Proposed Stream Protection Rule, 80 Fed. Reg. 44,436 (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0018) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0021) Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis (Dkt. No. OSM-2015-0002)

The document is a formal comment letter from a coalition of environmental groups regarding the proposed Stream Protection Rule. The authors argue that the rule fails to adequately protect stream channels from direct damage, particularly in Central Appalachia, and relies on unproven stream restoration techniques. They contend that OSMRE ignored critical factors in its analysis, including the structural decline of coal demand, the net economic drain of mining on the region, and severe public health impacts. The coalition urges the agency to retain the 1983 stream buffer zone, strengthen water quality standards, and incorporate the social cost of carbon into its environmental impact assessments.

• The coalition argues that the proposed rule's reliance on stream restoration and re-creation to mitigate the loss of mined-through streams lacks a scientific basis, noting that 97% of analyzed projects in southern Appalachia reported suboptimal or marginal habitat after five years of monitoring.
• The authors claim OSMRE violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by failing to consider that U.S. and global coal demand is in structural decline, which undermines the agency's argument that strong stream protections would compromise national energy needs.
• The document asserts that surface coal mining is a net economic drain on Appalachia, citing that in FY 2006, the coal industry's net impact on Kentucky's budget was a cost of $115 million, and in FY 2009, it cost West Virginia approximately $97.5 million.
• The coalition highlights a strong correlation between surface coal mining and elevated rates of serious health problems in Appalachia, stating that overall mortality rates in these regions are about 20 percent higher than the national average.
• The authors argue that OSMRE failed to analyze the effect of the proposed rule on climate change and should use the 'social cost of carbon' protocol to disclose the impacts of alternatives on coal use and carbon emissions.
• The coalition contends that the proposed rule's 'no action' baseline is incorrectly assessed because it assumes the wholesale destruction of streams is currently permissible, whereas the 1983 buffer zone rule prohibits disturbances that adversely affect environmental resources.
• The document urges OSMRE to clarify that compliance with water quality standards is a performance standard directly enforceable under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), specifically to prevent states like West Virginia from immunizing the industry from liability for impairing streams.
• The authors argue that the proposed rule's revegetation and reforestation provisions are inconsistent with 30 U.S.C. § 1265(b)(19), as they create extra-statutory exceptions for rock piles and impervious surfaces.

APA

Earthjustice (2015). Proposed Stream Protection Rule, 80 Fed. Reg. 44,436 (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0018) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0021) Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis (Dkt. No. OSM-2015-0002). https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/coalition20comments20on20the20stream20protection20rule_10.26.15.pdf

Chicago

Earthjustice. Proposed Stream Protection Rule, 80 Fed. Reg. 44,436 (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0018) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0021) Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis (Dkt. No. OSM-2015-0002). 2015. https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/coalition20comments20on20the20stream20protection20rule_10.26.15.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Earthjustice |title=Proposed Stream Protection Rule, 80 Fed. Reg. 44,436 (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0018) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0021) Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis (Dkt. No. OSM-2015-0002) |date=26 October 2015 |url=https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/coalition20comments20on20the20stream20protection20rule_10.26.15.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{earthjustice2015proposed, author = {{Earthjustice}}, title = {{Proposed Stream Protection Rule, 80 Fed. Reg. 44,436 (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0018) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Dkt. No. OSM-2010-0021) Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis (Dkt. No. OSM-2015-0002)}}, publisher = {Earthjustice}, year = {2015}, month = oct, url = {https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/coalition20comments20on20the20stream20protection20rule_10.26.15.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }