The People Comment Passionately On
Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining

July 24, 2003

Comments by Jeremy Muller
Executive Director, West Virginia Rivers Coalition

The mountaintop removal coal mining EIS.

 THIS IS A JOKE, RIGHT?

 ·        The agencies were directed by a 1998 lawsuit to report in 2000 how to "minimize the potential for adverse individual and cumulative impacts of mining operations." And in 2003 you decide that talking more between the agencies is the solution?

 HAVE YOU BEEN DRINKING FROM THE KANAWHA?

 ·        724 miles of Appalachian streams have been buried by valley fills – roughly the distance from Charleston to Philadelphia – and you say agency conversations will prevent more?

 ·        Currently, permits do not limit toxic metals. In one aspect of developing your EIS, 210 water quality samples were taken. 66 of those samples documented instream violations of selenium. Selenium can cause nerve damage, bronchitis, pneumonia, and kidney and liver damage. You say discussing this with the agencies will make it right?

 ·        Because of insufficient monitoring requirements the agencies and the public do not know what pollutants come off of mine sites, nor what quantity of pollutants. And you say talking will fix this?

 ·        Federal and state regulations clearly ban waste disposal as a primary stream use. Yet, in West Virginia about 4,000 permits are for in-stream sediment ponds, where the sole purpose is for waste treatment. And you say better communication will solve this?

 ·        Your EIS states that nearly 2,200 square miles of forests will eventually be eliminated because of mountaintop removal.  What’s the answer to this, more talking?

 ·        West Virginia Rivers Coalition conducted a report on coal mining in April of this year. We started it in March and finished it in April – all in 2003. It looks at why regulated coal operations still pollute West Virginia streams. I think it cost us twelve-hundred dollars, and it’s only 26 pages long. However, we came up with 37 different recommendations on how to lessen coal’s impact on rivers and streams. --- You spent 8 million dollars, took four-and-a-half years and come up with talking to each other as the solution?

 ·        Again, the original purpose of the EIS was to "minimize the potential for adverse individual and cumulative impacts of mining operations." But instead of tougher regulations, you guys and the Bush administration propose to streamline the review of permits for new mining operations. – I think this is something your agencies should definitely talk more about.

 The mountaintop removal coal mining EIS.