Contributed by: Bruce Golden, Regional Coordinator, Western PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation

It appears that Congress will likely give a short extension for the authority to collect the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund (AMRF) fee until September 30.

Pennsylvania currently receives about $25 million annually from the AMRF. At this rate, PA will need another hundred or so years to address just the most severe problems.

This extension is actually the second in less than a year. Originally the provision of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) enabling fee collection was set to expire September 30, 2004.

Competing bills had been introduced in both houses of Congress for reauthorization prior to that date, but the divergent interests were unable to reconcile differences. None of the bills gained traction and all died in the last session of Congress.

However, lawmakers brokered a deal to extend that authority to the current expiration date of June 30, 2005, with the intent of seeing new legislation that would not only extend the expiration date but deal with the tough issues not reconciled last time around and to gain some kind of consensus.

To the frustration to those on sidelines (including this author), nothing much appeared to be happening with the reauthorization issue since the new Congress had convened in January on up through the end of March.

At that point, with the help of those who are better equipped to understand Congress’s mysterious ways, it became apparent that, “Oh my!” there really isn’t ample time for a bill to be introduced, debated, modified, debated, modified, passed, reconciled, and who know what else prior to the current expiration date of June 30^th.

It appeared that the options were either another extension or expiration on the authority to collect fees. While expiration isn’t necessarily an irresolvable finality, it is something to be avoided if at all possible. The only viable vehicle for an extension that could realistically occur prior to the expiration date appeared to be the Supplemental Appropriations Bill before the Senate’s Appropriation Committee.

The first week of April was a time of intense efforts for quite a few people, both in and out of Congress, who wanted to see SMCRA Title IV live on.

In Pennsylvania, the hard work of Senator Specter and his staff, and Senator Santorum and his staff were particularly noteworthy resulting in a unanimous voice vote on April 6^th by the Senate’s Appropriations Committee.

The committee amended the Supplemental Appropriations Bill to include an extension for the authority to collect AML Fees by three additional months. West Virginia’s Senator Byrd also deserves a great deal of credit in this effort. The Senate version of the bill is expected to be approved by the House of Representatives and signed into law by the end of April.

This brings us to the present. It’s now less than six months until the probable expiration date of September 30^th is reached. In that time, legislation will have to be introduced, hashed out, and passed to not only extend the period which fees for the AMRF can be collected, but to reach a consensus on many issues that the various stakeholders can live with.

Fortunately, Rep. John Peterson (R-PA), who has been the lead Member of Congress on this issue, has been writing a bill that meets the needs of coalfield communities, that can protect Pennsylvania's interests in reclaiming abandoned mine lands, and can achieve broad consensus among all the coal-producing states. He is working to have it introduced shortly.

The issues involved are numerous and in some cases somewhat complex. For example, one issue pits states (generally in the western US) with high current coal production levels against states such as Pennsylvania having a high incidence of historic problems from the unregulated days of mining.

As a great simplification, those states putting a lot of money into the AMRF fund by virtue of their high production levels would like to have the money stay in their states (or alternately to have the fee eliminated), whereas the states having the greatest number of historic problems (PA is #1 in this category) argue the money should be directed to where the problems are.

Another issue that is proving to be quite divisive is that of the Combined Benefits Fund, a provision of SMCRA Title IV, which pays for health benefits for past workers of the United Mine Workers Association. This is a very thorny issue where consensus will be difficult to attain.

Unfortunately, a host of other issues also exist with the current legislation that are beyond this discussion. Much skill and compromise will surely be needed to resolve them.

In the coming months, we will need to closely follow the developments surrounding the reauthorization and modification of SMCRA Title IV. We trust that working with and providing support to Rep. Peterson and other legislators involved will take on a high priority. Encouraging and educating those in other states to take up similar positions will be an important role.

While we can breathe a sigh of relief for the extension, we recognize the real work is before us. The importance to Pennsylvania’s future for a reauthorization of SMCRA Title IV legislation cannot be underestimated. We owe whatever effort it takes to ensure that reauthorization occurs.

NewsClip: Reclamation Fund Must Be Reauthorized to Survive

4/8/2005