The Trouble with Montana Coal: Recovery and Reclamation

In the 1970s and 1980s, Montana faced a coal boom.  Recognizing the impacts of vast, unrestrained coal development, Montana became one of the first states in the country to pass a coal mine reclamation law, the Montana Strip and Underground Mine Reclamation Act (MSUMRA).  In fact, MSUMRA was such a good law it became the model for a federal law passed a few years later.

Coal development is once again looming in Montana as Governor Brian Schweitzer touts new coal mines, coal-fired power plants, and the alchemy of converting coal to diesel fuel.  As a result, renewed attention is being drawn to coal mining in Montana.  Has MSUMRA worked? Are there lingering impacts of coal mining?

Approximately 35-40 million tons of coal are mined in Montana each year.  That production level has remained relatively constant for more than a decade. Montana ranks 6th nationally in coal production.  Wyoming is far and away the leading coal-producing state, having mined 400 million tons in 2005.

Most of the coal mined in Montana comes from five major strip mines:  the Decker and Spring Creek mines just south of the Tongue River reservoir; the Rosebud and Absaloka mines at Colstrip; and the Sarpy Creek mine near Hardin just north of the Crow Reservation.

The process of strip mining is relatively simple.  First, the topsoil is removed and set aside for future use.  Next, the overburden or spoils (the material above the coal) is blasted and removed by giant shovels called draglines, exposing the coal seam.  Then the coal itself is excavated.  All of this work is done in a continuous process so that strip pits are constantly but slowly moving across the land.

Montana’s newest coal mine is the Bull Mountain mine located in the Bull Mountains between Billings and Roundup.  Permitted in 1995 it is an underground mine that uses the longwall mining method.  Though it doesn’t produce nearly as much coal as Montana’s strip mines, it has been targeted as the coal source for the governor’s coal-to-diesel fuel dreams.
For the most part Montana’s coal reclamation law has worked well.  There are, however, two areas that still need improvement.  The first is the pace of reclamation, and the second is the protection of groundwater.

Montana’s law requires reclamation to occur “as contemporaneously as possible” with mining.  The diagram below portrays the ideal.  After the coal is removed from one section of the pit, the spoils are used to backfill the pit and the material is regraded to the “approximate original contour” of the land (a requirement of the law).  Then topsoil is spread, the area is seeded and, with time, reclamation is accomplished.  In this idealized construct, there is little pit exposed, and shortly after mining the bulk of the reclamation work is completed.

This is not what happens in reality.  Montana coal mines encompass just over 62,000 permitted acres of which 36,632 acres have actually been disturbed by mining.  Of those 36,632 acres only 6,255—or just 17% — have been backfilled, regraded, and had topsoil applied.  Even worse, in the 30 years since Montana’s coal law was passed only 712 acres, or just under 2% of all land disturbed by mining, have achieved full reclamation.

Clearly Montana’s coal miners and the Department of Environmental Quality are not doing enough to ensure that reclamation happens promptly.  This practice needs to change for two reasons.  First, reclamation and revegetation is always more successful when it closely follows mining.  The longer topsoil sits, unused, the less productive it becomes.

Second, prompt reclamation reduces the risks of financial liability.  The more reclamation that is accomplished, the less potential liability there is for the State should an operator become financially insolvent.  DEQ believes that it holds sufficient bonds to complete reclamation if any mining company were to walk away from its responsibilities.  While this may be true, DEQ used to believe that its hardrock mine bonds were adequate.  Time has shown the exact opposite to be the case.  But why put it to the test?  If the coal company completes the reclamation promptly, the risk is greatly reduced.

The second area of concern is water.  Before a company can have its reclamation deemed complete, and completely recover its bond, it must show that it has restored the surface and groundwater hydrology.  This is invariably a problem.
In most coal areas the coal seam is also an aquifer.  Groundwater is moving through the coal.  When the coal is mined that aquifer is severed.  When the pit is filled in, the groundwater begins percolating through the fill material instead of the coal.  Beneath the surface, the pits become giant tea bags introducing many new constituents into the groundwater that previously were not there.

This groundwater contamination manifests itself in two ways.  First, the groundwater surfaces in seeps and springs that can harm livestock and wildlife.   Second, deep-rooted plants such as alfalfa use this contaminated water and when fed to cattle cause problems.

Coal-area residents and environmental groups have been trying to improve the State’s work in these two areas for years.  In 2003, however, a new problem developed.  Rep. Alan Olson (R-Roundup) introduced, at the behest of the coal mining industry, a bill changing Montana’s coal mine reclamation standards.

MSUMRA always had tough requirements for reclamation and revegetation.  Only native plant species were allowed for revegetation, and a company had to show by meeting plant diversity and density standards that the reclamation would be viable for a long period of time.  The promise of MSUMRA was that, after reclamation, the land would look relatively as it did before mining, and that it would support the same land uses.
Meeting this goal proved expensive and time-consuming for the mining companies, so they decided to change the law.  Rep. Olson’s bill was passed.  It did a number of things, but made one fundamental change to the law:  instead of reclaiming land for pre-mining uses, companies can now reclaim to a “higher and better use.”  Sounds good, right?  Unfortunately a “higher and better use” could be anything from a trailer court to an industrial park to a golf course to vast, flat fields of grass. 

The fields of grass are what the mining companies want.  Instead of going to the expense of regrading and shaping the mine property to approximate the surrounding landscape, they can just backfill it and flatten it out.  Instead of trying to re-establish the plant communities that have evolved, which are sustainable in eastern Montana’s arid environment and have supported generations of ranchers, the companies can plant introduced species that grow quickly with water and fertilization. 

In many ways environmental groups and coal-area activists were the victims of their own success.  Because they passed strong reclamation laws people thought the problems with coal mining had been solved.  In fact, coal companies will give anyone a tour of their reclaimed land work and proudly cite statistics about its productivity. 

Governor Schweitzer has naively called coal mining “deep farming.”  This shows an amazing lack of respect for the people who used the land before coal mining and who would like it to be useful again when the mining is done.  There are still major problems with timely reclamation and hydrology.

The recent changes to the law give the industry the opportunity to shirk its responsibilities.  Because the governor is pushing coal development ahead of other cleaner, more responsible methods of energy development, it is incumbent on MEIC and others to ensure the remaining problems of coal mining are solved.