Public Comment. Volume III - Montana Legislature
Public Comment. Volume III - Montana Legislature
Public Comment. Volume III - Montana Legislature
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Robert Ochsner<br />
April 5, 1994<br />
Page 4<br />
MERIDIAN MINERALS R/W<br />
Land Board Agenda Attachment<br />
Meridian Minerals wishes to secure easements for the construction,<br />
operation, maintenance and use of a rail spur to facilitate<br />
the transportation of coal from their Bull ~ountains Mine No. 1, .<br />
During review of.their applications, the Department identified<br />
certain issues which to date have yet to be fully resolved with<br />
Meridian.<br />
EASEMENT AUTHORITY<br />
The first issue is whether or not the Board even has authority to<br />
grant this easement request. John North, Chief Legal Counsel,<br />
recently investigated the easement authority of the Board and<br />
issued an opinion that the Board has limited authority when it<br />
comes to granting easements for private purposes. Private rail<br />
road purposes are not included in the allowable private uses.<br />
Meridian Minerals successfully argued that it was a private rather<br />
than a public rail before the Interstate Commerce Commission<br />
(ICC). In a December 18, 1992 decision, the Interstate Commerce<br />
Commission (ICC) ruled that this particular rail line is a private<br />
carrier, not a common carrier (see copy attached). Because<br />
of this, the Department raised the question as to whether or not<br />
this meant the easement was for a "privatel1 rather than "publicu<br />
purpose.<br />
The decision by staff legal counse1.i~ based on the premise that<br />
as a private carrier, Meridian may not have eminent domain powers.<br />
Settlement of this dispute would come about through successful<br />
court action by Meridian.<br />
If the Board decides that it does have authority to issue easements<br />
for this purpose, then the following issues arise: .<br />
DURATION & DATE OF ISSUE<br />
The use of the rail spur, as currently approved by the ICC, is<br />
directly tied to the mine project. As such, the rail spur was<br />
also treated as an ancillary facility in the EIS. The Department<br />
feels an easement in perpetuity is therefore not necessary. An<br />
easement restricted and limited to a specific amount of time, the<br />
duration of which could coincide with the life of the mine, seems<br />
more appropriate.<br />
In a letter to the Department dated January 27, 1993, ~eridian<br />
argues that because it controls 115th of the coal reserves in the<br />
Bull Mountains coal field area, the spur could be used in connec-<br />
EQC Eminent Domain Study -251 -
Change language