I. Introduction

The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) created the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) in the Department of the Interior. SMCRA provides authority to OSM to oversee the implementation of and provide Federal funding for State regulatory programs that have been approved by OSM as meeting the minimum standards specified by SMCRA. This report contains summary information regarding the Pennsylvania Program and the effectiveness of the Pennsylvania Program in meeting the applicable purposes of SMCRA as specified in Section 102. This report covers the 2000 evaluation year, of the period from October 1, 1999, to September 30, 2000. Detailed background information and comprehensive reports for the program elements evaluated during the period are available for review and copying at OSM’s Harrisburg Field Office.

II. Overview of the Pennsylvania Coal Mining Industry

The coal geology of Pennsylvania is dominated by the Appalachian Mountains running northeast to southwest and dividing the State into two distinct coal regions. The western bituminous region of the State, where the majority of mines are located is characterized by mountains and gently rolling hills. Areas within this region containing acidic overburden often require special reclamation efforts. The bituminous coal seams underlay about 12,000 square miles in 28 counties of the State. The coal is found in four fields; the Main Bituminous Field in the southwest counties; the Georges Creek Field in the southern counties; the Broad Top Field in the south-middle counties; and the North-Central Field in the north-central counties of the State.

The anthracite coal region is located in the northeast quarter of the State and covers approximately 3,300 square miles. The coal is found in four fields; the Northern Field in the Wyoming and Lackawanna Valleys; the Eastern-Middle Field; the Western-Middle Field; and the Southern Field. The southern field has the greatest amount of minable reserves with the greatest reserves. The coal lies almost entirely in synclinal basins oriented in a general direction of N 70 degrees E. The more than 20 different coal seams vary in thickness from a few inches to 50 or 60 feet. The anthracite region is characterized by steeply pitching seams, some with dips in excess of 60 degrees. Such seams require highly specialized mining techniques, and present unique challenges for solving problems such as mine subsidence associated with abandoned anthracite mines.

For more than a century, coal has played a major role in the economic and industrial development of Pennsylvania, particularly the steel making industry, and has historically employed thousands of workers. In recent years, Pennsylvania's coal production has experienced a decline. However, the estimated bituminous reserves that total 23 billion tons, or 5.3 percent of U.S. reserves, and anthracite reserves that total 7.1 billion tons, or 97 percent of U.S. anthracite reserves, are adequate for Pennsylvania to be a leading coal producing State.

In 1999 Pennsylvania produced approximately 74 million tons. In recent years, underground mine production has increased while surface production has decreased. The underground bituminous mines accounted for 59 of the 74 million tons of coal production. Total coal production in 1998 was 78 million tons.

The Pennsylvania mining industry is experiencing a period of change with fewer operations being permitted annually. At present the 53 bituminous underground mining operations, producing 59 million tons, account for about 12 percent of the 493 active mines. These operations vary in size and complexity, varying from small volume operations to large corporations with substantial production. Longwall mining is predominant in some areas. Of the 20 companies producing more than 200,000 tons of underground-mined coal, five companies accounted for approximately 43.3 million tons or 73 percent of total underground production.

The bituminous surface coal production of 15 million tons was mined by 391 operations. Of the 20 companies producing more than 200,000 tons, five companies accounted for 4.6 million tons or 30 percent of total surface mine production.

III. Overview of the Public Participation Opportunities in the Oversight Process and the State Program

During this year the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) continued several ongoing initiatives and undertook several important new initiatives that provided opportunity for public involvement.

In October 1999 PADEP announced its intention to revise its bond rate guidelines to reflect the full cost of bonding for surface mines, coal refuse reprocessing and coal preparation plant permits. Since primacy for these types of permits, Pennsylvania has utilized bond schedules with rates at less than the full cost of reclamation by taking into account dedicates monies in its reclamation fund available to support reclamation on individual permits in the event of forfeiture. PADEP also stated its intent to convert existing permits presently bonded under the ABS to full cost bonds through individual bond adjustments based on the revised rate schedules. In support of this initiative, PADEP published two reports on bonding. The first report, entitled: Full Cost Bonding for Land Reclamation on Pennsylvania’s Coal Mine Sites, provided an analysis of the issues and outlined the PADEP proposal. Secondly, PADEP developed a report, entitled: Assessment of Pennsylvania’s Bonding Program for Primacy Coal Mining Permits updated the condition of the Pennsylvania bonding program with respect to land reclamation on forfeited permits. This report evaluated bond forfeiture activities from July 31, 1982, to November 30, 1999, and also developed projections to assess program capability for future forfeitures. As discussed below, PADEP presented these bonding program initiatives to the Mining and Reclamation Advisory Board (MRAB) for its review and consideration during the year.

