EPA to deny permit to infamous coal mine

By Joe Byrne
Saturday, October 17th, 2009 -- 5:33 pm
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

MTNTOP1 I091016203916 EPA to deny permit to infamous coal mineOne of the largest mountaintop removal projects in the country was warned of an upcoming permit veto Friday by the Environmental Protection Agency. A letter from the EPA's regional administrator William Early to the Army Corps of Engineers outlined the agency's concerns and concluded that there is “a high potential for downstream water quality excursions under current mining and valley fill practices." The veto, if it goes through, represents a big victory for conservation activists in West Virginia, who have rarely seen the EPA step in when it comes to pollution from mountaintop mining.

Spruce No. 1 mine, managed by Mingo Logan Coal Co., is probably the most monitored mine in the U.S., having gone through an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers. Located in Logan County, in the heart of the coal-mining Appalachians, the Spruce Mine “as currently configured would bury more than seven miles of streams,” according to the EPA's assessment.

The EPA's decision was based on the extensive deterioration of the watersheds, and especially the stream valleys, associated with the Spruce Mine. According to Ken Ward Jr. of the Charleston Gazette, “a full third of the streams in the Little Coal watershed are impaired and nearly as much of the Coal is impaired,” due to the mining operations going on there.

“Similar data from nearby streams associated with existing mining operations strongly suggest that construction of the Spruce No. 1 mine has potential to cause or contribute to impairments downstream,” Early states in the letter.

Early's letter gives the Corps and Mingo Logan Coal two weeks to respond before the agency kicks off a public-comment period, the next step in the legal process for the EPA to overrule the corps' decision to grant the Spruce Mine permit.

Story continues below...

Environmentalists have been fighting the Spruce Mine operation for more than ten years. The proposal in 1998 for a 3,110-acre strip mine came from Arch Coal Co., and would have buried ten miles of stream valleys. That permit was blocked by the district court, and the parcel of land was shifted to a non-union subsidiary, Mingo Logan Coal.

The use of this type of veto has been exceedingly rare since it was created with the Clean Water Act of 1972. Though 80,000 proposals are processed annually, only 12 permits in 37 years have ever been denied. The EPA's decision against Spruce Mine and the Mingo Logan Coal Co. is part of the Obama administration's campaign to minimize environmental degradation caused by mountaintop removal practices.

Story comments are below...
  • crackbaby
    Here is a very real difference between the pro-pollution republican trash that ran this country for so long and the new Obama Administration. A huge difference that makes a big impact.

    Way to Go, O!

    cb
  • rexozone
    At last, the agency again lives up to its name after eight long years of being an oxymoron like, Clear Skies, No Child Left Behind, etc.
    Maybe we stand a chance against the tide of global warming and the outrageous tide of ignorance manufactured by companies profiting from false information...like the insurance companies, the energy producers, Phillip Morris and the oil magnates who stifle scientific research and rewrite history.
    Anathema to knowledge the right wing must pay for the mind melt they attempted.
  • dennycrane
    I know the "residents" here will have their chewin' backy and banjo string allowances cut, but what a statement by the EPA after 8 years of neglect.
  • frostfire451
    How stupid can you be!! Lights are not shining in the city becouse of the lovley idea of green. How often do you see natural green things? you think that everything comes from the sun and you live with asphalt and concrete.
  • moi2cents
    Yeah! Those poor ol' coal companies! They've been helpin the workin man for....evar! Just look at how rich all those coal workers are, shoot! Some of 'em even have trucks still. And the lovely country-side, whereof my man here speaks.....you have no idea. The streams are crystal clear, (and sometimes a little orangey) and nary a bug or fish to aggravate ya.
    Besides, it's an educational treasure-trove, being one of the best places on the planet to study acid sulfate soils.
    frostfire, there are way more responsible ways of making both energy and money...like not simultaneously raping 1)your workers 2)their environs 3)the rest of the country (who wind up having to pay for the staggering cost of cleaning up after). You sound like the chicken who wants to help the farmer sharpen up his axe. What ever gave you the idea that coal companies were the friend of anyone but themselves?
  • woodgas
    frostfire, everything does come from the sun, without the sun there would be nothing here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7OBTiyMoSE
  • bobby0679
    frostfire, you are a stupid fuckuni morn dude.
  • turnip
    It's no longer Global Warming, it's Climate Change. . . because the science is NOT in consensus outside of the UN shills, and the data no longer will support the whole 'theory'.
  • moi2cents
    You don't, unsurprisingly, sound like a person who's spent any time in any reputable university on THIS planet.
    But you're right, there are probably a few "scientists" at Bob Jones U who aren't convinced.
    So, you're precisely correct. If there's a dissenter, never mind the aluminum foil hat, we haven't achieved concensus. Virtual unanimity does not mean the same thing as concensus.
  • LumberJock
    Did you turnip your nose at education?
  • Talis13
    Turnip what an apt name you have.
    Is ignorance the new repube kewl?
  • dennycrane
    turnip

    Did you fall off of a "turnip" truck or a "coal" truck?
  • sparkey
    What happened? Did the coal company not pay a big enough bribe to the the EPA to look the other way? Sounds like the EPA made good on it's threat when they said; "pay us what we demand or else...".
  • Joe Magarac
    The old leftist grievance against capitalism was about who owned the means of production.

    The modern leftist grievance against capitalism is that the means of production exist at all.
  • moi2cents
    Wrong on both counts.
    It's never been about ownership. It's always been about irresponsibility. The concern is with the owners who fail to protect workers, the environment, etc.
    Oftentimes, negative externalities (costs associated with health care for those who have been sickened because corporations are too cheap to provide adequate workplace protections, cost associated with environmental degradation, etc.) are ignored by corporations. That puts the cost of dealing with all these things right back on taxpayers.
    This isn't a "leftist" v. "rightist" issue. It's more like common courtesy.
    If you ruin your own things, that's your choice. But when sicken people and poison ground water; when you render soil and water unfit for production or consumption, should that be paid for by everyone else so that a particular company can profit?
    Funny idea of justice you have.
  • moi2cents
    I guess if you had a house on a nice plot of land with a stream, you'd be fine with a coal company filling the upstream valley with mining spoils. You'd welcome the acid mine drainage.
    You'd be fine with that happening to your parents, after they'd spent a lifetime working for the mining company.
    If you wouldn't be fine with it...does that mean you're a leftist?
    Grievances against stupidity transcend those labels. Your attempt to obscure the point is pathetic. Your lack of concern for the plight of the working man is deplorable.
  • truthops2010
    Mr. Magarac, I have a suggestion. Go visit any of the small towns impacted by mountaintop removal, and try to guess the left, or right political leanings of the people united against it. Now resume your Glenn Beck cookie cutter life.
blog comments powered by Disqus