1

OSM Program Deficiencies and Remining Financial Guarantee Rulemaking Changes

EQB--November 16, 2010

J. Scott Roberts, Deputy Secretary

Mineral Resources Management

2

Timeline

October 2009-MRAB Recommends proposed regulations proceed

March 2010-Proposed Regulation Approved by EQB

May 1, 2010-PA Bulletin Publication as Proposed Regulation

May 31, 2010-Public Comment Period Ends September 7, 2010-MRAB Final Regulation

recommendation

3

Comments

3 Commentators 14 Comments Additional request from OSM for

clarification Regulations were revised in response to

these comments

4

Sections with Changes

86.1 Revise definition of ownership to exactly match the Federal Regulation

86.133 Emphasize that the application and permit for exploration on UFM areas must be available to the public

86.282 (RFGs) Clarification and adding a subsection that states that existing participants are eligible for subsequent RFGs

5

Sections with changes Continued

88.321 and 90.133 (noncoal waste disposal) changes made to match federal language

90.112 (spillway design) another clarification

6

Other Comments

Comment: The definition of "violation" is unclear as 30 C.F.R. § 701.5 includes two definitions of "violation." Federal regulations have two terms

violation violation, failure or refusal

7

Exploration on UFM

Comment: The proposed revisions to §86.133 prevents the Department from waiving the UFM permit requirement Federal Regulations require a permit

Comment: The permit term for should be consistent with other permits (5 years) Exploration is limited to 250 tons

8

Self-bonding qualifications

Comment: Subsection (a)(2) contains overly broad language relating to “all applicable Federal and State laws” This exactly matches the federal language

9

Letters of Credit

Comment: The Department should not undermine a bank’s ability to: (1) evaluate an operator’s financial stability and (2) issue a letter of credit based on that informed and highly regulated decision. The regulation doesn’t do what the

comment suggests

10

RFGs and LCs

Comment: The option to post a letter of credit should not be eliminated. LCs can still be used as bonds.

Comment: DEP and the Board should provide evidence to provide justification for the change. 16 RFGs have been forfeited-4 have required

payment from the fund-for three of these the demonstration was made by LC

11

RFGs and Discharges

Comment: Department should clarify that an RFG needs to be replaced if discharge liability is related to the remining area. This requirement in not intended to be

limited to the remining area. Any liability for a discharge is too great of a risk for the RFG program

12

Rebuttable Presumption Reimbursement

Comment: The Department should not unilaterally eliminate a surface mine operator’s or mine owner’s cost recovery rights. State law was changed. The regulation is

being changed to conform. There are other cost recovery provisions that are still applicable

13

Conclusion

The Department is requesting a approval of this final-form regulation.

Thank you