OSM's outrageous conclusion. In another significant area of regulation, OSM has not applied the prohibitions of Section 522 (e) of SMCRA to underground mining. Hence, subsidence damage within 300 feet of homes, schools, churches and public buildings or within 100 feet of a public road or cemetery is allowed. This is regardless of whether the operator possesses "valid existing rights" to mine the coal. In 1985, OSM announced it would conduct an Environmental Impact Statement/Regulatory Impact Analysis for the purpose of developing rules for the application of Section 522 (e) to underground mining. Five options are being considered by OSM, including allowing all subsidence effects of underground mining within protected areas. The significance of the EIS is perhaps best demonstrated by the coal industry's keen interest. The National Coal Association and American Mining Congress have commissioned their own study to show that any application of Section 522 protections to underground mining will devastate the industry and cripple America's ability to meet its energy needs. Illinois South has met with OSM officials to discuss the EIS. From what we learned at these meetings, and our understanding of OSM's overall philosophy, we have serious reservations about the outcome of the study. As experience with past Environmental Impact Statements by this agency has shown, in its zeal to lift restrictions on mining, rational and reasoned analysis is disregarded. A final area of regulatory unwillingness to apply SMCRA to underground mining is hydrologic impacts. Before a permit to mine can be granted, surface and underground operators are both required to submit a mining and reclamation plan showing how the hydrologic balance will be maintained. The quality and quantity of surface and groundwater systems on the mine site and in surrounding areas must be maintained. Still the state As you will hear, the evidence is mounting in Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Virginia that aquifers are being damaged and destroyed and surface streams are disappearing. regulatory authorities grant permits to mine. No violations are cited. In Illinois, the drainage patterns of entire watersheds are disrupted as the land drops. The reclamation plans approved be the Illinois Department of Mines & Minerals contain no clue as to how the operator will restore this overall drainage system. The problems these panel members will discuss are serious, but they are solveable. They do not require an outright ban on any form of underground mining, as our critics in industry might claim. Rather, fair and just resolution of these problems requires that underground operators assume the true cost of their mining. These costs should not be shifted onto the overlaying landowners and their communities, nor onto future generations. We do not believe Congress intended the law to work this way. Research is urgently needed to improve subsidence prevention and mitigation techniques. We need to learn more about ground water and surface water impacts. The people who are living with the damage have developed and endorsed a platform outlining needed policy changes. be provided the committee. Copies will The structure exists within SMCRA to provide the necessary protections called for in this platform. What is needed is a radical shift in the philosophy of the Department of Interior and Office of Surface Mining towards fulfilling the promises made to all of America's coalfield residents in SMCRA. Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony today. FOOTNOTES 1. Helmut Kratzsch, Mine Subsidence Engineering, (Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Springer-Verlag, 1983), translated by R.F.S. Fleming, p. 1. 2. Hearing No. 92-26, before the Subcommittee on Mines and Mining of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, 92nd Cong., 1st Sess., statement of Hon. Hollis M. Dole, Assistant Secretary, Mineral Resources, Department of the Interior, at 206 (1971). |