|
|
Illinois Performance Agreement |
| |
Annual Performance Agreement
Evaluation Year 1998
The Illinois
Department of Natural Resources
Office of Mines and Minerals
And
The Office of Surface Mining
Indianapolis Field Office
Part I. Purpose
Background: The concept of primacy under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of
1977 (SMCRA) provides that states may maintain exclusive jurisdiction over the regulation of
surface coal mining and reclamation operations. SMCRA creates the framework within which
States carry out the mandates of the Act through approved programs. SMCRA provides that
individual States may tailor primacy program provisions as deemed necessary to meet local
conditions and assure effective implementation. OSM's involvement with State primacy
programs is to support the States in accomplishing this objective and assist in assuring State
program provisions are maintained within the overall requirements of the Act. Consequently,
State programs differ significantly in both content and in the manner in which they operate to
address SMCRA requirements. Similarly, Field Office oversight of State program effectiveness
must be tailored to include timely, focused support and assistance to the individual States in
implementing and carrying out uniquely structured primacy programs.
OSM's oversight processes include evaluating the results of approved program implementation,
and providing programmatic and technical support and assistance to the States. The purpose of
this effort is to assure that individual States are appropriately addressing SMCRA requirements
as they develop and administer their laws, regulations and programs. On an ongoing basis, these
processes allow timely identification and resolution of program issues and serve to ensure that
State programs are in alignment with SMCRA. These efforts also serve to identify areas where
OSM needs to clarify its expectations of how SMCRA is to be implemented by the States.
Objective: The purpose of this Performance Agreement between the Indianapolis Field Office,
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement and the Illinois Department of Natural
Resources, Office of Mines and Minerals (OMM), Land Reclamation Division, is to:
Foster mutual respect in carrying out the requirements of SMCRA,
Assure that oversight topics reflect OSM/State priorities and consider the impacts on
State resources needed to participate in and support OSM's oversight effort,
Use on-the-ground results in protecting the environment and public health and safety
as the principle focus of program evaluation and documentation,
Evaluate program processes to the extent they impact achieving results,
Focus on technical assistance and programmatic review over case-by-case evaluation,
Provide timely follow-through on areas identified as needing program enhancements,
Support the OMM in developing its primacy program to address local conditions,
Encourage, in addition to OSM evaluation, State self-evaluation of program
performance, and
Provide for OSM and OMM review of oversight or sub-element reports.
This agreement is to be included in the evaluation file maintained by the Field Office and will be
available for public review.
Part II. Annual Evaluation Plan
Background: OSM's Directive REG-8 establishes the framework for carrying out annual State
program oversight. The directive provides flexibility to OSM Field Offices in designing an
annual oversight plan consisting of specific program reviews and areas for program/technical
support or assistance to the State's regulatory, abandoned mine lands and grant programs.
REG-8 allows States the opportunity to be involved in developing and carrying out the plan and
reporting on the results. Oversight topics reflect the highest priority review areas and/or
assistance needs determined by the State and the Field Office, and are developed with significant
input from other interests, including citizens and the coal industry. Annual plans may be
modified as issues are resolved, new issues arise, or as work priorities change. As specific
activities and individual studies outlined in the plan are completed, reports are prepared detailing
findings and identifying any required follow-up activity.
The oversight process is designed to stress prevention and prompt detection and correction of
any noted program-related problems. Program reviews will focus on "on-the-ground" evaluation,
overall reclamation success, and whether programs are meeting the goals of SMCRA. Oversight
should also identify innovative approaches to accomplishing program objectives, problem
resolution, or environmental protection, and recognize areas of outstanding approved program
implementation efforts.
Annual Performance Agreement for Evaluation Year 1998: The list of specific oversight
activities for this year is shown in Appendix A. Some of the topics listed are continuation of
evaluations conducted in Evaluation Year 1997 and are incorporated and continued in the current
year plan. Some of the activities may involve the next step of a study or review previously
conducted, while others initiate program reviews that were targeted for last year but not
implemented before the end of the evaluation cycle. Some of the evaluations listed are new for
this year. A detailed workplan will be developed for each of the program evaluation areas
identified in Appendix A. The individual workplans will be developed in conjunction with the
OMM, and will include the methodology, time period, population and sample size and resources
needed from each agency to conduct the proposed review.
Appendix B relates to additional data requirements as explained in Appendix A.
Public Input: Public comments are a critical aspect in developing OSM's oversight process.
REG-8 provides for public outreach, particularly for review topics and suggestions for improving
the Field Office's oversight. Oversight planning in close collaboration with the State includes
outreach to citizens, environmental groups, local governments, other State and Federal agencies,
the coal industry, and other public interest groups. Input from these groups will assist in
prioritizing issues and in developing the specific techniques to be used.
Part III. Concurrence
This Agreement shall be effective for the period October 1, 1997 through September 30, 1998.
