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 period of January 1, 1996 to September 30, 1996. Subsequent to the beginning of the evaluation year, the review cycle was changed to coincide with the federal fiscal year (October 1 - September 30). 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.

The following list of acronyms are used in this report:

List of Acronyms

ACSI Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative

AMD Acid Mine Drainage

BAMR Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation

EPACT Energy Policy Act of 1992

EHB Environmental Hearing Board

MOA Memorandums of Agreement

MRAB Mining and Reclamation Advisory Board

NOV Notice of Violation

OSM Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

PADEP Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

SMCRA Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977

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 the first nine months of 1996 Pennsylvania produced approximately 50 million tons. In recent years, underground mine production has increased while surface production has decreased. The underground bituminous mines accounted for 35 of the 50 million tons of coal production. Total coal production in 1995 was 61 million tons.

The Pennsylvania mining industry is experiencing a period of change with fewer operations being permitted annually. At present the 79 bituminous underground mining operations, producing 35 million tons, account for about 7 percent of the 1,098 active permits. These operations vary in size and complexity varying from small volume operations to large corporations with substantial production. Longwall mining is still predominant in some areas. Of the 19 companies producing over 200,000 tons of underground-mined coal, five companies accounted for 28.6 million tons or 81 percent of total underground production.

The bituminous surface coal production of 15 million tons was mined by 738 operations. Of the 21 companies producing over 200,000 tons, five companies accounted for 5.5 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

As noted in last year=s annual report, PADEP continued implementing a comprehensive outreach program, AFocus on the Year 2000", to enhance citizen, industry and third party participation and interaction in mining program activity. As a consequence of this initiative and the implementation of several significant regulatory program activities and program amendments, the Title V regulatory process in Pennsylvania resulted in a number of areas with in-depth public involvement. These program areas and initiatives included remining incentives and the drafting of subsidence repair, compensation and water supply replacement proposed regulations. During the year, PADEP held public meetings, hearings, conducted outreach activities, and met with citizen groups and the industry to get input in defining and developing these initiatives. The public also was involved in a number of specific cases and decisions made by PADEP, including permitting decisions, lands unsuitable petitions, bond release actions and enforcement cases. During the evaluation period PADEP received over 377 citizen complaints. The complaints covered a number of mining program areas including blasting, water quality impacts, water loss and subsidence. The Field Office received 10 citizen complaints during the period.

The Field Office/PADEP Annual Workplan includes several joint activities aimed at supporting and complementing PADEP=s program initiatives. The development and implementation of the workplan also provided a number of opportunities for public interaction and input in the program development and implementation process. The annual workplan agreement is included on PADEP=s (http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/minres/minres.htm) and the Field Office=s Internet Websites at (http//www.osmre/gov/harrisburg). A copy of the workplan is also available from the Field Office.

These activities were designed to further and enhance the implementation of SMCRA in Pennsylvania, by addressing and resolving specific issues or enhancing overall program performance. Examples of public involvement included:

A. The PADEP Program

The PADEP regulatory program includes extensive opportunities for public input throughout the full range of permitting, inspection, compliance monitoring and enforcement processes. During the review period, PADEP received a number of public comments on the adequacy of individual permit applications prior to rendering a decision on whether or not to issue the permits. Comments covered a wide variety of issues, ranging from blasting plan concerns to sediment control and post-mining land use. During the period, PADEP rendered decisions on 73 permits, resulting in 3 permit denials. Of these 73 decisions, 21 were appealed. The Environmental Hearing Board (EHB) hears appeals to PADEP permitting and enforcement decisions.

Through an advance notice of proposed rulemaking, PADEP provided the public with additional opportunity to comment on draft proposed rules on mine subsidence damage and repair and water supply replacement relating to underground mines.

Public concerns may submit both informal and formal complaints with respect to ongoing and completed operations as well as bond release requests. Complaints received by PADEP also covered a wide variety of issues, blasting complaints were noted as increasing during this period. During the year PADEP received and addressed approximately 377 written citizen complaints, of which 350 were resolved and the remaining are pending.

