EVALUATION YEAR 1998 PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT

I.	PURPOSE OF THIS AGREEMENT

The purpose of this Agreement with the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) Mid-Continent Regional Coordinating Center (MCRCC), Grants and Oversight Team (GOT) and the State of Missouri, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Quality, Mined Land Reclamation Program (LRP) is:

A.	Foster a shared commitment to the implementation of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) through the LRP regulatory and abandoned mined land programs by working together to accomplish shared goals.

B.	Define and specify goals, objectives and outcome measures used to determine the level of success by LRP and OSM in achieving the requirements of SMCRA Titles IV and Title V during the Evaluation Year (EY).

C.	Provide for a continuous multi-year working agreement.  Since these processes are continuous and not limited to one year, this Agreement charts a work plan for continuation of these efforts for an additional three years.

D.	Identify topic areas subject to evaluation in the EY-1998 annual State report.

II.	GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOME MEASURES USED DURING EY 1998.

A.	In a cooperative effort LRP and OSM will aggressively pursue reclamation of Abandoned Mine Lands by striving to increase the number of acres restored to productive use.

Measure(s):
The LRP will reclaim the sites as noted in the attached list during EY 1998.  Refer to Attachment 2.

The OSM will abate all emergency hazards, in accordance with their program.

B.	In a cooperation effort, we will prevent environmental problems by protecting the environment and public from off-site impacts of surface coal mining operations and ensure successful and timely reclamation of lands affected by surface coal mining operations.

Measure(s):
The LRP will minimize the number and severity of off-site impacts while protecting the environment and public from mining activities.  A LRP and OSM team will analyze offsite impact data assembled during the previous two evaluation years and will determine and report the causes.  This analysis and report will be completed in the first six months of the evaluation year.  Findings will be implemented in the LRP program during the second six months of the Evaluation Year.
The LRP and OSM will collect offsite impact data during the entire Evaluation Year.
The LRP will conduct reclamation at abandoned (forfeiture sites) as outlined in Attachment 3.
The LRP will work with permittees to ensure successful reclamation and timely bond releases.  The LRP will implement:
	•	recommendations of Bond Release TQM team.
	•	recommendations of the LRP staff/industry work group.
	
The OSM will process all complete grant applications within 60 days of receipt.

C.	The OSM will strengthen the capabilities of LRP staff to enforce SMCRA effectively through quality technical and scientific information, assistance and training by providing state of the art training, assistance, and advice.

Measure(s):
The OSM will attain a 90% customer satisfaction rate for:
Technical training,
Technical Information Processing System (TIPS),
assistance, and
information and technology transfer.
The OSM will provide a list of training opportunities being developed.  The LRP will provide OSM with a list of TIPS needs.  The OSM will provide technical assistance,  access to training resources to all LRP staff and will follow up with results surveys to determine program effectiveness.

III.	TOPICAL AREAS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE EY 98 ANNUAL REPORT.

	A.	Title IV Topics

	During Evaluation Year 1998 these AML issues will be  reviewed by LRP and OSM.

1.	Program’s should be responsive to public concerns.

Missouri has established a public inquiries tracking system and database.  The database will be used to review requests for assistance, outreach, public meetings, and other information regarding the AML program. 

OSM and LRP representatives will jointly review the data base established and complete a final report by September 30, 1998.  Interim steps, target dates, and criteria for review will be developed by the team.

2.	Missouri must have approved reclamation plans which meet the requirements of Federal laws and regulations and conduct reclamation in accordance with their plan.

During the evaluation year Missouri will maintain its approved Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Plan.  OSM will provide technical assistance to Missouri, on request.

3.  	On-the-Ground Reclamation is to be achieved in a timely, cost-effective manner.

Representatives of OSM and LRP representatives will perform post-project site visits to 20 percent of reclamation projects completed approximately 1 year previous and 20 percent of projects completed 3 years previous.  A final report will be completed by August 1, 1998.  Interim steps, target dates, scheduling for field visits, and criteria for review will be established by OSM in cooperation with LRP. 

4.	The LRP program should have systems in place to ensure accountability and responsibility for spending AML funds and a process to assure that such systems are working.

The OSM will initiate quarterly meetings with representatives from LRP to discuss grant related issues.

