19–006 

112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 112–670 

COAL MINER EMPLOYMENT AND DOMESTIC ENERGY 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION ACT 

SEPTEMBER 13, 2012.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 3409] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 3409) to limit the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to issue regulations before December 31, 2013, under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and 

recommend that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 3409 is to limit the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to issue regulations before December 31, 

2013, under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 

1977. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The Coal Miner Employment and Domestic Energy Infrastructure Protection Act (H.R. 3409) limits the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to issue regulations under the Surface Mining 

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 until December 31, 2013. The 

bill allows additional time for the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) 

to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act 

and generate a legally defensible ‘‘Stream Buffer zone’’ regulation. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

It also addresses the concerns raised by the cooperating agencies, 

coal mining States, citizens and industry raised in the April 2011 

Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee oversight hearing for 

the OSM Fiscal Year 2012 budget, and subsequent oversight hearings on the Obama Administration’s re-write of the Stream Buffer 

Zone regulation. 

In January 2011, documents prepared by independent contractor, 

Polu Kai Services, LLC (PKS) to support the Obama Administration’s Stream Buffer Zone rule making, were leaked to the press. 

The press reported that the preferred alternative in the re-written 

rule would result in the loss of over 7,000 jobs and place an additional 29,000 people below the poverty level in the Appalachian 

basin. In addition, coal production would decrease or stay flat in 22 

states. 

Shortly after these figures became public, the Administration 

backed away from these job loss estimates and began to publicly 

criticize PKS, who had been hired by OSM to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the regulation under the National Environmental Policy Act. Eventually OSM and PKS came 

to a mutual agreement to terminate the contract. While OSM 

blames the contractor for problems with the EIS, the contractor has 

raised concerns with OSM’s management of the process, in particular the numerous changes to the scope of the rule the EIS was 

to support. 

On November 4, 2011, the Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee held an oversight hearing titled ‘‘Jobs at Risk: Waste 

and Mismanagement by the Obama Administration in Rewriting 

the Stream Buffer Zone Rule.’’ During the hearing, OSM Director 

Joseph Pizarchik stated to Congressman Doug Lamborn (R–CO) regarding job loss numbers that ‘‘the numbers which you refer to 

were numbers that the contractor put together. Those numbers 

were fabricated based on placeholder numbers and have no basis 

in fact.’’ Further, he agreed with Congressman Rush Holt (D–NJ) 

that the ‘‘contractor, PKS, was incomplete and inaccurate.’’ 

On March 5, 2012, ENVIRON International Corporation released 

a summary of the results of a preliminary analysis of the anticipated economic impacts of OSM’s proposed rule. ENVIRON’s findings support the job loss estimates that were leaked to the press 

in January 2011. Despite the problems that Director Pizarchik prescribes to the contractors, it does not change that OSM committed, 

through a legal settlement, to a compressed schedule for what has 

evolved into a comprehensive re-write of regulations governing coal 

mining in the United States. 

After the release of the ENVIRON report, the Committee held a 

hearing on July 19, 2012 during which Director Pizarchik backtracked from his previous allegation that the reported numbers 

were simply placeholders. After discussing documents that show 

the job loss numbers would be devastating to the American people, 

Director Pizarchik was asked whether he continued ‘‘to assert that 

those were ‘placeholders’.’’ Director Pizarchik responded that, ‘‘At 

the time I made that statement, the information I had that those 

were placeholders numbers, and as I understood placeholders, that 

they did not have any basis in fact . . . But I have since learned 

that their definition of placeholder was different than was my understanding.’’ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

As a result, this Administration knows that their preferred regulations would cause thousands of Americans to lose their jobs, and 

would cause economic harm in at least 22 states and widespread 

economic displacement to tens of thousands of more Americans. 

However, according to the OSM Director on July 19th, they still 

are ‘‘making our best efforts to get it completed as soon as possible.’’ 

H.R. 3409 limits the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to 

issue regulations under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 before December 31, 2013, that would: (1) adversely impact employment in coal mines in the United States; (2) 

cause a reduction in revenue received by the federal government or 

any State, tribal, or local government, by reducing through regulation the amount of coal in the United States that is available for 

mining; (3) reduce the amount of coal available for domestic consumption or for export; (4) designate any area as unsuitable for 

surface coal mining and reclamation operations; or (5) expose the 

United States to liability for taking the value of privately owned 

coal through regulation. OSM is not responsible for mine safety 

regulations. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 3409 was introduced on November 14, 2011, by Congressman Bill Johnson (R–OH). The bill was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources. On November 18, 

2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on a draft version of the 

bill. On February 29, 2012, the Full Natural Resources Committee 

met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral 

Resources was discharged by unanimous consent. Congressman 

Rush Holt (D–NJ) offered amendment designated .001 to the bill; 

the amendment was not adopted by a bipartisan roll call vote of 

18 to 26, as follows: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 4 here HR670.001
5 

The bill was then adopted and ordered favorably reported to the 

House of Representatives by a bipartisan roll call vote of 26 to 18, 

as follows: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 6 here HR670.002
7 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 

Natural Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the body of this report. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides 

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Under clause 

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 3409—Coal Miner Employment and Domestic Energy Infrastructure Protection Act 

H.R. 3409 would temporarily prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from issuing new regulations that would have certain impacts 

on the coal industry. Based on information provided by the Office 

of Surface Mining (OSM), CBO estimates that implementing the 

legislation would have no significant impact on the federal budget. 

Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues; 

therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

Under the bill, the Secretary could not issue new regulations 

until the end of 2013 if those regulations would affect the coal industry in certain ways, such as reducing employment or limiting 

access to coal resources. CBO expects that the bill would probably 

not affect any proposed regulations currently in the rulemaking 

process. In addition, based on information provided by OSM, CBO 

expects that any regulations proposed in the future would not be 

issued before the end of 2013 and would not be affected by the enactment of the bill. Therefore, we estimate that implementing H.R. 

3409 would have at most a minimal impact on the federal budget. 

H.R. 3409 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeff LaFave. The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

2. Section 308(a) of Congressional Budget Act. As required by 

clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, 

this bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or 

tax expenditures. Based on information provided by the Office of 

Surface Mining, CBO estimates that implementing the legislation 

would have no significant impact on the federal budget. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 

clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective 

of this bill is to limit the authority of the Secretary of the Interior 

to issue regulations before December 31, 2013, under the Surface 

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977. 

EARMARK STATEMENT

This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined under clause 9(e), 

9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

This bill contains no unfunded mandates as defined under Public 

Law 104–4. 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing law. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(9) 

DISSENTING VIEWS

DISSENTING VIEWS—H.R. 3409: COAL MINER EMPLOYMENT AND

DOMESTIC ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION ACT

We oppose H.R. 3409 because it is so broadly drafted that it 

could have the effect of preventing the Interior Department from 

issuing almost any rulemaking dealing with coal mining, including 

regulations that are necessary to ensure states can properly carry 

out their programs, regulations that would ensure that mining operations are safe and that public health and American taxpayers 

are protected, and even regulations beneficial to the mining industry. 

The intent of H.R. 3409 appears to be to prevent the Interior Department from revising a Bush Administration midnight regulation 

that significantly weakened protections on the destructive practice 

of Mountaintop Removal Mining. Mountaintop Removal Mining is 

one the most environmentally destructive practices on earth, which 

has fouled water quality and destroyed nearly 2,000 miles of Appalachian streams since 1992. However, H.R. 3409 is drafted so that 

its impact would be much broader than just this one rulemaking. 

H.R. 3409 would prevent the Secretary of the Interior from issuing 

any regulation under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation 

Act (SMCRA) through December 31, 2013, if the regulation would, 

among other things, prohibit coal mining in any area, reduce employment in coal mines, or reduce coal production. 

Prohibiting any rulemaking based upon the criteria in H.R. 3409 

would be inconsistent with the purposes of SMCRA as outlined in 

section 102(f) to ‘‘strike a balance between protection of the environment and agricultural productivity and the nation’s need for 

coal as an essential source of energy.’’ In fact, this legislation could 

have far-reaching and significant unintended consequences for the 

regulation of mining activities in the United States. 

According to the Interior Department, this legislation could prevent the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) from approving state program amendments to improve mine-reclamation bonding programs, 

which could adversely affect the ability of states to ensure that the 

necessary funds are available to reclaim mine sites. It could prevent OSM from revising regulations governing temporary cessation 

of operations to ensure that mining operations are temporarily shut 

down in a way that protects the environment. It could prohibit 

OSM from developing guidelines and requirements for the use of 

Coal Combustion Residues for reclamation activities on active and 

abandoned coal mine sites. According to data from the state of 

Pennsylvania, disposing of coal ash in a landfill costs industry five 

times as much as beneficially using it at a mine. So this legislation 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

could actually lead to increased costs for the mining industry if it 

were to be enacted. 

The Majority rejected an amendment from Energy and Minerals 

Ranking Member Holt that would have simply ensured that the 

Secretary can continue to issue regulations that are ‘‘necessary to 

protect public health or safety or to ensure a proper return to 

American taxpayers.’’ Mr. Holt’s amendment would have ensured 

that we don’t completely tie the hands of the Interior Department 

when it comes to regulating coal mining in the United States and 

protecting safety and public health, as the underlying bill would do. 

We oppose H.R. 3409 because not only would it prevent regulation to protect the economy and the environment of the Appalachia 

region from destructive Mountaintop Removal Mining practices but 

it would also make mining less safe and threaten public health. We 

should allow the Interior Department to continue to do its job and 

ensure that our mining operations are safe and that we protect our 

workers, public health and American taxpayers. 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Ranking 

Member, Committee on 

Natural Resources. 

RAU ́ L M. GRIJALVA. 

NIKI TSONGAS. 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO. 

MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO. 

BEN RAY LUJA ́ N. 

GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO

SABLAN. 

PAUL TONKO. 

DALE E. KILDEE. 

RUSH D. HOLT. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS