As I’m going through the Obama administration’s proposed budget for the Department of Interior for the 2011 financial year, another thing jumped out at me …
Interior’s Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement is coming back again with its recommendation to stop sending money for abandoned coal-mine cleanups to states that have already cleaned up all their abandoned coal mines.
We’ve written about this before, about this time last year, when President Obama first floated the idea. See previous links here, here, here and here.
Among the items listed in Interior’s budget:
Terminating payments to coal-producing states and tribes that no longer need funds to clean up abandoned coal mines.
But this year’s proposal is a little different, in that it proposes to set aside $10 million per year to address high-priority coal problems that may develop after states or tribes become certified and for any remaining federal projects.
For those who have forgotten, the issue here is that a few states — most importantly, Wyoming, the nation’s largest coal producer — have “certified” that all of their pre-1977 abandoned surface mines have been properly reclaimed. Budget under current law, they continue to receive millions of dollars in money intended to clean up coal-mine messes. For more, check out this story from my Abandoned Promises series on the AML program. This story is worth a read as well.
Last year, this proposal went nowhere after it got significant opposition from Wyoming lawmakers. It would be interested to see what happened if Sen. Robert C. Byrd or Rep. Nick J. Rahall decided to champion the idea.
Subscribe to the Coal Tattoo
Yes, again and again — like closing of the OSM office in Wilkes-Barre, PA which proposed for decades, but continues to exist.
Budget proposals are just opening bids.
Remember in 1996, Senator Bob Dole supported completely abolishing OSM. See:
http://tinyurl.com/Sen-Bob-Dole-OSM
Seems to me that the AML program is key to shifting from surface production to surface reclamation while maintaining jobs. How do the more unabashed procoal at any cost politicians view the AML program? Bad money? I’ve found that many pro-strippers I have talked to agree that AML money could seed a process that could grow into something that everyone could support. Would entities such as ARRI be eligible for projects using that money? How does the money get spent?
Jason,
With a few exceptions, the environmental community and the coal industry ignore the AML program. That’s too bad, too, because you’re right that it could provide a lot of jobs.
One report by Downstream Strategies talks about this in some detail:
http://www.downstreamstrategies.com/Documents/reports_publication/AMD_remediation_%20West_Branch_Susquehanna_Jul2008.pdf
To learn more about the program, I’d suggest starting with my series, Abandoned Promises, which is online here:
http://wvgazette.com/News/AbandonedPromises
Ken.
[...] Blogs @ The Charleston Gazette – » Obama budget brings back AML reform proposal blogs.wvgazette.com – view page – cached As I’m going through the Obama administration’s proposed budget for the Department of Interior for the 2011 financial year, another thing jumped out at me … [...]
Just because a state or tribe is “certified”, that only means it has addressed its Priority 1 and Priority 2 sites — abandoned coal mine sites that pose an imminent or potential threat to health and/or safety. That does NOT mean that the state or tribe has addressed its Priority 3 sites, which after the 2006 Title IV reauthorization, refers to water quality and other environmental degradation as a result of abandoned coal mines.
It is most unfortunate that Wyoming has given the AML Fund Program for “certified” states a bad rap with its wasteful spending on obvious non-AML related projects. Montana’s DEQ Abandoned Mine Land Division spends its AML Funds on addressing Priority 3 sites (streams horrendously polluted by mine drainage), as well as many streams and lands that have been severely degraded by abandoned hard rock mines (there is no federal source of funding, such as the AML Fund, that currently provides money to cleanup abandoned hard rock mine sites.)
Also, has anyone given thought to the possibility of Wyoming (and other “certified” states/tribes) seeking reversal of their certification should they be stripped of their payout from the AML Fund? This would like significantly alter the distribution of AML Funds to other non-certified states, such as WV and PA, that desperately need these dollars.
People, particularly our legislators, need to be educated to understand that being “certified” under SMCRA only means that Priority 1 and 2 sites have been completely addressed (e.g. dangerous highwall reclamation, sealing of open mine shafts) and it does NOT mean that polluted, dead stream miles and abandoned mine lands have been reclaimed.