5.	Information on AML Program operations and accomplishments should be gathered and maintained in an effective manner.

Missouri will maintain it’s part of the Abandoned Mine Land Inventory System  (AMLIS) and other data management system(s) as needed to supply informational needs of the AML program.  Missouri will provide accomplishments data to OSM for the annual report by October 1, 1998.   Interim steps and criteria for measuring the program performance will be developed by LRP and OSM. 

		6.	Emergency complaints should be addressed timely and effectively and in compliance with the emergency guidelines outlined in OSM Directive GMT-10.  Only that action necessary to abate the emergency should be taken under the emergency program.

Missouri will promptly investigate complaints, insure criteria are met and abatement is timely and limited to the emergency.

	B.	Title V Topics

	1.	Tables

The LRP will provide data to complete annual report tables 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8.  The data will be submitted to OSM by September 15, 1998.  OSM and LRP staff will review this submission for consistency.  Tables 1, 4 and 9 will be completed by OSM.

2.	Off-Site Impacts

Table 4 is used to report off-site impacts that are identified throughout the evaluation period. (See Attachment 1).  Information concerning impacts that are not prohibited by the State Program/SMCRA and impacts that are not regulated by the State Program, will not be included in Table 4 information.  Information reported in Table 4 will not stand alone and will always be fully explained by a supporting narrative.

Data will be captured and  incorporated into Table 4.  OSM will complete a report of its findings by September 15, 1998.  Interim steps and criteria for measuring the program performance will be developed as necessary by LRP and OSM management.

3.	Customer Service (Outreach)

OSM will review LRP’s effectiveness in timeliness, accuracy, completeness, and appropriateness of State actions relative to handling (1) citizen complaints, (2) permitting actions, (3) bond releases, (4) lands unsuitable petitions, (5) Applicant/Violator System (AVS) data maintenance, (6) administrative and judicial review and (7) other  actions the State may have taken to enhance the process.

4.	Reclamation Success

OSM will evaluate and report on the effectiveness of State programs in ensuring successful reclamation.  Success will be based on the number of acres that meet the bond release standards.  Specific information on evaluating compliance with performance standards will be collected, evaluated, and reported.

Information will be collected to measure program performance in the following areas:
	1.  Land form/approximate original contour
2.  Land capability
	3.  Hydrologic reclamation
4.  Contemporaneous reclamation

A joint LRP and OSM team will agree on data collection and reporting.  The acres released from bond will represent accomplishment of specific on-the-ground reclamation.  OSM will be represented by Jeff Gillespie and Russell Frum.  LRP Will be represented by Greg Anderson and Phil Schroeder.

5.	Carryover from EY 97

*  Identification and Citation of Violations
The OSM will review and access LRP’s ability and/or willingness to cite all observed violations.  Partial inspections will be conducted of a sample of inspectable units.
*  Alternative Enforcement
Show Cause Orders, Consent Decrees and Settlement Agreements will be reviewed and field checked to determine compliance.
*  Forfeiture Reclamation
A sample of all reclaimed forfeiture sites will be visited before, during and after reclamation to determine if reclamation meets the States performance standards.
*  Bond Adequacy
The OSM will work with the LRP team to review the Missouri reclamation bonding program.
*  Program Amendments
Outstanding program amendments and required 732 issues reference OSM letter June 17, 1997 will be reviewed by OSM.  The LRP will submit program amendments needed to maintain its program in a timely fashion.




                    /signed/                                                                   12/24/97                                
Charles Stiefermann, Staff Director				                     Date
Land Reclamation Program
Division of Environmental Quality
Department of Natural Resources


                    /signed/                                                  	                12/18/97                                 
Russell W. Frum, Manager					                     Date
Grants and Oversight Team
Mid-Continent Regional Coordinating Center
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

Attachment 1
Off-Site Impacts

Purpose and Goal:
SMCRA and equivalent State program provisions require that impacts to areas outside the permit area be minimized. This measurement is intended to: identify and report the number and degree of off-site impacts; determine causes of the impacts; and identify where improvements may be made to lessen the number and degree of impacts.  If evaluation of data related to off-site impacts indicates program or implementation related problems, OSM and Missouri will implement changes, where possible, to minimize recurring impacts.  Therefore, the goal of this measurement is that State and OSM Programs direct efforts to decrease the occurrence of off-site impacts.  

Definition of Off-Site Impact:
For purposes of this Performance Agreement, an off-site impact is define 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.  

