October 7, 1998









Melvin Hodgkiss, Director

Surface Mining & Reclamation Division

Railroad Commission of Texas

P.O. Drawer 12967

Austin, Texas 78711



Dear Mr. Hodgkiss:



Enclosed is a proposed Performance Agreement for 1999, for the Texas Regulatory and AML Programs. This document lists the major topics to be evaluated in Fiscal Year 1999. Please review the proposed agreement and send your comments or the signed agreement to this office by October 25, 1998. The Tulsa Field Office is available to discuss the workplan topics or other items of oversight at your convenience.



If you have any questions concerning this agreement, call me or Ken Haynes at (918) 581-6430.



Sincerely,









Michael C. Wolfrom

Director

Tulsa Field Office



Enclosure

















OVERSIGHT WORKPLAN FOR 1999



FOR TEXAS



COAL MINING AND RECLAMATION REGULATORY PROGRAM



ADMINISTERED BY THE



RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS









































OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING

TULSA FIELD OFFICE



I. Goals and plans for achieving them



The Office of Surface Mining's (OSM) main goal is to ensure that coal mining operations do not adversely affect the natural and human environment during and after coal mining and reclamation. In States that have programs approved pursuant to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA), OSM's goal is to ensure that the State program is no less effective than a Federal program would be and to ensure that the State program is fully implemented. The goal for the Railroad Commission of Texas (RCT) as the regulatory authority in Texas is to fully implement the approved State program. With these common goals, OSM and RCT share a commitment for achieving the purposes of SMCRA.



OSM's specific plans are to work with the State to provide resources, technical expertise, and evaluation of the implementation of the State program. OSM will inspect mines in accordance with OSM's policies, concerns of citizen's, and concerns of OSM staff. OSM will also routinely review grants, permitting actions, inspection and enforcement records, and other actions in accordance with OSM policies.



OSM will provide feedback to RCT so that on-the-ground problems can be identified and corrected and so that RCT's accomplishments are noted.





II. Oversight Workplan for the Regulatory Program



OSM's Directive REG-8 provides instructions for the oversight of State programs. OSM is directed to solicit comments from citizens on oversight and incorporate those comments into an oversight workplan for the year. OSM is also directed to select oversight topics from concerns identified from mine inspections, document reviews, and national concerns. Workplans will also consider State needs and should include self-evaluation studies conducted by the State. Evaluation study findings will be compiled into topic-specific reports and into an Annual Evaluation Report. In addition to new topics identified from State needs and OSM concerns; issues from previous years are to be followed through to resolution.



With the emphasis of oversight being directed toward on-the-ground results of mining and reclamation, OSM will inspect all active mining operations. TFO's inspections will include looking at off-site areas that are potentially impacted by mining and reclamation operations to ensure that off-site impacts are identified. TFO will conduct as many bond release inspections as possible to ensure that it can evaluate reclamation success. OSM will provide RCT with results of the inspections through inspection reports and through Ten-Day Notices when violations are observed that have not been cited. Data from OSM's inspections will be analyzed to identify trends in the implementation of the State program.





A. Topics to be evaluated in 1999



1. Issues from previous evaluations



The only issue from previous evaluations is the continued efforts in updating the Texas program in accordance with the 30 CFR Part 732 letters OSM has sent to Texas. In 1998, most of the issues were resolved. Only a few such as revegetation success guidelines remain.

2. Ongoing topics



(a) Off-site Impacts

(b) Reclamation Success

(c) Customer Service



3. New Topic



Ground Water Hydrology



B. Procedures



The basic standards for evaluation will be the requirements of the State program. Procedures will be developed that are specific to each topic. OSM and RCT will work jointly to carry out evaluation studies whenever possible. Reports of the findings will be prepared. OSM and RCT will discuss the findings so that issues are properly explored from all perspectives. Topics-specific plans and procedures are listed below:



Topic Reason for Review Details of review Time Frame
Off-site impacts. OSM emphasis. Data on off-site impacts will be collected on State and Federal inspections, enforcement actions, and civil penalty assessments on all active permits. Documents (especially inspection reports) will include data collection on the nature of off-site impacts, degree of impact, and reparability of damage. OSM will analyze data and report findings in consultation with RCT. Categories of impacts to be evaluated include hydrology, blasting, encroachment, land stability, fish and wildlife, air quality, and vegetation. Throughout EY- 1999, data on off-site impacts will collected. In October 1999, the data will be analyzed to look for trends and to prepare a report. The report on this topic will be used in preparing the Annual Evaluation Report.
Reclamation Success. OSM emphasis. Also, from recent bond releases, TFO has questions about incremental bond release practices, checkerboard release patterns, and timing requirements on bond release applications. OSM and RCT will compile information on bond releases throughout the year. TFO will attend as many bond release inspections as possible to ensure that its evaluation concentrates on the on-the-ground success. A joint review of bond release procedures will be performed:

1. To determine if incremental bond releases comply with the approved program;

2. If current bond release procedures allow for a checkerboard pattern of failures; and,

3. Are the administrative procedures regarding the processing of bond release applications being followed.

OSM will prepare a report on reclamation success based on bond releases at the end of the evaluation year.
Ground water hydrology Citizen complaints have been predominately concerned with the effects that mining has on water wells. Review pre-mined vs. post-mined recharge capacity of water wells on and off mining permits.

Complete a joint review by July 1999.
Customer Service



OSM emphasis on Customer service and routine oversight activities. Review how the State handles the following activities:
  • citizen complaints
  • permitting actions
  • bond releases
Complete by August 1999.
Updating the Texas program 732 letters. The remaining issue is Revegetation Success/bond release standards. OSM will process program amendments as quickly as possible. RCT will provide prompt responses to issue letters. OSM expects to have all Texas program amendments prompted by 732 letters completed in 1999.


