OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 1 of 15

COALEX STATE COMPARISON REPORT - 239

December, 1992 (Revised: February, 1993)

Ernest F. Giovannitti, Director

Bureau of Mining and Reclamation

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources

209 Executive House Building

P.O. Box 8461

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105-8461

TOPIC: HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGIC RESOURCES

INQUIRY: What provisions have the states made to carry out the requirements of OSM 

regulations 780.31(a) and (b) relative to historic and archaeological resource 

protection? Please ask the IMCC member states the following questions:

1. Have you hired staff or outside contractors with expertise in historical or 

archaeological resource assessment? 

a. How many? 

b. Type of expertise? 

c. What do they do

2. Do you provide funding to your State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to 

carry out historical or archaeological site assessment? If yes, what level of 

service is provided by the SHPO?

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with your SHPO relative to historic or 

archaeological resource protection? If yes, please summarize respective roles 

and responsibilities.

4. What level of protection [avoidance, mitigation (minimize impacts), 

documentation (site surveys), enhanced documentation (artifact recovery)] under 

your permitting and enforcement programs is provided for the following: 

a. Historic/archaeological sites which are listed on or eligible for listing on the 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). 

b. Historic/archaeological sites which are known but not listed/eligible for 

listing on NRHP. Do you have criteria for defining "known" sites? 

c. Sites or areas where there is a high probability of finding archaeological 

resources. Do you have criteria for defining "high-probability" sites?

5. If a permit applicant owns the property to be mined (including the historic or 

archaeological resources on the property), how does this affect the responses to 

question 4 above?
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 2 of 15

SEARCH RESULTS: Twelve IMCC member states, including two non-coal states, 

responded to the survey. The responses to the questionnaire follow; a table 

summarizing the responses to questions 1, 2, 3 and 5 appears at the end.

ALABAMA

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: No. We consult with the Alabama 

Historical Commission. 

a. Number of the Ala. Hist. Comm. staff: 

1. 1 - State Historic Preservation Officer 

2. 1 - Chief of Administration 

3. 5 - Professional Archaeologists 

4. 10 - Cultural Resource Coordinators

b. Expertise: 

c. What do they do: Professional archaeologists review requests for 

evaluations and recommend and/or approve site assessments conducted 

by contracted archaeologists. Archaeologists also manage site owned 

cultural and historical sites. Cultural Resource Coordinators make onground inspections for site assessments.

2. Do you fund SHPO: No. 

Level of service provided by SHPO: N/A.

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: No.

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: 

a. Sites on NRHP: Avoidance. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: Avoidance or mitigation. "Known" sites 

have been surveyed by other archaeologists or have sub-surface 

structures present. 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: A Phase I Study (Cultural 

Assessment) is required. "High probability" sites are any elevated areas 

near a water supply, and are prevalent over most of the state.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: The property is treated the same 

as any other. 

ARKANSAS

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: No. 

a. Number: N/A. 

b. Expertise: N/A. 

c. What do they do: N/A.

2. Do you fund SHPO: No funding provided.

Level of service provided by SHPO: N/A.

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: No.

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: 
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 3 of 15

a. Sites on NRHP: Obtain approval and/or guidance from the SHPO. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: No criteria for defining "known" sites. 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: No criteria for defining "highprobability" sites; however, there have been cases when the SHPO has 

alerted the permit applicant that the proposed permit area is in a highprobability area. The Surface Mining and Reclamation Division (SMRD) 

required that the applicant satisfy the SHPO which resulted in an 

archaeological survey by the applicant. The applicant must provide a 

clearance letter from the SHPO in the application. If the SHPO has 

questions about the permit area, the applicant has usually cleared it by the 

time the permit application is submitted to the SMRD. It has the SMRD's 

experience that the applicant has proceeded with the archaeological 

survey rather than question the SHPO's request.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: The applicant must satisfy the 

SHPO.

ILLINOIS

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: No, nor have we hired anyone inhouse specifically or this purpose. However, one staff member has expertise and 

is utilized for cultural resource review. 

a. Number of in-house staff:One 

b. Expertise of in-house staff: This individual does not have formal 

educational training, but has "hands-on" experience with survey work 

during his tenure with a coal company. 

c. What does the in-house staff do:Primarily, respond to SHPO comments on 

permit applications and make determinations on the need for initial 

surveys or additional phase surveys.