For example, a blasting operation that exceeds the State program’s  limits for vibration or air blast at a structure outside the permit area would be reported as an off-site impact where impacts to a resource (people, land, water, structure) can be substantiated.  A violation may exist that does not result in an off-site impact if damage to the resource cannot be substantiated.  A second example may be when another State or Federal agency has cited a violation like water quality.  In this case, an off-site impact would be recorded even though no violation was noted by the State regulatory authority.  A third example is a discharge from a mine site that does not meet the State program effluent limits that enters a receiving stream with water quality that is worse than the discharge.  There may be no negative impact on the stream, but the discharge may be a violation.  No off-site impact would be reported.  A fourth example is where a buffer zone within a permit area is disturbed in violation of the State program.  In this case, an off-site impact would be recorded.  A final example applies to State programs that allow permitted land to be bonded at a later date, but prior to disturbance.  If a mining operation causes a disturbance in the non-bonded portion of the permit area, an offsite impact would be recorded.

Although the great majority of off-site impacts will be events that constitute violations of the regulatory program and may be cited as such, there may be exceptions to this general rule. 
For example, a breached diversion ditch may have caused sediment to leave the permit area, causing an off-site impact.  However, a violation may not have been cited because the violation may have been corrected during or prior to the inspection.  This example should be identified as an off-site impact even though no violation was cited.  Other examples may exist where off-site impacts caused by a regulated activity are documented, but, for whatever reason, a violation was not cited.

Impacts Not Regulated by the State Program:
There are many impacts from mining and reclamation that are not regulated or controlled by SMCRA or State Programs.  There are also impacts that occur outside the permit even though a mine is in compliance with State program provisions.  One example is a sediment control structure that meets all design standards.  A rainfall event that exceeds the design standard causes a failure of the structure, resulting in off-site impacts.  In this example, an off-site impact occurs but is not regulated by the program because all program requirements were met.  Therefore, under the definition of off-site impacts contained in this directive, the impact would not be recorded.  Another example may be nuisance impacts such as those related to blasting or dust.  Blasting operations may be in full compliance with the program although local residents are impacted from noise or vibrations.  Dust from coal stockpiles or spoil piles may annoy local residents, but dust may not be regulated by the State program. 

Impacts on Bond Forfeiture Sites - Continuing, long-term off-site impacts identified on bond forfeiture sites will be reported separately in Table 4 and addressed in a report narrative.  Such impacts may be identified either through special studies or through routine measurement of off-site impacts.  The number and extent of such impacts will be reported once.  However, the magnitude of impacts that continue from year to year will be properly characterized.  The evaluation and reporting of off-site impacts associated with bond forfeiture sites will be determined based upon the significance of these sites.

Positive impacts - Positive impacts; i.e., improvement in water quality due to reclamation of remined areas will be determined and considered and reported in the overall evaluation narrative.

Resources and Type and Degree of Impacts:
The off-site resources that may be affected during mining and reclamation operations include  land, water, people, and structures.  Water resources include surface and ground water quality and quantity.  Fish and wildlife resources that may be impacted are included as part of water and land resources.  

The types of impacts that may affect these resources include, but are not limited to blasting, land stability, and hydrologic impacts; unauthorized encroachments onto protected or non-permitted areas; and other impacts.  An off-site impact is normally one that occurs outside the permit area.  However, off-site impacts also may occur within a permit area, but outside of the approved disturbance area, such as an encroachment into a buffer zone or area prohibited from mining.

The off-site information to be collected, evaluated, and reported are the number of off-site impacts and the degree of impact.  Additional information to be gathered for each impact is the type of impact and the resource affected.  Each impact may affect more than one resource; i.e., a blasting impact may affect both land and people.

