Plans for Prison on Mountaintop-Removal Site in Kentucky Scuttled. Maybe.

US Bureau of Prisons has withdrawn the $500 million proposal, but Mitch McConnell says he’s going to make it “move forward.”

The Federal government’s plan to build a maximum-security prison on a former mountaintop-removal coal-mining site in eastern Kentucky has been one of those zombie-like bad ideas that simply refuses to die. But after years of fierce opposition by environmental, prisoner rights, and local citizen rights groups, it appears that the controversial project might finally be buried forever.

photo of mountaintop mining in Kentucky
The Bureau of Prisons has for years been proposing to build an 800-acre, maximum security prison on a mountaintop removal site in Kentucky, like one of thos pictured above. Photo by Photo by Doc Searls.

Last month, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) formally withdrew its plan for the $510 million project in Kentucky’s Letcher County based on what it claimed was “new information” pertaining to the “environmental analysis” for the project.

Opponents of the project say the decision, though not entirely expected, is clearly a result of their sustained campaign against the prison.

“We were surprised that they actually withdrew it. We thought we were going to have to litigate this all the way through,” says Dustin McDaniel, director of the Abolitionist Law Center, one of the groups that sued the Bureau of Prisons last year over the project along with 21 federal prisoners from around the country who say they were not properly informed about possible environmental and health impact of a prison that could house them in the near future. (The initial lawsuit was filed in November 2018. Friends of Lilley Cornett Woods and North Fork River Watershed, a local group that has long opposed the prison due to its likely impacts on surrounding natural areas and threatened and endangered species, joined the suit this past April.)

“This outcome couldn’t have happened without the courage of local residents in Letcher County and federal prisoners, all who risked significant blow back for standing up to oppose this prison,” says Panagioti Tsolkas, co-founder of the Campaign to Fight Toxic Prisons.

Plans for the prison first surfaced back in 2005. In 2015, the federal government set aside $444 million for the project, making it the most expensive proposed federal prison in US history. That sum has since ballooned to $510 million. If built as planned, the 800-acre, maximum security prison would be the fourth new federal prison in eastern Kentucky, and the sixth federal prison built in Central Appalachia, since 1992, making the region one of the most concentrated areas of prison growth in the country.

America's Toxic Prisons

The environmental injustices of mass incarceration.

Matthew Morgenstern is convinced his Hodgkin’s lymphoma was caused by exposure to toxic coal ash from the massive dump right across the road from SCI Fayette, a maximum-security prison in LaBelle, Pennsylvania, where he is currently serving a 5 to 10 year sentence.

>Read More…

Touted by its supporters — including Kentucky Representative Hal Rogers and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell — as a job creator in an economically depressed region, the project has been stalled due to multiple challenges from local land owners, environmental groups, and prisoner rights organizations.

Activists have long pointed out that the facility, which was to be sited near an active mine and coal sludge pond, would impact nearby wildlife habitats, including a 250-acre old growth forest within Lilly Cornett Woods. Building it would require clearcutting over 120 acres of forest habitat for two federally endangered bat species — the Indiana bat and the gray bat — as well as excavating and grading an additional 59 acres, and the destruction of three acres of wetlands.

Yet, despite years of opposition to the project from many quarters, including from within the federal government itself, it simply refused to die. Not even after the US Department of Justice withdrew its request for funding the project in June 2017, citing a declining prison populations and noting that the Bureau of Prisons (which is a subdivision of the justice department) could expand capacity at existing facilities and through private prisons if necessary. Instead, less than a year later, in March 2018, the Bureau of Prisons went ahead and issued a Record of Decision, indicating its “intent to move forward with construction” of the facility.

Which is why the bureau’s announcement last month that it was abandoning the project came as a bit of a surprise. McDaniel believes it could be partly due to an amendment to the lawsuit that had been filed recently. The amendment included information from the new federal budget that specifically mentioned that the budget didn’t support the construction of the prison.

In a section proposing the that project be cancelled, the budget states:

“Given the declining prison population has reduced capacity demands, new construction is more costly than purchasing existing unused facilities, prison construction has not been shown to spur local economic growth, and complications associated with the Letcher County site have contributed to increased costs and significant delays.”

“I think because of that information [the bureau’s] attorneys probably told them that this project was going to be hard to defend,” McDaniel says. “We hope the BOP’s action ends this prison project permanently, and that it also signifies a turning point nationally, away from investing money in prison construction, and toward increased investment in communities devastated by mass incarceration.”

But as with zombies, one can’t be totally sure this project won’t revive again. Hal Rogers and Mitch McConnell are already claiming that they are going to work together to ensure that the project “moves forward.”

“What you have here is a pork barrel project. It is politicians who have been behind this saying they are not giving up, but there really is no basis to proceed,” McDaniel says. “If they do decide to proceed, then they will need another two years to complete a new environmental impact statement, and, of course, we will sue again.”

Get the Journal in your inbox.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

You Make Our Work Possible

You Make Our Work Possible

We don’t have a paywall because, as a nonprofit publication, our mission is to inform, educate and inspire action to protect our living world. Which is why we rely on readers like you for support. If you believe in the work we do, please consider making a tax-deductible year-end donation to our Green Journalism Fund.

Get the Journal in your inbox.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

The Latest

For the Love of Alabama

R. Scot Duncan fell for the Southern state two decades ago. He’s been calling attention to its stunning biodiversity ever since.

Kelsey Barnett-Fischels

Are Black Vultures Being Scapegoated for Livestock Deaths?

New bill would make it easier for ranchers to kill the protected birds, despite insufficient data on vulture predation.

Ian Rose

To Save Native Plant Communities, Diversify the Field

So says ecologist working to save one of California’s most endangered ecosystems and promote LGBTQ+ visibility in science.

Anna Marija Helt

Biden Attacks Republican Climate Deniers as He Unveils Extreme-Heat Rules

President hails proposal to protect millions of Americans from the nation's top weather-related killer.

Dharna Noor The Guardian

Buying Baja

In Mexico's iconic peninsula, locals fight rich outsiders and rampant development that threaten to transform the coast and dry up aquifers.

Krista Langlois Photos and video by Kristina Blanchflower

Guardians of
the Forest

The rural community of Segunda y Cajas in northern Peru leads efforts to protect one of the most biodiverse areas and vital sources of water for the region.

Leslie Moreno Custodio