COSMAR AND BLASTING

Lee W. Saperstein, Professor of Mining Engineering

The Pennsylvania State University

ABSTRACT

Section 709 of Public Law 95-87, "Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977,"
requests the National Academy of Sciences to determine if the standards of the act are
applicable to minerals other than coal. The Academy has established the Committee on
Surface Mining and Reclamation to respond to this charge. The committee is, itself,
organized to be responsive to the varieties of minerals, environments, mining systems, and
locations that are representative of U.S. mining systems. It is not the charge of the
committee to write trial legislation, but to indicate whether or not technology, extant or
proposed, is available to meet the standards of the law, and at what cost. It is within this
set of conditions that the committee will examine blasting.

INTRODUCTION

The following comments are in response to a request to speak about the probable
restrictions on blasting that would result if a Federal non-coal reclamation act were to be
passed. Inasmuch as any answer would be mostly conjecture, it is intended to report on
what has happened in a study of non-coal reclamation legislation and to give the probable
path for future events. Should these comments provoke further discussion, it would be
most healthy. It should be remembered, however, that most of the studies that are to be
described are still in progress, and that the prediction of conclusions is, at best, premature
and, at worst, harmful.

THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES STUDY

Several public talks have been given about the progress of the surface mine study. To
facilitate the giving of these comments, and to assure assent to their content, the remarks
of Dr. James Boyd, Chairman of the study panel, before the American Mining Congress on
October 12, 1978, are used as a base. His remarks give the progress of the study most
succinctly and are paraphrased in this section. The Surface Mine Reclamation and Control
Act of 1977, Public Law 95-87 passed by Congress and signed by the President on August
3, 1977, contains section 709 which directs the Chairman of the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) to contract with the National Academy of Sciences - National Academy of
Engineering "for an indepth study of current and developing technology for surface and
open pit mining and reclamation for minerals other than coal designed to assist in the
establishment of effective and reasonable regulations of surface and open pit mining and
reclamation for minerals other than coal." The section further elaborates in broad language
some of the issues and problems that the study shall address.

Copyright © 2000 International Society of Explosives Engineers

1979G - COSMAR AND BLASTING - P 81 1 of 5
"The study shall:

(1) Assess the degree to which the requirements of this act can be met by such
technology and the costs involved;

(2) Identify the areas where the requirements of this act cannot be met by current and
developing technology;

(3) In those instances, describe the requirements most comparable to those of this act
which could be met, the costs involved and the differences in reclamation results
between these requirements and those of this act;

(4) Discuss alternative regulatory mechanisms designed to insure the achievement of the
most beneficial post mining land use, for areas affected by surface and open pit
mining."

In order to address this section of the law, CEQ has contracted with the academies, and
the Committee on Surface Mining and Reclamation (COSMAR) was established under the
auspices of the National Research Council to carry out the provisions of section 709. Thus
the job of the committee is to answer the four-part charge; the role of CEQ is to draft trial
legislation. As can be seen, the first three parts of the charge limit the study committee to
the "requirements of his act." If requirements different from those in the act are to be
proposed, hen they should be part of the fourth charge, in a separate communication to
CEQ, or implicit in a discussion of compliance costs.

PL 95-87 was designed to regulate coal mining. A number of differences in geology,

mining and reclamation methodology and technology, and environmental issues separate
coal surface mining from other minerals. Coal occurs in tabular bodies, is found in most
geomorphic and climatic regimes and occurs under many different cultural conditions. In
spite of the relative geologic simplicity of the occurrences of coal, the office of surface
mining has drafted for consideration nearly three hundred pages of regulations to
implement the requirements of the act.

There are approximately one hundred commodities recovered from mines existing in a
large number of geological and environmental settings. In total, they disturb more area
than coal mines. Coal disturbs about 40 percent of all land utilized by mining. If the same
types of regulatory mechanisms are to be applied to all mining, the magnitude of the
regulations will be many times that for coal mining. To analyze the effect that each
regulation will have on different kinds of mining under different climatic and topographical
conditions will be no mean task. The congress appears to have recognized this eventuality
in inserting item 4 of section 709, that is the request to explore alternative mechanisms for
achieving the same end.

