer that will enable us to continue to provide the energy this nation needs and to create the good jobs West Virginians deserve.
“With this particular permit, it’s about more than just mining. It’s about post-mine land use and building opportunities for southern West Virginia with the King Coal Highway. I am attending the meeting tomorrow because we want a clear understanding of their intent, and we want to continue to build the base for this highway.â€
This particular permit, as the governor said, involves part of the plans for the King Coal Highway. As I’ve written before, EPA objected to this particular permit on Jan. 20, 2009, the day that President Barack Obama took office.
A copy of the permit objection letter is here and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit document is here. The permit calls for burying more than 8 miles of streams, including more than 2 miles of perennial streams and more than 4 miles of perennial streams.
Here’s what EPA said about its concerns:
A compensatory mitigation statement was included in the Public Notice and includes and approach of headwaters re-establishment, establishmen, and preservation, restoration and enhancement of degraded channels downstream from the proposed mine, restoration of temporarily impacted channels and treatment of water quality downstream from the proposed mine.
EPA has signficant concerns regarding the cumulative impacts of this project on the watershed, impairment of downstream water quality and the significant amounts of impacts to perennial stream channels. EPA does not believe that the proposed mitigation will adequately offset the persistent and permanent impacts to the aquatic ecosystem communities and functions.
In addition, EPA said in its letter that agency officials are also concerned that the CONSOL permit application “does not represent the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative.â€
The proposed post-mining land use for five miles of King Coal Highway requires that the applicant leave portions of the mine site to West Virginia Department of Highways (WVDOH) specifications for line and rough grade for the highway, and areas for utility right of way.
This leads our agency to question if all methods of avoidance and minimization are being incorporated due to the inability to return the areas to the area to approximate original contour.
…If WVDOH were undertaking the venture themselves, would the impacts be minimized through such methods as bridging the perennial channels, or the selection of an alignment with less aquatic impacts? Consideration of alternatives to minimize the impacts to downstream water quality should be evaluated …
Sure, his is a permit that would actually do something with the flattened land (build a road). But that does not remove the obligation under the Clean Water Act to avoid or minimize damage to streams.
I’m sure Gov. Manchin has reviewed the permit application in great detail so he can discuss it with EPA officials — Oh, wait, I forgot … As Manchin says whenever anybody asks him about Massey’s permits for the proposed site of the Coal River Mountain Wind Project, the governor doesn’t involve himself in permitting issues.
Subscribe to the Coal Tattoo
very interested to see the out come of this…thanks
Isn’t this a Consol of Kentucky permit? Didn’t WVDEP announce just yesterday that it was settling a whole bunch of Clean Water Act violations for $215,000? Is Governor Joe really going to advocate to EPA on behalf of a company that his own administration just acknowledged is polluting the water at its existing operations? Can he do that with a straight face? Is the $215,000 fine going to be used to finance the Governor’s travel budget for this trip? Can I write a simple declarative sentence, or must I write in question form?
[...] – » Mountaintop removal: Gov … Manchin goes to Philadelphia . See more here: Blogs @ The Charleston Gazette – » Mountaintop removal: Gov … Share and [...]
What would anyone expect from a governor owned by the coal interests.
EPA sent the letter BEFORE reviewing any information associated with this project. They sent the letter based on the 404 Public Notice. Did you explain that? You probably don’t even know that because you’re not a journalist.
How can the EPA come to any rational conclusions if they have not read the EID or the compensatory mitigation plan? Their decisions look arbitrary and capricious to me.
By the way, EPA will have the opportunity to review this information and comment, so perhaps they should have waited before demanding that the USACE deny the permit. Instead of asserting (in your typical facetious manner) that the Governor doesn’t know the specifics about this project, perhaps you should have been a journalist and covered the Joint Development Initiative MOA signing ceremony that the Governor attended in Williamson and the FHWA Public Workshop for the reevaluation of the King Coal Highway. Where was the Gazette? AP ran the story, yet the Gazette didn’t mention it. Why is that? Because it doesn’t fit in to your agenda.
It is clear that your supposed independent reporting on mountaintop mining over the years is a biased opinion and should be reserved to the Opinion Section of this Newspaper.
Unbiased,
Well, the public notice said the comment period for that permit from the Corps was Dec. 3, 2008, through Jan. 2, 2008.
I don’t know what documents EPA had at hand when it issued its Jan. 20 letter — but they did mention that the Public Notice contained a statement about the mitigation plan.
However, one thing is clear: The ONLY documents that are available to the public during the comment period are what’s included in the Public Notice. All of this other stuff — documents developed by the back-and-forth between the Corps and the applicant — are not made available to the public prior to the permit being issued.
To paraphrase you: How can the public come to any rationale decision — and provide intelligent comments — if it can’t see the Environmental Information Document and the entire mitigation plan prior to the permit being issued?
That’s one of the issues pending in front of Judge Chambers: Whether this constitutes adequate public notice and comment, to not have the entire record available for the public during the comment period.
No, I didn’t cover the signing ceremony you mention. But in my experience, there’s very little news at that sort of photo op.
I was not aware of the FHWA Public Workshop — are any documents from it available online and, if so, please provide the link and I’d be happy to review them.
Overall, though, you don’t really present any information that suggests that EPA’s concerns about this permit are not well-founded.
Ken.
Personally, I think that Joe Manchin should just give up governorship of the state and go directly into lobbying for the coal industry. Why should he be paid for two jobs? Either he is for the people of this state or the coal industry. He can’t be for both fairly. We could save tax dollars on keeping him like a king with his refurbished mansion and his state jet by booting him out of office, and let the coal industry pay his way. He has proven that over and over again. Let the coal industry pay him and give us a real governor!
He is for the people of WV, those of us that still have a job and want to keep it.
[...] A collection of new lawsuits has just been filed alleging serious flooding damage in one Mingo County community was caused by illegal strip-mining related to the King Coal Highway project that is so popular with Southern West Virginia political leaders. [...]