2010-07-02_ENFORCEMENT - C1980007

Home Browse Search

1. Underground Mining Activities - means a combination of.• (a) Surface operations incident to underground extraction of coal or in situ processing, such as construction, use, maintenance, and reclamation of roads, above-ground repair areas, storage areas, processing areas, shipping areas, areas upon which are sited support facilities including hoist and ventilating ducts, areas utilized for the disposal and storage of waste, and areas on which materials incident to underground mining operations are placed, As in the first cited regulation, when wholly viewed and with definitions applied, this regulation also seeks to ensure that the maximum (i.e. "all") potential surface disturbances incident to predicted (i.e. proposed) mining, as well as the regional range (i.e. areal extent) of suggested (i.e. projected mining be adequately accounted for (i.e. sufficiently described) on maps, cross-sections and in the permit text. No where in this regulation does it state or require that planned and/or proposed mining be specified and/or limited to within the lines blocks or timing as depicted on a map, nor that only the acreage above those projected mining zones are the only areas that should be considered as affected acres within the permit boundary. Surface disturbances associated with the surface operations incident to the underground mining within the permit area must also be considered and described. The regulation merely asks for these tools (i.e. cross-sections, timetables, narratives and maps) to be used to describe or represent these surface and underground mining areas - to describe the entire proposed predicted affected area, including the overburden, interburden and coal seams to be mined (i.e. the "stratum to be affected"). In section 2.05.3 of MCC's permit, including Map 51 and others, MCC has amply described all proposed surface disturbances, even beyond the extent of proposed workings, in the .permit narrative and on maps, cross-sections and timetables as required. As the regulation requires, all of these tools (e.g. narrative, maps, etc.), were used to adequately represent (i.e. sufficiently describe) the areal extent of proposed workings and the stratum to be affected, not just the proposed operations and timing presented on Map 51, as alleged in this NOV. Several other maps and exhibits (e.g. Maps 15-20, & 50- 52 and Exhibits 79 - Deer Creek Shaft, Exhibit 80 - Methane Drainage Wells, etc.) were included to describe the workings, stratum and surface disturbances as well. As such, MCC has been and remains in compliance with this regulation. MCC has endeavored to provide the best possible estimates and projections of where and when mining could reasonably be anticipated, planned or projected based on actual mining data (e.g. face mapping), data from the closest exploration drill holes (that has to be widely spaced due to the rugged terrain and other access restrictions), professional geologic interpretations, and professional mine engineering and management judgment. As is reiterated in the discussions below, it is not possible, it is not business- or operationally prudent, nor is it reasonable to expect or require that projections or predictions of mining and associated facilities and operations as depicted on a map be exact and absolutely bounded. MCC's affected area, including all current, planned and projected mining and surface operations disturbances, is contained within its valid existing coal leases and the permit boundary and is fully described in MCC's permit. The three exploratory development entries that have been alleged to violate the regulations, the Act and MCC's permit were developed within MCC's valid, existing coal leases and within its approved permit area (i.e. within the area in which all projected potential affects and impacts, whether from mining or surface disturbances, have been described and included in the permit as affected area.) These three entries do not constitute a new or extended longwall 4