Aug 23 - Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News - J.J. Stambaugh The Knoxville News-Sentinel, Tenn.

About 50 people turned out to a public meeting Monday on proposed changes to a federal coal-mining rule that they say would lead to disastrous consequences for the environment.

The meeting at the downtown Hilton Knoxville hotel was called to seek public input for a pending environmental impact statement on the possible consequences of the rule change, according to officials from the U.S. Department of the Interior's Office of Surface Mining.

At issue is a 2-decades-old rule that protects streams and water quality during strip mining by creating a 100-foot stream buffer zone that has proven unpopular with companies who want to "mine through" the streams during mountaintop removal.

Monday's event was the first of four public meetings scheduled in the eastern coal-producing region of the nation.

Most of those who showed up at the meeting made it clear that they don't want to see the rule changed at all. If anything, they said, they would like to see regulations tightened and existing rules strictly enforced.

They also protested the format of the meeting and expressed concerns that their comments wouldn't be recorded.

"We understand that there will be no official transcript from this meeting and instead of people having the chance to give public comments, people will be divided into small groups to talk to each other about the stream buffer zone," said Ann League, a board member of Save Our Cumberland Mountains, in a written statement.

"We want to be able to stand up and make comments to (officials), not sit around and chit-chat with each other."

But David Hartos, a physical scientist from the Office of Surface Mining, explained that each of the groups would be given a chance to come up with lists of issues and possible alternatives they'd like to see addressed in the environmental impact statement.

"This is a meeting, it's not a hearing," he said. "We invited folks to come in and tell us what their issues are. We want to interact. We're here to improve. We're not trying to suppress any speech or anything like that."

Many audience members, however, were skeptical.

Chris Irwin, a University of Tennessee law student, criticized the format as "hopelessly complex, designed to make it harder for people."

Axel Ringe said the Bush administration has a track record of disregarding public input in conflicts between industrial and environmental interests. He also questioned whether any of the suggestions developed during the meeting would actually be used to formulate policy.

"What weight is intended to be given to the public comments?" he asked Hartos. "What assurances do we have?"

Hartos countered that all the groups' suggestions would be taken seriously. "I can assure you it does not go into a black hole," he said.

When it came time for the groups to present their suggestions, they came down heavily in favor of leaving the stream buffer zone intact or even expanding it. Some people also recommended eliminating all variances and considering the "present and future impacts on economic value of land for other uses" such as recreation.

Immediately before the meeting, about 20 people protested the rule change outside the Hilton. Several of them gave speeches while others waved signs at the rush hour traffic, one of which read: "Proposed and weakened 100 ft. Stream Buffer Zone rule causes death."

"How can a seam of coal be more important than a person's past and heritage?" League said.

Hartos said the public comment period on the rule change has been extended to Sept. 1. Until the cutoff date, comments can be e-mailed to sbz-eis@osmre.gov .