[cuppett777]

Contractors Claim Administration Pressed to 'Soften' Job-Loss Estimates From Mining Rule
By Judson Berger

Published November 18, 2011
| FoxNews.com

Print Email Share Comments
Text Size

House Natural Resources Committee

Nov. 18, 2011: Consultant Steve Gardner testifies before a House Natural Resources Committee subcommittee on Capitol Hill.
The Obama administration pressured analysts to change an environmental review to reflect fewer job losses from a proposed regulation, the contractors who worked on the review testified Friday.

The dispute revolves around proposed changes to a rule regulating coal mining near streams and other waterways. The experts contracted to analyze the impact of the rule initially found that it would cost 7,000 coal jobs.

But the contractors claim they were subsequently pressured to not only keep the findings under wraps but "revisit" the study in order to show less of an impact on jobs.

Steve Gardner, president of Kentucky consulting firm ECSI, claimed that after the project team refused to "soften" the numbers, the firms working on the study were told the contract would not be renewed. ECSI was a subcontractor on the project.

The government "'suggested' that the ... members revisit the production impacts and associated job loss numbers, with different assumptions that obviously would then lead to a lesser impact," Gardner testified before a House Natural Resources subcommittee."The ... team unanimously refused to use a 'fabricated' baseline scenario to soften the production loss numbers."

The charges escalate a dispute over environmental regulations that has been brewing for months, as the Obama administration tries to overhaul mining rules that were put in place at the end of the George W. Bush administration following a years-long review.

"Right now, there's a tremendous amount of smoke. And where there's smoke, there's usually fire," Rep. Bill Johnson, R-Ohio, told FoxNews.com ahead of the hearing Friday.

The prediction that the changes would cost 7,000 jobs was first made public in January of this year. As officials in the affected states cried foul, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement defended its proposed re-write.

Joseph Pizarchik, director of that office, went further in a hearing earlier this month and said the job-loss stats were "fabricated based on placeholder numbers and have no basis in fact."

He said the numbers were "based on no evidence."

But on Friday, the subcontractors pushed back.

Gardner rejected Pizarchik's claim, and said in written testimony that the office asked the team to re-do its study when it "did not like the result of the analysis."

Johnson said he will "demand accountability" as he looks into what happened during the review.

"We've got potentially a very serious issue here," the congressman said.

The discrepancy in the numbers centered on what the consultants were comparing the new rule against.

According to Gardner, the Obama administration wanted them to assume the Bush-era 2008 mining regulation was in effect across the country -- though it is not and has been challenged in court. Gardner's firm did not want to do that but noted that using that assumption would show "less job loss impact."

While the mining industry has expressed concern about the economic impact of the regulation overhaul, the administration claims it is trying to address serious environmental issues that were unresolved in the last review.

Pizarchik, in his submitted testimony earlier this month, said the 2008 rule did not "fully" explore mining's impact on aquatic ecosystems. He said the government's goal is to protect drinking water, wildlife and scenery.

As officials debate the impact of proposed national mining regulations, another environmental decision in Ohio could put more jobs at stake. Earlier this week, the U.S. Forest Service withdrew plans to sell drilling rights on a national forest in Ohio so experts could study the impact of a drilling process known as fracking.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...#ixzz1e5OPFLt5

[cuppett777]

sad,but thats the government for you...

[vector]

http://www.dailymail.com/News/statenews/201111200029

uh oh

[vector]

the more you watch

the less you know

:eyeroll:

[TheRealVille]

More Faux News lies.



From Vectors link:

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) - New government data shows employment in the Appalachian mining industry is at a 14-year high.

The federal Mine Safety and Health Administration says the total number of coal jobs nationwide is at its highest level since 1996, with 90,354 jobs in 2011.

In Appalachia, the 59,059 jobs reported were the most since 1997. In miner-heavy West Virginia, coal employment reached its highest level since 1992, with 23,353 jobs.

Growth in employment in the coal industry comes despite increased scrutiny and regulatory changes aimed at reduce the environmental impacts of mining. Republican congressional leaders, meanwhile, have blocked new mine-safety legislation and are working against proposed MSHA rules aimed at ending black lung disease.

[Bob Seger]

More Faux News lies.

From Vectors link:

How is it a lie to report a story that a contactor claims? Did Gardner testify on Capital Hill or not? If he did, where is the lie? He's the one telling the story.


As far as more mining jobs, I would like to know where in the heck they are in this area. Mine after mine after mine has been shut down over the last few years.

