The bituminous surface coal production of 13 million tons was mined by 405 operations.  Of the 21 companies producing each more than 200,000 tons, five companies accounted for 4.7 million tons or 36 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, one of which was its bonding program.

Pennsylvania has bonded mines under either of two systems, a conventional bonding system (CBS) covering underground mines and coal preparation plants and an alternative bonding system (ABS) for surface mines, refuse reprocessing, and coal refuse disposal.  The ABS, established in 1981, consists of a per-acre bond rate schedule and a supplemental bond fund.  The bond rate schedule establishes a $3,000 per acre minimum bond for actual mining areas and another $1,000 per acre bond for support activities.  The schedule imposes higher per-acre rates when the maximum thickness of the rock overlying the coal (overburden) exceeds certain depths.  In addition to the site-specific bond, the ABS includes a statewide supplemental bond fund supported primarily through a per-acre reclamation fee collected at permit issuance.  In the event of forfeiture, the money in the bond fund (pool) supplements the per-acre permit bond to reclaim the site.  PADEP is now in the process of converting existing permits, presently bonded under the ABS, to a CBS through individual bond adjustments based on revised bonding 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, provides an analysis of the issues and outlines the PADEP process.  The second report entitled Assessment of Pennsylvania's Bonding Program for Primacy Coal Mining Permits provides an update on the condition of the Pennsylvania bonding program with respect to land reclamation on forfeited permits.  This report evaluates bond forfeiture activities from July 31, 1982, to

November 30, 1999, and develops projections to assess program capability for future forfeitures.  Throughout this evaluation year PADEP has conducted extensive outreach on this issue with citizens, the coal industry, the legislature and the congressional delegation.  This also included continued discussion of this and related bonding program initiatives with the Mining and Reclamation Advisory Board (MRAB), composed of representatives from the Citizens Advisory Council (CAC), the coal industry, county conservation districts and the Pennsylvania General Assembly.

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 with citizen groups and with the coal industry, and throughout the year.  A copy of the 2001 workplan is available from the Harrisburg Field Office.

Examples of public involvement included:

A.        THE PADEP PROGRAMS

• The MRAB

Significant public involvement in the PADEP regulatory program occurs through MRAB.  MRAB's purpose is to advise PADEP on coal mining and reclamation issues, such as regulations, proposed legislation, 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.  MRAB and its subcommittees address a number of coal program areas each year and publish an annual report on its activities.  Last year (2000), MRAB considered PADEP’s proposed conversion from an alternative bonding system to a CBS.  This year (2001), MRAB continued consideration of that issue through review of PADEP’s draft technical guidance setting out the requirements for determining bond amounts under a CBS.  MRAB also considered a number of rulemaking packages covering permit/road requirements, attorney fees, coal refuse disposal, the licensing of blasters and storage and handling of explosives.  The minutes of the meetings, as well as handouts and MRAB’s annual report are available on PADEP's website.

• The Citizens Advisory Council

PADEP solicits and/or receives public input on proposed changes to the Pennsylvania mining program from the Citizen Advisory Council (CAC).  The CAC was established in 1971 to review the activities of PADEP, make recommendations and report their activities annually to the Governor and the General Assembly.  The council is composed of 19 members who are citizens of the Commonwealth.  The CAC is responsible for reviewing all environmental laws and making suggestions for the revision, modification or codification of these laws.  Last year CAC reviewed PADEP’s Act 54 Report on the Impacts of Underground Coal Mining.  This year CAC considered the Act 54 supplemental report.  The Chairperson’s May 21, 2001, letter to the Acting Secretary of PADEP, about the review, complemented PADEP on improvements in the data presented and the conclusions in the report.

• Environmental Quality Board

The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) is a 20 member independent board that adopts all PADEP regulations.  The Board, which is chaired by the Secretary of PADEP, includes members from 11 state agencies, the CAC and the State Senate and House of Representatives.  PADEP through the EQB requests comments on all proposed regulations and holds public hearings or public meetings to provide citizens with the opportunity to express their concerns.  The PADEP EQB addresses all comments received on proposed rules in the preamble of the final rules that are published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.  As part of the development of regulations required by statute or by regulatory initiatives, PADEP, where there is significant public interest, holds outreach discussions or other public meetings to explain regulatory initiatives.  The Pennsylvania Bulletin is available for public review on the PADEP Internet site.