The committee has attempted to break down this monumental task into more manageable
pieces by organizing nine panels. Each panel will deal with the different kinds of mining

Copyright © 2000 International Society of Explosives Engineers

1979G - COSMAR AND BLASTING - P 82 2 of 5
methods required by differing kinds of geologic occurrences and will be looking at these
occurrences under varying types of climatic, geomorphic, and cultural conditions. The
committee has attempted to involve as much of a cross section of skills as possible in these
nine panels.

It may be instructive to spell out the nine panels and the types of issues they are to
address: (1) oil shale and tar sands;* (2) construction materials;* (3) large open pit mines
in low water table areas--e."., copper mines in arid areas; (4) large open pit mines in more
humid regions--e."., iron ores in north central states; (5) coastal plain deposits, primarily
phosphate in North Carolina and Florida; (6) surface expression of underground
operations--e."., lead-zinc deposits, silver and gold and northern phosphates; (7) dimension
stone quarrying which leave high vertical walls when operations are complete; (8)
discontinuous ore bodies in sedimentary formations--e."., uranium deposits in Wyoming,
Utah, Colorado and New Mexico; (9) clay and bauxite deposits including kaolinite, fire
clays, brick clays, residual bentonite.

Use of these nine panels to attack the problem was chosen by the committee after
consideration of a number of different approaches. The panels should be able to cover the
major types of mining technology as well as reclamation methods even though there may
be some unique or unusual mining situations which are not covered. In these cases,
individuals familiar with these special cases will be contacted for input to the study.
Indeed, it is important to point out that every operation that would have difficulty in
meeting the requirements of PL 95-87 should make their views known to the panels.
Moreover, they should indicate the specific of their concerns including documentation of
cost figures, reasons that provision of PL 95-87 are or are not applicable, and other
approaches that may be taken to address the problem.

Certain aspects such as the economic and social costs of mining can be addressed on more
or less an industry-wide basis. These are being addressed by a subcommittee of the main
committee. Secondly, an environmental subcommittee was established to oversee issues
involved in on-site as well as off-site environmental effects. The environmental
subcommittee has assigned individuals to monitor the deliberations of the nine panels to
assure that proper attention is being paid to environmental concern.

A third subcommittee on alternative regulatory mechanisms is concerned with the methods

of regulatory control, mechanisms by which regulations are developed and adopted, by
whom they are administered, and to consider other ways in which oat-mining land use
would be optimized. Each of the nine panels will be examining how the industry is being
currently regulated and comparing that to the provisions of PL 95-87. Finally, an editorial
subcommittee composed of the editor and five committee members, and over which the
chairman of the full committee presides, serves more or less as an executive committee
and keeps the operation on track.

All of the panels will make their reports to the committee. The panel reports will be
appendices to the full report but only the main report will be cleared through the
Academy's review process and will constitute the report of the Academy to CEQ.

Copyright © 2000 International Society of Explosives Engineers

1979G - COSMAR AND BLASTING - P 83 3 of 5
It should be re-emphasized that the committee welcomes input from anyone who feels he
has a contribution to make to the study. It must be remembered however that all
committees of the National Academy of Sciences/Engineering are composed of volunteers.
It is therefore better to have all communications channeled through the permanent staff
who support the committee. Mr. George White is the senior staff member of COSMAR
and his office is at the Academy Headquarters in Washington.

The contract with CEQ requires that the report to CEQ be before the end of July. The
report however will have to be completed by May 1, 1979, in order to give the academy
sufficient time for its extensive review process. This means that writing and refining the
report will take place from now into the early months of 1979.