[TheRealVille]

How is it a lie to report a story that a contactor claims? Did Gardner testify on Capital Hill or not? If he did, where is the lie? He's the one telling the story.


As far as more mining jobs, I would like to know where in the heck they are in this area. Mine after mine after mine has been shut down over the last few years.

You only hear what you want to hear. I have heard of several mines around here that have been hiring. I have a buddy in Martin County that said the company he works for is hiring just about anybody that walks through the door, that can pass the drug test. I have other friends that have went to work at different jobs in the mines over the last couple of years.

[Old School]

You only hear what you want to hear. I have heard of several mines around here that have been hiring. I have a buddy in Martin County that said the company he works for is hiring just about anybody that walks through the door, that can pass the drug test. I have other friends that have went to work at different jobs in the mines over the last couple of years.

Are they hiring surface or underground miners? Most of the underground mines are hiring anyone who has their certification and can pass a drug test.

Surface mines are differnent, companies are beginning to run out of permitted areas as most have permits that have state approval the EPA is still not approving 404 permits and approving very few NPDES permits. If surface mines are hiring I have to wonder for how long?

[TheRealVille]

Are they hiring surface or underground miners? Most of the underground mines are hiring anyone who has their certification and can pass a drug test.

Surface mines are differnent, companies are beginning to run out of permitted areas as most have permits that have state approval the EPA is still not approving 404 permits and approving very few NPDES permits. If surface mines are hiring I have to wonder for how long?

Some of both. The guys that I was talking about jumping to different jobs, were surface. The first buddy works in an underground,his company has a pretty much open call for people that have a card and can pee clean. The point is, that it isn't as bad as conservatives would have you believe. The link shows it. In my trade, I used to have to travel all over to find the work. Some of the miners around here might have to do what a lot of us have done for years, travel to the work.

[Bob Seger]

Some of both. The guys that I was talking about jumping to different jobs, were surface. The first buddy works in an underground,his company has a pretty much open call for people that have a card and can pee clean. The point is, that it isn't as bad as conservatives would have you believe. The link shows it. In my trade, I used to have to travel all over to find the work. Some of the miners around here might have to do what a lot of us have done for years, travel to the work.

I'm certainly not seeing and direct result of all this hiring. All I can say is that my business has a direct correlation to how strong the economy is, and I can tell you 100% right now. It Sucks!!!!

[Old School]

Some of both. The guys that I was talking about jumping to different jobs, were surface. The first buddy works in an underground,his company has a pretty much open call for people that have a card and can pee clean. The point is, that it isn't as bad as conservatives would have you believe. The link shows it. In my trade, I used to have to travel all over to find the work. Some of the miners around here might have to do what a lot of us have done for years, travel to the work.

I work in the industry, and believe me it is getting bad, the company I work for has not had a new permit issued by the EPA in three years. Most companies have always been able to keep areas permitted ahead, these existing permits are now being mined and since no new permits are being issued by the EPA and companies are now starting to mine out of places to work.

[TheRealVille]

I work in the industry, and believe me it is getting bad, the company I work for has not had a new permit issued by the EPA in three years. Most companies have always been able to keep areas permitted ahead, these existing permits are now being mined and since no new permits are being issued by the EPA and companies are now starting to mine out of places to work.

You work for one company. You might want to check out some of mines that are doing all the hiring, that are bringing the numbers up to record numbers in the last fourteen years from the link. The numbers are in black and white at the link.

[TheRealVille]

The fact of the matter is, that hiring in the mining industry is at a 14 year high. That tells one of two things, you all either are ignorant of the facts, or you blatantly give false information.

[TheRealVille]

the more you watch

the less you know

:eyeroll:

Which brings up another study....

Fox News Viewers Know Less Than People Who Don't Watch Any News: Study

Fox News viewers are less informed than people who don't watch any news, according to a new poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University.

The poll surveyed New Jersey residents about the uprisings in Egypt and the Middle East, and where they get their news sources. The study, which controlled for demographic factors like education and partisanship, found that "people who watch Fox News are 18-points less likely to know that Egyptians overthrew their government" and "6-points less likely to know that Syrians have not yet overthrown their government" compared to those who watch no news.

Overall, 53% of all respondents knew that Egyptians successfully overthrew Hosni Mubarak and 48% knew that Syrians have yet to overthrow their government.

