REV10838 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

B that, with certain exceptions, surface coal prohibited on or within specifie3 distances uses. The process for implementing section determination, as a prerequisite for permit section 515 or 516, whether a requester has a surface coal mining operation on such lane § 761.12 (1990). mining operations are of those lands and 522(e) requires a issuance under the right to conduct is. See 30 C.F.R. IInder section 522(e), if a person who proposes to conduct a surface coal mining operation on lands protected by section 522 (e) does not qualify for one 'of the statutory exceptions, then the person cannot conduct the intended.operation on such lands. See 30 C.F.R. § 773.15(c)(3)(ii) (1990). The person is therefore _ ineligible to obtain a permit for the operation. On the other hand, if the person is entitled 'to an exception from the section 522(e) prohibitions for the intended surface coal mining operation, then the person is eligible to receive a permit under the appropriate section of SMCRA'. Section 522(e) does not specifically mention subsidence~as an activity subject to its prohibitions. Section 522 (e) is implemented primarily at 30 C.F.R. Part 761. That part provides definitions of key terms concerning SMCRA section 522(e) and describes thE: procedures to b~followed in implementing the prohibitions of section 522(e). In section 701(28) of SMCRA, Congress defined the term "surface coal mining •operations""as used~in section 522(e).to mean,:.in pertinent part, activities conducted on thE: surface of lands in connection with a surface coal mine oi~ subject to the requirements of section 516 surface operations and surface impacts incident to an underground coal minE:, and the areas upon which such activities occur or where such activities disturb the natural land surface. • - ~ ~ Part 761' was first adopted i.n 1979, as part of the Permanen}' Program rules. The definition of !'valid existing rights." in that rulemaking has been subject to repeated rulemaking actions and court challenges concerning issi~ies not directly relevant to the • subject of this opinion. In reiPermanent Surface Miriina ' Regulation Litigation I; No, 79?-1144 (D.D.C. Feb. 26, 1980), 14 ERC 1083, 1091; In re Permanent~Surface Mining Regulation _ Litigation II. Round III--VER,.Ido. 79-1144. (D.D.C. Mar. 22, 1985), 22-ERC 1557, 1564. OSM :is currently contemplating further rulemaking to implement section, 522(e), including a new definition of "valid existing nights."