For the United States Department of the Interior,
Office of Surface Mining, Indianapolis Field Office:
Andrew R. Gilmore, Field Office Director Date
For the Illinois Department of Natural Resources,
Office of Mines and Minerals, Land Reclamation Division:
_______________________________ _______________
Don Pflederer, Supervisor Date
Appendix A
1. National Review Topics under OSM's Directive REG-8: With the exception of C.
below, the following review topics are continued from the Evaluation Year 1997
Performance Agreement . All methods, standards and agreements will remain the same
except as noted in the discussion below:
A. Measurement of Off-site Impacts:
The standards and measurements established under the EY 97 performance agreement are
incorporated into this agreement with the following clarifications from the Draft Directive
Reg-8.
The term off-site impact is now defined in Draft Directive REG-8, dated August 22, 1997
as:
anything resulting from a surface coal mining and reclamation activity or operation that
causes a negative effect on resources (people, land, water, structures). The applicable
state program must regulate or control the mining or reclamation activity or result of the
activity causing an off-site impact. In addition, the impact on the resource must be
substantiated as being related to a mining and reclamation activity and must be outside
the area authorized by the permit for conducting mining and reclamation activities.
The August 22, 1997 Draft REG-8 clarifies that data may be collected concerning impacts
which may not be controlled or regulated by the State. This philosophy was incorporated
in the Evaluation Year 1997 Performance Agreement. The draft REG-8 makes it clear
that this type of data should not be included within Table 4. However, while this
information will not be reported in the table, it will be included separately in the Annual
Report.
The Evaluation Year 97 Performance Agreement contained a review element concerning
off-site impacts on abandoned sites. The evaluation of this element will continue under
the current year Performance Agreement. The August 22, 1997 Draft REG-8 indicates
that long-term off-site impacts are to be reported separately in Table 4 and addressed in a
report narrative. The number and extent of impacts should be reported once. However,
the magnitude of the impacts that continue from year to year should be properly
characterized.
Further definition of the review will be set forth in the subject specific workplan.
B. Reclamation Success:
Under this element, OSM will evaluate and report on the effectiveness of the State
program in ensuring successful reclamation on lands affected by surface coal mining
operations. At a minimum, information will be collected to measure program results in
the following areas:
Land form/approximate original contour
Land capability
Hydrologic reclamation
Contemporaneous reclamation
This element is continued and incorporated into this agreement. The methods and
standards that apply are those set forth in the EY 97 Agreement. Further definition of the
review will be developed in the subject specific workplan.
C. Customer Service
REG-8 requires that each year, that OSM evaluate the effectiveness of customer service
provided by the State by monitoring the State's responses to complaints and requests for
assistance and services. To accomplish this, the OSM is to evaluate the timeliness,
accuracy, completeness and appropriateness of state actions in a sample of one or more of
the following activities:
handling of citizen complaints
permitting actions
bond releases
lands unsuitable petitions
administrative and judicial review
AVS determinations
The customer service aspects of bond releases has been chosen as a review topic for this
evaluation year.
Bond Releases: A sample of phased bond releases will be selected for review
under the topic of Reclamation Success. The selected sample will also be
evaluated for timeliness, accuracy, completeness and appropriateness of the
State's actions.
2.. Selected Programmatic Review Topics for Evaluation Year 1998: The following topics
have been selected for review during Evaluation Year 1998. Workplans will be developed
for each element which identifies the population, the sample, methods and measures or
standards and resources (personnel and time).
Bond Release and Contemporaneous Reclamation: This topic was planned for
EY 1997 but the review was never begun. A joint State/Federal team will be
formed to address this topic. The team will be convened within the first quarter of
the Evaluation Year with the following charge:
Determine whether the increasing number of acres with remaining liability
is one which will continue or whether they can be expected to decline over
time.
Determine if any relationship exists between Phase III release and specific
land uses which suggest that difficulty may exist within a land use category.
Determine whether specific legitimate business reasons exist which would
explain the increasing acreage under bond.
Determine whether there is an actual delay in land reclamation or whether
the delay is in application for bond release.
The team will develop, within the first quarter of the evaluation year, a workplan
which fully addresses each of the issues discussed above, and others as deemed
appropriate. The workplan will indicate the resources necessary to accomplish
each task.
Acid Mine Drainage: The Mid-Continent Region has selected as a topic for
review with the States, at least one aspect of the OSM Acid Mine Drainage Policy.
The IFO has chosen to review the application of Objective 1 of the OSM AMD
Policy Document. Objective 1 states:
Only approve permits where the operation is designed to prevent off-site
material damage to the hydrologic balance and minimize both on- and
off-site disturbances to the hydrologic balance. In no case should a permit be
approved if the determination of probable hydrologic consequences or
other reliable hydrologic analysis predicts the formation of a postmining
pollutional discharge that would require continuing long-term treatment
without a defined end point.