Dan Cassino, a political science professor at Fairleigh Dickinson, explained in a statement, "Because of the controls for partisanship, we know these results are not just driven by Republicans or other groups being more likely to watch Fox News. Rather, the results show us that there is something about watching Fox News that leads people to do worse on these questions than those who don’t watch any news at all."

This isn't the first study that has found that Fox News viewers more misinformed in comparison to others. Last year, a study from the University of Maryland found that Fox News viewers were more likely to believe false information about politics.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/21..._ref=false

[Old School]

You work for one company. You might want to check out some of mines that are doing all the hiring, that are bringing the numbers up to record numbers in the last fourteen years from the link. The numbers are in black and white at the link.

The fact of the matter is, that hiring in the mining industry is at a 14 year high. That tells one of two things, you all either are ignorant of the facts, or you blatantly give false information.

Yes I work for only one coal company, I found that working for more than one was too much for me to handle.:biggrin: I have many friends that work for other coal companies and they are in the same position, one will be out of surface permits within 3 months, another has about 2 years left and the others are in between those two. FYI we are also hiring, employees are leaving us for other companies that have a longer life and we have to fill those positions to maintain our production. If you compare West Virginia's total production (UG and Surface) 165 million for 08 to 144 million for 09, while the number of miners have increased from 20,207 in 08 to 27,892 in 09. This means production per minier has dropped 8,165 tons per year in 08 to 5,162 tons per year in 09. Is this drastic drop due to mining conditions, or new regulations or something else?

These surface mines have to maintain their production levels to fullfill their contracts, so they are hiring more to maintain that level. The fact is existing permits are running out and the EPA is refusing to approve new permits that are minable.

As far as being igorant of the facts, maybe you should do a little research before making comments like you have.

[vector]

Yes I work for only one coal company, I found that working for
more than one was too much for me to handle. I have many friends
that work for other coal companies and they are in the same position,
one will be out of surface permits within 3 months, another has about
2 years left and the others are in between those two. FYI we are also
hiring, employees are leaving us for other companies that have a longer
life and we have to fill those positions to maintain our production. If
you compare West Virginia's total production (UG and Surface) 165
million for 08 to 144 million for 09, while the number of miners have
increased from 20,207 in 08 to 27,892 in 09. This means production per
minier has dropped 8,165 tons per year in 08 to 5,162 tons per year in 09.
Is this drastic drop due to mining conditions, or new regulations or something else?


been in the mines for 34 years this is the best i have

seen it since i first started in 1977 why?

one thing there was no such thing as mountain top

removal they would just strip around the points

so everything was underground then i think in 77 we had

about 275000 underground coal miners then they come up

mountaintop removal where it don't take 25% of the men

and twice the coal then they flood the market which drives

down the price of coal now who do you think that hurt's

it hurts the working people because that's the easy thing to cut

today the mines are safer wages are higher why because the

demand for coal is up

i'm gonna give you some more good advise you probaly won't

listen stay away from fox news read a paper or something

[Old School]

I have to disagree MTR was around in 1977, in fact MTR was ongoing in the early 70’s property owned by Island Creek Coal Company and Martin County Coal Corp.

I’m not sure where 275,000 underground miners came from because according to the NMA there were only 143,121 coal miners in 1973 nationwide and in 1983 there were 175,642 coal miners. If you think that it only takes one-fourth of the manpower to operate a surface mine as it does an underground mine your badly mistaken.

Coal companies do have a history of flooding the market, however that usually happens when coal prices spike upward and everyone wants to raise their production or new players want to get into the game.

[TheRealVille]

Yes I work for only one coal company, I found that working for more than one was too much for me to handle.:biggrin: I have many friends that work for other coal companies and they are in the same position, one will be out of surface permits within 3 months, another has about 2 years left and the others are in between those two. FYI we are also hiring, employees are leaving us for other companies that have a longer life and we have to fill those positions to maintain our production. If you compare West Virginia's total production (UG and Surface) 165 million for 08 to 144 million for 09, while the number of miners have increased from 20,207 in 08 to 27,892 in 09. This means production per minier has dropped 8,165 tons per year in 08 to 5,162 tons per year in 09. Is this drastic drop due to mining conditions, or new regulations or something else?

These surface mines have to maintain their production levels to fullfill their contracts, so they are hiring more to maintain that level. The fact is existing permits are running out and the EPA is refusing to approve new permits that are minable.

As far as being igorant of the facts, maybe you should do a little research before making comments like you have.

