Company outlines plan to reopen nearby coal mine; towners press on noise, traffic and dust

Scofield — Representatives for a company seeking to reopen the Kenny coal mine near Scofield told the Scofield Town Council on Feb. 10 that the project is again in permitting and could begin preliminary work if state approvals and buyer contracts materialize.

Greg Hunt, a representative of Coal Energy Group, told the council the company has gone through permitting attempts twice before and expects the current permit update to reach the state’s technical-review stage in the coming months. “It’s not a certain deal. We’re very hopeful,” Hunt said.

The presentation drew about an hour of questions from residents and council members about where operations would sit relative to town buildings and a campground, how the company would control fan and equipment noise, how trucks would enter and exit the site, and how the company would manage dust and emergency medical services.

Why it matters: The area under discussion includes county-owned coal that would generate royalty revenue for Carbon County. Residents are concerned about local impacts — noise from ventilation fans and equipment, increased truck traffic on Highway 96, dust from stockpiles and haul roads and strain on local emergency medical services (EMS). Several speakers said the mine’s surface facilities would be close to the highway and to existing town uses, and asked for mitigation that would reduce community disruption.

What the company said

Hunt said the state Division of Oil, Gas and Mining deemed the company’s updated permit application complete and that a public notice and comment period is under way; he said the public-comment period runs for roughly two weeks after the notice appeared in the paper and that technical review is next. Ben Grimes, who described his work on the permit updates, said the state required new water-monitoring, soils and archaeology work because earlier permits had lapsed under the state’s three-year start-construction rule. “When they deem it to be complete, you can put in a public notice,” Grimes said.

Hunt and Grimes said the timing for any ground work depends on the state review and on getting buyer contracts. Hunt estimated, if things progress, that work could show traction by mid- to late summer; he and Grimes emphasized the schedule was uncertain.

Operations and mitigation discussed

- Portal and fans: The company expects to begin work at a portal and install ventilation fans. Hunt said the company would use low-velocity fans to reduce the characteristic high‑pitched noise of older high‑velocity fans; he did not provide decibel measurements. Residents pushed for additional measures, such as roadside noise walls similar to highway sound barriers.

- Stockpile and dust control: Company representatives described a single stockpile sized to supply a unit train buffer and discussed dust controls required by air-quality permitting. Grimes said stacking-tube openings would be offset to reduce wind-driven dust and that water sprays would be used on piles in summer; road dust controls would follow the Division of Air Quality permit and include visual monitoring and mitigation such as watering or chloride treatments for unpaved roads.

- Traffic and road improvements: The company said UDOT required turn, acceleration and deceleration lanes to serve the mine entrance and that loading would likely use a Wildcat loadout near Helper that the company says it controls through a relationship with a nearby operator. The company expects most heavy haul to bypass the town’s central corridor once the turn lanes are in place.

- Workforce, production and county ownership: Company representatives said a likely startup staffing level would be about 20 underground miners plus surface support — roughly 25–30 employees — with an initial production target in the hundreds of thousands of tons per year (Hunt estimated a “sweet spot” of roughly 800,000 tons per year, with other scenarios discussed). Ben Grimes said the first mining block the company expects to develop is owned by Carbon County; company representatives estimated the county holds an estimated 25 million recoverable tons in that block.

- Emergency medical services: Residents asked whether the mine would support local EMS. Hunt said previous proposals included mine contributions to EMS and that the company is open to working with the town on EMT staffing or equipment, but no written agreement was presented.

What residents asked for

Residents repeatedly asked for details on noise mitigation (including barriers), the location and size of the stockpile, how many trucks would use town roads, timing of shifts, and how dust on town roads would be controlled. Campground and store owners asked specifically about protecting their businesses. Several residents urged the company to negotiate road‑speed reductions with UDOT and to work with Carbon County on enforcement and road repair.

What was not decided

Council members and company representatives did not take any formal action on the mine. No council motion was made to endorse or oppose the permit. Company representatives left the meeting with requests from the community for more detailed noise data, a proposal for a noise barrier, a clearer estimate of truck counts and a written proposal for EMS support.

Ending: The company will continue the state permitting process while the town and residents pursue additional information. The permit notice remains in public comment; the company said technical review by the state is ongoing and that final timing depends on the completion of that review and on securing buyers and financing.