Lawyers for Arch Coal certainly seem to have had enough of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to delay making a decision on whether it will veto a Clean Water Act permit for the company’s Spruce No. 1 Mine.
Recall that a week ago, Department of Justice lawyers asked U.S. District Judge Robert C. Chambers to continue a stay of litigation over the Spruce Mine for another 3 weeks, until March 26. EPA said it needed still more time to decide if it would try to overrule the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which approved a permit for what would be the largest mountaintop removal mine in West Virginia history.
Well, yesterday, Arch Coal’s lawyers — my good friends Bob McLusky, Jim Snyder and Blair Garder — responded to EPA’s request for more time. They noted that the federal government had already received eight extensions of time and is now asking for a ninth.
The company lawyers asked Chambers to not allow any further extensions beyond that March 26 date, unless EPA by then has taken the next step in the formal process it must follow to veto the permit: Publishing a public notice announcing its intention to issue the veto.
They added:
Presumably, if USEPA initiates that further step, then the United States will seek an indefinite stay of the pending litigation. Mingo Logan will vigorously oppose any such request at that time. Contrary to the representations in the Corps’ motion for extension, USEPA has done little to resolve its concerns in dialogue with Mingo Logan. More important, if
USEPA’s concerns are valid and its proposed course of action lawful, both of which Mingo Logan disputes, USEPA may pursue remedies other than continued delay of this action in which USEPA is not a party. USEPA has declined to invoke or subject itself to this Court’s authority,
and the Court ought to decline further delays accommodating concerns that USEPA has not presented to the Court for adjudication.
Subscribe to the Coal Tattoo
I have to agree with Arch. This permit has been studied more that than Bio Chemistry. Its time for the EPA to either block it or get out of the way of progress.
Not to ruin the suspense for the soap opera crowd, but both Arch and the EPA already know how this episode ends.
EPA partially (and likely conditionally) approves the permit hence avoiding having to withstand an appeal of an outright denial.
Arch has to appeal through the admistrative appeal process which consumes time (cost of all this is a business expense that gets passed along to the electricity users eventually).
After this episode is over the story will continue for another year or two.
No one really needs to be mining coal that cannot be sold so getting or not getting the permit right now is not an issue.
The EPA has been buying time and knawing away on Arch to get whatever can be gotten.
Getting permits now is not for mining more coal, but for making the coal in the ground more valuable. Besides, future permits are going to be more difficult to get and more restrictive than ever.
Not to ruin the suspense for the soap-opera crowd, but both Arch and the EPA already know how this episode ends.
EPA partially (and likely conditionally) approves the permit hence avoiding having to withstand an appeal of an outright denial.
Arch has to appeal through the admistrative appeal process which consumes time (cost of all this is a business expense that gets passed along to the electricity users eventually).
After this episode is over the story will continue for another year or two.
No one really needs to be mining coal that cannot be sold so getting or not getting the permit right now is not an issue.
The EPA has been buying time and knawing away on Arch to get whatever can be gotten out of them.
Getting permits now is not for mining more coal, but for making the coal in the ground more valuable. Besides, future permits are going to be more difficult to obtain and have more restrictions than ever.
The outcome will be:
a partial approval (and likely conditional too) of the permit by EPA which is more difficult for Arch to challenge;
an appeal of the EPA decision by Arch — with intervenors from all sides; and
a temporary cessation or slowdown (to begin with) of mining at the mine site as a result of EPA action — but in reality mostly due to continued lack of demand for coal.
I very much hope that this doesn’t happen.
The Spruce mine is located in Logan county, WV.
In recent Logan Banner polls, the people of said county do not want MTR.
This decision comes from a county that depends on coal revenues I hope the courts pay attention to what the people wants.
In support of MTR and WV Senate Bill 235 / HB 3129, Creative Communities.
We all want to see our communities thrive and overcome the challenges of the twenty-first century, and we are all saddened any time we hear of a school closing. The enhancement of our communities will make them more attractive and encourage our young people to remain in our state and new residents may join us.
The encouragement of small businesses will provide an opportunity for our neighbors to have second jobs and our young people to earn some money while developing a work ethic. Entrepreneurs are more likely to flourish in such an environment and bring more employment and better paying jobs.
Now the issue is how to pay for it. Well, here are three ways without raising taxes:
1. Private public and private funding sources.
2. Stimulus funds.
3. A subsidy from the federal government.
No. 1 above is very easy. We already have organizations in place to help with this. No. 2 requires that these funds be spent for what the name suggests and not to support an inefficient government organization. Some may say that it is ok to spend stimulus funds to finance state government because the recession is nearly over. The declining tons-per-man in our coal fields, and the fact that the administration is NOW willing to help small business, tells me that our economic recovery will be slow. Better to bite the bullet and use these resources to build our economy and not to merely postpone the inevitable.
The subsidies mentioned in item No. 3 are usually associated with agriculture. There is the timber subsidy which started in the western states during the 80′s and subsequently spread to Kentucky and Virginia ( but not to us). Since the administration is determined to ban mountain top removal, and to destroy our coal market, it is only right that it pay a subsidy to West Virginia. The newly formed Congressional Coal Caucus should be of great help to us in this endeavor, however they will likely not be able to make any progress until after November’s election.
We support MTR but don’t let anyone try to order us around about it.
Shelby
Since Ken is not going to call you on it for obvious reasons, can you provide the information that says the people of Logan County are against MTR. If you are talking abot the poll in the Banner that people are against MTR on Bolt, that is an entirely different issue.
Shelby and Concerned Miner,
Those Logan Banner “polls” are not scientifically conducted public opinion surveys. They have no validity at all — just as the similar “polls” the Gazette does have no validity.
They are not random surveys of the population and don’t ask questions in a scientific manner intended to try to actually figure out where public opinion is on an issue.
It’s absurd to use them for anything other than public amusement.
Ken.
When will Chambers issue a ruling on the EPA’s request for a 3-week extension period?
Amsta,
I believe that Judge Chambers gave the U.S. government until Wednesday (March 17) to respond to this Arch Coal brief, so it would be unusual for him to rule before then.
Ken.