The permits are running out, yet hiring is at a 14 year high? Yea that makes sense. Maybe you can find somebody that failed math in school that will believe that. :biggrin:

[Bob Seger]

Which brings up another study....




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/21..._ref=false

I'm not sure the Huffington Post is such a good example of countering a claim that another news source carries a bias.

[Bob Seger]

For all of this extreme upswing in production that is being claimed here, you would think that Route 23 would be overwhelmed with an increase in coal truck traffic. Kinda the opposite from my observation. I cant ever remember seeing 23 have such a low number of coal haulers going up and down the river as what there is now.


Just ask anyone in this area that is associated with the retail sector, and they will tell you that the economy is the worst that it has been since probably the 60's before the coal boom hit in the early to mid 70's.. It's flat out awful right now.

[TheRealVille]

For all of this extreme upswing in production, you would think that 23 would be overwhelmed with an increase in coal truck traffic. Kinda the opposite from my observation. I cant ever remember seeing 23 have such a low number of coal haulers going up and down the river as what there is now.

Well then, you don't travel it as much as I do. You very seldom ever saw a truck on 23 when I traveled it every day in late 2007-2008, and now I travel it almost as much(not daily, but almost daily), and it is loaded with trucks.

[TheRealVille]

I'm not sure the Huffington Post is such a good example of countering a claim that another news source carries a bias.

They both carry a bias, but do the studies/polls? BTW, it's not countering a claim. It is two completely different polls, on two completely different topics..

[TheRealThing]

The permits are running out, yet hiring is at a 14 year high? Yea that makes sense. Maybe you can find somebody that failed math in school that will believe that. :biggrin:

And you're telling Seger he only hears what HE wants to? Thought you didn't read the liberal rags, the Huffington Post? No offense, I think I'm gonna go with the actual miners on here that are trying to explain the truth to you.

[Bob Seger]

Well then, you don't travel it as much as I do. You very seldom ever saw a truck on 23 when I traveled it every day in late 2007-2008, and now I travel it almost as much(not daily, but almost daily), and it is loaded with trucks.

Yeah I probably dont. I only have 35 trucks on the road every day and only go through about 400,000 gallons of diesel fuel every year. This stuff is all still new to me as I have only been doing it for 25 years. I know nothing, but I am still trying to learn. I admit, I'm pretty naive and I do pretty much live a sheltered life when it comes to what goes on with the local economic sector. Thanks for all the experts on here to help make me aware of all the prosperity that is flowing through the region. I'm gonna make it my #1 New Years resolution to get more involved with what's going on around me this next year.:Thumbs:

[Hoot Gibson]

Amazing coincidence that immediately on the heels of Congressional testimony that the administration tried to persuade contracters to spin projected job losses in the coal industry, a study is released showing that the Obama administration has created a record number of jobs in the coal mining industry. Unbelievable - literally unbelievable.

[TheRealVille]

Yeah I probably dont. I only have 35 trucks on the road every day and only go through about 400,000 gallons of diesel fuel every year. This stuff is all still new to me as I have only been doing it for 25 years. I know nothing, but I am still trying to learn. I admit, I'm pretty naive and I do pretty much live a sheltered life when it comes to what goes on with the local economic sector. Thanks for all the experts on here to help make me aware of all the prosperity that is flowing through the region. I'm gonna make it my #1 New Years resolution to get more involved with what's going on around me this next year.:Thumbs:

Well, you are blatantly giving false info then. It is fact what I said in my above post. From the fall of 2007, all through 2008 I traveled rt 23 twice a day going and coming, going to Huntington. Very few trucks on it. I drove it some in 2009, on a regular basis and there might have been few trucks on it. I can't remember where I worked in 2010, so I can't say on the number of trucks traveling that way, but as of late, I have been traveling to Huntington about 3 times a week, and there are tons of trucks on rt 23 going that way.

I had you figured all wrong Bob, I thought you were a doctor.

[TheRealVille]

And you're telling Seger he only hears what HE wants to? Thought you didn't read the liberal rags, the Huffington Post? No offense, I think I'm gonna go with the actual miners on here that are trying to explain the truth to you.

This coal hiring link is from the Charleston Daily, not Huffington. The huffington link is about Fox news listeners being more inclined to believe false information, and I don't need huffington to tell me that, I just needed a study showing it. BTW, the study isn't from huffington, they just reported it.
http://www.dailymail.com/News/statenews/201111200029

[Bob Seger]

Well, you are blatantly giving false info then. It is fact what I said in my above post. From the fall of 2007, all through 2008 I traveled rt 23 twice a day going and coming, going to Huntington. Very few trucks on it. I drove it some in 2009, on a regular basis and there might have been few trucks on it. I can't remember where I worked in 2010, so I can't say on the number of trucks traveling that way, but as of late, I have been traveling to Huntington about 3 times a week, and there are tons of trucks on rt 23 going that way.