PADEP solicits public input on proposed changes to Pennsylvania mining program by including citizen representatives in the development of new and revised regulations, as well as publishing proposed regulations to the public for formal comment prior to implementation.

Finally, the public is involved in the PADEP regulatory program through representation on the Mining and Reclamation Advisory Board (MRAB). Meeting regularly, generally on a quarterly basis, this board (made up of citizens, industry and legislative representatives) explores issues that develop under the program and offers PADEP advice. Areas addressed by the MRAB this review period included post mining discharges and use of ash from coal fired power plants.

B. Development and Implementation of Oversight Agreements

PADEP and the Harrisburg Field Office maintained an open process in the development and implementation of oversight activities through an annual workplan agreement. Drafts of the agreement were provided to the public for comment on the proposed plan as well as any suggestions for additional or alternative areas that should be incorporated in the plan. The Harrisburg Field Office met with interested citizen groups to explain the content of the agreement and discuss suggestions for improvements as well as additional areas for oversight initiatives. The Field Office also met regularly with citizens group representatives during the review period to address concerns that were identified with ongoing oversight activity.

C. Implementation of Energy Policy Act Requirements

With underground mines now accounting for approximately 70 percent of the coal produced, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT) requirements to repair or compensate surface owners for damage from subsidence is a major undertaking in Pennsylvania. EPACT significantly changes the way surface owners and mining companies address damage to improved property. Pennsylvania enacted the Act of June 22, 1994 (P.L. 357, No. 54) - amendment to the Bituminous Mine Subsidence and Land Conservation Act of April 27, 1966, (P.L. 31, 1st Sp. Sess., No. 1) as amended, 52 P.S. ' 1406.1 et seq (State Act 54). State Act 54 contained provisions similar to those created under EPACT. On July 28, 1995, OSM published final rules in the Federal Register addressing implementation of subsidence damage repair and compensation or water supply replacement requirements in Pennsylvania.

EPACT implementation in Pennsylvania relates to two distinct time periods; (1) the period or Agap@ from the passage of EPACT to the passage of State Act 54 [October 1992 - August 1994], and (2) post-Act 54. PADEP will monitor underground mining operations for both of these time periods. For the Agap@ period prior to State Act 54, PADEP will inform operators of their responsibilities to comply with EPACT. Most cases to date have resulted in proper compensation as provided in EPACT. However, if these case-by-case efforts do not resolve the subsidence damage repair and compensation or water supply replacement problem, PADEP will refer the case to OSM to address the problem under EPACT authority. To date, OSM has issued one Notice of Violation (NOV) to a permittee for failure to promptly repair or compensate for damages to a private residence. OSM is investigating several other EPACT Agap@ period cases. PADEP will continue to investigate complaints and refer to OSM those that are within the scope of EPACT. In the second period, PADEP has primary responsibility for monitoring operations and taking appropriate steps to ensure compliance with the requirements of Act 54, including issuing any necessary enforcement actions.

Throughout the year, PADEP and the Field Office met periodically with citizens groups of Western Pennsylvania to discuss subsidence and water loss issues. A major area of concern expressed by citizen groups is the lack of timeliness in implementing EPACT requirements in both the initial (Federal Enforcement) and subsequent (State Enforcement) period. With respect to the initial period, the groups are concerned that the public was not fully aware of the protections afforded under EPACT. The groups have asked that OSM develop a comprehensive outreach program to inform citizens who may have been affected during the Agap@ period. With respect to the State Enforcement period, the groups are concerned that the lack of state regulations under Act 54, effectively inhibits full implementation of all EPACT requirements. Examples of this include provisions related to pre-subsidence surveys and portions of the subsidence control plan.