2. Do you fund SHPO: No. SHPO receives funding through National Park Service. 

Level of service provided by SHPO:SHPO performs reviews of all permits, 

significant revisions and renewals by virtue of being a member of our interagency 

committee. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: The SHPO is a member of 

our interagency committee. They receive copies of all permit applications and are 

allowed to comment within 45 days. IDMM considers the SHPO comments prior 

to making its final permit decision. 

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: 

a. Sites on NRHP: All of the above options could be utilized. To date, most 

operators commit to survey work in lieu of avoidance. Surveys through 

Phase III have been required. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: Our SHPO considers virtually every 

known site as potentially eligible. We have no definition of "known site". 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: We have no definition of "highprobability" sites.
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 4 of 15

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: Has no impact. Compliance with 

the regulations still required. 

INDIANA

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: No. We use in-house staff. 

a. Number of in-house staff: Two staff members under SHPO are paid by the 

Division of Reclamation (DOR). One additional professional archaeologist 

is an administrator at the DOR. 

b. Expertise of in-house staff: Historic and prehistoric archaeologists exceed 

requirements of the Society of Professional Archaeologists for their fields. 

c. What do the in-house staff do: Review all applications, maintain database, 

provide recommendations to Director of the DOR and to industry, review 

compliance field work and reports.

2. Do you fund SHPO: The DOR funds two positions. Level of service provided by 

SHPO: SHPO provides assessments and recommendations on the basis of 

information obtained from the applicant and any other available information. The 

applicant must provide sufficient information to make necessary assessments. 

SHPO may provide recommendations concerning the manner of which such 

information can be obtained. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: An agreement is currently 

being developed, which provides for the DOR to consult with the SHPO. 

Determinations requiring additional information and field work to discover 

unknown resources are made by the DOR as the Department of Natural 

Resources (DNR) director delegate. The DNR director is also the SHPO. 

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: 

a. Sites on NRHP: Joint approval of any impacts must be obtained from both 

SHPO and DOR. The means of addressing those proposed impacts are 

specific to property and part of the joint approval process. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: The nature of known properties must be 

reported by the applicant. SHPO will then supply a determination on 

eligibility. Protective measures are not considered for properties that are 

not eligible for listing. A "known" site is one which is recorded at one of the 

state's records holding institutions, recorded in the SHPO's files, listed in a 

county history, depicted on a county atlas, recorded by a county historian, 

recorded by a local historical society, depicted on county soil survey 

maps, reported in documents of the Geological Survey, etc. 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: DOR uses the guidelines found 

in Federal Directive TSR-7. Determinations are made from analysis of 

settlement and subsistence systems identified for the region and an 

examination of the relationships of topography, soils, etc. to know sites in 

the region. Probabilities are determined through a comparison to the 

characteristics of the area to be permitted.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: Property ownership does not affect 

the requirement of the applicant to address the impacts of his operation.
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 5 of 15

KENTUCKY

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: No. However, the Department for 

Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (DSMRE) hired qualified 

archaeologists. 

a. Number of in-house staff: Three. 

b. Expertise of in-house staff: N/A 

c. What do the in-house staff do: Review permit applications and coordinate 

with SHPO.

2. Do you fund SHPO: Yes. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: Yes. DSMRE entered into a 

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the SHPO which includes funding. The 

MOA is currently being renegotiated in its entirety. The new MOA is expected to 

be in place by the end of February, 1993. 

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: DSMRE screens all 

proposed permit applications and determines on a case-by-case basis whether 

an initial reconnaissance survey of the proposed permit area is required to 

determine whether any potentially eligible historic or archaeological sites exist 

within the proposed boundaries. 

a. Sites on NRHP: A protection of mitigation plan is required for all listed 

and/or eligible sites. The scope and level of detail required for a protection 

and/or mitigation plan is determined site-by-site in consultation with the 

SHPO. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: N/A 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: If potentially eligible sites exist, 

the applicant is required to do further studies to determine whether the site 

is eligible.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: Ownership of the property has no 

impact on how applicant addresses historic or archaeologic sites prior to mining.

MISSOURI

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: No. 

a. Number: N/A. 

b. Expertise: N/A. 

c. What do they do: N/A.

2. Do you fund SHPO: No. 

Level of service provided by SHPO: The assessments are performed by private 

consultants hired by applicants. The SHPO only reviews the report and issues its 

findings. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: No formal agreement. 

