Peabody coal mine documentation released

<i>NHO file photo</i><br>
Black Mesa, located near Kayenta, is called <i>DziÅ‚Ã­jiin</i> (Black Mountain) because of the numerous seams of coal which run through it. Coal has been strip mined from the mesa since the 1960s by Peabody Western Coal Company, raising concerns over the use of groundwater to transport the coal across slurry lines.

FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. - A coalition of grassroots organizations announced last week that a settlement agreement had been reached with the federal government allowing the public release of documents related to the Peabody Coal Companies' coal mines on Black Mesa in northeast Arizona.

"For over 40 years, Peabody's coal mining operations have continued to change the cultural and physical landscape of Black Mesa," said Wahleah Johns of the Black Mesa Water Coalition. "As Navajo citizens, we have every right to ask them to disclose their operating permits."

In January 2010, an administrative law judge withdrew Peabody Coal Company's Life of Mine permit for consolidated operations on Black Mesa after hearing input from community stakeholders, including a number of tribal organizations, individuals and conservation groups.

"The people living near this mine suffer the damage that coal-fired pollution does to our health," said Sierra Club organizer Andy Bessler. "The public has the right to study and review Peabody's permit in order to help guide and strengthen the necessary oversight of dangerous and destructive coal mining on Black Mesa."

"The right to information is but an extension of our human rights. For the communities who have been living with the toxic legacy of strip coal-mining from Black Mesa, this right should not have been restricted," said Cynthia Pardo, also with the Sierra Club. "We can now have greater hope that OSM will guarantee everyone's freedom to information over Peabody's coal mining operations in the future."

Peabody's operations on Black Mesa have long been controversial. The Black Mesa mine closed in 2005 after the utility company owners, led by Southern California Edison, could not reach an agreement with the Navajo and Hopi tribes on coal supplies and an alternative to pumping groundwater from the Navajo aquifer (N-aquifer) to feed the Mohave Generating Station in Laughlin, Nev. When OSM issued a permit to Peabody to resume mining operations, neither it nor Peabody identified a new purchaser of coal from the mine. In addition, federal agencies' analysis of the permit failed to adequately consider the impacts of global warming on endangered fish in the Colorado River.

The settlement resolved the plaintiffs' appeal under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), a federal law that ensures federal agencies make documents available to the public to ensure adequate public involvement in federal actions like regulating Peabody's operations on Black Mesa. OSM was forced under the appeal to make Peabody's documents available under FOIA.

"While it took some time, the [OSM] is ultimately to be commended for working with communities to ensure full disclosure of Peabody's permitting documents and without protracted litigation," said Brad Bartlett of the Energy Minerals Law Center who represented the plaintiff organizations involved in the settlement. "Impacted communities and tribal members can now see for themselves how Peabody is supposed to be operating."

The public including Navajo and Hopi citizens can now easily access this important and large document. Readers can now learn more about Peabody's reclamation plans, large water impoundment that contain toxic pollution and details about protecting wildlife and important sacred lands. The web access to Peabody's mining plans makes transparent the shear volume and local impacts from Peabody's coal mining on Black Mesa. The 30 volume permit application can be downloaded at either www.sierraclub.org/kayentacoalpermit or www.coaldiver.org/Kayenta.

For more information, visit www.blackmesawatercoalition.org or www.sierraclub.org/coal.

Comments

Comments are not posted immediately. Submissions must adhere to our Use of Service Terms of Use agreement. Rambling or nonsensical comments may not be posted. Comment submissions may not exceed a 200 word limit, and in order for us to reasonably manage this feature we may limit excessive comment entries.