Here we go again!

The 5 February Federal Register published notice of the federal proposal to prepare an EIS related to mountaintop mining and valley fills. Comments are being solicited and are due by 31 March 1999. Below is a letter written by Stephen Kunz (spkunz@aol.com) that you may find helpful in developing your own comments. Your letters should be sent to William Hoffman at the address listed below, or e-mail him at Hoffman.William@epamail.epa.gov .

***************************

William Hoffman
Environmental Protection Agency 3ES30
1650 Arch Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029

In re: Comments on Intent to Prepare an EIS for
          Mountaintop Mining and Valley Fills in Appalachia

Dear Mr. Hoffman:

This letter is to provide comments on the Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to Consider Policies, Guidance, and Processes To Minimize the Environmental Impacts of Mountaintop Mining and Valley Fills in the Appalachian Coalfields, as published in the Federal Register on 5 February 1999 (Vol. 64, No. 24, p. 5778). These comments are provided as a public service and not on behalf of any client. They are based on my experience during more than 20 years as a private- sector environmental consultant during which time I have worked closely with federal and state environmental regulatory programs.

My primary comment is to state that I strongly endorse the proposed preparation of an EIS. I think it is necessary, it is appropriate, and it is long overdue. Decisions concerning whether or not to allow mountaintop removal and valley fills, and under what conditions, must be based upon an environmentally sensitive planning and review process that attempts to anticipate and prevent mine-related problems rather than react to them.

1) The extraction of coal in general, and the mountaintop removal method in particular, are terribly destructive to the natural and human environment. There is no debate over the fact that coal is very important to the economy of Appalachia and the United States, but that is no reason to allow mines to operate without regard for the adverse effects they cause. Mining and environmental protection are not mutually exclusive. Like other businesses and industrial activities, mines should be held liable for any adverse effects they cause. Mining should be allowed to be conducted only where it can be demonstrated that adverse impacts that cannot be avoided will be effectively mitigated.

2) Valley fills, whether related to mountaintop removal surface mining or longwall underground mining, have significant adverse impacts on entire watersheds. The impacts include the loss or degradation of streams, wetlands, and terrestrial and aquatic wildlife and their habitat. These effects in turn impact the people who live, work, or recreate in these areas. These impacts must be addressed in the design and operation of mines. Unless strict measures are imposed to require suitable replacement of the resources lost or degraded, valley fills should not be allowed.

3) According to the Federal Register notice, the EIS will evaluate significant environmental impacts associated with mountaintop mining operations that utilize valley fills, including impacts on water quality, streams, aquatic and terrestrial habitat, habitat fragmentation, the hydrologic balance, and other individual and cumulative impacts. All of these are relevant areas of concern and all should be thoroughly reviewed and evaluated.

4) According to the Federal Register notice, the resource agencies will consider potential revisions to relevant regulations, policies, and guidance that would minimize the potential for adverse individual and cumulative impacts of mining operations. The EIS should review existing regulations to ensure that they are clear, consistent, and protective of the human and natural environment. In addition, the EIS should review existing regulatory practices and procedures in light of existing regulations to determine whether the prescribed requirements are being followed by applicants and whether those requirements are being fully and consistently applied by the regulators.

5) According to the Federal Register notice, the EIS "may" consider information on the following, but I believe that the EIS absolutely must consider each of these matters:

- the cumulative environmental impacts of mountaintop mining (as part of this matter, consideration should be given to whether new mines should be directed toward watersheds that have already been impacted or degraded by mining activities);

- the efficacy of stream restoration (it may be easier to accomplish stream restoration in certain geographic areas or under certain conditions or situations);

- the viability of reclaimed streams compared to natural waters (if "reclaimed" streams are significantly impaired, mitigation/reclamation has not been adequate);

- the impact that valley fills have on aquatic life, wildlife, and nearby residents (this has not been well documented);

- biological and habitat analyses that should be done before mining begins (this should always be required; without these baseline analyses, potential and actual impacts cannot be accurately evaluated);

- practicable alternatives for in-stream placement of excess overburden (these must be explored in every case);

- measures to minimize stream filling to the maximum extent practicable (these must be explored in every case); and

- the effectiveness of mitigation and reclamation measures (this should be evaluated so that ineffective measures will no longer be accepted or allowed).

6) The title of the Federal Register notice refers to "Appalachian Coalfields", but the discussion and focus of the proposed EIS appears to relate largely to West Virginia. I suggest that the scope of the EIS should include all of the Appalachian coal states, and in particular should review the regulatory policies and procedures of each of the appropriate state mining programs.

A strong emphasis on effective regulation is necessary to ensure that mining is actually done in compliance with the law. After-the-fact enforcement is important, although too often it is inadequate or non-existent. However, stringent enforcement of regulatory requirements at the application review stage will prevent the need for huge and costly cleanup programs after the mine has created environmental problems.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. If a comment/response document is compiled, kindly send me a copy.

Yours truly,

Stephen P. Kunz
Certified Senior Ecologist (ESA)

<<<<END>>>>

return