However, SHPO understands its role as the final authority on the adequacy of 

the permit application. 
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 6 of 15

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: Missouri requires all 

applicants to coordinate with SHPO and DNR. No permits are issued until SHPO 

approves. 

a. Sites on NRHP: Avoidance, or if that is not possible, a mitigation plan 

which meets the approval of the SHPO. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: Site survey may be required if SHPO is 

not comfortable with available information. 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: The SHPO determines the 

criteria. Surveys are usually required where a "high-probability" exists.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: Does not affect the level of 

protection.

OHIO

Ohio Division of Reclamation (DOR) has promulgated rules and regulations on historic 

preservation/protection as effective as OSM regulations for surface, underground 

mining, and AML reclamation projects.

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: Ohio DOR hired a permanent fulltime professional archaeologist in 1986. Applicants hire professional prehistoric 

and historic archaeologists (contracting firms) as well as historic architects to 

perform the Phase 1 (literature search), Phase 2 (field locational investigation), 

Phase 3 (historic property eligibility assessment), Phase 4 (mitigation) surveys 

when the DOR archaeologist requires historic/archaeological investigations. The 

DOR archaeologist and contracting archaeologists are qualified per the (1983) 

Secretary of Interior's Standards (for qualifications) and Guidelines (for survey 

reports). DOR AML projects also contract with professional archaeology firms to 

perform the Phase 1-4 surveys after the DOR archaeologist reviews them, if 

surveys are necessary. 

a. Number of in-house staff: Ohio DOR has one professional archaeologist. 

b. Expertise of in-house staff: Ohio DOR staff archaeologist has a Ph.D. in 

North American Prehistoric and Historic Archaeology with expertise in 

Ohio Valley and Columbia Plateau (Northwest America) archaeology and 

ethnohistory. The archaeologist has over 20 years of professional 

experience in the discipline, including, a decade of college and university 

teaching, six years with Ohio DOR, and two years as tribal archaeologist, 

Calville Reservation, Washington State. The Ohio DOR archaeologist has 

had his dissertation published, as well as numerous articles. 

c. What do the in-house staff do: Ohio DOR archaeologist researches, 

writes, and implements, historic preservation rules and regulations for 

surface, underground, AML reclamation, AML emergency and state nocost AML projects. The archaeologist is charged with administering the 

archaeology program for all regulatory and AML projects. The 

archaeologist is in daily contact with SHPO on various projects, MOU's, 

mitigation strategies, program/policy procedure amendments, and 
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 7 of 15

technical matters. The archaeologist performs research at the Ohio 

Historical Society and county historical societies as well as on-site 

reviews, as necessary, to clear or delineate those survey areas that are 

"archaeologically sensitive". The archaeologist holds training sessions for 

DOR staff, contacting archaeologists and industry on various aspects of 

archaeology. He also is the facilitator of the Taskforce to reduce the costs 

of archaeology surveys for industry and obtain funding for the experiment 

to determine the effects of subsidence on subsurface archaeology sites in 

order to create an MOU on full coal recovery areas. The archaeologist 

also attends and participates in several professional meetings and OSM 

and Advisory Council Training courses conducted annually. In addition to 

several other duties, the DOR archaeologist conducts on-site meetings 

between DOR, SHPO, OSM (as necessary), contracting archaeologists

and applicants on all Phase 4 mitigation projects (with an impressive 

record in cutting costs to applicants). The DOR archaeologist does not 

perform any surveys himself given the magnitude of his duties and 

responsibilities (not all of which are mentioned here).

2. Do you fund SHPO: Ohio DOR does not provide any funding to SHPO. 

Level of service provided by SHPO: Ohio SHPO is afforded comment on all 

surface and underground projects, provides technical assistance when required, 

and signs off on all AML federal (Section 106 NHPA) projects. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: Ohio DOR does have 

MOU's with SHPO for regulatory and AML archaeology programs. These MOU's 

are in the process of being updated and revised. Briefly, SHPO is afforded 

comment on all aspects of archaeology throughout the permitting process for all 

surface and underground operations. SHPO is provided with a copy of the 

Attachment 27 (surface) or 27A (underground) which contains archaeology 

related and project area data as well as a copy of the application map. SHPO 

provides comment within the 30 day comment period recommending clearance 

of a Phase I or II survey. Ohio DOR archaeologist performs research as 

described in #1c above. DOR informs the applicant the area is cleared of a full or 

partial survey is necessary. The applicant hires qualified archaeologists to 

perform the work, and both applicant and archaeologists are in routine 

communications with the DOR archaeologist who then review the survey reports 

and sends one copy to SHPO for their comment. If SHPO recommends 

additional investigation, the applicant may avoid the archaeological site and 

receive a conditional permit issuance or perform a high level survey, the scope of 

which is determined by the DOR archaeologist.