PADEP and the Field Office are working to address these concerns. Both PADEP and OSM are developing public outreach to citizens of areas with underground mining, particularly longwall mining. PADEP=s McMurray office developed an initial public education program designed to explain State and Federal subsidence requirements. PADEP provided a screening of the draft program for citizen representatives and OSM. This presentation was designed to gain in-depth comments and input as part of finalizing the outreach effort. Similarly, the Field Office is working with the citizens and coordinating with PADEP to develop an outreach process to inform property owners on their rights under Federal laws/regulations for the initial enforcement period. The primary focus of OSM=s notification effort addresses mining during the EPACT window from October '92 - August '94.

D. General Outreach

The Field Office continued to interact with citizens groups, industry and other state and federal agencies in carrying out Federal oversight responsibilities. The Field Office met with industry representatives such as the Pennsylvania Coal Association. As noted above, the Field Office attends the Mining and Reclamation Advisory Board meetings to provide input on Field Office oversight initiatives and explain any new OSM programs. The Field Office also accompanied citizen group representatives to specific field issues to gather information on issues and concerns raised, including field visits to homes affected by subsidence and blasting. As a result of these investigations, the Field Office arranged a meeting between the OSM Director and western Pennsylvania citizen groups concerned about subsidence. The meeting included a tour of affected properties, roads, and utilities related to underground mining activity in the area.

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 the review period, OSM completed the required public input requirements for program amendments under consideration. As an example, the Field Office held a public hearing on a proposed amendment to the Pennsylvania program to include changes resulting from the Coal Refuse Disposal Control Act. The change would authorize variances for mining within 100-feet of a stream and providing refuse disposal site selection criteria and incentives.

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

In August, PADER=s remining and reclamation incentives regulations were approved by the Environmental Quality Board. These regulations provide for a remining operator=s assistance program, financial guarantees to assist mine operators in bonding remining areas and bond credits for voluntary reclamation of abandoned mine lands. PADEP initiated a process to implement these incentives.

During the Evaluation Year PADEP initiated two studies to identify potential and existing acid mine drainage (AMD) problems. These PADEP programs identified active mine sites, without an existing AMD discharge, but with a potential to have a post mining pollutional discharge; and identified those sites currently treating AMD.

The first study was conducted as a follow-up to last evaluation year=s review of acid mine drainage inspection techniques. In this study, PADEP evaluated permits statewide to identify those sites with the greatest potential for producing a pollutional discharge at the conclusion of mining and reclamation activities. Mining and reclamation plans proposed in the applications for these permits demonstrated that pollution could be prevented and, thus, served as the basis for permit issuance. However, since these sites have acid-forming conditions, PADEP has focused additional attention at identifying critical times and segments of the mining and reclamation process for increased inspection or monitoring to enhance success in pollution prevention. For each of the sites identified during this study, basic hydrological information was recorded. This information included the names of the coal seams being mined, the location of any historical AMD discharges in the area, the quality and quantity of current discharges, and the logging of pertinent pit characteristics. In addition, the survey documented the steps currently being taken on each of these sites to minimize the likelihood of post-mining discharges.

PADEP also implemented a program to identify sites statewide where, if existing AMD treatment presently being undertaken by the permittee was discontinued, a negative environmental impact would result. Those sites have been identified and PADEP is collecting data 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, and (4) the amount of bond available to address the long term solution.

In another study conducted this year, OSM and PADEP jointly inspected 30 active permits, to follow up on compliance enhancement initiatives and enforcement data trends noted last year.

Last year, PADEP implemented revised program guidance to focus and prioritize inspection activity to enhance industry compliance and the protection of public and the environment. The guidance identifies certain times or conditions under which inspectors should consider additional site inspections, such as inspecting during critical mining and reclamation activities or on sites with the potential for problems. PADEP=s intent is to maximize compliance by encouraging and providing inspectors a means to be pro-active in preventing the occurrence of violations. Where necessary, inspectors may proportionately reduce inspections on certain identified high compliance permits. During this year, a study was conducted to review the effectiveness of the new program guidance. With a few exceptions the study found little documentation of PADEP inspectors adjusting inspection frequency on newly started operations and special need sites. In discussions, State inspectors advised that additional inspections had been done on these sites, but that reports were not always completed to document the visits. The Field Office will continue to monitor this important compliance initiative and work with PADEP in assessing its effectiveness.

