PURPOSE OF THIS AGREEMENT
The purpose of this performance agreement between the Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), Birmingham Field Office (BFO), and the
Alabama Surface Mining Commission (ASMC) is to:
1. Assure the continued constructive relationship currently held by the BFO
and the ASMC in a shared commitment to accomplish the respective goals of
the State and Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA).
2. Identify shared goals and work as partners to accomplish those goals
ensuring that both parties understand their responsibilities for achieving them.
3. Identify specific evaluation topics for Evaluation Year (EY) 1998 review.
4. Emphasize that overall reclamation success and on-the-ground results will
be utilized as the primary indicators of program performance.
RESPONSIBILITIES AND GOALS
A. Shared BFO-ASMC Responsibilities and Goals
1. Develop an EY 1998 evaluation plan that identifies topics for review during
the evaluation year (Attachments A). Ensure a clear understanding of the
topics for review, including any joint evaluations, as well as the methodologies
to be utilized.
2. Establish program areas targeted for special emphasis during EY-1998
where the evaluation of the target areas will be conducted jointly by both the
BFO and the ASMC. ASMC will have the opportunity to participate in other
oversight studies or surveys conducted during the evaluation year as it may
choose to do so.
3. Promptly address and discuss implementation issues and problems
identified during the evaluation year in a manner that produces clear
descriptions of those problems and issues and leads to solutions which are
mutually agreeable to both the BFO and the ASMC.
4. Conduct joint OSM-ASMC inspections for all complete OSM inspections
to be made during the evaluation year.
5. Meet at least quarterly to discuss data collection procedures and progress
and to resolve any outstanding concerns.
6. Recognizing that the regulatory program is quite dynamic and that changes
are often dictated by field conditions, revisions in regulations, policies, etc.,
this document is subject to modification pending joint ASMC/BFO consensus.
Either party may initiate dialogue which results in modifications to this
performance agreement so long as both parties agree to the modifications.
B. Birmingham Field Office Responsibilities and Goals
1. Serve as the initial OSM source for technical and policy information
relating to the implementation of SMCRA, responding to all ASMC requests
for assistance or information in an accurate and timely manner.
2. Provide to ASMC the most current technical and policy information.
3. Perform evaluation functions in a fair and open manner with the full
cooperation of ASMC.
4. Immediately notify ASMC of issues that reflect on performance and
provide adequate time for response.
5. If violations of the State's program are encountered during BFO field
inspections, the State will be notified of the violation through the Ten-Day
Notice process or, in the case of joint inspections, will be given the opportunity
to address the violation onsite.
6. The BFO will develop an outreach plan to solicit comments from the public
and interested parties. Input from the ASMC will be solicited at appropriate
intervals during the plan implementation.
C. ASMC Responsibilities and Goals
1. Continue transmitting, to the BFO, program data relating to permitting,
inspection, enforcement and bonding, in the agreed upon format and will
continue the computerized transmission of the program data from ASMC to
the BFO.
2. Provide data as reasonably determined necessary for the BFO to complete
reporting requirements pursuant to Directive REG-8.
3. Take timely action to resolve all issues and problems identified in EY 1998.
D. Non-evaluative Data Collection
The Birmingham Field Office with the cooperation of the ASMC will gather
the data listed below for the evaluation year. The data will not be utilized for
evaluation purposes, but collection is necessary for the OSM's interactions
with Congress and with other customers and stakeholders.
Number of State inspections by type - both complete and partial
Number of State enforcement actions by type
Actions concerning lands unsuitable petitions
SIGNATURES
Representing the Alabama Surface Mining Commission and the Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Birmingham Field Office, the following parties agree to the
purpose, goals and anticipated actions proposed in this performance agreement.
/s/ Randall C. Johnson 9/10/97 /s/ Arthur W. Abbs 9/4/97
Randall C. Johnson, Date Arthur W. Abbs Date
Director Field Office Director
Alabama Surface Mining Commission Birmingham Field Office
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement
ATTACHMENT A
Alabama
Enhancement and Performance Review
Evaluation Year 1998
Principle Being Evaluated: Bond Release
Reason for Selection: This area is considered for review because of the Directive REG-8
requirement to study the State's effectiveness in ensuring successful reclamation on lands
affected by surface coal operations.
Requirements: Directive REG-8 states that success in ensuring successful reclamation "will
be determined based on the number of acres that meet the bond release standards".
Background: Various aspects of ASMC's bond release procedures have been reviewed
during the previous evaluation periods. Past studies have shown that all bond release
standards were met, bond amounts were properly recalculated, and the state's decisions on
awarding bond release request were appropriate in all cases. The 1996 Bond Release Review
determined that ASMC was meeting the requirements of its program with regard to bond
release and timely reclamation.
Population/Sample: An appropriate sample, not to exceed 50 (including Phase I, II, and III
releases) will be drawn from releases received by the BFO from October 1, 1997, through
June 30, 1998. ASMC will submit the bond release document with the ASMC's Director's
initial signature to the BFO (this will allow the BFO approximately 30 days to review these
sites prior to the ASMC's Director's final signature). Site reviews will be conducted to
evaluate the following parameters:
Phase I - AOC achievement, drainage control, land stability
Phase II - replacement of soil resources, vegetation stability
Phase III - postmining land uses, successful revegetation, surface water quality and
quantity, restoration of ground water recharge capacity, comparison of premining to
postmining surface water quality and quantity restoration.
Summary of Planned Review: Each site visited will be evaluated for the parameters listed
above based on the type of bond release under review. Bond release-related documents will
be reviewed at the State office to determine the presence of State documentation of the
successful completion of these parameters. Success will be based on the number of acres
bond released that is in compliance with State performance standards.
Reporting: A report of the review will be prepared, and a draft copy will be provided to
ASMC for their consideration.
Schedule:
Commence site reviews in October 1997.
Complete data collection by August 1, 1998.
Prepare draft report by August 15, 1998. ASMC will routinely be afforded 30 days
to provide written comments to the BFO. In the rare instance that a quicker review is
needed, it will be specifically requested.
ASMC comments will be incorporated, and the final report prepared by September
20, 1998.
ALABAMA
ENHANCEMENT AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW
EVALUATION YEAR 1998
Principle Being Evaluated: Off-site Impacts
Reason for Selection: This area is considered for review because of the Directive Reg-8
requirement to study the State's response to off-site impacts which occur during mining and
reclamation activities.
Requirements: Directive REG-8 states that "OSM will evaluate and report on the
effectiveness of State programs in protecting the environment and public from off-site
impacts resulting from surface coal mining and reclamation operations". An off-site impact
is normally one that occurs outside the area authorized by the permit for conducting mining
and reclamation activities. Off-site impacts affect resources including the people, land,
water, and structures. Occurrences of off-site impacts should be noted in Notices of
Violation(NOV), except in instances when the impact is not a violation of ASMC's
regulations. However the impact should be identified for this review.
Background: The BFO began collecting off-site impact data during EY1996 on complete
inspections only. As a measurement and reporting of end results, OSM will report nationally
in terms of the number and extent of observed off-site impacts. Data collected in this review
is not to be used for comparison among States, but rather to identify and to reduce the
number of off-site impacts.
Population/Sample: All inspections, including those of bond forfeiture sites, performed by
OSM during EY1998 will include an evaluation of off-site impacts. The inspections will be
performed between October 1, 1997, and August 15, 1998. All associated ASMC inspection
reports and documentation during the review year and all citizen complaints which lead to
violations during the review year will be reviewed. Additionally, all NOV's issued by
ASMC during the period will be evaluated for off-site impacts.
Summary of Planned Review: Utilizing Table 4 (Off-Site Impacts) of the Directive REG-8
and a separate data sheet as collection tools, BFO field personnel will collect data concerning
off-site impacts during all inspections and the subsequent review of associated ASMC
inspections reports and NOV's issued during the period. Positive impacts will also be
identified and addressed in the report. Information on impact will also be gathered from
State civil penalty assessment records for all violations cited by the State during the review
period. Findings will be discussed with ASMC prior to development of the report.
Reporting: A report of the review will be prepared identifying the number and degree of
off-site impacts, the causes of the impacts, and suggested improvements. A draft copy will
be provided to the ASMC for their consideration.
