REV95791

• Permit No: C1981044
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 3/31/2004
• Doc Name: Right of Entry Information
• From: RAG Empire Corporation
• To: DMG
• Type & Sequence: RN4
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Janet H. Binns
March 31, 2004
Page 3
II. Rule 2.03.6.
A. Rule 2.03.6(1) states:
Each application shall contain a complete and detailed legal description
of the proposed permit boundary, a description of the documents upon
which the applicant bases his or her legal right to enter and begin surface
coal mining operations in the permit area, and a statement as to whether
that right is the subject of pending litigation. The description shall
identify those documents by type and date of execution, identify the
specific lands to which the document pertains, and explain the legal rights
claimed by the applicant.
This Rule section requires (I) provision of a "description" of the documents upon
which the applicant bases its legal right to enter and begin surface coal mining operations
in the permit area, and (2) to "explain" the legal rights which it claims.
This Rule section only requires that the description identify the documents by
type and date, and identify the specific lands to which the document pertains. This
section does not require an applicant to submit those documents, but only to describe
them. In its January 21, 2004 response to the Division, Empire identified and described
the now terminated lease as the basis for its legal rights of entry. Therefore, Empire
clearly has met the requirements of Rule 2.03.6(1). This section does not require Empire
to submit any documents to the Division.
This section also requires that an applicant explain the legal right of entry that it
is claiming. Empire's January 21, 2004 response to the Division explained the legal
rights it is now claiming, as acknowledged by the Division's January 30, 2004 letter.
That letter complained that Empire had only submitted legal arguments, while in fact;
submitting an explanation of legal rights is all that is required by the regulation.
Presently, as was the case in January 2004, Empire's right is not the subject of pending
litigation.
It appears, then, that Empire has met the requirements of Rule 2.03.6(1) because Empire
(1) described the relevant documents, and (2) explained its legal right of entry.
B. Ruie 2.03.6(2).
The Division's previous letter, dated January 16, 2004, stated that Rule 2.03.6(2)
required Empire to submit documentation of its right of entry. Subsection (2) does
require the submission of actual documentation of a right of entry, unlike subsection (1)
which only requires a description of the documents. However, subsection (2) is not
applicable: (i) subsection (2) only applies in split estate situations, while the current
dispute does not involve a split estate since the lease included both coal and minerals