## Facts

- Environmental organizations challenged a Department of the Interior regulation interpreting the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA).
- SMCRA prohibits “surface coal mining operations” in or near specified protected locations (including public parks, schools, and certain public facilities).
- SMCRA defines “surface coal mining operations” to include “surface operations and surface impacts incident to an underground coal mine.”
- The challenged regulation categorically excluded subsidence caused by underground mining from the statutory term “surface coal mining operations,” which would permit underground mining that causes surface subsidence impacts in otherwise protected areas.
- The district court held the regulation contrary to SMCRA, vacated it, and the Secretary of the Interior and an industry association appealed; the challengers cross-appealed on additional matters.

## Issues

1. Whether SMCRA’s definition of “surface coal mining operations,” including “surface impacts incident to an underground coal mine,” encompasses subsidence caused by underground coal mining.
2. Whether the Secretary’s regulation excluding subsidence from that definition is a permissible interpretation under Chevron.

## Decision

- The D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court’s invalidation of the regulation to the extent it excluded underground-mine subsidence from “surface coal mining operations.”
- The court held that subsidence is a “surface impact[] incident to an underground coal mine” within SMCRA’s definition.
- Because the regulation conflicted with the statute’s text and structure, the agency was not entitled to deference for a categorical exclusion of subsidence.
- The court left in place vacatur of the challenged rule as inconsistent with SMCRA.

## Legal Principles

- When a statute expressly includes “surface impacts incident to an underground coal mine” within a definition, an agency may not adopt a regulation that removes a core category of such impacts.
- Statutory text and structure control over an agency’s narrower reading where the statute pairs “surface operations” with “surface impacts,” indicating effect-inclusive coverage.
- Under Chevron, deference is unavailable when the agency interpretation conflicts with the statute’s clear terms at step one.
- SMCRA’s protected-area prohibitions apply to mining-related surface impacts covered by the statutory definition, including subsidence from underground mining.

## Conclusion

The D.C. Circuit held that SMCRA’s definition of “surface coal mining operations” includes subsidence as a surface impact of underground mining, and it affirmed vacatur of the Interior Department regulation that categorically excluded subsidence from that definition.


Citizens Coal Council v. Norton, 330 F.3d 478 (D.C. Cir. 2003)