Schedule:
o Develop an inspection sample, and begin review by October 1997.
o Complete collection of data by August 1998.
o Prepare a draft report by September 1, 1998. ASMC will be afforded 30 days to
provide written comment to the BFO.
o ASMC comments will be incorporated, and the final report prepared by October 15,
1998.
ALABAMA
ENHANCEMENT AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW
EVALUATION YEAR 1998
Principle Being Evaluated: Bond Forfeiture Reclamation
Reason for Selection: This area is considered for review in order to evaluate the Regulatory
Authority performance with regard to completing the reclamation plan for sites on which the
reclamation bond has been forfeited. The measurement will compare ASMC's bond
forfeiture site reclamation to applicable standards in the permit reclamation plan.
Requirements: Chapter 880-X-9E of the Rules of the Alabama Surface Mining Commission
provides for the forfeiture of the reclamation bond as a result of the permittee's failure to
meet the conditions of the bond. ASMC can determine the amount of bond funds to be
forfeited based on cost estimates, and must use the funds on the permit area on which the
bond coverage applies to complete the reclamation plan.
Background: The BFO conducted a bond forfeiture review during EY 1995. That review
focused on the timely expenditure of collected bond forfeiture funds. The review did not
identify any significant problem, but did result in ASMC procedural revisions to enhance the
timing and rate of expenditure of bond forfeiture funds and site reclamation. This review will
focus on the extent of reclamation compared to the permit reclamation plan.
Population/Sample: The population will include all bond forfeiture sites reclaimed since
October 1995 as well as all bond forfeiture sites not reclaimed as of October 1, 1997. The
sample will include 25% of the sites on which reclamation was completed during that time,
and all the sites remaining to be reclaimed. If the sample size is insufficient to complete the
evaluation, additional sites may be considered. The sample will include a total of
approximately 20 bond forfeiture sites, reclaimed and unreclaimed, on which a field
evaluation will be conducted.
Summary of Planned Review: The BFO will coordinate each phase of the review with
designated ASMC personnel. BFO personnel will review bond forfeiture documents and will
discuss with appropriate ASMC personnel to identify ASMC's bond forfeiture reclamation
procedures, such as reclamation monitoring. For instance, ASMC's reclamation monitoring
procedures for either contractor reclamation or surety reclamation will be evaluated. A field
review of bond forfeiture sites will be conducted on the sample sites to evaluate the level of
reclamation. Reclamation will be compared to the reclamation plan. Difficulties experienced
by ASMC will be addressed. Deviations from the reclamation plan will be noted.
Determining factors for reclamation plan revisions, such as land owner consent, necessary
reconfiguration, etc. will be reviewed. Reclamation will be also evaluated on the basis of
corrections of performance standard violations and achievement of post mine land use.
Findings will be discussed with ASMC prior to development of the report.
Reporting: A report will be prepared addressing the scope and method of the review, the
time frame of the review, samples evaluated or documents reviewed, findings, and
recommendations. A draft copy will be provided to the ASMC for their review and
comment.
Schedule:
o Develop an inspection sample, and begin review by January 31, 1998.
o Complete collection of data by June 1, 1998.
o Prepare a draft report by July 1, 1998. ASMC will be afforded 30 days to provide
written comment to the BFO.
o ASMC comments will be incorporated, and the final report prepared by August 15,
1998.
ALABAMA
ENHANCEMENT AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW
EVALUATION YEAR 1998
Principle Being Evaluated: Handling of Citizen Complaints
Reason for Selection: This area is considered for review because of the Directive REG-8
requirement to review a sample of specific State activities related to customer services, one of
which is citizen complaints. The measurement will compare the actions and steps taken during
the processing of citizen complaints to the guidelines developed and adopted to process citizen
complaints.
Requirement: Chapter 880-X-11B of the Rules of the Alabama Surface Mining Commission
outlines ASMC's procedures for receiving and acting on requests for inspection when there is
reason to believe that certain violations, conditions or practices exist. These procedures address
confidentiality of the citizen, the determination of reason to believe, access to the permit site, the
accompanying citizen, timing of action taken, response to the citizen, and the citizen's right to
appeal the action taken.
