Late last month, corps District Commander Robert D. Peterson refused the EPA's request that the corps revoke the Spruce Mine permit or at least suspend it and push the company to reduce the number and size of valley fills proposed.

Peterson said corps staff members "determined there were no practicable alternatives that would have less impacts on the aquatic environment" and that "all appropriate steps were taken to minimize potential adverse impacts."

In court documents, Mingo Logan lawyer Bob McLusky has criticized the EPA's effort to revisit the permit.

"Its belated objections undermine any confidence that mine operators and hard-working West Virginians can have that the permits on which they depend will not be forever subject to the shifting whims of federal regulators who rarely venture into Appalachia," McLusky wrote.

However, public records show that the EPA has consistently raised the same concerns about the Spruce Mine, even during the Bush administration.

During the comment period on the current Spruce Mine permit, in June 2006, the EPA issued a letter that ranked the proposal as "EC-2," or "Environmental Concerns and Insufficient Information."

The EPA praised the company and the corps for reducing the mine's impacts, but said the permit still did not contain adequate mitigation for water-quality damage, sufficient study of cumulative impacts or a detailed review of potential environmental justice effects of the operation.

"We have remaining environmental concerns based on the uncertainty of the mitigation proposals and as yet incomplete cumulative impact assessment and management plans for the Little Coal River watershed," wrote then-EPA regional administrator Donald Welsh.

Environmental groups have been fighting the Spruce Mine since 1998, when it was proposed as a 3,113-acre mine that would bury more than 10 miles of streams in the Pigeonroost Hollow area near Blair. Arch Coal had proposed it as a continuation of its Dal-Tex mountaintop removal operation.

U.S. District Judge Charles H. Haden II blocked the permit, prompting Arch Coal to close Dal-Tex and lay off more than 300 United Mine Workers union members employed there. Since then, Arch has continued to seek the permit but shifted it to its non-union arm.

In January 2007, corps officials issued a slightly scaled-back version of the Spruce Mine that would bury more than 7 miles of streams. Soon after that, environmental groups sought to have U.S. District Judge Robert C. Chambers block the permit.

The Spruce Mine was not among those halted by a March 2007 ruling by Chambers or directly affected by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision overturning Chambers, but, the company accepted a "stand-still" agreement that severely limited mining and filling operations, at least until the appeal was decided.

Last year, the mine employed about 30 workers and produced about 600,000 tons of coal, federal records show.

Reach Ken Ward Jr. at kw...@wvgazette.com or 304-348-1702.

 Read more in Coal Tattoo:

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- The Obama administration moved a step closer on Friday to cancelling a Clean Water Act permit for the largest mountaintop-removal mine in West Virginia history.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency officials cited their "very serious concerns regarding the scale and extent of significant environmental and water-quality impacts" from Arch Coal Inc.'s proposed Spruce No. 1 Mine in Logan County.

In a letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, EPA regional administrator William E. Early formally warned that his agency was prepared to block the Spruce Mine permit unless its impacts are further reduced.

"While we recognize that the project has been modified to reduce projected impacts . . . there is the potential for its associated discharges to cause further stream degradation," Early wrote.

Early said EPA experts remain concerned that the 2,300-acre Spruce Mine will damage downstream water quality and add to cumulative environmental damage in a heavily mined area. The EPA also said the permit does not contain adequate measures to mitigate environmental damage or spell out what steps would be taken should water-quality impacts occur.

"EPA has worked hard to assess the effects of surface coal mining on water quality in streams below mining activities," Early wrote. "What we have learned is compelling and further substantiates the scientific literature that points to a high potential for downstream water quality excursions under current mining and valley fill practices."

Early's letter gives the corps and Arch Coal subsidiary Mingo Logan 15 days to respond before the EPA issues a notice that would kick off a public-comment period, the next step in the legal process for the EPA to overrule the corps' decision to grant the Spruce Mine permit.

Under the Clean Water Act, the corps generally processes "dredge-and-fill" permits that allow coal operators to bury streams with waste rock and dirt, but, Congress gave the EPA broad authority to overrule the corps if it believes serious water-quality damage could be avoided.

Before it can formally veto the Spruce Mine permit, the EPA would need to accept public comment and give the corps and the company at least two more chances to fix the permit's problems.

Although the corps processes about 80,000 Clean Water Act permits every year, the EPA has used its veto power only 12 times since 1972 -- and has never used it to block a coal-mining permit.

In his letter, Early told the corps that the veto threat on the Spruce Mine "reflects the magnitude of anticipated direct, indirect and cumulative adverse environmental impacts associated with this mountaintop removal operation.

"EPA emphasizes that the Spruce No. 1 represents an unusual set of circumstances we do not expect to be repeated again," Early wrote.

Corps officials in Huntington and Washington could not be reached for comment Friday afternoon. A spokeswoman for St. Louis-based Arch Coal did not respond to requests for comment.

Late last month, corps District Commander Robert D. Peterson refused the EPA's request that the corps revoke the Spruce Mine permit or at least suspend it and push the company to reduce the number and size of valley fills proposed.

Peterson said corps staff members "determined there were no practicable alternatives that would have less impacts on the aquatic environment" and that "all appropriate steps were taken to minimize potential adverse impacts."

In court documents, Mingo Logan lawyer Bob McLusky has criticized the EPA's effort to revisit the permit.

"Its belated objections undermine any confidence that mine operators and hard-working West Virginians can have that the permits on which they depend will not be forever subject to the shifting whims of federal regulators who rarely venture into Appalachia," McLusky wrote.

However, public records show that the EPA has consistently raised the same concerns about the Spruce Mine, even during the Bush administration.

During the comment period on the current Spruce Mine permit, in June 2006, the EPA issued a letter that ranked the proposal as "EC-2," or "Environmental Concerns and Insufficient Information."

The EPA praised the company and the corps for reducing the mine's impacts, but said the permit still did not contain adequate mitigation for water-quality damage, sufficient study of cumulative impacts or a detailed review of potential environmental justice effects of the operation.

"We have remaining environmental concerns based on the uncertainty of the mitigation proposals and as yet incomplete cumulative impact assessment and management plans for the Little Coal River watershed," wrote then-EPA regional administrator Donald Welsh.

Environmental groups have been fighting the Spruce Mine since 1998, when it was proposed as a 3,113-acre mine that would bury more than 10 miles of streams in the Pigeonroost Hollow area near Blair. Arch Coal had proposed it as a continuation of its Dal-Tex mountaintop removal operation.

U.S. District Judge Charles H. Haden II blocked the permit, prompting Arch Coal to close Dal-Tex and lay off more than 300 United Mine Workers union members employed there. Since then, Arch has continued to seek the permit but shifted it to its non-union arm.

In January 2007, corps officials issued a slightly scaled-back version of the Spruce Mine that would bury more than 7 miles of streams. Soon after that, environmental groups sought to have U.S. District Judge Robert C. Chambers block the permit.

The Spruce Mine was not among those halted by a March 2007 ruling by Chambers or directly affected by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision overturning Chambers, but, the company accepted a "stand-still" agreement that severely limited mining and filling operations, at least until the appeal was decided.

Last year, the mine employed about 30 workers and produced about 600,000 tons of coal, federal records show.

Reach Ken Ward Jr. at kw...@wvgazette.com or 304-348-1702.