GENERAL38313 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Gerald Magnuson .; April 15, 1981 '', Page 5. ~.~ More importantly, the provisions of Section 31 (b) are totally inconsistent with the recent decision of Judge Flannery In Re Permanent Surface biining Regulation Litigation, Civil Action No. 79-1144, 14 ERC 1083, F. Supp. (1980). In this decision, Judge Flannery ruled that 30 C.F.R. Sections 779.20 and 780.16 of the Permanent Surface Mining Regulations requiring wildlife surveys and wildlife reclamation plans were invalid and unauthorized by SMCRA. The Aepartment of the Interior, through the BLM, cannot require through lease stipulations what OSM is prohibited from requiring through regulations under Sb1CRA. °(c) The lessee shall prepare and submit to the BLM concurrently with the filing of its mine plan, a socio-economic and transportation impact mitigation study, concerning the offsite aspects of the proposed development, which will include a factual statement of the following: (1) The estimated number of employees the specific lease operation will require during its phases of construction and operation; the estimated multiplied population attendant to that employment; and where that population is anticipated to reside. (2) Based on information acquired in con- sultation with state and local government, an analysis of the estimated effect of that popu- lation influx upon the co~5nty and community infrastructure, including: (i) the transportation system at' the county and local level; (ii) the domestic water requirements, (iii) the domestic facilities and requirements, (iv) the requirements facilities, sewage treatment collection system on the eductional (v) the requirements the new population will impose upon the fire and police protection systems,