Background: REG-8 requires the Field Office to evaluate the effectiveness of customer
service each evaluation year. The BFO has selected this area of State activities to review to
determine timeliness, accuracy, completeness and appropriateness of State action. The BFO has
not recently conducted a review in citizen's complaints. Because of OSM's emphasis on public
participation, the BFO needs to develop a better understanding of ASMC's citizen complaint
processes in the areas of initial action and subsequent follow-up action and notifications. The
BFO particularly needs a better understanding of follow-up actions taken on citizen complaints
received by OSM and forwarded to ASMC through the TDN process.
Population/Sample:The population will be those citizen complaints received during the period
of October 1, 1996 through September 30, 1997. This includes those complaints received
directly by ASMC and those provided to ASMC by the BFO through the TDN process. A
sample of approximately 20 will be selected for this review.
Summary of Planned Review: The BFO will coordinate each phase of the review with
designated ASMC personnel. Discussions will be conducted with appropriate ASMC personnel
to identify procedures and guidance for receiving and documenting citizen complaints. The
review will address the nature of the complaint, the manner of receipt, action taken, and citizen
notification. Also addressed will be the time frame of the procedures and the general outcome of
the complaints processed by ASMC during review period.
Reporting: A report will be prepared addressing the scope, method, and the time frame of the
review. This report will identify the documents reviewed and the sample of citizen complaints
reviewed. It will also highlight the findings and recommendations. A draft copy of this report
will be provided to ASMC for comment before finalizing.
Schedule:
Develop a review Sample, and commence by March 1, 1998.
Complete data collection by July 1, 1998
Prepare a draft report by July 15, 1998. ASMC will be afforded 30 days to
provide comment to the BFO
ASMC comments will be incorporated, and the final report will be prepared by
August 20, 1998.
ALABAMA
ENHANCEMENT AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW
EVALUATION YEAR 1998
Principle Being Evaluated: Acid Mine Drainage
Reason for Selection: This area is considered for review in order to evaluate the Regulatory
Authority performance relative to inspection activities and procedural compliance on sites with
actual or potential acid mine drainage problems.
Requirements: Chapter 880-X-10-C of the Rules of the Alabama Surface Mining Commission
requires that surface mining activities be conducted according to approved plans to minimize
acidic, toxic or other harmful infiltration of ground and surface water. Acid-forming and toxic-forming
spoil is to be identified, buried, or otherwise treated to avoid contamination of the
ground and surface water. Ground and surface water are to be monitored for early identification
of acidic or toxic infiltration.
Background: A study was recently completed on the permitting requirements for identification
and subsequent handling of toxic materials. That follow-up review dealt with the technical
aspects of identifying, isolating and treating toxic or acidic materials. This review is intended to
evaluate routine inspection activities involving mine sites identified as potential AMD producers.
The review is to determine coordination between the permitting/technical staff and the inspector,
compliance with AMD policies and procedures by the permittee, the permitting staff, and the
inspector. Further, it is to identify the course of actions when new AMD concerns are identified
on an existing permit.
Population/Sample: The population will include active permits issued prior to September 30,
1997. The sample (approximately 20) will be drawn from permits with identified potential AMD
problems.
Summary of Planned Review: Each phase of the review will be coordinated with designated
ASMC personnel. BFO personnel will initiate discussions with ASMC technical staff and
inspectors to identify existing policies and guidance. Once the sample is selected, BFO
personnel will review the selected permit files and will conduct field reviews of the selected
sites. With each permit, continued discussions will be conducted with the inspector in order to
determine the trail of AMD actions or events and compliance activities, including adherence to
the toxic materials handling plan.
Reporting: A report will be prepared addressing the scope and method of the review, the time
frame, samples evaluated, documents reviewed, and the findings and recommendations. A draft
copy will be provided to ASMC for their review and comment prior to finalizing the report.
Schedule:
Develop and inspection sample, and begin the review by March 1, 1998.
Complete collection of data by July 1, 1998.
Prepare a draft report by July 15, 1998. ASMC will be afforded 30 days to
provide written comment to the BFO.
ASMC comments will be incorporated, and the final report will be prepared by
August 30, 1998.