PADEP developed an Internal Management Control Program to evaluate and verify the effectiveness of its own enforcement program. Last year's annual oversight report identified an increase in industry compliance and a significant decrease in the number of active sites, and a corresponding decrease in State citation activity. In an effort to make further improvements in the State's compliance record, PADEP requested OSM assistance in developing and implementing a self-assessment process that would result in early identification and resolution of compliance related issues rather than relying solely on OSM oversight. During the initial program, teams consisting of one OSM inspector and one PADEP inspector supervisor conducted 30 active surface mine inspections (six from each district), and focused on 11 performance standards with the potential to cause on-the-ground impacts to determine if they were being routinely cited. The PADEP inspector assigned to the permit accompanied the team to provide information about the permit and mining operator. Of the 30 sites inspector, 20 were in full compliance. Of the 310 performance standards reviewed, only 15 violations were observed; seven of these were believed to have existed at the time of the last State complete inspection. The joint OSM/State review team found State inspectors had not consistently cited these violations. The data, while from a limited number of sites, indicate that violation citation and program effectiveness could be enhanced from increased emphasis on enforcement consistency. PADEP's Internal Management Control Program will be continued and expanded during the current oversight year." OSM intends to continue this study on additional sites during next evaluation year and work with PADEP on ways to continue to enhance operator compliance and strengthen inspector consistency

This year was marked by continued growth in AMD treatment activities in Pennsylvania. Several new watershed groups have emerged, and are receiving support and guidance from OSM and PADEP. There are now about 40 watershed groups with the abatement of AMD as their primary interest. The Bureau of Mining and Reclamation and the Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation (BAMR) continue to expand AMD programs, dedicating 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 to be the recognized leader in the formation of effective watershed groups, and the use of partnerships to accomplish AMD abatement.

Pennsylvania=s AML program continued to make good progress 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 24 major projects and 77 smaller state work force projects. Reclamation included 17,000 ft. of highwall (168 acres of land), 35 acres of subsidence protection, and 31 openings. Also, BAMR is making rapid progress toward full obligation of grant funds by 1997. Achieving full obligation of grant funds on a yearly basis will be a major accomplishment for 1997.

The PADEP and the US Army Corps of Engineers, in consultation with other affected agencies such as the Office of Surface Mining, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and the PA Fish Commission, completed work on a general program permit for Pennsylvania that addresses AML wetlands. Under the terms of the permit, the Department will continue to be responsible for delineating wetlands on AML project sites. Approval of this general program permit will facilitate project development work, and more rapidly move many AML projects with mining created wetlands to the construction phase.

The Office of Surface Mining, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Pennsylvania Historic and Museum Commission and PADEP now have three Memorandums of Agreement (MOA) regarding reclamation of AML sites eligible for listing on the National Register for Historic Places. PADEP has retained a consultant to assist in meeting the site requirements of the MOA=s. Additional MOA=s are in development against the backlog of AML project sites with historic or archeological significance.

In addition to the traditional AML reclamation activities, BAMR has shifted a significant amount of resources to the problem of acid mine drainage from abandoned mine sites. BAMR is now actively working in partnerships with BDMO, watershed groups, conservation districts, and Federal agencies such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency, and the Office of Surface Mining to address the problems of acid mine drainage across the state. The Bureau is promoting partnerships in stream recovery through the development and implementation of a state wide comprehensive plan for mine reclamation, and individual watershed rehabilitation plans. These plans will encourage the use of human and financial resources within the total watershed in an approach that will help assure the most effective, synergistic outcomes.

The Pennsylvania state legislature this year passed legislation that will allow the Department to subgrant Title IV AML funds to local units of government. This flexibility will permit the Department, in carefully selected situations, to use conservation districts, and local municipalities as their agents to construct and manage AMD abatement projects, in concert with other Federal grant funds.

