The AP's Oct. 22 article, " 'War on coal' label obscures battlefield realities," uses disparate facts to reach the wrong conclusion. Irrespective of who came up with the term, the residents of hundreds of coal mining and coal using communities throughout America's heartland believe the administration is waging something tantamount to a war on their economic futures—whether that future depends on a job in coal mining, a utility job or a job in manufacturing.

Let's just review the administration's actions over the last four years. First, the EPA abruptly halted the processing of mining permits throughout Appalachia and subsequently set new conditions of operation that the courts have ruled were illegal under the Clean Water Act and other laws. Next, the Department of the Interior announced it was throwing out regulations governing how coal was mined across the country. The courts similarly ruled DOI could not take such arbitrary action. Finally, EPA issued a basket of regulations governing the use of coal to generate electricity: Regulations that by their strict limitations and aggressive timelines are virtually impossible for coal plants to meet—even the newest higher efficiency plants. All the while, EPA admits the health and environmental benefits of these rules are marginal as most of the claimed benefits will come from regulations already on the books.

These actions are highly detrimental to coal's production and use—irrespective of weather patterns, unsustainably low natural gas prices (see Sunday's New York Time article) or questions about Appalachian coal reserves. The people who mine coal from the world's largest reserves—some of it nearly untapped—and the people who rely on coal for affordable and reliable electricity understand that. Too bad the AP got tangled up in a web of extraneous circumstances.

Hal Quinn
President & CEO
National Mining Association
Washington, D.C.