Based on a comprehensive analysis of the latest scientific findings, the paper calls on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the federal Army Corps of Engineers to stay all new mountaintop removal mining permits unless new mining and reclamation techniques “can be subjected to rigorous peer review and shown to remedy these problems.”
More from Grist, NRDC, Watthead and Appalachian Voices.
Sadly, the article is not online.
Here are the supporting materials:
1 –
Press release from DC Rising Tide via email.
This morning concerned citizens spelled out the words “Shame EPA” at the Environmental Protection Agency Headquarters in protest of the agency’s decision to approve the Hobet 45 mining permit in Lincoln Co. West Virginia.
The group greeted the morning rush of EPA staff with rolicking chants like this one, “Mountaintop removal does not deserve EPA approval/ That’s madness, insane/ Lisa Jackson, what a shame.” Even the security guards were nodding to the rhythm while activists spoke with curious EPA workers.
The Hobet permit is one of 79 permits which were deemed by the Agency to present significant environmental harm to the local watersheds thus requiring an enhanced review process. EPA claims that in the case of this permit they have found a reasonable compromise.
Unfortunately for residents of Lincoln County and surrounding waterways, this permit will still allow for 3 miles of intact streams to be mined as well as millions of cubic yards of hazardous fill to be placed in existing valley fills offsite.
Residents like Judy Bonds, Director of Coal River Mountain Watch and resident of West Virginia, express grave concern about this decision as they worry that it is a sign at the new year of things to come. “We, the affected citizens that are living with the impacts of this destructive mining practice, pray that this decision is not a preview of other destructive mining permits being approved.
She continued to express concerns that this decision would only encourage miners who have lately resorted more to fear tactics and violence. “The very sad thing about this decision it is that the coal industry will think that their thugery and their threats contributed to this decision and may encourage them to be more violent in the future. Shame, Shame EPA.”
“We certainly hope this is the last destructive permit approved that will allow the coal industry to continue to blast our homes and pollute our streams,” Judy added.
Even with the changes made to the permit unacceptable adverse impacts will be felt in the communities surrounding this mine. Mountaintop removal is a deadly practice and should be abolished immediately.
Introduction: I’m glad to be here today to answer questions from Grist, a great website covering environmental news.Q: Are there any alternative ways of boosting public transit in the climate bill?
A: The climate bill gives us an excellent opportunity to increase public transportation. It’s critically important to reduce greenhouse gases, to use less oil and fuel, and to provide better services to the people of our community, make their lives a lot easier. Now, we’re very pleased about the House passing the climate change bill. It’s an important bill; it establishes the framework to bring down greenhouse gases. But I must tell you, I think we could do much better on public transportation. And I’m looking forward, in the Senate, to providing more dedicated revenue sources to increase our commitment to improve public transportation in our nation. I think we can really get the job done that will help our communities as far as life is concerned, traffic is concerned, also, save us oil and energy and bring down greenhouse gases.
Q: Is there a push in Congress to preserve the EPA’s new-source-review authority?
A: It’s a very high priority that we preserve the new authority of EPA to regulate, especially under the Clean Air Act. We want to make sure that those authorities remain. Now, we are concerned about the House bill. The House bill is an important bill, and it moves us forward on global climate change, but we don’t think we should take away from EPA’s ability to use authority within the Clean Air Act, to make the type of progress necessary to bring down greenhouse gases. Bottom line is, we want it to be a partnership between what Congress will give this administration, the policies that we establish, working with the EPA to make the type of changes necessary to affect climate change in this country.
Q: What’s the status of the Appalachian Restoration Act? Is there any appetite in the Senate for addressing mountaintop removal?
A: Mountaintop removal for coal is just devastating. There is no justification for mountaintop mining. The coal industry is important, but getting coal by that technique destroys our rivers. It destroys our environment. It’s not fair to the people of that community. Their rivers are being destroyed, and it’s just a horrible process. I’m pleased that we have bipartisan support to move legislation. Now, the EPA has already taken some steps. They’re carefully reviewing each permit. I give the EPA a great deal of credit for taking that extra time, but they need the authority from Congress that prohibits this type of mining in our country. I do think there is support for it, and I’m hopeful that this Congress will move forward to an act of meaningful help for the EPA, in keeping our rivers clean and helping the environment.