• The EHB

The Environmental Hearing Board (EHB) is an independent quasi-judicial agency that includes the Chairman and four members.  Members are administrative law judges with a minimum of five years of relevant legal experience.  The EHB has the sole power to hear and decide appeals of PADEP’s actions.  Litigants have the right to appeal EHB decisions to the Commonwealth Court. The EHB issued a number of decisions that deal with issues related to the approved state program.  In People United to Save Homes v. DEP , 97-262-R (Adjudication issued

December 28, 2000), EHB held that PADEP acted appropriately in granting a renewal permit for the operator of an underground coal mine where the permit renewal application was filed less than 180 days before the expiration date of the permit. In Richard and Cathy Maddock v. DEP, 99-224-L (Adjudication issued April 13, 2001), EHB found that PADEP acted appropriately when it revised a mining company’s coal refuse area permit to authorize the company to use a borehole, which it had already drilled, as a conduit to collect surface seeps and direct these seeps to treatment.  In John M. Riddle, JR. v. DEP, 99-227-MG (Adjudication issued February 26, 2001), EHB found that PADEP was correct in not ordering a mining operator to provide a landowner with an alternate water supply.  This finding was based on evidence that the impact to the water supply was likely the result of the landowner’s failure to periodically clean the well and drought conditions that prevailed throughout the area.

• Public Participation in Permitting, Inspection and Enforcement Activities

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 approved 68 permits.  PADEP provided opportunities for public comments on the adequacy of these individual applications prior to permit issuance.  Typically, the areas of concern addressed in these comments on permit applications are 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 on ongoing and completed mining operations, and bond release requests.  PADEP received and investigated approximately 1,160 citizen complaints, of which 1,092 were successfully resolved.  The remaining complaints were pending resolution at the close of the evaluation year.  Complaints can be directed to many aspects of the mining activities including stream pollution from erosion and mine drainage, blasting effects on structures and water supplies, damage to public roads, mining off permit, and dust among others.  However, the majority of complaints received are from citizens concerned with the effects of subsidence from underground mining on homes and personal water supplies. PADEP continues to be very effective in working with citizens and the mining companies to resolve complaints.

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 are implemented as a dual (State/Federal) enforcement process in Pennsylvania.  For State law cases (post August 1994) relative to EPACT, 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.  Following the July 28, 1995, Federal Register Notice, when OSM promulgated its own regulations relative to EPACT, 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.  Dual enforcement continues until an amendment to the State's program, as discussed above, is approved.  Since inception of a dual enforcement 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 three years, and none has involved direct Federal action.

D.        General Outreach BY OSM

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 Clean Streams Program (CSP).  Since 1996, when the program was first funded, about $7.8 million in clean stream grants have been awarded to Pennsylvania.  PADEP has identified 12 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 CSP, Congress gave OSM budget authority to enter into project agreements with local non-profit watershed groups to remediate AMD.  Under this program, OSM has funded 21 watershed cooperative agreement assistance projects in Pennsylvania for a total amount of $1,552,240.  These projects involve multiple partners providing financial and other assistance.  PADEP is providing financial and technical assistance on a significant number of these projects.

E.         Program Amendments

The program amendment process offers the public, the industry and citizens’ groups an opportunity to have input into the approved Pennsylvania program.  During this evaluation year, OSM acted on a number of formal and informal amendments. OSM approved program amendment PA 875.00 concerning anthracite prime farm lands.  The approval (PA 875.06),

66 FR 42750-42753, August 15, 2001, removed condition 30 CFR 938.16(p).  OSM provided comments to PADEP on three informal amendment submissions.  These informal amendments involved maintenance plans for post-mining roads, permit findings, and bond adjustments under certain conditions.

One amendment reported in last year’s annual report is awaiting final approval.  Another amendment concerning attorney fees has been approved and is pending publication in the Federal Register.

