MINUTES
September
9-10, 1997
Pottsville
District Mining Office
Special MRAB
Meeting to discuss
Possible
Remining and Abandoned Mine Reclamation Initiatives
September 9:
Members
In Attendance: Fred Wolf, Chairman;
Representative Sam Smith; George Ellis; Sue Germanio; John Ford; Howard
Laur; David Strong; Jeffrey Clukey; Pat Krommes; Jack Chamberlin; Steve
Shrawder; Duane Feagley; Mark Snyder.
Others
in Attendance: Rod Fletcher & Dave
Hogeman, Bureau of Mining & Reclamation; Don Barnes, Bureau of District
Mining Operations; Don and Bill Rosini, Shamokin Filler; John Beadle, I & I
Engineering, Inc.; Craig Morgan, Eastern PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine
Reclamation; Michael Ferko, Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation,
Wilkes-Barre; Keith Laslow & Roger Hornberger, Pottsville District
Mining Office; Jonathan Brightbill, Office of Policy & Communications;
Richard Hergenroeder, Gannett Fleming, Inc.; Ed Wytovich, Schuylkill County
Conservation District.
The
meeting was called to order at 1:00 by Fred Wolf, Chairman.
Dave
Hogeman and Donald Barnes addressed the board.
They stated that the Department is in the process of developing some
possible initiatives for remining and abandoned mine reclamation. These initiatives are still in the
developmental stage and were being presented to the board for discussion and
input. The Department is also looking
for MRAB involvement in further developing these initiatives.
A
panel discussion was held to discuss ideas and thoughts about remining and
reclamation in Pennsylvania. The panel
members were:
·
John
Rich, Reading Anthracite Company
·
Mark
Killar, Western PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation
·
John
Blaschak, Fisher Mining Company
·
Don
Barnes, Bureau of District Mining Operations
Attached
to these minutes is a copy of the questions that the panel members were
asked. The following are comments and
questions from the panel members as well as the others in attendance:
n Why would there be an
extension on the collection of AML funds past the year 2004?
n Do a small demonstration
with fly ash before doing a large project to show the public the success of
using co-products.
n Encourage the use of
co-products
n Do not like the idea of
using fees for co-products
n DEP should take a proactive
role vs. a reactive role
n Permit process for biosolids
is too cumbersome and very difficult.
n Kiln dust is only a short
term solution
n Fly Ash? Is very good for
vegetation and not allowing water to permeate the mine site.
n May lose sight of the
importance of protecting watersheds if DEP allows a credit program. Should be site specific (one watershed)
n Overall load reduction in a
particular watershed.
n Pollution credits are a good
concept; DEP should watch so that it’s not taken advantage of.
n Credits should only be
offered on Post-Mining Discharges and not encountered water.
September 10:
Members
in attendance: Fred Wolf, Chairman;
Jack Chamberlin; Mike Young; John Ford; Howard Laur; Sue Germanio; Sue
Wilson; Jeff Clukey; Mark Snyder.
Others
in attendance: John Rich, Reading
Anthracite Co.; Michael Ferko, Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation,
Wilkes-Barre; Joe Pizarchik, Office of Chief Counsel; Gary Byron & Dave
Hogeman, Bureau of Mining & Reclamation; Jonathan Brightbill, Office of
Policy & Communications; Don Barnes; Bureau of District Mining
Operations; Craig Morgan, Eastern PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation;
Mark Killar, Western PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation.
The
meeting was called to order at 9:05 by Fred Wolf, Chairman
Dave
Hogeman, Don Barnes and Gary Byron continued the discussion from the previous
day. They prepared a PowerPoint
Presentation for the board members and discussed each individual initiative. There was a comment and response period
after each initiative was introduced.
The following are some comments from that discussion:
Legislative Initiatives:
n What would OSM response be
to a .35 cent/ton fee waiver? Tax
credits have the least impact on the Commonwealth
n Will it involve local
governments?
n Where do civil penalties go
at this time?
n Can this be tacked on to the
Good Samaritan legislation?
n Increase in fees &
deregulation of utilities are going to hurt PA coal companies. Funding is flawed. Another fee would be counterproductive.
n Anthracite underground would
be hit hard by a per ton fee.
n Property tax in coal areas
is not going to be received well; bad idea.
n Tax non-coal producers, i.e.
gas industry.
Financial Initiatives:
n The problem is congress
won’t release the money to the states.
Get Congress to appropriate the money based on need of the state.
n Is it possible to bring back
the RAMP program?
Regulation/Policy
Initiatives:
n What are the Bonding
Requirements going to be? Performance
Standards?
n Who is going to monitor the
no-cost contracts?
n How is the liability
determined? What if the water is
degraded? Perpetual liability for
treatment?
n Will BMP’s &
design-based standards replace the need for constant monitoring?
n What does “self-monitoring”
mean?
Partnership Initiatives:
n Is there any effort to
record historic data? Scarlift reports?
n How would you attract
partners in that program to get the job done?
n Landowners must be in
agreement with this idea before the database of suitable remining land is put
together.
n How will the Department
determine which land is economical for remining?
n There should be local
interest in the watershed to make this project happen.
Public Education
Initiatives:
n no comments
Monitoring & Compliance
Fee:
n No comments
Cost sharing for AML &
AMD projects:
n No comments
Maximize reclamation on
Commonwealth lands:
n No comments
“Adopt an Abandoned Mine
Site” Program:
n No comments
The
board members decided that they are going to take an active role in developing
these initiatives, either through ad hoc committees or by reviewing any changes
that are made before they are released.
There will be more discussion on this program at the next meeting.
The
next MRAB meeting will be held on October 23-24, 1997, in Greensburg, PA.
The
meeting was adjourned at 12:00.