 AML projects follow the same process except the DOR archaeologist does 

not have the final word, SHPO does (SMCRA archaeology regulations vs NHPA 

Section 106, 110 law). 

4. . Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: 

a. Sites on NRHP: Ohio DOR, to date, has not dealt with a listed NRHP 

property on a surface, underground or AML mining operation. If, however, 

a listed property is encountered SHPO would be involved through 
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 8 of 15

comment, review of any mitigation plans, on-site meetings, etc. Any 

eligible NRHP property within a surface or surface affected underground 

application area is treated as follows: the applicant is given the option to 

avoid the eligible property with the boundaries flagged, and permit 

issuance conditioned, or if avoidance is not possible (usually due to 

economic reasons), the applicant must have a Phase 4 (mitigation) survey 

performed by qualified professionals after the DOR archaeologist and 

SHPO review and approve (usually with substantial realistic modifications) 

the mitigation plan. Mitigation on underground full coal recovery areas only 

applies to eligible standing historic structures. No archaeological surveys 

are currently performed on full coal recovery areas, except where surface 

impacts would occur. All AML archaeology projects fall under NHPA 

Section 106 and 110. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: In the Ohio DOR application, an 

Attachment 27 and 27A, is sent to SHPO for review. One part requires 

SHPO to list all known sites within a 1.5 mile radius of the project area. 

Ohio DOR field staff also inform the archaeologist of obvious sites while 

performing reviews. Known sites usually have not had Phase 3 eligibility 

assessment studies performed on them. Ohio DOR provides the applicant, 

early in the application process, with the option of avoiding the known 

sites. If this is not possible then the applicant has the option of 

documenting the site (if known but not documented) to save money or 

contracting qualified archaeologists to document and assess the site's 

eligibility status. Criteria for a known site include previous documentation 

of a site filed at the SHPO, a site discovered during research or on-site 

reviews by the archaeologist of field staff, or a site brought to DOR of 

SHPO's attention by a local landowner collector or other public avenue. 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: SHPO comment on a project 

area usually identifies those areas likely to be "archaeologically sensitive". 

The DOR archaeologist then performs research (literature and on-site 

reviews) to specifically clear or delineate survey areas since the date sent 

to SHPO, specifically the application map, fails to identify all types of 

disturbance within the project area (drill roads, primary, and secondary 

effects from previous mining, clearcut logging, etc.) Criteria used by the 

DOR archaeologist to identify "high probability" sites include disturbance 

to an area, topographic setting in relationship to other known and eligible 

sites, geological strata on steep slopes (conducive to rock overhang/shelter formation), visibility (degree of site alteration), focus (quantity 

and quality of artifactual remains), on-site review, etc.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: For Ohio DOR, if the applicant 

owns the project area, including the archaeological resources, he/she has to 

follow the procedure identified in #4 above. Ohio DOR does not make a 

distinction since the SMCRA archaeology rules and regulations do not make any 

distinction. The applicant must abide by the rules and regulations whether for 

archaeology, hydrology, blasting, etc. if he/she owns the project area or is 
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 9 of 15

leasing it form private landowners. There has not been one instance the DOR 

archaeologist is aware of (since he began in 1986 where an applicant has 

refused to do an archaeological survey when required regardless of whether the 

applicant owner the project area or was leasing it.

NORTH CAROLINA (Non-Coal)

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: No. North Carolina Department of 

Environment, Health and Natural Resources routes copies of the application to 

the North Carolina Division of Archives and History, Department of Cultural 

Resources. 

a. Number: N/A. 

b. Expertise: N/A. 

c. What do they do: They perform site inspections and comment as to 

whether there is a high probability for archaeological resources.

2. Do you fund SHPO: No. They have their own funding.

Level of service provided by SHPO: N/A. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: We have a cooperative 

agreement to advise them of all new/proposed mine sites; then if the potential is 

high for archaeological resources, they contact the operator directly and handle 

the situation from there. 

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: 

a. Sites on NRHP: We adjust blasting limits and buffer zone widths when 

these structures are in close proximity to a mine. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: Department of Cultural Resources does 

this and maintains an inventory. 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: Department of Cultural 

Resources is responsible for this.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: Conditions of the permit are still 

adjusted no matter who owns/operates the mine.

