By Bruce Golden, Regional Coordinator, Western PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation

(Note: These remarks were presented as testimony this week by Mr. Golden before the Green Ribbon Commission chaired by Rep. Bill Adolph (R-Delaware) and Sen. Mary Jo White (R-Venango) in Harrisburg.)

Chairman White, Chairman Adolph, and distinguished members of the Green Ribbon Commission, thank you for inviting me to speak before you about one of Pennsylvania’s most chronic environmental problems, acid mine drainage.

My name is Bruce Golden, Regional Coordinator of the Western PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation, a non-profit group whose mission is to advance the cause of abandoned mine reclamation in western Pennsylvania.

Working in concert with county conservation districts, we see ourselves as a helping hand for those groups grappling with local problems caused by past mining practices. In existence for over 20 years, we are a recognized leader in this cause. Our sister organization, the Eastern Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation, is performing similar services in the anthracite coal region.

Years ago, before regulations protected the environment, extensive coal mining occurred throughout much of Pennsylvania. Mining operators minimized costs but in ways that turned out to be disastrous to the environment. Throughout coal country, rust-colored, lifeless waters are testament to a century’s worth of unregulated mining. Acid mine drainage (AMD) is the culprit. Characterized by its acidity and metal content, streams affected by AMD are generally not suitable for drinking or recreation.

We’ve inherited well over 4,000 miles of these seriously degraded waterways, now Pennsylvania’s single worst water pollution problem.

In spite of the magnitude of this problem, a truly remarkable phenomenon is happening in Pennsylvania: AMD impacted watersheds are being transformed into usable and desirable resources.

This renaissance of sorts is not just the story of environmental improvement, but one of the passionate people acting at the local level in partnership with government, business, industry, academia, non-profit organizations and foundations to bring about meaningful change.

It’s also the story of the success of passive treatment systems that have been instrumental in the treatment of AMD. I’ll illustrate with a two examples.

In Somerset and Cambria Counties, a local coalition known as the Stoneycreek River Improvement Project did what many thought next to impossible: in less than 8 years a virtually lifeless AMD impacted river now has 22 species of fish including reproducing trout. The upper reaches of the Stonycreek River are considered to be one of the best reclaimed trout fisheries in America.

Using passive treatment, that fishery extends to downtown Johnstown. People there are now looking to the river for economic growth from tourism, fishing, and white water rafting. Nature has tremendous resiliency given a chance: with only a partial cleanup, the Stoneycreek has made an amazing comeback. This astounding success was only possible through the dogged determination of over 55 active local partners dedicated to the project.

A similar story comes from the heavily mining-impacted watershed adopted by the Slippery Rock Creek Watershed Coalition in Venango, Butler, Mercer, and Lawrence Counties.

Collectively their 12 passive treatment systems process 500 million gallons of AMD per year, enough water to supply 3 cities the size of Punxatauny. They remove enough iron and aluminum annually to construct 200 small pickups. In 11 miles of streams where fish, absent for 100 years, are back and reproducing.

The environmental success is equaled by the success of people and partners who have bought into the process and become involved at many levels. As proof that these projects take on lives of their own, I’ve given you a publication called “Accepting the Challenge” produced by the Slippery Rock Watershed Coalition that eloquently develops this topic. I urge you to examine this very approachable work.

I could go on and on about the successes that are being achieved throughout the Commonwealth by the people comprising more than 150 watershed groups and their partners. The energy and creativity released on projects is often something to behold. These are action-oriented people on a mission to improve their environment. If we could bottle this determination, energy and enthusiasm, we’d make a fortune.

I’d now like to turn to the technologies involved with treating AMD. First a little background. The most common way of treating AMD is to capture it as it exits the mining environment, then neutralize the acids and precipitate the metals as sludge. So-called active treatment methodologies directly add chemicals to the AMD on an ongoing basis in treatment facilities. Although effective, active treatment has not been widely used for legacy AMD problems because of high operations costs.

In contrast, passive treatment mimics nature’s way of treating AMD by using constructed wetlands and ponds, but still uses the strategy of neutralizing acids and precipitating metals.

Since the mid 1990s, passive treatment technologies have taken center stage in our AMD reclamation efforts. This still emerging technology has advanced substantially over the past decade. We better appreciate both the capabilities and limitations of passive treatment.

For instance, operations and maintenance are more important than originally thought, and we know we have to budget for those costs. We also appreciate that passive treatment may not always be the best alternative for every situation. Sometimes active treatment or a combination of active and passive methods makes for the most cost effective solution.

Other innovative approaches to the problem are being explored. For example,

· resource recovery looks to the metals in AMD for their potential economic value;

· in-situ treatment technologies have promise in treating AMD within the mining environment;

· waste streams from other industries may have value in treating AMD;

· marketing mine pool water as a resource to water intensive industries such as the power industry is something we’ve already started to do.

We commend DEP’s leadership role in encouraging these and other innovative approaches in dealing with AMD.

Now let’s turn to funding. Plain and simple, without adequate funding, we stop dead in our tracks.

The people behind these projects have worked very hard and have been very fortunate to obtain the funding necessary for their projects. Funding has come from a variety of sources, but without doubt the standout player has been the existing Growing Greener program.

Without Growing Greener much our successes would simply not have happened. And Growing Greener has been a wonderful catalyst for multiplying value. On average, for every Growing Greener dollar spent, another dollar was matched by project partners.

Pennsylvania is now the recognized leader in its approach to the dealing with AMD. And Growing Greener is the envy of many other states. I like to think of our approach as a triangle, with the sides representing people, technology, and funding. Each of the sides is dependent on the other two. And sufficient quantities of each are needed to make it all work. It’s a winning formula.

In formulating a game plan on how we go about dealing with the abandoned mine reclamation problems in Pennsylvania, it’s useful to examine the magnitude of the problem. Simply put, it’s big, real big. Many billions of dollars will be needed to fully address the problems statewide.

We need to be in this for the long haul. Realistically, even with optimistic estimates of costs and generous funding, it will take many decades to put this behind us (or behind our children and grandchildren). The decisions made in the upcoming months will help decide how many decades it may take.

In the triangle I referenced earlier, funding will always be the element in the shortest supply dictating the rate of progress. From our standpoint we need and can use all the funding that comes our way. The Governor’s Growing Greener II proposal, therefore, merits our support.

I’ll finish with these recommendations.

· The Commonwealth has a treasure in “citizen capital”. Take advantage of the tremendous energy and opportunity to leverage resources that exists with watershed groups and their partners by funding worthy local reclamation projects.

· Continue to invest in new, improved and innovative technologies.

· Protect the investments we make with reclamation projects by providing funds for operation and maintenance. [As a rule of thumb, we use 4% of the construction costs to estimate annual OM&R costs.]

· Work smarter. Strategically apply available resources to projects that will get the greatest bang for the buck. Many watershed groups have completed or are in the process of doing comprehensive watershed assessments that serve as a guide to their reclamation efforts.

· Be patient, but with a sense of urgency. Recognize the magnitude of the problem. Fund at the highest levels possible. Avoid “feast or famine” funding cycles.

I’d like to close with a passage from “Accepting the Challenge” which provides a fitting summary:

“Pennsylvania has the largest inventory of abandoned mine problems in the entire US. No one government agency, business, or concerned group of individuals can hope to restore the entire state. Only through cooperative partnerships, statewide concern, and the innovation of improved treatment techniques will this unfortunate legacy be resolved.”

Bruce Golden can be contacted at the Western PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation at 724-837-5271 ext. 136 or by email to: bruce@wpcamr.org .

1/28/2005