Economic Loss from the Destruction of the Health and Retirement 

Funds — tmony 10 

Good morning or My name is D 0/t/M-D 

F/Wevitw, v1/✓ 

, and I live in town/city, state. I am a member of UMWA Local 

6461-4?N' Associ c4-44 P‘,14glopy eo PiUnion = and work at Company Name, Mine Name. Now PAm i' 

In deciding on the final language to be contained in the "clean power 

plan," the EPA has stated that it looked at many potential scenarios in 

order to craft an effective and workable solution to the global climate 

problem. I could argue, broadly, that this policy will undoubtedly be 

rejected by the majority of other countries around the world, and therefore 

have no impact on the problem, making it a ridiculous approach. I will 

instead focus more narrowly on some economic problems the EPA has 

failed to address. 

I am sure that the agency has done some elaborate economic studies to 

bolster its position with regard to this policy. However, as a coal miner 
and an individual who will feel the brunt of this policy most severely, I 

must question whether there was any focus placed on the economic 

devastation that will slam coalfield communities. Has the EPA actually 

looked at the numbers? Did it look at this situation in real dollar terms, 

and does it see what the policy it has settled on will mean? 

I am sure that this panel has heard that there are over 100,000 retired 

miners, their families and widows who are currently receiving pension 

and medical benefits from the UMWA Health and Retirement Funds. But 

I wonder if anyone here understands exactly what that means in terms of 

real dollars. I also wonder if you understand how that money supports not 

only the beneficiary, but the community as well. Allow me to give you 

just a few facts and figures to make my point. 

In 2013, the 100,000-plus beneficiaries of the Funds received pension 

benefits in excess of $590 million. These earned benefits were used to pay 

for municipal services, buy clothing, food, support education and help 

maintain a stable life for the beneficiary. In Pennsylvania, where you are 

holding this hearing, pensioners received over $111 million. In 
neighboring West Virginia, pension benefits topped $204 million. The 

bottom line is, these benefits help to sustain communities. 

In that same year, these miners and their families also accessed over $577 

million in healthcare services; services that were necessary to heal the 

sick, mend the injured and cure disease. They allowed the beneficiaries to 

maintain or regain their health, but they also provided assets needed to 

keep the doctors' offices, clinics pharmacies and hospitals operational. 

These benefits, like the miner's pension check, help to sustain the 

community. 

As I stated in my opening, based on the actions of other nations, there is 

little hope that this policy will be effective in achieving any amount of 

success in addressing its stated mission. Let there be no doubt. If 

implemented, this policy will succeed where countless ruthless coal 

operators failed over the years — in destroying the UMWA Health and 

Retirement Funds. Should that happen, simple economics says the $1.1 

billion that annually goes into the coalfields from these Funds will no 
longer be available to sustain lives or communities.