Opinion ID: 1287569
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the large mine permit

Text: After making its determination, the Commission issued a notice of decision, granting approval for the application for a large mine permit subject to a set of conditions. The notice of decision lists the six requirements that are applicable to all conditional use permits as set forth at CC & BJ 49.15.330 and the twenty-one requirements set forth in the mining ordinance (CC & BJ 49.65.100-195), and states its findings for each of these requirements. TNA and AFJ argue that the findings and conditions in the notice of decision evidence a lack of compliance with the code. They argue that the CBJ used a `phased' approach in approving the large mine permit. They point to three ways in which they believe the CBJ engaged in phasing. First, the Commission withheld approval of the dam, the tailings pond and marine water discharges until further information was provided, yet granted the permit for the remainder of the project. Second, the Commission approved the permit, yet required Echo Bay to provide further information on certain matters. Third, the Commission imposed as a condition that Echo Bay obtain necessary permits from other agencies. Echo Bay and CBJ argue that this phasing is consistent with the code. CBJ argues [t]he purpose of the mining ordinance and the Commission is to grant permits, not to deny them. CBJ and Echo Bay argue that the CBJ mining ordinance does not vest the commission with discretion to disapprove a large mine permit application when the standards for permit issuance have been met, relying on CC & BJ 49.65.130(f), which states that if the commission determines that the application, with stipulations or conditions as appropriate, satisfies the standards of Sections 49.65.135 and 49.15.330, it shall approve the application.  (Emphasis added.) CBJ and Echo Bay also contend that the mining ordinance can be satisfied by including permit conditions which incorporate the requirements of the ordinance  it is not necessary to determine in advance whether the plans submitted in the permit application will satisfy those requirements. CBJ argues that the purpose of the ordinance is to mandate compliance not predict it.