As stated in last year’s report, OSM conditionally approved Act 114 (PA 837.01) amending the Coal Refuse Disposal Control Act.  There were seven conditions outstanding from that approval. OSM took action (PA 837.90) to remove six of the seven conditions, pending PADEP’s submittal and OSM’s approval of an amendment containing the implementing regulations.  On August 16, 2001, OSM provided comments to the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board on the proposed implementing regulations (PA 837.92:  30 Pa. B. 3053-3065, June 17, 2000) relative to the Coal Refuse Disposal Act.  On July 14, 2001, the final rules (PA 837.92:

Pa. B, 3735-3751) were published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.  PADEP has not yet submitted these rules as a program amendment.

PADEP recently published one proposed rule and one final rule that affect the approved program. The proposed rule deals with permit and road requirements and was recently published in the Bulletin (31 Pa. B., 4538, August 18, 2001).  The rule is tied to two of the informal amendments listed above (PA 870.00 and PA 870.01).  The final rule (PA 878.01:  31 Pa. B., 3751-3765,

July 14, 2001), revises Chapters 210 and 211 that cover the use of explosives and licensing of blasters.  PADEP has not yet submitted these rules as a program amendment.

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

Accomplishments/Innovations

Pennsylvania continues to be successful developing remining initiatives aimed at reclaiming lands through additional mining activity.  PADEP has been pro-active in working with other agencies to identify options to existing regulatory requirements to facilitate 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.  The success of this program has been significant in achieving reclamation of mined lands that otherwise would have remained in an unreclaimed degraded state.  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; reduces the legal and environmental risks to the operator; and reduces the paperwork required for operators to remine abandoned mine lands.  In addition, part of the initiative includes incentives for mine operators to remine and reclaim abandoned mines at no cost to taxpayers.  This initiative by the state has resulted in almost one thousand acres of land being returned to productive, pre-mining uses, has reduced sedimentation of streams and has enhanced the potential for over-all improvements to stream water quality, quantity and habitats.  During this evaluation year, the Pennsylvania mining industry initiated 41 remining projects involving 941.4 acres for a total reclamation value of $4,925,847.

In addition, PADEP and the Environmental Protection Agency (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”, which allows testing of innovative approaches to environmental protection.  A copy of the FPA and additional information about the initiative is available at PADEP's website.

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, PADEP achieved outstanding success in this program as Pennsylvania initiated 14 GFCC sites representing reclamation of approximately 140 acres for an estimated reclamation savings of $652,130.  Among the States, Pennsylvania has excelled in developing and implementing this program.

Stage I and Stage III Bond Releases; 6. Remining Assessments; and 7. Intent to Explore Approvals.  These studies demonstrate a commitment on the part of PADEP to continue to enhance its administration of the approved program.

This year was marked by continuing growth in AMD treatment activities in Pennsylvania.  A number of state and locally administered AML and AMD abatement projects were funded under Pennsylvania's Growing Greener program.  Growing Greener funds are separate from funds awarded under OSM's Abandoned Mine Land Fund.  This year, PADEP awarded $38.08 million in Growing Greener 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 CSP funds to enhance the partnership approach to AMD cleanup.  PADEP's mining bureaus, the Bureau of Mining and Reclamation, the Bureau of District Mining Operations and the Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation (BAMR), continue to support AMD programs by providing staff and financial resources to assist the formation of watershed groups, develop watershed restoration plans, collect stream data, and implement AMD treatment plans. Pennsylvania continues its leadership role in forming watershed groups, and use of partnerships to accomplish AMD abatement.  To date, OSM has awarded PADEP $7.8 million in grants for CSP projects, for the cleanup of streams contaminated by AMD.  A total of 12 projects were identified by PADEP to receive these funds.  Six projects 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 in order to assess, in the upcoming calendar year, how these funds can most effectively be used to address forfeiture sites with long-term water pollutional discharges.  However, 19 Hydrologic Unit plans were previously approved by OSM and there is currently approximately $15.7 million in the fund, including grants and interest.  About $26.6 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 have provided 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 10 major projects and 22 smaller state workforce projects.  Reclamation included 3,450 lineal ft. of highwall (102.30 acres of land), and 35 acres of subsidence.