PADEP conducted outreach to the coal mining industry, consulting firms and watershed organizations, to provide information on and discussion of its proposal to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a pilot project for Best Management Practice-based remining permits. The pilot project involves a watershed-based approach to monitoring and regulating remining operations, rather than by the use of traditional effluent limits. As a pilot study, up to eight remining projects may be authorized under EPA’s Project XL, a national pilot program that allows the EPA to work with state and local governments, businesses and federal facilities to develop and test better or more cost-effective ways of achieving environmental and public health protection.

During this evaluation year, PADEP implemented a technical guidance document, "Imminent Hazards Associated with Subsidence from Active Mining," (Number 563-2112-658). This guidance provides PADEP personnel, affected citizens and the public at large with a common understanding of how PADEP identifies and resolves imminent harm situations. Citizens previously raised concern about immediate and short-term impacts resulting from planned subsidence as mining occurs under their homes, utility lines and roads.

Annually, the Field Office develops a workplan to review and support the implementation of Federal SMCRA, through Pennsylvania’s Abandoned Mine Reclamation and Regulatory Programs. The draft is provided to PADEP with the intent of developing and finalizing a joint workplan for both oversight activities and support of approved SMCRA program initiatives. Opportunities for public interaction and input were provided during workplan development, and throughout the year. The workplan is on OSM’s Website at . A copy of the workplan is also available from the Harrisburg Field Office.

Examples of public involvement included:

A. The PADEP Programs

Significant public involvement in the PADEP regulatory program occurs through the MRAB. The MRAB’s purpose is to advise PADEP on coal mining and reclamation issues, such as, experimental practices, alternate methods of backfilling, selection of reclamation projects, alternate reclamation methods, obligations for pre-existing pollution liability, alteration of reclamation plans, reclamation fees and bonding rates and methods. The MRAB is composed of a diverse group including representatives from the Citizen Advisory Council, the coal industry, County Conservation Districts, and the Pennsylvania General Assembly. A number of coal program areas are addressed by the MRAB and its subcommittees each year, and annually, MRAB issues a report on its activities. As noted, one of the significant areas addressed by MRAB this year was PADEP’s proposed bonding system changes and enhancements, involving the conversion of new and existing permits from a bond pool to a Full Cost Bonding (FCB) system. At its June meeting, MRAB unanimously supported, with conditions, PADEP’s proposed FCB guidelines. MRAB’s Annual Report is made available on PADEP’s website.

PADEP solicits and/or receives public input on proposed changes to the Pennsylvania mining program from the Citizen Advisory Council (CAC). CAC is responsible for reviewing all environmental laws and to make suggestions for the revision, modification or codification of these laws. During this evaluation year, CAC also outlined its concerns with PADEP’s Act 54 Report on Impacts of Underground Coal Mining. CAC expressed concern about the report’s credibility with respect to data collected and that the report did not contain all of the information needed to evaluate the effects of deep mining, including information on the cost of the impacts of deep mining.

As part of the development of regulations required by statute or by regulatory initiatives, PADEP may, in certain instances, hold outreach discussions or other public meetings to explain regulatory initiatives. PADEP requests comments on all proposed regulations and holds public hearings or public meetings to provide citizens with the opportunity to express their concerns. PADEP addresses all comments received on proposed rules in the preamble of the final rules that are published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

The Environmental Hearing Board (EHB) issued a number of decisions that deal with programmatic issues. In Blose v. DEP, EHB Docket No. 98-034-R (Adjudication issued March 7, 2000), EHB found that although PADEP’s system for approving mining within buffer zones under 25 Pa. Code § 86.37(a)(5)(v) adequately protected the public, its form conflicted with the wording of Pennsylvania’s Regulations. In Wayne v. DEP, EHB Docket No. 98-175-R (Adjudication issued July 11, 2000), pages 22 and 23, EHB found that PADEP cannot grant a Stage III bond release, where a haul road is to remain in place, unless PADEP first approves both the road’s retention and its maintenance plan.

The PADEP regulatory program receives public input throughout the permitting, inspection, compliance monitoring and enforcement processes. With respect to permitting activity during this evaluation period, PADEP records indicated approval of 100 permits. PADEP received public comments on the adequacy of individual permit applications prior to rendering a final decision on permit issuance. Some of the areas of concern addressed by these comments on permit applications included subsidence control plans, blasting plans, sediment controls, post-mining land use, hydrologic balance protection, and the adequacy of maps and supporting information.

With respect to inspection, compliance monitoring and enforcement activity during the evaluation year, the public may submit both informal and formal complaints with respect to ongoing and completed mining operations, and bond release requests. PADEP received and addressed approximately 686 citizen complaints, of which 620 were resolved. The remaining complaints were pending resolution at the close of the evaluation year.