Specifically, the IFO will review a sample of permits which have identifiable
acid-toxic forming conditions to assure the protection of the quality and quantity of
surface and ground water systems during mining and reclamation. This evaluation
will be designed by the IFO hydrologist in conjunction with OMM hydrology staff.
A work plan will be developed during the first quarter of the evaluation year which
identifies the universe, the sample size, the standards and measurements and the
resources required to conduct the evaluation. The evaluation will be conducted
during the second quarter of the evaluation year.
Data Sharing: The EY 97 performance agreement indicated that the IFO and the
OMM would pursue options of electronic data sharing to meet OSM's data needs.
While progress was made in this area, further refinement is needed. The OSM
Draft Directive REG-8 indicates that to the extent possible, as a part of this
agreement, the State and OSM will establish a joint OSM-State database that will
be maintained and updated by the State. To accomplish this end, a joint
State/Federal team will be convened early during the review year to determine data
needs, data availability, added database requirements, if any, methods of gathering
and testing data, and methods of transferring data electronically between agencies.
The joint work team shall complete its tasks by the end of the third quarter of the
1998 evaluation year.
Rill and Gully Repair: This issue relates to a lack of agreement between the IFO
and OMM as to the correct interpretation of policy pertaining to rill and gully repair,
specifically timing. This issue will be resolved by way of an oversight
meeting(s) between IFO and OMM to be scheduled during the first quarter of the
evaluation year.
PHC/CHIA and Acid and Toxic Materials HandlingEvaluation: A study will be
conducted during the 1998 evaluation year that focuses on on-the-ground aspects of the
PHC/CHIA. The purpose of this study will be to determine that disposal of toxic material
is conducted in a manner consistent with the PHC/CHIA and acid and toxic forming
material handling plans. A workplan setting forth the details of this study will be
developed during the first quarter of the evaluation year. A report of findings and
recommendations will be produced for IFO and OMM management consideration no later
than the end of the third evaluation year quarter.
Issue Resolution: The primary value of oversight over the long term is program
enhancement. If, in the course of the 1998 evaluation period, OMM or OSM should
identify any matter of program administration, implementation, or maintenance relating to
program enhancement or which impacts program effectiveness, OSM and OMM agree to
promptly resolve such issues in a cooperative and productive manner. The IFO and the
OMM will initiate issue resolution by informal discussion to arrive at a mutually
acceptable resolution.
3. Complete Inspections
The IFO will conduct ten (10) performance standard oriented complete inspections during
the evaluation year. The focus of the inspections will be toward gaining an overview of
the on-the-ground impacts of active operations in Illinois. The inspections will be
conducted on active operations and will to the extent possible be conducted as joint
inspections with the State.
4. Additional Data Requirements.
Illinois w ill provide information for completion of the attached tables (Appendix B) on a
quarterly basis. This information will be provided no later than 15 days from the end of
the quarter. Specific formats and delivery systems wi ll be developed during the
first quarter of the evaluation year.
Additionally, the OMM will provide necessary information required for REG-8 tables,
excluding Table 4 and Table 9.
Appendix B
Additional data tables. The tables below were derived from the final I&E Data Team Report.
STATE OF __________ INSPECTION ACTIVITYPERIOD: October 1, 19__ - September 30, 19__
| Inspectable Unit Status | Number of Inspections Conducted | |
|---|---|---|
| Partial | Complete | |
| Active* | ||
| Inactive* | ||
| Abandoned* | ||
| Abandoned* | ||
| Total |
State should provide inspection data to OSM annually, at a minimum, and maintain inspection
data on a continual basis. OSM offices responsible for Federal and Indian Programs need not
complete this table since data will be queried from the I&E Tracking System.
* Use terms as defined by the approved State program
STATE OF__________ ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITYPERIOD: October 1, 19__ - September 30, 19__
| Type of Enforcement Action | Number of Actions * | Number of Violations* |
|---|
| Notice of Violation |
| Failure-to-Abate Cessation Order |
| Imminent Harm Cessation Order |
*Do not include those violations that were vacated. States should provide the enforcement data to OSM annually, at a minimum, and maintain data on a continuous basis. OSM offices responsible for Federal and Indian Programs need not complete this table since data will be queried from the I&E Tracking System.LANDS UNSUITABLE ACTIVITY STATE OF____________________
PERIOD: October 1, 19__ - September 30, 19___
| Number of Petitions Received | |
| Number of Petitions Accepted | |
| Number of Petitions Rejected | |
| Number of Decisions Declaring Lands Unsuitable | Acreage Declared as Being Unsuitable |
| Number of Decisions Denying Lands Unsuitable | Acreage Denied as Being Unsuitable |
State should provide lands unsuitable data to OSM annually if there is any activity in this program area. OSM OFFICES RESPONSIBLE FOR FEDERAL AND INDIAN PROGRAM STATES MUST ALSO COMPLETE THIS TABLE.