PADEP=s Ten Percent AMD Set Aside Fund has grown to about eight million dollars. BAMR continues to submit projects for approval, and this year has more than doubled its staff in this program. There are now eight approved AMD Qualified Hydrologic unit plans. BAMR is spending more time investigating AMD problems, and providing local assistance to individuals and groups seeking to clean up their streams.

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:

To evaluate off-site impacts, OSM and PADEP conducted joint inspections and evaluations of 30 active surface mining sites. The inspections focused on 11 performance standards selected for their potential to create on-the-ground impacts.

Of the 30 sites reviewed 20 were in full compliance with the 11 performance standards. Further, of the 310 performance standards reviewed during this study, there were only 15 in violation. The inspection teams observed 15 on-the-ground violations on 30 sites for an average of .5 violations per site reviewed. Offsite impacts had occurred on three of the 15 violations.

During the inspections, the teams were asked to make a call as to whether (1) the observed violations were likely to have been present during the last state complete inspection (LSCI); and, if so, (2) were they appropriately cited. Of the 15 violations observed by the OSM/State team during this study, seven were judged to have existed during the LSCI. In each of the seven, the State inspector had not taken appropriate action to get the violations corrected. The remaining eight violations were all new violations that occurred after the LSCI.

These findings must be considered in light of the small number of samples. OSM and PADEP recognize that the population of this review is small and plan to continue this study and update the findings during the next evaluation year. OSM will work with PADEP on ways to enhance operator compliance and inspector consistency.

B. Bond Release:

During the review period, PADEP released 236 Stage I bonds on 6,751 acres, 244 Stage II bonds on 9,480 acres and 168 Stage III bonds on 9,256 acres. Bonds were forfeited on 19 primacy permits incorporating 788 acres. As a result of the forfeiture reclamation program 1,797 acres were reclaimed (1,754 acres by surety companies and 43 acres by PADEP). The reclaimed bond forfeiture sites generally succeeded in meeting reclamation plan requirements. However, the reclamation plans do not address all hydrologic concerns, particularly treatment of AMD seeps.

The average length of time between the initiation of mining and the completion of backfilling was approximately 3.5 years. A large majority of sites were reclaimed to approximate original contour. Alternative configurations were approved in several cases mostly for refuse disposal and refuse reclamation operations. The most common alternative configuration employed was a terrace backfill.

VI. OSM Assistance

This evaluation year OSM provided technical assistance to PADEP in resolution of several citizen=s complaints and provided assistance through participation on teams to develop program enhancements. Technical assistance provided by OSM included participating in a joint study to help resolve the blasting complaints of citizens living adjacent to an active mine in the Anthracite Region. Additionally, technical assistance was provided to determine the cause of a landslide in the Bituminous Region.

OSM provided further assistance to Pennsylvania through participation with PADEP on teams to develop program enhancements, including remining, AMD, compliance, enforcement, Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative (ACSI), AML, and grants. PADEP/OSM teams worked together to evaluate and improve grant management functions including lien evaluations, AML inventory maintenance, the Authorization to Proceed process, and project cost tracking. Detailed reports are available.

VII. General Oversight Topic Reviews

The below listed evaluation reports are available for review at the Harrisburg Field Office of OSM and selected reports are available on the World Wide Web (Internet). On the Internet, the reports are located on the Harrisburg Field Office area of the OSM Home Page: (http://www.osmre.gov/harrisburg/) [Note: The address is case sensitive.]

A. Underground Mines

OSM prepared a report on the status of activities related to EPACT Agap@ sites. EPACT was passed by Congress on October 24, 1992. The implementing regulations were promulgated on March 31, 1995. Pennsylvania=s State Legislature passed comparable legislation effective August 21, 1994, thus creating a Agap@ period during which only the Federal requirements were in force. PADEP has been investigating gap period sites and forwarding the reports to OSM for appropriate follow-up.