Conclusion: I really want to thank Grist for giving me this opportunity to answer some of your environmental questions. I hope that we can continue this dialogue. Please feel free to go to my website, which is cardin.senate.gov, where we can help you with more information. This is an important subject. It deserves great debate. We appreciate you being part of it.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today announced the preliminary fate of 79 valley fill permit applications associated with mountaintop removal coal mining. In a move that pleased environmentalists and coalfield residents in central and southern Appalachia, the EPA recommended that none of the 79 permits be streamlined for approval.This decision is not final, but is part of a coordination procedure outlined in a June “memorandum of understanding” between the Environmental Protection Agency, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Interior to deal with a backlog of permits held up by litigation over the past few years. The EPA has promised a more stringent and transparent review of all mountaintop removal valley fill permit applications.
Willa Mays, executive director for Appalachian Voices, a regional environmental group, was delighted about the EPA’s preliminary list. “By recommending these permits not be approved, the EPA and the Army Corps has demonstrated their intention to fulfill a promise to provide science-based oversight which will limit the devastating environmental impacts of mountaintop removal mining,” Mays said. “EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, Army Corps’ Assistant Secretary Jo-Ellen Darcy and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Terrence “Rock” Salt have shown exceptional leadership. This is indeed good news especially paired with the fact that 156 members of the House of Representatives are now cosponsors of the Clean Water Protection Act.”
Jeff Biggers has a great piece on this at The Nation.
EPA press release below the fold.
Late last week — just before the Labor Day holiday — the Obama administration EPA issued a mountaintop removal bombshell: A major letter that blasts a whole host of problems with the largest strip-mining permit ever issued in the state of West Virginia.
EPA experts have concluded that the mine, as currently designed and permitted, would violate the federal Clean Water Act. They’ve urged the Army Corps of Engineers to suspend, revoke or modify the permit. In response, Corps lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Robert C. Chambers for a 30-day stay in legal proceedings over this permit, to give Corps staffers time to re-examine the project.
Here is the EPA’s letter to the Corps:
Letter –
Here is the Corps legal motion:
Motion –
Much, much more on this from Jesse Jenkins.
West Virginia Environmental Protection Secretary Randy Huffman’s testimony in June at a congressional hearing on mountaintop removal has drawn a lot of comment, and even helped fuel a protest calling for his resignation.It turns out that even some folks within Huffman’s own agency were none too happy with his staunch defense of the coal industry before a hearing of a Senate Environment and Public Works subcommittee.
Behind the scenes, a respected biologist at the WVDEP’s Division of Water and Waste Management responded with a strongly worded memo that challenged Huffman’s statements and urged agency officials to make sure the secretary “will be better informed the next time he represents our agency’s current state of knowledge to federal authorities and elected representatives.”
Doug Wood, a biologist in the water division’s watershed assessment section, wrote his memo on June 30, less than a week after Huffman appeared in Washington at a hearing on a bipartisan bill that would end the coal industry’s practice of burying hundreds of miles of streams with waste rock and dirt (the stuff that used to be mountains).
Here is Doug Wood’s leaked memo:
EPA-Corps Enhanced MTM Coordination Procedure –
Total recoverable metals water testing results from Emory River mile 2.2, where ash clogs the river, revealed arsenic levels were 260 times the allowable amounts in drinking water. Lead measured 16 times higher than the drinking water standard while barium and cadmium were three times higher. Selenium measured 1.9 times higher than the Tennessee acute aquatic life criteria and 7.6 times higher than the Tennessee chronic aquatic life criteria.
Ever wonder what happens when human beings are exposed to arsenic?
Long-term exposure to arsenic in drinking water can cause cancer in the skin, lungs, bladder and kidney. It can also cause other skin changes such as thickening and pigmentation. The likelihood of effects is related to the level of exposure to arsenic and in areas where drinking water is heavily contaminated, these effects can be seen in many individuals in the population.
…
Soluble inorganic arsenic can have immediate toxic effects. Ingestion of large amounts can lead to gastrointestinal symptoms such as severe vomiting, disturbances of the blood and circulation, damage to the nervous system, and eventually death. When not deadly, such large doses may reduce blood cell production, break up red blood cells in the circulation, enlarge the liver, color the skin, produce tingling and loss of sensation in the limbs, and cause brain damage.
In addition to the host of problems associated with burning coal, as well as the deleterious effects of mountaintop removal, storing and transporting the byproducts of burning coal is a daunting task prone to environmentally disastrous spills. These spills are literally poisoning the water we drink and the food we eat. It is shameful, and frankly pretty damn embarrassing, for the United States to be so dependent on the dirtiest energy source on the planet in the 21st century.
Sadly, the main thing getting in the way of reducing use of coal in the United States is the influence of the coal lobby. The lack of coverage meaningful coverage from corporate media obscures the issue so it doesn’t get the attention it deserves. When it comes down to it, I’m with Al Gore:
I can’t understand why there aren’t rings of young people blocking bulldozers, and preventing them from constructing coal-fired power plants.
Here are some additional resources:
