Actually, this Hobet 45 permit does not contain “valley fills” in the sense that the industry defines them. I tried to make that clear in my story, but didn’t do a very good job, apparently.

I wrote:

The 600-acre Hobet 45 permit application sought federal Army Corps of Engineers approval to bury more than six miles of streams beneath a “mine-through area,” sediment ponds and stream crossings, according to agency documents. The company would produce about 2.1 million tons of coal annually for about six years.

http://wvgazette.com/News/MiningtheMountains/201001040446?page=2&build=cache

I’m sure that you, Casey, know what they mean by a “mine-through” area … but I doubt most readers of the newspaper do.

For those folks, it’s not strictly speaking a “valley fill” but the end result for the streams that are “mined through” is the same. They’re gone, disappeared.

My understanding is that the spoil produced here was originally about 180 million cubic yards, and EPA prompted a reduction of that number to 160 million cubic yards.

The spoil is going back on that “mine through” area and some amount — I don’t know how much — is going to be hauled to nearby mine sites for disposal. Neither EPA nor the Corps have released details yet on how all of that is going to happen.

I’d like to see those details, too, and I’ll pass them on as soon as I get them.

Ken.

This is an ongoing operation — it’s setup to operate a certain way.

(Unless the coal can be sold it cannot be mined.)

Coal productions and recovery rates are not meaningful in this regard.

P.S. I doubt if the bank yards volume is included in the permit materials although it is fairly easy to calculate from other information that is in the permit.

Good question. I don’t have a complete answer, because I don’t have all of the final permit documents yet. I apologize. I’m trying to get them and if I do, and they’re not too big, I’ll post them.

The initial Corps permit public notice, http://www.lrh.usace.army.mil/_kd/Items/actions.cfm?action=Show&item_id=15034&destination=ShowItem refers to 2.1 million tons of annual coal production for a period of 6 years.

The EPA letter to the Corps, released yesterday, http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/pdf/Hobet_Jan_5_2010_letter.pdf refers to allowing extraction of 91 percent of the coal …

I don’t have other numbers on this at this time. Sorry.

Ken.

Ken.

All the discussions and exchanges with the EPA would not neccessarily be part of the permitting process — there had to be a lot of understanding and agreement has to what should be in the final document — attorney-client previleged stuff.

I may be wrong about that, but I don’t think so.

It would cost a hell of a lot more than the coal is worth if the company just went “gung-ho” and got it anyway. Companies have to have mine plans before they start a permit that they have to conform with as they go. That doesn’t even mention the whole big lawsuit Hobet has had against them for piddly environmental stuff. The fines would be certain if they went on through and got all the coal. Nobody needs to figure out how much it would costs cause it would costs a lot more than it’s worth.

I’m waiting now to get a copy of the final permit documents from the Corps. My understanding is that in this instance, some amount of the spoil is being transported off that permit area to a nearby permit area that has more room for backstack.

I’ll try to answer more about this as the permit documents become available.

Ken.

Perhaps someone has already figured out how much the potential (but by no means certain) fine would cost to get that last 9% of coal.

Once the permit is un-contested then discussions and exchanges between the company and the agencies will be available through a Freedom of Information Act request — a year from now.

If the permit issuance is contested, some of those materials would be obtainable through discovery and other legal actions.

There’s no doubt that mining methods will be more costly — shorter mine faces would be worked and there maybe spoil rehandling both expensive and time consuming.

Also, the costs of not having the permit and having to undergo the negotiations by themselves are a lot.

Those who actually know are the mine engineers and managers and I’m very sure this was not a fun exercise for them or for the agencies — it’s more than a lot of work to squeeze an operation this tightly.

This is especially difficult with the coal market being depressed and likelihood of flucuating coal prices.

P.S. Permits can always be modified and I’m sure some allowance was made if this becomes necessary albeit everyone involved would pray it does not.

More expensive hauling of rock to place spoil elsewhere? Any idea of the increased cost?