•  Issues

During this evaluation year, OSM and PADEP have continued to work together to develop a sound approach to resolve a number of bonding issues.  A key aspect of this approach is PADEP’s implementation of a plan to phase out the current ABS and implement a CBS.  PADEP has done an excellent job in this evaluation year of notifying operators of any additional bonding obligations under the Conventional Bonding System and is now in the process of recalculating bonds on those sites requiring adjustments.  PADEP continues to be pro-active in requiring operators to provide funding for long-term treatment of pollutional discharges.  In addition, OSM and PADEP continue to cooperatively maintain and enhance the inventory of long-term pollutional discharges. The purpose of the inventory is to help determine the magnitude of the potential harm from AMD, to assess the potential for use of passive treatment technologies, to address problem sites, to identify the amount of bond available to treat the discharges and to estimate the cost to abate the pollution.  PADEP has done an excellent job in providing accurate, up-to-date information to this system.  PADEP has also been successful in early identification of these discharges and in requiring operators to provide active/passive treatment of these discharges to mitigate off-site impacts.

Subsidence from underground mining and its potential for impacting surface water has increasingly become a significant issue in Pennsylvania.  On December 12, 2000, the Raymond Proffitt Foundation (RPF), a non-profit organization, served OSM with notice of its intent to sue based on adverse impacts to Enlow Fork, a perennial stream located on the border of Greene and Washington Counties in western Pennsylvania, from the surface subsidence effects of underground mining.  The notice stated that changes to the stream morphology (ratio of riffles, pools and glides), as a result of subsidence, were resulting in elimination of uses of and significant environmental harm to the stream.  OSM conducted an investigation of the biological and morphological conditions at Enlow Fork and concluded that the observed impacts were minor in nature and did not warrant further action.  Through the course of the evaluation year, RPF sent two additional letters related to surface water impacts from subsidence.  These letters stated that Laurel Run and Beham Run, two streams located in southwestern Pennsylvania, had suffered significant imminent environmental harm by being dewatered for 1.5 miles and 3,000 feet respectively as a result of subsidence from underground mining.  OSM investigated these allegations and concluded that Laurel Run had been dewatered for 1.5 miles as a result of subsidence and that dry areas of Beham Run could not be directly attributed to subsidence.  OSM responded to RPF that such impacts may be an expected result from planned subsidence.  The response also advised RPF that these impacts are frequently temporary.  In the Laurel Run and Beham Run cases, OSM conducted a preliminary investigation into the potential for significant imminent environmental harm and then forwarded the allegations to PADEP for further review and evaluation under the approved state program.  In the Laurel Run case, PADEP has ordered mitigation of the streambed and has required the company to provide a demonstration that further mining under the stream will not result in the same consequences.  PADEP is still investigating Beham Run.

An issue that has received significant focus over the past two years is the backlog of required program amendments.  Resolution of these outstanding program amendments has been identified as an area of priority for the upcoming evaluation year.  HFO and PADEP are engaged in a cooperative effort to address this issue.

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 which meet the bond release requirements for the various phases of reclamation.

A.        Off-Site Impacts  

Introduction:

The purpose of this evaluation was to carry out the oversight activity required under OSM's Directive REG-8, with regard to monitoring off-site impacts occurring from surface coal mining operations.  The study was developed as part of the HFO annual work plan.

This evaluation year, OSM reviewed off-site impacts by a study of the state’s civil penalty assessment and enforcement files for the 92 state enforcement actions issued during the first six months of the evaluation year.  The files were reviewed to identify documented off-site impacts.

The review analyzed the off-site impacts in terms of types of resources affected by the impact, degree of impact and the type of impact.  The types of resources affected identified for the purposes of the study were people, land, water and structures.  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 categories of impacts identified for the study were: Blasting, Land Stability, Hydrology, Encroachment and Other.

Data Presentation and Discussion:

The review of civil penalty and enforcement data found that PADEP’s inspection and enforcement program has done an excellent job in minimizing off-site impacts. These study findings indicate that 95% of the mine sites (2,085 of 2,160) were free of off-site impacts.

