ms. maria gutto, moon county west virginia organizer. as you come forward, i'll lay out the ground rules, like all our witnesses, your written testimony will appear in full in the written records, so i ask that you keep your oral statements to under five minutes. our microphones are not automatic, so you have to press the button to start. i'll also explain how the timing light works. i. >> my name is art kirkendaal, i am a representative of the deep south of west virginia.

prior to being nominated to senate, appointed to senate and i'm the democrat nominee this year, successful, i was on the county commission local for 30 years. and so disturbing regarding the laurel permit back in 1998, we had a real tussle over there about the opportunity to mine coal, and as a commissioner, you set the budget for all the public works depends on you. the school kids depend on you the ability to have life in a rural county. so when this permit was dispanted. we lost 400 quality jobs, $29 million back in 1998 in direct payroll, if you do the other jobs that support the coal industry, probably $100 million in that particular area.

our coal severance at that time was about $400,000 a quarter. i had to start cutting the budget to tighten things up because we got up to $72,000 one quarter. when 20% of your budget is derived from coal tax in the energy producing county, it's pretty, pretty tough. so during the years now, we're in almost the 14th year, we're still not mining coal, there's still 230 jobs today in question that would be mining the surface mine. and when we talk about the devastation of surface mining, let's look at the plus side of surface mining. we're in a challenged terrain in logan county. i think they say 28-degree slopes. we have no flat land and after some of the flat land at mining for coal, we now have a jail, an industrial court and a shopping mall and other things that give us a little bit of diversif

diversificati diversification. and being also on the commission, we set up what they called a master land usage program. what that meant was, we could put in lang in a mine permit to where we could take people out of flooded areas, we put them up on a surface mine and leave the power and the sewage there instead of taking it all out and starting over. that's what you get when you mine coal in areas that need to be surface mined. let these people have a life. we have had two major floods come into logan county. army corps, coming in there, troops, cleaning up our area, if those people would have been on some of these surface mined areas that we have, that wouldn't have happened. if you don't think you can get killed, go back to the buffalo flood few years ago, 124 people.

>> i'm an environmentalist too. it used to be aoc, that's original contour. plan out what you want to do with that property after the extraction of coal. if we mine all the coal in southern california that needs

to be mined, 3%, i'm telling you we can make it on 97% of the mountains. second fact, i chair one of the most instrumental groups in america, the atv hatfield and mccoy train system. if it's so devastating, we have had visitors from all 50 states and almost 30 foreign countries, permit sales up, we're trying to diversify. we're trying to be a tourist area and mine coal too and we can do both. don't be duped, come down to west virginia and see what what with can do and how we do it but don't put the onus back on us that we can't keep. let me take you to some post mine land that's been redone. i had a news crew in a

helicopter, they said where is the reclaimed sfland i said you've been over it for 16 minutes now. so with that, thank you for the opportunity, and let's be sensible and put america back to work, thank you very much. >> thank you for your testimony, senator kirkendaal. >> thank you members of the committee, i'm karen herbert, affiliate of the u.s. chamber of commerce, which is the nation's ladies and gentlemenest business federation. let's talk about what -- not whether coal should or should not be part of our energy mix, it is about the rule of law and whether america is a safe place for long investment. south side about the integrity of our regulatory process. it is about whether america is open for business.

one of our great strengths for our country is that we hold the rule of law sa-- hundreds of businesses would be questioning if they too could have their permits retroactively invested, there's no way to actually calculate risks than with a regulatory agency that can simply change its mind at will. rerecognize a clear, transparent regulatory system is valuable to both business and the environment. but the government must honor the agreements it makes. in the case of spruce mine number one, the epa did not. to get a scale of mack tud, i would should be -- issues approximately 60,000 discharged permits annually under section

404 andst mates whether that coverings $200 billions of annual investments. it's not just a matter of mining your industry projects, it covers a significant component of our economy, including residential commercial buildings, roads, renewable energy and other products. a reduction or constriction on these investments and these key infrastructure areas will limit job growth. in fact a study by the group estimates that for every million dollars of construction spending, we generate a thousands jobs. we cannot avoid or government to restrict job growth. after ten years of review, epa did not even i'd tie the need to withhold approval for spruce mine number one when it had the opportunity and ability to do so, so attempting to -- almost two years after issuance would

not only cause immediate economic loss to the mine owner, the state of west virginia and the workers, but it would really create a substantial negative, economic and chilling impact on the economy as a whole, setting up precedent that 404 permits can be revoked or changed at will. if permits -- significantly reduced capital investments, fewer jobs and more expensive infrastructure. the united states is still an attractive market for investments, but government increased risks, the united states becomes less attractive. according to the world economic forums, the u.s. which long held the top global position has continued its three-year decline and now holds fifth place. two of the factors krilted for this decline, where a reduction the transparency of government policy making and secondly the increase in burdensome regulation.

when the government takes abation to revoke a legal permit of another agency, this sends a message to the business community that -- transparent and endiring regulations upon which they can make decisions and investments, they require a process that makes sense, a process that has clear time frames and a process for once a decision is made, it is honored and its investments can go forward and hire people. without such confidence, capital would go elsewhere and that undermines not only our competitiveness, but the ability to get america back on its feet and americans back to work. fortunately the u.s. system still has checks and balances and in this case the system worked. the judge called the epa's interpretation, ill ledge come, impractical, refers to their logic as magical thinking, and quote, it is unreasonable so

sew -- at the on set of this case, the epa sought to silence its critics. the epa is struggling to waste the taxpayers dollars to defend an indefensible policy that is transpare transparently -- adhere to laws and regulation governing it's industry and the regulators have an obligation to provide a clear procedure to follow. >> mr.izenberg you may begin.

