Coal news and updates

More than three dozen coal mines across north Alabama would be forced to close and lay off about 1,000 workers if a federal judge grants a request by two groups for a preliminary injunction halting the issuance of a certain type of surface mining permit, coal companies claim in federal court documents.

 

Two environmental groups, however, argue that since last year the permits granted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineering to Alabama coal companies have allowed about 27 miles of streams to be filled in by mining waste in the Black Warrior River watershed, a major source of drinking water for Birmingham and west central Alabama communities.

 

U.S. District Court Judge William M. Acker Jr. on Friday granted a motion by the Alabama Coal Association and four mining companies - MS&R Equipment Co., Inc., Reed Minerals, Inc., Twin Pines, LLC, and Walter Minerals, Inc. - to intervene in the lawsuit filed by the two environmental groups.

 

In that same order, Acker also set a hearing for Jan. 30 on the request for a preliminary injunction by Black Warrior Riverkeeper and Defenders of Wildlife.

 

The riverkeeper and wildlife groups filed a federal lawsuit in Birmingham on Nov. 25 challenging the Corps' use in Alabama of Nationwide Permit 21 (NWP 21), which allows surface coal mines to fill in small streams or wetlands without first having to have detailed studies or analysis of its cumulative impact.

 

The Corps made changes in February 2012 to the permits, including for the first time putting limits on the length or size of the streams that can be filled. But the two environmental groups say 41 coal mining operations have been granted extensions under the "grandfather" provision of NWP 21. 

 

Under the "grandfather" provision the companies can operate under the old - 2007 - rules that allow unlimited fill of streams and wetlands. The Alabama companies can continue to operate under the previous version of the permit until 2017.

 

On Dec. 3 the two groups asked Acker to issue the preliminary injunction halting the NWP 21 permits issued to the 41 mining operations until there is a resolution of the lawsuit.

 

The Corps, however, has defended the issuance of the permits and argues against the request for an injunction.

 

The corps argued in its Dec. 18 response that it's too late to request an injunction, about 20 months after the revised permit process was approved. The environmental groups also have not demonstrated a likelihood that they will succeed on the merits of their claims, the Corps argues.

 

"Meanwhile, the requested injunction would significantly interrupt ongoing mining projects, potentially depriving the economy of a vital source of income for thousands of families and of a critical energy source for the region and the nation," the Corps stated. "Further, the public interest is served by allowing the Corps to efficiently administer its nationwide permit program."

 

The Alabama Coal Association, which represents the companies that hold 38 of the 41 (NWP 21) permits, and the four companies argue in their motion to intervene the permits have allowed them to mine millions of tons of coal this year. If forced to halt operations, the companies also would have to lay off employees.

 

"If the 2012 NWP 21 were vacated, mines associated with 38 of the permit authorizations ... would be forced to close, resulting in approximately 1,000 mine workers being laid off," according to the association and companies' response.

 

Mines could still apply and get permits through another process that requires more analysis, but that could take a few years, according to court documents.

 

The association and companies say the two environmental groups should be required to post an "appropriate" bond for seeking an injunction to halt their operations. A bond would go towards paying for economic losses if operations are halted and a judge later finds in favor of the mining companies.

 

The association and coal companies also contend the riverkeeper and wildlife groups don't have standing to bring their claims. "The streams are located on private property and are not subject to public navigation. Plaintiffs' have no access to these streams to enjoy the particular activities described in the complaint, and therefore have no injury," according to the association response.

 

The two environmental groups say the Corps hasn't done its job to protect Alabama's streams from mining.

 

"It's the responsibility of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to ensure that surface mining in Alabama strictly follows the permitting process required by law," Catherine Wannamaker, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, stated in a press release issued when the lawsuit was filed. "It is possible to balance protections for clean water and natural resources with economic opportunities, but this process has failed to do so."

 

The Southern Environmental Law Center and the firm Public Justice filed the lawsuit on behalf of the riverkeeper and wildlife groups.

 

Source: http://blog.al.com/