The study data demonstrated that effluent standards are the most likely violations to result in off-site impacts.  Of the 92 state enforcement actions reviewed, 51 involved off-site impacts. Fifty of the fifty-one (98%) off-site impacts observed in this study of state enforcement data were to water resources.  The impacts to water resources occurred primarily from discharged water that did not meet effluent limits.  These discharges resulted in the pollution of nearby streams by acidity, iron, manganese or sedimentation; or a combination of these contaminants. There were 42 minor and 6 moderate off-site impacts to the water resources adjacent to these mine sites.  These impacts were quickly corrected, resulting in only minimal short-term damage to the receiving stream in the mine site vicinity.  There were only two major hydrology impacts noted in the study, one impact resulting in water loss to a nearby dwelling and another resulting in damage to a receiving stream.  In the water loss incident PADEP required the operator to restore water to the dwelling in an expedient manner.  In the case involving damage to the receiving stream, PADEP required quick abatement of the violation, resulting in only short-term impacts to the stream.  The one non-water impact observed in the study was a major impact from a violation of blasting performance standards. In this case, three vehicles were damaged by flyrock.

The overwhelming majority of violations observed in the study had only minor to moderate impacts off the permit area.  Further, PADEP worked with the permittee to ensure that these violations, when they did occur, were quickly abated.  This is clearly demonstrated by the short abatement time operators took to resolve impacts.  The average time to correct the impacts observed in the study was 15 days.  When violations are relatively minor and are abated quickly it is unlikely that long-term impacts will occur.

The distribution of the degree of impacts is identified in Figure 1 below.  Figure 2 identifies, in percentages, the resources affected.  The review found 51 off-site impacts and 66 resources (people, land, water or structures) affected by those impacts.  As demonstrated by these data, it is possible for one off-site impact to affect more than one resource.  For example, an off-site hydrology impact may affect land and water.  However, due to the minor to moderate nature of the impact, no long-term effects resulted.

Figure 1

Figure 2

As referenced earlier, the PADEP inspection and enforcement program has done an excellent job in minimizing off-site impacts from surface coal mining operations.  This is clearly demonstrated by the low percentage of operations where off-site impacts were observed.  When off-site impacts did occur they were mostly minor to moderate with no long-term effect.  Further, PADEP focused resources toward sites with violations to insure that the conditions that resulted in the off-site impacts were abated rapidly.

B.        Bond Release

During the review period, PADEP released Stage I bonds on 7,057 acres, Stage II bonds on 8,330 acres, and Stage III bonds on 9,128 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.

C.        Bond Forfeiture

In terms of forfeitures, bonds were forfeited on 16 primacy permits incorporating 1,379 bonded acres.  Of this acreage, 1,218 acres were affected and 1,070 acres had been reclaimed while 148 acres still required reclamation.  The reclaimed bond forfeiture sites met reclamation plan (land) requirements.

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, including the AMD inventory, AMD treatment cost estimating, compliance monitoring, Clean Streams Program and historic properties.  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.

PADEP continues to maintain 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 to compile a comprehensive inventory of long-term pollutional mine discharges.  The purpose of the 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 regard to the effort of characterizing abatement costs, OSM assisted PADEP in developing a treatment cost-estimating program.  OSM’s role involved researching cost information used in the program.  The computer program, termed Treatcost, uses discharge-specific information stored in PADEP’s AMD inventory to estimate an annual treatment costs.  The versatile program has many applications and is a significant accomplishment.

OSM assisted PADEP to develop and jointly participated in an Internal Management Control Program.  The purpose of the program is for PADEP to evaluate and verify the effectiveness of selected program areas.  This year PADEP and OSM jointly designed and conducted seven management control studies, four in the bituminous coal region and three in the anthracite region. The bituminous studies focused on the following areas: 1. Haul Roads; 2. Government Financed Construction Contracts; 3. Post-Mining Discharge Treatment Facilities; and 4. Erosion and Sediment Controls.  The Anthracite Region studies focused on: 1. Completion Reports for Stage I and Stage III Bond Release; 2. Remining Assessment; and 3. Intent to Explore Approvals. The cooperation between PADEP and OSM in these studies has been exemplary and clearly enhances both agencies overall mission of environmental protection and land restoration.