B. AMD Prevention

PADEP conducted a follow-up to last evaluation year=s study of acid mine drainage inspection techniques. For the study, PADEP evaluated permits statewide to identify those sites with the greatest likelihood of producing a pollutional discharge at the conclusion of mining and reclamation activities. While the identified sites have a somewhat greater risk of creating AMD, today=s improved permitting procedures and periodic hydrological reviews insure that new post-mining discharges are infrequent. A summary of PADEP findings are available for public review.
During the evaluation year, PADEP implemented an initiative to identify sites statewide where, if existing treatment was discontinued, a significant adverse environmental impact would result. Those sites have been identified and PADEP is collecting data to determine (1) the magnitude of potential harm, (2) the potential for use of passive treatment for each site, (3) the emergency options available should treatment be discontinued, and (4) the amount of bond available to address the long term solution.

C. Compliance and Enforcement Effectiveness

OSM conducted a review of State inspection and enforcement data to observe any trends in inspection or enforcement frequency. The data was compared to similar data from previous years.
OSM conducted a total of 98 inspections during the evaluation year. Of those inspections 55 were randomly selected inspections of active mine sites. A summary of the data from those inspections is available.
During the evaluation year OSM and PADEP designed and carried out a team study to determine industry compliance levels for selected performance standards. This study evaluated 30 active surface mine permits, six from each of five State District Mining Offices, during the period from September through October of 1996. The field inspections focused on 11 performance standard categories selected because of their potential to create on-the ground impacts.
In early 1996, PADEP implemented several program enhancements, among them an effort to focus inspection resources on identified Ahigh need@ sites. A preliminary study was completed to evaluate the effectiveness of these enhancements.

D. Program Amendments

The Field Office conducted a review of the status of Pennsylvania program amendments. Outstanding amendments and conditions, and significant program submissions were summarized.

E. Abandoned Mine Land Program

Over the past several years, BAMR has been increasing the percentage of reclamation projects that incorporate wildlife enhancement features such as wetlands, special plantings, and brush piles. A joint study was conducted to monitor, encourage, and promote new and existing wildlife enhancements and wetland construction activities on AML Grant Projects.
A team consisting of BAMR and the Field Office staff conducted a review to determine if the AML lien evaluation process could be streamlined to reduce the amount of resources expended on individual property evaluations. More specifically the objective of the study was to determine if lien reviews, that have consistently found reclamation actions which do not result in a significant increase in property value, can be addressed on a program wide basis.

F. Remining

Pennsylvania has a wide range of program elements that are aimed at eliminating unreclaimed lands through improved remining opportunities. During the review period, Pennsylvania and OSM worked in a team approach to further develop the remining program. A report summarizing the status of that team was prepared.

G. Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative

This year was marked by continued growth in AMD treatment activities in Pennsylvania. Several new watershed groups have emerged, and are receiving support and guidance from OSM and PADEP. The Field Office attended numerous meetings and conferences in support of AMD cleanup projects and activities. Two Clean Streams Initiative projects were approved in Pennsylvania=s FY97 AML program grant. The projects, funded from Pennsylvania=s unappropriated State share balance, are $325,000 for Little Toby Creek, and $325,000 for Quemahoning Creek. A report was prepared on the status of the ACSI program.

H. Review of Grants Related Issues

The simplified grant, also known as the AML program grant, process was established in 1993 with a goal to reduce the amount of up-front paper work needed to receive an award, and to provide greater flexibility to the states in managing their AML grants. A review of the status of this program was conducted and a reports were prepared for several selected activities including maintenance of the AML inventory, the authorization to proceed process, project cost tracking, and the lien activity.

Contact Information:
Office of Surface Mining
Appalachian Regional Office
3 Parkway Center
Pittsburgh, PA 15220
Phone: (412) 937-2804
getinfo@osmre.gov

Webmasters message
Please send website comments and suggestions
to Brent Means at bmeans@osmre.gov

Privacy Policy
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
Disclaimer

OSM Home Page