>> my name is rossizenberg, i'm -- national associate of manufacturers. i'm very pleased to come before the subcommittee today to discuss logan coal company's first mine and what the retroactive veto of that permit -- manufacturers really need predictability from the regulatory process. they must understand the rules of the road so they can make responsible, informed investment decisions. this lack of predictability is precisely the problem with the spruce mine case that we're here to discuss today. the spruce mine detail was at its core a $250 million decision by epa that created a $220 billion problem. so let's talk fist about the $250 million.

arch logan intended to create at least 250 new well paying jobs in west virginia. now about that $220 billion problem, as ms. harper noticed before me, it issues 16,000 -- more than 220 billion zlrz of investment annually is conditioned on the issuance of these permits. and this includes pipelines, transportation infrastructure, agriculture and many other sectors, for as long as the -- under which 4 04 permits might be mod -- first mine introduced for each of these soak fors is a completely new and undefined threat to their permits. epa's decision probably would have made it more difficult to make investment hiring or development decisions. project developers would now

have to account for the possibility of now having the rug pulled out from under them after work on the projects had begun. now the precedent set by the spruce mine case is a serious threat for manufacturers in its own rite but it's only a small part of broader new water policies set by the epa that have manufacturers concerned. it's appearing to test the boundaries of it's authority. epa is in the -- clean water act. manufacturers are concerned that the guidance is legislative in nature and could significantly impact regulatory certainty by subjecting a wide range of traditionally in trust state waters to clean water act jurisdiction and permitting. moreover by doing this dramatic policy shift from guidance rather than by regulations or

the regulatory process, manufacturers feel that epa is circumventing a lot of the regulatory safeguards to protect the -- economic impact statements and job loss analysises and impact to smaller businesses. in addition epa is on the verge of taking another 404 action in this the spruce mine case. this time it looks like it will issue a pre-emptive -- if the project were to move forward, it could attract several billion dollars of investment in countless manufacturing jobs, but the epa's taking the position that it can say no to this project even before the application for permit has been filed. i would like to say that this -- uncomfortable with the scope of its authority under the clean water act. it clearly wants more. but by trying to get more through questionable regulatory

decisions, epa is causing a great deal of uncertainty. it's also ensuring that most of it will be subject to litigation. epa's goal could not be to issue the most responsive water regulations that might survive judicial scrutiny, it should be the right of congress to -- set forth in the plain language of the clean water act. if epa wants or needs additional regulatory authority? well,n't is that why we have congress. epa should be here asking congress for such authority. manufacturers need predictability from the regulatory process. a problem system of checks and balances will ensure that problem will not happen again. >> thank you for your testimony. we l now hear from ms. gunno. >> i'm from boon county west

virginia and i help to represent the appalachian communities where coal mining -- thank each of you for allowing me the opportunity to speak to you again today. i appreciate your obligations and responsibilities in protecting and serving all u.s. citizens. my hope is that you listen and hear the pleas for our lives in southern appalachia where these atrocious mountain top mining -- the stream and the people of flair seem unpossibility to most people in this courtroom. but to me and the people of blair, the stream is a part of our home. when mountain top removal is permitted near your home, you will soon be forced to leave what is the birth place of your family and your children's birth rights as heirs to your family dream.

you are forced by destruction to leave the land that our parents fought for. why is it -- leave us to die in a post mining waste land for temporary jobs and energy. you should ask yourselves, are we knowingly and willingly flipping on our lights and lining our pockets at the expense of the livelihood and health of the people in appalachi appalachia, the answer to this, in my opinion is yes, you are. the spruce permit is one example of the steps the epa has taken to stop irresponsible mining practices which were ignored during the bush administration. people from all over appalachia have lobbied the epa for these protections for the past 15 years, the coal industry was allowed to do as they pleased during the eight years of the bush administration.

