|
This news story originally provided by The Charleston Gazette
On Thursday, coal industry officials gathered in a hotel
conference room to learn how they can obtain Clean Water Act permits
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Corps officials billed the special workshop as a chance for them
to provide an overview of permitting requirements.
But the corps refused to explain how it plans to interpret a new
federal court ruling that restricts its permit authority.
“I’m not sure with the current thing going on if I ought to
answer that,” said Mark Taylor, a permitting section chief for the
corps Huntington District office.
On Tuesday, the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition alleged in
court papers that the corps was allowing coal operators to violate
the July 8 ruling by U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin.
Joe Lovett, a lawyer for the coalition, asked Goodwin to clarify
his ruling because “coal operators may be acting unilaterally to
fill streams in accordance with their self-interested and improper
interpretation of the court’s order.”
In his ruling, Goodwin said that the corps could no longer
approve mining valley fills through a streamlined permit process
meant only for activities that cause minor environmental damage.
Rather than these “general” or “nationwide” permits,
Goodwin said, coal companies must go through individual permit
reviews when they propose to bury streams with waste dirt and rock.
The judge ordered the corps not to issue new Clean Water Act for
valley fills in Southern West Virginia without individual reviews.
Goodwin ordered the agency to suspend those for valley fills
“on which construction has not commenced as of today, July 8,
2004.”
Since the ruling, though, some coal industry officials have
argued that the order does not apply to sites where preparatory work
— such as building sediment ponds at the foot of valley fill sites
— has begun.
Blain Rethmeier, a spokesman for the U.S. Justice Department,
which is representing the corps, said the agency would not explain
its interpretation of the Goodwin ruling.
During Thursday’s workshop at a South Charleston hotel, corps
officials distributed copies of a March document that outlines how
companies can obtain the very nationwide permits that Goodwin
ordered not be issued.
Initially, a corps spokesman said he didn’t know why the
document was still being distributed. Later, the spokesman said it
was handed out because some workshop participants were from states
where Goodwin’s ruling is not in effect.
Chuck Minsker, the corps’ spokesman, said agency officials have
inspected eight of the 11 mining operations specifically mentioned
in Goodwin’s original ruling.
“I assume they were checking to see that [the operators] were
following the guidelines that were sent out,” Minsker said.
The corps, though, has not sent out any guidelines. Instead, the
agency simply sent operators a letter that quoted directly from
Goodwin’s ruling.
Asked what sort of activity the corps inspectors would consider a
violation of Goodwin’s ruling, Minsker said, “I can’t really
answer that question.”
Taylor first said that corps inspectors had found “a full
range” of work had been done at the mine sites as of the July 8
date of Goodwin’s ruling.
Later in the same interview, Taylor said, “So far, it’s been
pretty cut and dried, between all of the waters having been filed,
or they’ve done nothing.”
Taylor said he could not say what the corps would tell a coal
operator who asked for guidance on how to comply with Goodwin’s
ruling.
“If they have that question, they can ask it, and we will
answer it,” Taylor said.
To contact staff writer Ken Ward Jr., use e-mail or call
348-1702.
|