Each impact will be classified as to the degree of impact as minor, moderate or major.  General guidelines for assessing the degree of impact are:

Minor
	Small amount of disturbance outside of permit or authorized area
	Small amount of sediment, flyrock, erosion outside permit or authorized area
	Low volume or short duration water discharge that marginally exceeds effluent limits and has a marginally negative impact on receiving stream water quality
	Impact does not interfere with land use
	Impact does not jeopardize public safety
	Impact does not cause damage to uncontrolled structures or restricted areas

Moderate
	Anything not fitting guidelines for minor or major impact

Major 
	Large amount of disturbance outside of permit or authorized area
	Large amount of sediment, flyrock, or erosion outside permit or authorized area
	High volume or long duration water discharge of poor quality enters a high quality stream
	Impact interferes with land use
	Impact jeopardizes public safety or causes personal injury
	Impact causes damage to uncontrolled structures or restricted areas
	Mining without a permit 

Sources of Information for Off-Site Impacts:
There are several sources of information for identifying off-site impacts that will be used.  These include, but are not limited to: State inspections, enforcement actions, and civil penalty assessment data; OSM inspections; citizen complaints (alleged impacts will be substantiated); special oversight studies; and information from other environmental agencies.  The sources of information and the basis used to identify and report the number of off-site impacts will be explained in the narrative description of the evaluation.

Reporting:
The off-site impact oversight report will be prepared as supporting documentation for the annual report.  It will include detailed information on data collection, verification, and analysis; discuss any conclusion on the effectiveness of the State program in preventing off-site impacts; and discuss measures taken to address any identified program or implementation deficiencies.  It will identify and report on the number and degree of off-site impacts; determine causes of the impacts; and identify where improvements may be made to lessen the number and degree of impacts.  

ATTACHMENT 2

Missouri’S Land Reclamation Program
Abandoned Mine Lands Section
Project Plan for 1998

ATTACHMENT 3
BOND FORFEITURE 1998 RECLAMATION SCHEDULE
DECEMBER 1, 1997

"A" COAL MINE LAND RECLAMATION FUND

YATES ENERGY

Minor maintenance regarding repair of two impoundment structures and construction of approximately 700 lineal feet of riprap channel is proposed for December 1997 or January 1998.  Liability release presentation is tentatively proposed for the May 28, 1998 Land Reclamation Commission Meeting.

Midwestern Mining & Reclamation

Minor maintenance proposed during the spring of 1998 with regard to establishment of vegetation in areas reclaimed in 1996 and 1997.  Liability release presentation is tentatively proposed for the May 28, 1998 Land Reclamation Commission Meeting.

Central West Coal

Minor maintenance proposed during the spring of 1998 with regard to establishment of vegetation in areas reclaimed in 1997.  Liability release presentation is tentatively proposed for the May 28, 1998 Land Reclamation Commission Meeting.

Bill’s Coal Company

The reclamation contract is estimated to be 90% completed by January 1, 1998.  Upon final completion of the contract there will be maintenance related to revegetation during the spring and fall of 1998.  Liability release presentation is tentatively proposed for the November 18, 1998 Land Reclamation Commission Meeting.

Note: By the completion of the reclamation contract will Bill’s Coal Company all monies of the AA: Coal Mine Reclamation Pool will have been spent with an anticipated overrun of $300, 000.
Upon Land Reclamation Commission concurrence of liability release for Bill’s Coal Company the AA@ Pool will be discontinued.

"B" COAL MINE LAND RECLAMATION FUND

L. B. MINES

Design of reclamation plans are scheduled for March 1998 with a contract to be awarded in late April or early May, reclamation for this site is proposed for the summer of 1998.  Liability release presentation is tentatively proposed for the September 24, 1998 Land Reclamation Commission Meeting.

BURBRIDGE

Design of reclamation plans are scheduled for March 1998 with a contract to be awarded in late April or early May.  Reclamation for this site is proposed for the summer of 1998.  Liability release presentation is tentatively proposed for the September 24, 1998 Land Reclamation Commission Meeting.

UNIVERSAL COAL

Renick Site

Reclamation for this site has been started with a completion date estimated for the spring of 1998.  Liability release presentation is tentatively proposed for the September 24, 1998 Land Reclamation Commission Meeting.

Other Sites

A review of the bond forfeiture summation files prepared by the Inspection and Enforcement Section will be made for December 1997 through February 1998.  Maps of location and mining extent will be made and on site visits to forfeited areas is proposed to start in March 1998.  A detailed schedule for reclamation of all areas will be made upon completion of site visits.

MISSOURI MINING

A review of the bond forfeiture summation files prepared by the Inspection and Enforcement Section will be made from December 1997 through February 1998.  Maps of location and mining extent will be made and on site visits to forfeited areas is proposed to start in March of 1998.  A detailed schedule for reclamation of all areas will be made upon completion of site visits.