West Virginians Comment on Coal Mining Stream Protection Rule
The State Journal
3 August 2010
By Pam Kasey
MORGANTOWN -- West Virginians interested in the rules governing surface
mining recently attended open houses hosted by the federal Office of
Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement in Beckley and in Morgantown.
“I think the forum is really good,” said Morgantown resident Rich
Dennis of the format, which encouraged self-education and written
comments rather than opinions expressed before an audience. “I’ve been
to some public forums that tend to be raucous. This is much more
accessible.”
About 60 people signed in at each of the open houses, two of nine the
OSM held nationwide to gather input toward an environmental impact
statement that will in turn inform a 2012 Stream Protection Rule
governing the effects of coal mining on waterways.
The rulemaking comes in response to the Obama administration’s stated
intention to revisit the Reagan-era Stream Buffer Zone rule that was
modified at the end of the Bush administration.
But it also responds to larger concerns about water quality impacts of
surface mining and about the processes followed by and roles played by
OSM, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers in reviewing mining permits.
Principal Elements
Posters at the open houses detailed 11 principal elements of the
proposed action. They include requiring coal companies to gather more
extensive baseline data on proposed mining sites and establishing a
definition for the term “material damage” downstream from mines.
They also include adding monitoring requirements for surface and ground
water and aquatic biology, and using monitoring results to establish
discharge thresholds for corrective action.
For each principal element, participants’ opinions were sought on
possible alternatives.
A principal element that would require mining companies to reforest
previously wooded areas, for example, could require reforesting to
pre-mining diversity, planting native species and minimizing forest
fragmentation.
Attendees
Attending during the middle hours of the 3-8 p.m. July 28 open house in
Morgantown were three families that each spent at least 45 minutes
reviewing the posters and talking with presenters.
Rich and Bettina Dennis took their sons Tristan, 14, and Liam, 11, to
learn about and comment on the rule changes. All members of the family
expressed opposition to mountaintop removal mining, and Rich Dennis
said they would submit comments via e-mail.
Betsy and Stephen Lawson, who live in a heavily surface-mined section
of Monongalia County, said they felt the presentation was very
technical.
“I know dirty water when I see it, but I don’t know what suspended
solids are in it,” said Stephen Lawson. “What kind of useful input can
I have other than, the fewer permits there are and the more stringent
they are, the better?”
Betsy Lawson liked the fact that OSM is considering impacts not only to
water quality but to aquatic communities, as well.
Still, she said, “I’d like to see the end of strip mining altogether.”
She submitted extensive written comments.
Curtis “Oro” Hutson and his wife, Paula, attended the Morgantown
session from Deep Creek Lake, Md.
“This is great for what it’s worth, keeping the water quality we have,”
said Curtis Hutson, who in the past drove a truck for a coal industry
contractor. “Hardwood reforestation would be a major step in the right
direction.”
Attending the Morgantown session at the same time was a coal industry
executive who preferred not to comment.
But the coal support group Federation for American Coal, Energy and
Security (FACES of Coal) posted a statement on its website: “OSM should
be focused first and foremost on the stability of mining fills, but is
elevating the avoidance of streams above all other concerns.”
Outcome
Holmes said the OSM saw the events as successful.
“What we’re finding is that the level of detail that people gave us in
their written responses shows that they were fully engaged and they
took time to look very carefully at these things,” he said. “This open
house process worked as we hoped it would.”
The nine open houses generated 453 individual comments by the July 30
deadline, while the OSM Web site logged about 19,000 comments,
according to Holmes.
OSM expects to generate a draft EIS by February 2011 that will be
subject to another round of public comment.