PADEP continues to be very active in working with other agencies to identify viable options to existing regulatory requirements associated with remining operations. PADEP’s remining initiatives are discussed below.

B. Development and Implementation of Oversight Agreements

The Harrisburg Field Office maintained an open process for industry and citizen involvement in oversight activities through the annual workplan. The plan was provided to PADEP and interest groups for comment or suggestion of additional oversight initiatives that should be incorporated into the plan. The Harrisburg Field Office also met with interested groups to explain the proposed and ongoing activities and to discuss their comments.

C. Implementation of Energy Policy Act (EPACT) Requirements

As outlined in prior Annual Reports, the EPACT requirements for repair or compensation of subsidence damage and replacement of water supplies resulting from underground mining continue as a dual (State/Federal) process in Pennsylvania. Dual enforcement is needed until an amendment to the State’s program, as discussed below, is approved. Since only EPACT was in effect in the period from October 1992 to August 1994, the process provides for PADEP to inform operators of their responsibilities under the Federal law, with OSM action only if needed to bring about repair or compensation of subsidence damage and replacement of water supplies. Since inception of this dual process in 1995, Federal action has only been necessary in one case. The number of new "gap" period cases has been under ten for the past two years, and none have involved direct Federal action.

For State law cases (post August 1994), the process provides for PADEP to carry out State law and regulations implementing repair or compensation of subsidence damage and replacement of water supplies resulting from underground mining. Under the July 28, 1995, Federal Register Notice, OSM retains authority where EPACT would provide greater relief on individual cases, until amendments to BMSCLA are incorporated in the approved program through the program amendment process.

D. General Outreach

OSM continued interacting with citizens groups, industry and other State and Federal agencies on oversight and State program initiatives. The Field Office met with industry representatives such as the Pennsylvania Coal Association (PCA) and attended the MRAB meetings to provide input on oversight initiatives and explain any new OSM programs.

OSM continues to provide assistance to PADEP and numerous local groups and associations in promoting the clean-up of Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) impacted streams through the Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative (ACSI). Since 1996, when the program was first funded, about $5.1 million in clean stream grants have been awarded to Pennsylvania. PADEP has identified 16 projects across the coalfields of Pennsylvania to receive this funding. These projects are being accomplished in partnership with other agencies and watershed groups to maximize the effectiveness of the cleanup effort. The Field Office attends workshops, and individual watershed meetings throughout the year in support of AMD clean-up efforts and PADEP programs. Also, under the umbrella of the ACSI, Congress gave OSM budget authority for Fiscal Years 1999 and 2000 for project agreements between OSM and local non-profit watershed groups to remediate AMD. Under this program, OSM funded 15 watershed cooperative agreement assistance projects in Pennsylvania for a total amount of $935,840. These projects involve multiple partners providing financial and other assistance.

E. Program Amendments

The program amendment process offers the public, industry and the citizens groups an opportunity to have input into the approved Pennsylvania program.

During this evaluation year, OSM acted on numerous amendments to the approved state program. OSM approved PADEP’s Small Operator Assistance Program amendment ( PA 846.02) on March 23, 2000. OSM’s approval removed condition 30 CFR 938.16 (ooo). In addition, OSM approved two program amendments resulting from PADEP’s Regulatory Basic Initiative. One of the amendments (PA 845.02) revised provisions in the approved program concerning ownership and control, bonding, civil penalties and areas unsuitable for mining. In the other program amendment (PA 849.02) related to the Regulatory Basic Initiative, OSM approved approximately 62 minor revisions. Also, in 1998, OSM conditionally approved Act 114 (PA 837.01) amending the Coal Refuse Disposal Control Act. There were seven conditions outstanding from that approval. This evaluation year, OSM took action (PA 837.90) removing six of the seven conditions pending PADEP’s submittal and OSM’s approval of an amendment containing the implementing regulations.

As reported last year, Pennsylvania submitted proposed amendments to the approved State program with regard to repair and/or compensation for damage to structures or water loss caused by subsidence from underground mining. The formal amendment submission included State Act 54 of 1994,enacted on June 22, 1994, amending Bituminous Mine Subsidence and Land Conservation Act (Act 54) and final rules set forth in Volume 28, Pennsylvania Bulletin, 2761-2791, June 13,1998, implementing Act 54. Upon request, OSM held a public hearing on June 21, 1999. Following that hearing and review of the PADEP submission, OSM forwarded a list of issues to PADEP and received the PADEP response letter on June 1, 2000. A final letter addressing the remaining issues was sent to PADEP on June 23, 2000 and PADEP’s response to that letter was received on July 14, 2000. OSM’s determination on the amendment package was in final preparation at the close of the evaluation year.