I had you figured all wrong Bob, I thought you were a doctor.

Blatant false info?? How is that?


I have a good friend that is a salesman at FS VanHoose and the word from him is that this the worst year that they have had in perhaps their history and you're talking about a 100 year old company. Their annual spring and fall sales have been disasters. Another very good friend is the manager at Lowes. It's awful there too according to him. I do business with all the WalMarts and I can promise you that week in and week out, they have had a steady decline in overall customer purchases for quite some to me now. They keep cutting their department managers and now have single heads over mutiple departments because business is so bad. The food sector is being hit extremely hard. Realtors will tell you they cant give a house away right now. Long time furniture merchants such as Maggards and Tony&Terry's had to shut their doors because they just cant survive any more. How do I know this? I am personal frinds with both entities. My business offers the most basic of all human needs as well, and business absolutely stinks. It is way way off. So there you have it. I have entailed info for just about every economic sector out there.

For the most part if people in eastern Kentucky have a nickle, it is not going to stay in their pockets for long, they'll spend it. If everything was up and running as you say business would be booming. I promise you it is far far far the opposite.

Doctor, no I'm not. Coal miner, no I am not, and dont claim to be an expert on that by any means, but I do know a couple of the "true miners" that have posted in this thread and I have every confidence in the world in them to tell you that they are "true experts" in their field and know very very well what they are talking about if you would listen.. But I am probably the most qualified of anybody that has posted in this thread and perhaps of all members on this whole board that can give a first hand account of how this current ecomomy is devastated and how it has stymied retail business. Everything, and I mean everything in this region is a direct result of what King Coal produces. I am more inclined to listen to Old School and his explanation as to why a temporary surge may exist and why in reality it may be very short lived. It is my humble suggestion for others too listen to what he has to say. If there is a current boom in the coal business, then all I have to say is I am scared to death if we have a downturn. I dont need to read some kind of an account that some newspaper (that just may have a political agenda) may publish to see what is going on. I live and breathe it every single day. As bad as it is right now, my fear is that it is going to get much much worse if this current administration in Washington is allowed to exist for another term.

[Old School]

The permits are running out, yet hiring is at a 14 year high? Yea that makes sense. Maybe you can find somebody that failed math in school that will believe that. :biggrin:

Once again let me try to explain the situation. In the past coal companies maintained surface mining permits two to five years in advance of their current operations, only one or two companies have received new mining permits since Barry and crew took office. The permits that were being held are now being mined, and companies are unable to project future mine plans or obtain financing for future projects.

Also, coal companies normally sign contracts (some long term, some short term) to supply their coal in advance, sometimes these contracts are signed one or two years in advance. Couple that with a 3,000 ton per miner/year drop in tonnage production, companies have to hire more workers to maintain production to supply the necessary contracts.

Now let’s review
1) Most coal companies were permitted ahead 2-5 years as late as 2008.
2) Companies are mining these surface permits now.
3) No new suface permits in last three years (Obama adm.)
4) Many long term contracts signed two years ago are still in force and have to be fulfilled.
5) Production is down 3,000 tons per miner/year.
Does that make sense now, because that’s about as simple as I can make it.

[Bob Seger]

Once again let me try to explain the situation. In the past coal companies maintained mining permits two to five years in advance of their current operations, only one or two companies have received new mining permits since Barry and crew took office. The permits that were being held are now being mined, and companies are unable to project future mine plans or obtain financing for future projects.

Also, coal companies normally sign contracts (some long term, some short term) to supply their coal in advance, sometimes these contracts are signed one or two years in advance. Couple that with a 3,000 ton per miner/year drop in tonnage production, companies have to hire more workers to maintain production to supply the necessary contracts.

Now let’s review
1) Most coal companies were permitted ahead 2-5 years as late as 2008.
2) Companies are mining these permits now.
3) No new permits in last three years (Obama adm.)
4) Many long term contracts signed two years ago are still in force and have to be fulfilled.
5) Production is down 3,000 tons per miner/year.
Does that make sense now, because that’s about as simple as I can make it.

That's about as simple of an explanation as it can get IMO Old School.:Thumbs: