|
Summary
<br /> The Review Process
<br /> Permit C-1980-007 was issued on July 31, 1981 for an initial five-year term, and since then has
<br /> been renewed for seven additional five-year terms, as of the date of publication of these findings.
<br /> Operations at the West Elk Mine have been conducted under several different names in the past.
<br /> Before 1991,the West Elk Mine itself was known as the Mt. Gunnison No. 1 Mine. Since the
<br /> mine opened, operations were conducted under the following names: Anaconda Minerals
<br /> Company, ARCO Coal Company(a Division of Atlantic Richfield Company), and West Elk
<br /> Coal Company, Inc. The name was changed from West Elk Coal Company, Inc., Mt. Gunnison
<br /> No. 1 Mine, to Mountain Coal Company, West Elk Mine, and processed by the Division as a
<br /> Succession of Operator. Both companies are wholly owned subsidiaries of the Atlantic Richfield
<br /> Company. The Division issued a proposed decision to approve the name change pursuant to
<br /> Rule 2.08.6(4) on December 20, 1991. The decision was final following the public comment
<br /> period, on January 20, 1992. The permit was subsequently transferred by succession of operator
<br /> to Mountain Coal Company, LLC, a subsidiary of Arch Coal, Inc., on April 23, 1998. Arch
<br /> Coal, Inc. was renamed Arch Resources, Inc. effective May 15, 2020.
<br /> Thirteen permit revisions have been approved (PR-9 was withdrawn and PR-13 was numerically
<br /> skipped). Ten bond release applications have been approved. A complete summary of previous
<br /> major permitting actions is given below.
<br /> Mountain Coal Company, formerly the West Elk Coal Company, applied on November 6, 1979
<br /> for a permit to conduct underground mining and reclamation operations at the West Elk Mine,
<br /> formerly the Mt. Gunnison No. 1 Mine.
<br /> The application was determined to be complete on November 29, 1979. The first review
<br /> comments from the Division of Water Resources were received on March 26, 1980, and
<br /> comments from the Division of Wildlife were received on April 22, 1980. During the latter part
<br /> of June, 1980, the Division received the Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and
<br /> Enforcement's (OSMRE) Apparent Completeness Review of the application, which was
<br /> subsequently incorporated into the July, 1980 Mined Land Reclamation Board for Coal Mining
<br /> (MLRB) Preliminary Adequacy Review Letter and then forwarded to the company. On January
<br /> 13, 1981, a meeting was held between OSMRE and MLRD to assess the adequacy of MCC's
<br /> responses, and it was at this point in time that the responses were found to be substantially
<br /> inadequate in a variety of aspects. This resulted in a decision to prepare a second,joint adequacy
<br /> letter which was sent to the company on February 6, 1981.
<br /> On January 30, 1981 the Division received additional comments from the Division of Water
<br /> Resources which outlined the deficiencies in the application with regard to water rights and, in
<br /> particular, with the deficiencies of the proposed Minnesota Creek Basin Augmentation Plan.
<br /> Additional comments on water rights issues were submitted in February and March of 1981 in
<br /> the form of objection letters from several concerned citizens. These letters also discussed
<br /> problems relating to alluvial valley floors, protection for perennial streams, the potential for
<br /> landslides to be triggered by subsidence, cumulative hydrologic impacts, the adequacy of MCC's
<br /> subsidence monitoring and subsidence control plans, and a number of procedural issues. These
<br /> 6
<br />
|