Resolution of the award of attorney fees continue as a program issue carried over from the last several years. As noted in prior Annual Reports, OSM required PADEP to amend its coal mining laws so that cost and fees may be awarded in any coal mining administrative proceeding which results in a final order and to provide that the permittee may recover costs and attorney fees from the citizen or PADEP only where it is shown that the citizen or PADEP acted in bad faith for the purpose of harassing or embarrassing the permittee. In September, the House of Representatives approved language (House Bill 866) designed to make PA SMCRA consistent with Federal law on the awarding of attorney fees in mining-related cases.

Resolution of outstanding program amendments has been identified as an area of priority for the upcoming evaluation year. The Field Office and PADEP began a series of initiatives to resolve the list of program amendment issues.

IV. Major Accomplishments/ Issues/ Innovations in the Pennsylvania Program

As reported in last year’s Annual Report, on June 3, 1999, OSM and PADEP received notice from the Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture) of its Intent to Sue under Section 520(a) of SMCRA, citing the lack of sufficient bond to insure treatment of long-term pollutional discharges. On October 13, 1999, PennFuture filed suit in United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The suit challenged the adequacy of Pennsylvania’s bonding system, among other things, with respect to funding for long-term treatment of pollutional discharges. The suit seeks relief from the Court by requiring PADEP to submit a program amendment to OSM that will insure the coal mine bonding program achieves the purposes and objectives of SMCRA with respect to bonding for AMD abatement. The complaint also seeks the Court to require OSM to determine whether PADEP has fulfilled its obligations to administer the approved SMCRA program and to immediately initiate a proceeding to enforce the approved program and/or implement a Federal program if PADEP has failed to fulfill its bonding program obligations.

In response to the suit, PADEP filed a motion to dismiss the eight counts in the complaint that dealt with Pennsylvania. In an order dated July 6, 2000, six of the eight counts filed against PADEP were dismissed. No action was taken in the decision on the three counts against OSM. In addition, motions to intervene by PCA, the Pennsylvania Anthracite Council and the Anthracite Region Independent Power Producers Association were granted. The court is currently reviewing a motion, filed by the plaintiffs, requesting reconsideration of the dismissed counts.

With regard to the issue of AMD and long-term treatment, PADEP substantively updated its inventory of sites with long-term pollutional discharges. Analysis of the inventory may help to determine: (1) the magnitude of potential harm; (2) the potential for use of passive treatment; (3) the emergency options available should treatment be discontinued; (4) the amount of bond available to address the long-term solution; and, (5) the long-term cost to abate the pollution. Enhancements to the AMD inventory include addition of data elements for latitude, longitude, bond amount, coal seam(s) mined, acreage of coal removal, type of special AMD permit conditions, names of primary and secondary watersheds affected, date the discharge was first identified, type of treatment, and location of the discharge on the permit.

As part of the inventory update effort, PADEP completed revision the "Remine" model for prediction of annual treatment costs and capitol improvement costs. The "Remine" model was originally developed by EPA and PADEP in 1988. The model is applicable to discharges from underground and surface mines. The new model, titled "Treat Cost" will allow PADEP to calculate the cost of treating discharges.

During the Evaluation Year, as discussed above, PADEP completed a financial reassessment of its bonding programs. PADEP’s reassessment of its alternative bonding program concluded that full cost bonds, with bond adjustments as needed, would best carry out the requirements of the bonding program. PADEP also found deficits in its conventional bonding programs, and that enhancements were needed in these programs to prevent continuing funding shortfalls. PADEP developed a number of proposals to support the process of conversion to FCB that are designed to assist current permittees with the transition to FCB, and that will continue or further support PADEP’s remining initiative.

Pennsylvania Surface Mining Conservation and Reclamation Act (PASMCRA), as does Federal SMCRA, prohibits the release of reclamation bonds on sites with pollutional discharges, unless other financial assurances for long-term water treatment are provided. As a result, PADEP is holding bond on a number of post-primacy permits with post-mining discharges. As part of its continuing efforts during the evaluation year to address the problem, PADEP continued to develop the concept of site-specific treatment trust funds for use as a means of addressing long-term treatment responsibility. While amendments to PASMCRA require that site-specific trust funds must be designed to provide treatment for at least 50 years, PADEP is formulating trust funds based on perpetual treatment.

In terms of forfeiture reclamation, Pennsylvania may negotiate with sureties for reclamation in-lieu-of collecting a forfeited bond on certain sites, including sites with long-term treatment liability. PADEP takes several measures aimed at ensuring the value of the work performed and/or treatment provided exceed the forfeited bond amount. As noted in prior Annual Reports, OSM reviews found that PADEP achieved more land reclamation than would have otherwise resulted from collecting the forfeited bond and contracting for the work where the bonds were not adequate to finance all reclamation obligations remaining after forfeiture.