Analyses of every provision of PL 95-87 that could possibly apply to any phase of
non-coal surface mining is a near impossible task. The committee will therefore focus its
main efforts toward addressing the environmental protection standards and surface effects
of underground mining as spelled out in sections 515 and 516 of the law. This is not to say
that the committee intends to neglect the social aspects but a voluntary committee such as
COSMAR with limited funds at its disposal can hardly be expected to address with equal
vigor all portions of the act. In addition to examining in detail the environmental standards
of PL 95-87, the panels will also be looking at state and local environmental regulation as
well as other federal laws which impinge on the mineral industry. Provisions of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, The Safe Drinking Water Act, The Clean Air Act, The
Resource Conservation Recovery Act, The Coastal Zone Management Act, and the Wild
and Scenic Rivers Act will be examined along with others to evaluate how these laws are
applied to the non-coal mineral industry.

BLASTING STANDARDS

It is seen that blasting, an unit operation used throughout the mining industry, could be
studied by any one of the panels. However, because of extensive use of blasting by the
aggregate industry and because of that industry's experience with blasting regulation by
the individual states, the panel on construction materials will address blasting specifically.
The chairman of that panel is Dr. James R. Dunn of Dunn Geoscience, and Mr. Alan
Foster of Vibra-Tech Engineers is the member of the panel who is expert in blasting
matters.

As with any of the regulatory standards that the panels or the full committee is studying,
the question can be divided philosophically into two parts. These are 1) whether or not
there is technology with which to comply with the standard; and 2) whether or not the
standard is sensible. Although the second question may e of great concern, it is generally
outside of the charge to the Academy. If we consider the blasting standard briefly, this
dichotomy is most evident.

Blasting is mentioned in the law itself in subsection 515(b)(15) with the text containing
such language as, "limit (blasting) so as to prevent (injury, damage, and adverse impacts)."

Copyright © 2000 International Society of Explosives Engineers

1979G - COSMAR AND BLASTING - P 84 4 of 5
This section was translated into one and one-half pages of initial regulations--those
currently in force--and promulgated in the Federal Register on December 13, 1977, as
Title 30, Chap. VII, part 715.19 of the U.S. Code. As many are aware, the regulations go
one step beyond the law in that they specify a peak particle velocity of one inch per
second as the limit of safety. Needless to say, these standards have swelled somewhat in
the proposed final regulatory scheme. Over two pages, parts 816.61-68, of surface
performance standard regulations, and nearly two pages, parts 817.61-68, of underground
regulations specify the proposed blasting rules. Essentially, however, the final rules repeat
the initial ones.

The panel, and the committee, are considering whether the requirements of the law can be
applied to non-coal minerals. It is important to remember that while the present law
addresses, at length, the issues of blasting records, public notification, and blaster training
and certification, it is not specific about the performance standard necessary to prevent
blasting injury and damage. It merely states that blasting is to be limited. Although it would
be easy for the standard promulgated in the coal regulations (one inch per second) to be
imposed universally, there is nothing in the law that suggests that it has to be. It is not
known how CEQ expects to handle the variety of mineral types and regions in this
country. If there were to be separate regulations for each type, it is conceivable that there
could be separate blasting regulations.

Other papers presented to the Society of Explosive Engineers are concerned with the
appropriateness, in a technical sense, of the vibration standard. The Committee on Surface
Mining and Reclamation is constrained to answer the basic question, "is there technology
to meet the requirements of the law?" It may not be the question that we would like to
answer, but it is the one we have.

CONCLUSION

From experience in some of the more populous states, it is known that industry often can,
at a cost, comply with the technical requirements for blasting of these standards. It is
recognized that this is a sensitive statement, because the cost involved may exceed profit
margins and thus lead to mine closure. Nonetheless, it is relatively easy to project, for
blasting, an answer to the question. Industry most likely will be able to comply with the
requirement of PL 95-87 and the probable additional cost will depend upon the level
imposed, the degree of blasting, and nearness to protected structures. The unasked part of
the question, namely whether one inch per second will prevent damage, is not going to be
resolved by the committee's study. If anybody has information on blasting problems,
techniques, or costs that should be considered by the panel or the full committee, please
convey it to Mr. Foster or to me.

*Oil shale and tar sands and sand and gravel are specifically mentioned as two
commodities for special reports. The Panel on Construction Materials is considering both
sand and gravel and crushed stone.

Copyright © 2000 International Society of Explosives Engineers

1979G - COSMAR AND BLASTING - P 85 5 of 5