then in 2009, in steps the obama administration trying to mix the problems that the bush administration created and then ignored. the coal industry has said that the epa and the obama administration are trying to shut down coal. the coal industry is perpetuating a lie that there is a war on coal and that coal mining jobs are under attack. this is the same false crisis that is created by this industry each time that they don't get what they want. according to recent reports by ken ward of the west virginia gas set, goal mining has actually increased since 2009 when the obama administration took office. annual west virginia coal mining

jobs were higher in 2011 than in the last 23 years. the war on coal is a lie invented by the coal industry. it's a multimillion dollar misinformation campaign funded by big coal polluters to distract americans from the deadly effects of coal's pollution on public health. there is a war in appalachia, believe this. this war is not on coal. this war is on the people of appalachia, coal is not our king, god is, coal is only the dictator of some. expanding any mountain top removal including the spruce number one permit means the depopulation of another mountain community and the sick sickening of the people who live in this country, we will die as a culture as we suffer with the

inability to pass this mountain culture on to our children. not even our historic mountain cemeteries are left intact and accessible. it is not as if this committee, congress, the coal industry and the obama administration doesn't know what mountain top removal is doing to people. they not only know about it, but they are supporting it and allowing it by not ending it. after visiting the central appalachian communities, the u.n. women's tribunal recommendations for rio 20 included that mountain top removal should immediately be stopped with a more for rum on all mountain top removal until a full investigation can be accomplished. we will not back down, we know we are doing the right thing in ending this evil that has came

in to destroy our very existence. we appalachians for many years have lobbied the epa to enforce the laws to prothe ethe coal industry in west virginia is anti-light. and the enforcement of laws is the only chance we have as a culture. our family were -- what the coal industry and our government is doing to our native communities in southern appalachia feels much like the second, silent forced removal of our people. >> okay, thank you, and thank all of you for your testimony here this morning. members of the committee may have additional questions for the record and i would ask that you respond to these in writing. we will now begin questioning, members are limited to five minutes in their questions, but

we may have additional rounds. i now recognize myself for five minutes for the first set of questions. senator kirkendaal, in your testimony you discussed the benefits to boon county and west virginia more broadly. did i hear you right that there is a $29 million direct payroll and a total $100 million direct and indirect payroll that is being lost by the nonoperation of the spruce coal mine? >> mr. chairman, those were numbers i reflected, that was back in 1998, when daltex shut down. the loss of revenue that we -- we couldn't make it up. we have never made it up. we made cuts. that was $29 million of direct payroll that were employees of daltex when the permit was no

longer there for them to operate and work. the people who bring the supplies to the mine, the tires and the trucks, the bolts and whatever they do, all the materials, you can estimate, we have done a lot offest mailted numbers that was between $90 million and $100 million for the support venn dors. >> correct adirect and indirecty job are we talking about? >> some say a qualifying coal mini mining job if a person works his normal hours, is between $55,000 and $70,000 a year. so 2 4u7b qualified coal mining jobs could be anywhere between 1,000, 1,200 jobs of activity with that kind of revenue there to be split among different type needs and services.

>> with the money that would come to the county or the state, is the county or the state able to make water quality and stream quality improvements? >> well, here's the thing, in logan, we have i was commissioner for 30 years starting in 1980, when i got there, i think less than 28% of the people had potable water. most of the water lines back then were two-inch lines, we were very aggressive in requests for funding and when i left the county commission in 2010, we were way over 90% of the people in our county, logan, had potable water. we do have a policy and a program now about stream restore ration, you simply can't get in a stream anymore from federal regulations. i don't care what you've got in the mid of that stream.

the guy on that river recently had flooding where the water will flow from upper counties down there, you will have trees debris lodgeded from one side of the water way to the other. you get in that stream and muddy the water to kill a craw dad, you're going to jail. so what we had to do as a commission is make application to what they call the soil conservation agency in charleston. and they come in, send engineers to bring the stream back to what they call bedrock, and let it restore itself naturally. we were okay with that. we worked with it. there is avenues to restore streams, but some of the interpretation of streams is what the problem is now a dry ditch is -- annual rainfall. that's a stream. >> all right, thank you.

miss har berth, do people working in regulatory agencies have a thorough enough understanding of the problems it's causing in our economy by increasing uncertainty? >> in our opinion absolutely not. the reverberations of decisions like this are not just in one county or one state, they're across the country, they're argumenting industries unrelated to mining, unrelated to engine. it is building, it's transportation, it's roads, it's bridges, and these decisions that are taken should not be taken so lightly. we understand that there are billions of dollar at stake. >> will this have the result of driving american jobs overseas this kind of -- >> we have to want investment in the united states. we have to attract it, which have to be inviting, rather than

than saying to capital investors take your money elsewhere because you're going to have that type of certainty somewhere else. the decisions these are look for like caesar chavez than american -- do we actually want to scare it to other markets. >> i now recognize the ranking member. >> thank you, let me begin request a comment that this little side show earlier just confirms in my mind that, indeed the officials at the environmental protection agency had important better things to do with their time this morning than to engage in political theater. mr. chairman, you knew days ago they were not coming, you did not have to print cards to establish a little skit here. to ask where the officials were. and this just, as i say,

confirms that they indeed have much more important things to be doing this morning. ms. ganeau, we have, i think a chart available that's a map of the area, the red in the center, i guess, is the mountain top area in question. all of the other gray areas are permitted areas. so it's not as if this is the only opportunity for, you know, in the tri-state region -- ms. ganeaux. according to the epa, there are 257 past and present fas mining permits in the