Pennsylvania continued developing remining initiatives designed to provide a wide range of program elements aimed at eliminating unreclaimed lands through additional mining activity. PADEP has been very active in working with other agencies to identify viable options to existing regulatory requirements associated with remining operations. As noted in previous years, a number of remining incentives were included in amendments to Pennsylvania SMCRA (Act 173 of February 1993). PADEP’s remining efforts were an important part of the "Reclaim PA" initiative announced on October 23, 1998. During the time period of October 1999 to October 2000, the Pennsylvania mining industry initiated 51projects involving 1,512 acres for a total reclamation value of $8,333,466.

PADEP and EPA entered into a Final Project Agreement (FPA) to explore a new approach to encourage the remining and reclamation of abandoned coal mine sites. The approach is based on compliance with in-stream pollutant concentration limits and implementation of best management practices, instead of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System numeric effluent limitations that are otherwise measured at individual discharge points. The intent is to carry out a pilot project as part of EPA’s "Project XL" under which EPA tests innovative approaches to environmental protection. A copy of the FPA and additional information about the initiative is available at PADEP’s website.

PADEP continued to make progress in reclamation of abandoned mines through the Reclaim PA program. Reclaim PA is a statewide approach to maximizing reclamation of Pennsylvania’s abandoned mineral extraction legacy. Reclaim PA contains a number of program initiatives that integrate existing and newly created resources. With respect to the coal program, Reclaim PA provides incentives to operators that do remining; reduce the legal environmental risks to the operator connected with remining; and cut down on paperwork needed for operators to begin remining abandoned mine lands. In addition, part of the initiative includes ways to encourage mine operators to remine and reclaim abandoned mines at no cost to taxpayers.

On March 26, 1999, OSM approved an amendment to the Pennsylvania Abandoned Mine Lands (AML) program to improve the efficiency of the Pennsylvania program by allowing the government financed construction contract (GFCC) exemption in Section 528 of SMCRA to be applied in cases involving less than 50% financing. The exemption applies in the limited situation where the construction constitutes a government approved and administered abandoned mine land reclamation project under Title IV of SMCRA. During the review period, Pennsylvania evaluated 35 GFCC sites representing reclamation of 283 acres and a cost savings to the AML program of approximately $2.3 million. Of the sites evaluated, OSM has authorized 23, Pennsylvania has completed the contracting requirements on 14, and two have been reclaimed. Pennsylvania estimates that approximately 80% of the GFCC sites involve either abandoned coal refuse areas or surface subsidence areas from past underground mining. Among the States, Pennsylvania has excelled in developing and initiating this new reclamation.

PADEP developed an Internal Management Control Program to evaluate and verify the effectiveness of its enforcement program. This year PADEP designed and conducted five management control studies focusing on the following areas: (1) Permits with large pits exceeding 1500' x 300'; (2) Intent to explore approvals; (3) Mineral extraction permits; (4) Government financed construction contracts; and, (5) Completion reports on Stage II or III bonded areas.

This year was marked by continuing growth in AMD treatment activities in Pennsylvania. A number of state and locally administered AML and AMD projects were funded under the second year of Pennsylvania’s Growing Greener program. Growing Greener funds are separate from funds awarded under OSM’s Abandoned Mine Land Fund. In the first year of Growing Greener, PADEP awarded $16.52 million in grants and contracts for projects that will cleanup abandoned coal mine and abandoned oil and gas mine sites. In addition, in several projects, Growing Greener funds were combined with ACSI funds to enhance the partnership approach to AMD cleanup. PADEP’s mining bureaus, Bureau of Mining and Reclamation, Bureau of District Mining Operations and Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation (BAMR) continue to expand AMD programs, providing staff and financial resources to assisting the formation of watershed groups, developing watershed restoration plans, collecting stream data, and implementing AMD treatment plans. Pennsylvania continues a leadership role in forming watershed groups, and the use of partnerships to accomplish AMD abatement. To date, OSM has awarded PADEP $5,094,753 in grants for ACSI projects, for the cleanup of streams contaminated by AMD. A total of 16 projects were identified by PADEP to receive these funds. Several have been completed and the others are in various stages of design and construction. These are partnership projects, with local watershed groups, private companies and other Pennsylvania and Federal Agencies often contributing time and financial resources.

PADEP has placed a hold on contracting new projects under its 10% AMD Set Aside funds and no new Qualified Hydrologic Unit Plans were submitted for approval to OSM in the past year. However, 19 Hydrologic Unit plans were previously approved by OSM and there is currently approximately $13.3 million in the fund, including grants and interest. About $23.2 million in grant deposits and interest have come into the 10% set-aside fund since its inception. Fifteen AMD projects have been completed under these approved Hydrologic Unit plans and several others are ongoing. BAMR staff involved in the AMD Set-Aside program provide a valuable service to watershed groups by conducting stream sampling, attending meetings, giving advice and guidance on how to get started in cleaning-up streams, and helping develop partnerships for AMD abatement activities.

Pennsylvania's AML program continued to achieve success in traditional areas of abandoned mine land reclamation such as dangerous highwall removal, subsidence control, and sealing shafts and portals. Specific accomplishments include completion of 12 major projects and 42 smaller state workforce projects. Reclamation included 3,200 lineal ft. of highwall (37.1 acres of land), and 18.9 acres of hazardous water bodies.

V. Success in Achieving the Purposes of SMCRA as Measured by the Number of Observed Off-Site Impacts and the Number of Acres Meeting the Performance Standards at the Time of Bond Release

To further the concept of reporting end results, the findings from performance standard evaluations are being collected for a national perspective in terms of the number and extent of observed off-site impacts and the number of acres that have been mined and reclaimed and which meet the bond release requirements for the various phases of reclamation. Individual topic reports are available in the Harrisburg Field Office that provide additional details on how the following evaluations and measurements were conducted.

A. Off-Site Impacts

During the evaluation year, PADEP inspectors conducted inspections on 2,269 permits. Ninety-five percent of the permits were free of off-site impacts. OSM evaluated off-site impacts by reviewing the civil penalty assessment files for all State enforcement actions issued during the first six months of the evaluation year. The evaluation studied the degree of off-site impacts resulting from violations cited in 92 enforcement actions. Of the 92 enforcement actions reviewed there were 53 cited with identified off-site impacts. Those 53 off-site impacts were evaluated and analyzed in terms of the type of impact, the resources affected by the impact and the degree of impact. The degree of impact was divided into three levels. Those levels are: (1) minor impacts or impacts that do not affect the public, disturb a small area or have negligible effect on the receiving stream; (2) major impacts, or impacts that have significant impacts to the public, that affect large off-site areas and have major impacts to the receiving stream; and, (3) moderate impacts, or impacts that do not fit in either of the first two categories. The distribution of the degree of impacts were as follows: 68% minor, 28% moderate, and 4% were major impacts.

Analysis of the data related to the resources affected by an impact found that violations of the hydrology effluent standards most often result in off-site impacts (78%). The impacts to water resources occurred because discharged water did not meet effluent limits. These discharges resulted in impacts to nearby streams by acidity, iron, manganese or suspended solids; or a combination of these contaminants. There were 28 minor, 10 moderate, and no major impacts to the water resources adjacent to these mine sites. Erosion and Sedimentation control violations represent nine of the total 42 hydrology impacts. In these cases, uncontrolled runoff to offsite lands caused erosion and sedimentation to adjacent land. Land stability violations accounted for 8% of the total types of impacts. The category listed as other (6%) consists of violations pertaining to dust, whereby proper methods were not followed to control fugitive dust. Air blasts accounted for the two violations, and encroachment violations (4%) were a result of mining too close to residential property.

The graph above displays the decrease in off-site impacts since 1997. Minor shifts occurred in the types of impacts reported; however, hydrology impacts have steadily declined, as did the overall number of impacts reported.

B. Bond Release

During the review period, PADEP released Stage I bonds on 5,402 acres, Stage II bonds on 5,006 acres, and Stage III bonds on 6,802 acres. The average length of time between the initiation of mining and the completion of backfilling has been approximately 3.5 years. A large majority of sites have been reclaimed to approximate original contour. Alternative configurations have been approved in several cases mostly for refuse disposal and refuse reclamation operations. The most common alternative configuration employed has been a terrace backfill.

In terms of forfeitures, bonds were forfeited on 15 primacy permits incorporating 536.2 acres. As a result of the forfeiture reclamation program, 172 acres were reclaimed by PADEP. The reclaimed bond forfeiture sites met reclamation plan (land) requirements. However, in most cases, long-term treatment of AMD is not otherwise provided where post-mining discharges are not abated by forfeiture reclamation. As noted above, this issue is also the subject of the PennFuture litigation in U.S. District Court.

VI. OSM Assistance

This evaluation year OSM provided technical assistance to PADEP in resolution of citizens’ complaints and provided assistance through participation on teams to develop program enhancements. OSM continued to provide assistance to PADEP in the development of an AML program amendment for enhanced reclamation opportunities through government financed construction and reclamation of abandoned sites adjacent to active coal operations.

Technical assistance provided by OSM also included participation with PADEP on teams to develop program enhancements, including remining, AMD, compliance, enforcement, and ACSI.

As previously noted, PADEP updated its AMD inventory on sites with long-term pollutional discharges. In conjunction with this effort, the Field Office updated the inventory of forfeited permits with discharges. Together, the active/inactive and forfeiture inventories are part of a State and Field Office effort in the Appalachian Region, to compile a Region-wide inventory of long-term pollutional mine discharges (commonly referred to as acid mine drainage or AMD). The purpose of the Regional inventory is to pinpoint the geographic location where coal mine drainage problems occur, to characterize the magnitude and abatement cost of water pollution for defined geographic areas, and to establish strategies for addressing the impacts of actual and potential discharges.

In a continuing effort to address AMD-related issues, OSM contracted with Tetra Tech EM, Inc., to evaluate the financial considerations associated with bonding long-term treatment of AMD. During this evaluation year, OSM made three Tetra Tech reports available to the public as part of its commitment to technology transfer. The released reports are titled "Methodologies for Estimating the Costs of Treatment of Mine Discharges" (February 28, 2000), "Sensitivity Analysis of the Methodology for Estimating the Costs of Long-Term Treatment of Mine Drainage" (June 15, 2000), and "Final Report of the Feasibility of Using Various Financial Mechanisms to Demonstrate Financial Assurance for the Long-Term Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage" (June 21, 2000). The reports, along with other information about AMD abatement, are available on OSM’s web site at:

The Field Office compiled information from permit files on blasting complaints as part of a nationwide OSM effort to gather information to identify any trends that may help OSM and the States resolve blasting related complaints. The nationwide study focused on complaint diversity, complaint spacial relation to the mine, compliance methods used by the mine, contact level by the regulatory authority, final disposition of the complaint and mitigative measures taken. The report based on nationwide study was in final preparation at the close of the evaluation year.

OSM assisted PADEP to develop an Internal Management Control Program. The purpose of the program is for PADEP to evaluate and verify the effectiveness of its enforcement program. This year PADEP and OSM jointly designed and conducted five management control studies focusing on the following areas: (1) Permits with large pits exceeding 1500' x 300'; (2) Intent to explore approvals; (3) Mineral extraction permits; (4) Government financed construction contracts; and, (5) Completion reports on Stage II or III bonded areas.

In response to a citizen complaint late in 1999, OSM initiated action under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) on the Thomas Kent Jr. Farm National Register Historic Property in Greene County. The historic property was the subject of an application for permit revision that would allow full extraction mining beneath the Kent Farm. This undertaking would cause an adverse effect on the property because of anticipated damages to structures and land features that constitute the historic designation. In March 2000, OSM issued guidance clarifying the consultation process required in Section 106 of NHPA. OSM clarified that it is the Federal Agency official responsible for completing the Section 106 consultation. OSM later concluded, although PADEP disagrees, that any mining prior to completion of the consultation process that could cause adverse effects constitutes mining without a valid permit subject to enforcement under SMCRA. In October 2000, OSM issued a Record of Consultation Findings on Kent Farm. OSM accepted PADEP’s permit evaluation actions and decision as part of the Section 106 process. The record included a proposed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for the consulting parties’ consideration. If signed, this MOA would formally accept the mining and mitigation plan as approved by PADEP, and specify those activities the company will take to protect, repair and replace damaged features of the structures and lands so that the historic qualities that made the property eligible for listing on the National Register, are maintained. At the end of the evaluation year, OSM was seeking agreement on the proposed MOA from the consulting parties.

OSM is also updating its directives and guidance regarding the Section 106 Consultation Process.

VII. General Oversight Topic Reviews

The below listed evaluation reports are available for review at the Harrisburg Field Office of OSM.

I. Underground Mines

A. Subsidence/Water:

EPACT Report:

OSM conducted a study to verify that all citizens affected by mining, during the EPACT gap period (October 24, 1992, through August 21, 1994), were properly compensated and/or repairs made. The study focused on the investigation process and resolution.

B. Other Underground Mining Operations:

Shadow Area Report:

A study was carried out to characterize the number, type and degree of impacts to people, land, structures and water resources resulting from subsidence impacts from underground mining. The evaluation consisted of a detailed review, over time, of surface areas overlying longwall mine panels (shadow areas). A final report is available detailing the results of this study.

II. AMD Prevention

A. AMD Inventory Update

Mine Drainage Inventory Report:

A detailed analysis was conducted of the Pennsylvania portion of the Appalachian Region AMD Inventory. The analysis characterizes the scope, magnitude and abatement cost of water pollution. A report is available with the findings from that analysis.

B. AMD Impacts

Follow-up to the State’s Post-Mortem Study:

A study was conducted to follow-up on last year’s review of Post-Mortem sites. During last year’s review, drought conditions resulted in several dry discharges. This study focused on those previously dry sites and sampled them during more normal weather conditions. A report was produced on the findings of that study.

Active / Inactive Report:

The Harrisburg Field Office continued its study from last year to review active and inactive surface mine and refuse pile primacy permits with pollutional discharges. Data was collected to further develop the existing inventory database containing the active and inactive sites, and to characterize the type and extent of AMD pollution on those permits. A report is available detailing the findings from this review of 25 active and inactive sites.

Bond Forfeitures with AMD:

The Field Office continued its study from last year to identify primacy bond forfeitures with AMD, and collect water quality and quantity information. This year, staff revisited 17 sites that were dry last year to determine if the end of the drought would restore the discharges. The Field Office also reviewed new primacy forfeitures to determine if any had AMD. A report is available with the findings from that study.

Bond Forfeitures with CO&A’s:

Also continued was an activity to identify primacy forfeitures that had been addressed with consent orders and agreements (CO&A). The study was based on CO&A’s identified during a review of forfeited sites with third-party reclamation and with potential long-term pollutional discharges. The purpose of the study was to determine whether the CO&A’s provided for reclamation in accordance with the reclamation plan, including the long-term treatment of post-mining pollutional discharges. A report is available with the findings from that study.

Vertical Flow Passive Treatment Systems (Progress Report):

A progress report has been completed for this study that evaluates the success of vertical flow systems (VFS) used to passively treat AMD on active, inactive, and forfeited mine sites. The purpose of the study is to provide permit reviewers with design-criteria guidelines and water-quality guidelines that can be used to successfully implement VFS. Because the study has not been finalized, it will continue through evaluation year 2001 and a final report will be completed at that time.

C. Compliance Monitoring:

Internal Control:

This year OSM and PADEP jointly conducted five management control studies. The studies focused on the following areas: (1) Permits with large pits exceeding 1500' x 300'; (2) Intent to explore approvals; (3) Mineral extraction permits; (4) Government financed construction contracts; and, (5) Completion reports on Stage II or III bonded areas. A report is available with the findings from these studies.

Oversight Inspections (Monitoring Report):

OSM conducted a total of 457 inspections during the evaluation year. Of those inspections, 133 were randomly selected inspections of active mine sites. This data was used to determine the number of sites in full compliance. A report is available summarizing the findings from this review.

State Bond Releases (Monitoring Report):

OSM conducted a field study of bond releases performed by the State. The review was designed to determine on-the-ground success of PADEP’s bond release program as required in REG-8. A report is available providing the findings from this study.

National Blasting:

As part of a National initiative, a study was performed to gather information and to identify any trends in blasting complaints that may help OSM and the States resolve the numerous complaints received annually. The study focused on complaint diversity, complainant’s spacial relation to the mine, compliance methods used by the mine operators, contact level by the regulatory authority, final disposition of the complaint and mitigative measures taken. A report is available with the findings from that study.

Off-Site Impacts:

As part of the effort to determine the number of Off-Site Impacts in Pennsylvania, OSM conducted a review of the violations cited by PADEP during the first six months of the evaluation year. In addition, off-site impact data was gathered during all inspections conducted during the evaluation year. A report is available of the findings from this review.

Regulatory Program Grant Activity Review:

Regulatory Program Grant Activity (Progress Report):

A study was conducted to cross-reference grant activities with the approved program, pending amendments, requested amendments, program guidance manual documents, and other coal regulatory program laws and regulations to determine if activities, and associated costs were eligible to be charged to or used as match in the grant. The primary purpose is to assure the appropriateness of associated grant charges and confirm whether any adjustments are needed to the Automated Management Information System (AMIS) to reflect the results of the review. This study is ongoing and will be completed during the next evaluation year. A progress report is available on the status of the study.

Permit Findings and Documentation (Progress Report):

A review of permit findings and documentation was conducted as part of a National/Regional Initiative. OSM and PADEP jointly participated in this study to determine the type and extent of written permit findings being prepared under the Pennsylvania program. The review included OSM and PADEP requirements, guidance information, information from PADEP legal staff, and actual permit findings completed since January 1997. This study is ongoing and will be completed during the next evaluation year. A progress report is available on the status of the study.

Historic Preservation, Abandoned Mine Land Sites:

OSM and PADEP conducted a joint review of the MOA’s that have been developed, to date, between OSM, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Pennsylvania Historic and Museum Commission, and PADEP on AML reclamation projects. The study evaluated the status of each agreement, the degree to which OSM and PADEP met the stated requirements, recommended methods for streamlining and improving the process.

These tables present data pertinent to mining operations, State and Federal regulatory activities within Pennsylvania. They also summarize funding provided by OSM and Pennsylvania staffing. Unless otherwise specified, the reporting period for the data contained in all tables is the 2000 evaluation year (October 1, 1999 - September 30, 2000). Additional data used by OSM in its evaluation of Pennsylvania’s performance is available for review in the evaluation files maintained by the Harrisburg Field Office.