C. Methods for Resolving Issues



To resolve issues that arise from evaluation studies, OSM and RCT will jointly work to develop a process for resolving each issue. Each issue may require different methods for resolution, but may include specific action plans, technical assistance or training, and follow-up evaluations.



Success of issue resolution will be measured by on-the-ground correction of the problem that precipitated the issue.



D. Technical Assistance that OSM will provide



OSM will provide technical assistance as needed based on requests from RCT. This will include the TIPS system, technical expertise in specific areas, and training.





E. Core data that will be provided



RCT will continue to provide OSM with:



copies of current applicable State laws and regulations;

copies of permits applications that have been issued with all revision and renewal documents;

copies of inspection reports of all complete and partial mine inspections;

copies of enforcement documents including hearings records;

compiled data on inspection and enforcement, permitting actions, and other data that is required for the preparation of the Annual Evaluation Report;

documents relating to grants, AML inventories, and AML reclamation projects.



OSM will provide:



copies of Federal laws and regulations including all changes and OSM's interpretation of the changes;

timely and complete information relating to grants;

timely notification of oversight inspections and evaluation studies;

copies of Federal inspection reports and enforcement actions;

results of Federal oversight studies and copies of all oversight reports relating to Texas;

copies of OSM research studies relating to Texas.





III. Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program



A. Introduction

On June 23, 1980, the Secretary of the Interior approved Texas' abandoned mine land reclamation plan under Title IV of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). This approval allows the State of Texas, through the Railroad Commission of Texas (RCT), exclusive responsibility and authority to operate the AML Program. Texas' approved State Reclamation Plan outlines the authority, policy and procedures by which the State shall operate this Program. RCT, Surface Mining and Reclamation Division, is responsible for implementation of this plan.



B. Responsibilities



1. The State will:

(a) Actively pursue implementation of the AML program while adhering to its approved program, State and Federal laws and regulations.

(b) Collaborate with OSM to resolve issues of concern to TFO. The State agrees to promptly notify OSM of any AML problems or issues that may arise.

(c) Assist OSM with data and information required to satisfy general information requests of OSM and others. Requests to prepare and provide information will be screened to ensure that it is needed and in the best interest or OSM and the State.

(d) Advise OSM of technical and educational needs.

(e) Comment on OSM's draft Annual Evaluation Report.

(f) Utilize, where possible, innovative approaches to managerial efficiency, problem resolution, environmental protection, and extraordinary achievements in program implementation.



2. OSM will:

(a) Actively participate with the State in implementation of its AML program.

(b) Provide technical and educational assistance to the State, including, upon request, expertise from the Federal government or other sources when possible.

(c) Provide timely and consistent response to requests from the State concerning grants, financial, and programmatic questions,

(d) Provide assistance for complying with all applicable Federal laws and regulations.

(e) Collaborate with the State to resolve issues of concern to TFO. OSM agrees to promptly notify the State of any issues that may arise.

(f) Prepare and distribute the Annual Evaluation Report in accordance with AML-22.

(g) Recognize, through annual reports and other means, innovative State approaches to managerial efficiency, problem resolution, environmental protection, and extraordinary achievements in program implementation.



C. Principles of Excellence for Enhancement and Performance Review



These principles support the concept of excellence in reclamation, along with performance measures that can be used to determine how well the AML Program is meeting the principles.



1. Measuring Success

The State's on-the-ground reclamation is successful. The performance measures are:



(a) Does completed reclamation meet the goals of the project?

(b) Is reclamation successful on a long-term basis?

2. Reclamation Plan

The State must have an approved reclamation plan which meets the requirements of Federal laws and regulations and must conduct reclamation in accordance with its plan. The performance measures are:



(a) Does the current plan meet the requirements of SMCRA, the regulations and other applicable laws? Does the State AML program work cooperatively with OSM to establish a schedule and make necessary changes to the plan?

(b) Does the State AML program comply with OSM Directive AML-1 (AML-Inventory)?

(c) Does the State AML program comply with its plan for project ranking and selection?

(d) Does the State AML program follow the realty requirements of the plan?

(e) Are the State contracting procedures being followed?

(f) Does the State AML program perform the AVS check as required on the successful bidder at the time of contract award?

(g) Does the State AML program comply with NEPA as required?



IV. Topics for Review in 1999



A. State's on-the-ground reclamation is successful.



Does reclamation meet the goals of the project?



Background: This is a review of active and completed projects to compare what was funded and approved in the grant. This evaluation will include review of RCT project files and site inspection. Not less than two completed projects and one in progress will be reviewed. The review will include comparing work identified in the approved grant with completed projects and active projects.



Schedule: A schedule for site visits and file reviews will be coordinated with RCT in order not to interrupt the work schedule.



B. The State must have an approved reclamation plan which meets the requirements of Federal laws and regulations and must conduct reclamation in accordance with its plan.



Does the State AML program comply with National Environmental Policy Act as required.



Background: Review RCT files to identify actions dealing with required interagency/governmental coordination at the appropriate time with project planning and design. Routine correspondence, grant applications and records are considered on an on-going basis throughout the evaluation period.



Schedule: File reviews will be coordinated with RCT in order not to disrupt the work schedule.





Agreement



This workplan covers activities for the 1999 evaluation year. It may be amended in writing at any time through the mutual agreement of the parties. It may be terminated in whole or in part in writing by either party. However, no such termination shall be effected until the parties have attempted to resolve any disagreement.





Signatures:





Michael C. Wolfrom, Director Date Melvin Hodgkiss, Director Date

Tulsa Field Office Surface Mining and Reclamation Division

Office of Surface Mining Railroad Commission of Texas