OSM provided financial and program assistance to PADEP through the CSP, which since 1998, has been used to award PADEP $7.8 million in AML funds targeted for restoring streams polluted with abandoned mine drainage.  Thirteen AMD remediation projects have been funded by PADEP using these CSP funds.  HFO routinely consults with PADEP regarding the CSP projects selected to help assure they meet the guidelines of the program, and to identify the contributions of other funding and non-funding partners.  In addition, since 1999, OSM has been awarding partnership grants to non-profit watershed groups for AMD remediation projects.  OSM has made 21 direct grant awards to watershed groups under the Clean Streams Program for a total of about $1.5 million.  PADEP is frequently involved as a primary partner in these direct assistance grants, either providing funding and or technical assistance, and HFO coordinates with PADEP to help assure the successful completion of the projects.  In many of these projects, the funds provided by OSM complete the remediation budget.  Because of the partnership nature of the Clean Streams Program, HFO is routinely involved in meetings with PADEP and other project partners, helping to coordinate the technical and programmatic aspects, and to resolve issues.

HFO is working with PADEP and PHMC to adapt the Section 106 consultation process of the NHPA to the state’s permitting process in order to reduce the duplication in data gathering and the controversy created by past actions.  HFO, PADEP and PHMC believe this cooperative effort will provide a more effective and efficient method of addressing historic resources.  The need for a more effective and efficient Section 106 Consultation process became apparent when, 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 Site 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.  OSM determined that 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 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.  A Memorandum of Agreement was signed by the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC), PADEP, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and OSM in March 2001, completing the Section 106 consultation process on the historic property prior to its undermining. 

  VII.   General Oversight Topic Reviews

The below listed evaluation reports are available for review at the OSM Harrisburg Field Office. Copies have also been provided to PADEP.

I.          Underground Mines

·        Subsidence/Water:

In 2000, OSM completed a study of the underground mine PHC/CHIA process.  The study looked at the PHC section of PADEP’s permit application.  OSM and PADEP met several times throughout 2001 and have made considerable progress in reconciling the issues noted in that study.  PADEP is in the final stages of developing its CHIA process for underground coal mines. PADEP will be preparing a summary document by March 1, 2002, on how CHIAs for underground mines are performed in the regulatory program. PADEP plans to present this process in the Intergovernmental Benchmarking Workshop on the PHC/CHIA process sponsored by the Interstate Mining Compact Corporation (IMCC) in early 2002.

II.         AMD Prevention

A.        AMD Impacts:

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 potential pollutional discharges.  Data was collected from these sites to verify information in the AMD inventory, and to characterize the type and extent of AMD pollution on those permits.

Bond Forfeitures with CO&A's:

Also continued was an activity to identify primacy bond 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 CO&As were reviewed for compliance with applicable standards.

Vertical Flow Passive Treatment Systems (Progress Report):

A progress report has been completed relative to vertical flow systems (VFS) used to passively treat mine drainage on mine sites.  The purpose of the study is to provide technical assistance to PADEP in an attempt to better understand treatment characteristics of VFS.  During 2001 many sites were visited as part of the process of site selection and two sites were identified as study sites.  Because the study has not been finalized, it will continue through evaluation year 2002 and a final report will be prepared after a sufficient amount of data is available to identify chemical trends. 

B.         Compliance Monitoring:

Internal Control:

This year OSM and PADEP jointly conducted seven management control studies. The seven studies included four in the bituminous coal region and three in the anthracite region.  The bituminous studies focused on the following areas: 1. Haul Roads; 2. Government Financed Construction Contracts; 3. Post-Mining Discharge Treatment Facilities; and 4. Erosion and Sediment Controls.  The Anthracite Region studies consisted of: 5. Completion Reports involving Stage I Bond Release, and Stage III Bond Release; 6. Remining Assessment; and 7. Intent to Explore Approvals.  A report is available outlining the findings from the studies.

Oversight Inspections (Monitoring Report):

OSM conducted a total of 504 inspections during the evaluation year.  Of those inspections, 242 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.

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, by OSM inspectors, during the evaluation year.  A report is available of the findings from this review.

Endangered Species Bat Surveys, Abandoned Mine Land Sites:

OSM and PADEP conducted a joint review of the accomplishments associated with the survey of certain abandoned mine lands projects for use by bats.  OSM and PADEP staff reviewed a sample of projects where the design had been initiated between 1995 and 2001 to determine the existence of a survey and the type and extent of documentation.  OSM and PADEP recommended several improvements in the documentation process.  A report on the findings from this study is available.