PENNSYLVANIA

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: No. 

a. Number: N/A. 

b. Expertise: N/A. 

c. What do they do: N/A.

2. Do you fund SHPO: Yes. 

Level of service provided by SHPO: Through a coordinated review process, the 

SHPO identifies if known historic or archaeologic resources exist or if there is a 

high probability of these resources existing. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: Pennsylvania is currently in 

process of developing an agreement. 

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: 

a. Sites on NRHP: Avoidance and mitigation. 
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 10 of 15

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: SHPO usually asks for 

avoidance/mitigation. SHPO and the applicant communicate directly to 

work things out. There is no criteria for defining "known" sites. 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: SHPO utilizing model to 

determine if a specific site has a high probability of containing 

archaeological resources. SHPO usually asks for a site survey. SHPO and 

applicant communicate directly to work things out.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: Same level of protection provided 

except permit applicant and SHPO are usually more amenable to mitigation.

SOUTH CAROLINA (Non-Coal)

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: State has required third-party 

consultants to be retained by operator to conduct archaeological surveys. 

a. Number: 3-4 

b. Expertise: Specific expertise in conducting detailed archaeological 

surveys, mapping artifacts, and developing mitigation procedures. 

c. What do they do: See b. above.

2. Do you fund SHPO: N/A.

Level of service provided by SHPO: N/A. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: N/A. 

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: 

a. Sites on NRHP: Operators are required to propose and implement 

methods to limit significant adverse effects on significant cultural or 

historic sites. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: If sites are not considered eligible for

listing, they generally are not considered "significant" for protection 

pursuant to the Mining Act. 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: The South Carolina Land 

Resources Commission relies on the expertise and comments of the 

South Carolina Department of Archives and History to determine highprobability sites - generally investigate tracts greater than 50 acres.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: From a permitting perspective, 

ownership vs leasing is not a factor for consideration. All requirements pursuant 

to the South Carolina Mining Act apply to all mine sites.

VIRGINIA

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: Yes. 

a. Number: Two. 

b. Expertise: Consulting Engineering firm subcontracts to archaeologist listed 

by the SHPO to investigate AML projects. 

c. What do they do: Conduct Phase I archaeological surveys and evaluate 

potential for historic significance.
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 11 of 15

2. Do you fund SHPO: No.

Level of service provided by SHPO: N/A. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: Virginia is currently in the 

process of developing an interagency agreement with the SHPO. 

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: 

a. Sites on NRHP: SHPO would determine potential impact and recommend 

action regarding historic/archaeological site. 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: Provided by consultation with SHPO. 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: Evaluation may be conducted 

by an archaeologist. No specific criteria.

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: Ownership of the property 

including the historic or archaeological resources on the property does not have 

any effect on the responses to Question 4 above.

WEST VIRGINIA

1. Have you hired outside staff or contractors: No. (See below.) 

a. Number: N/A. 

b. Expertise: N/A. 

c. What do they do: N/A.

2. Do you fund SHPO: Our agency has proposed the funding of two positions for 

the WV SHPO. Details concerning the type and level of service provided have 

not been finalized.

Level of service provided by SHPO: N/A. 

3. Do you have an interagency agreement with SHPO: WVDEP is in the process of 

finalizing an agreement with the SHPO which will detail both agencies' roles and 

responsibilities. 

4. Level of protection under permitting and enforcement: The West Virginia Division 

of Environmental Protection's current procedures require the applicant to notify 

the WV SHPO of their proposed mining operation by submitting appropriate 

maps and a description of the operation. SHPO, in turn, reviews the proposal to 

identify known or probable historic or archaeological sites and issues a 

recommendation based on their findings. This recommendation may range from 

requiring a detailed site survey by an approved archaeologist, to not requiring 

any further information. The WVDEP requires the applicant to comply with the 

SHPO's request, which may include protection, documentation, or artifact 

recovery, before a mining permit is issued.

 In some cases, the SHPO is not specific as to what they are looking for, 

resulting in detailed site surveys being prepared on the entire proposed area. 

This is expensive for the applicant and tends to delay the final review and 

processing of an application. 

a. Sites on NRHP: N/A 

b. Criteria for defining "known" sites: N/A 

c. Criteria for defining "high-probability" sites: N/A
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 12 of 15

5. If permit applicant owns property to be mined: This has no effect on permitting 

and enforcement.

Survey conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall

TABLE OF RESPONSES

ALABAMA

Hire Staff or 

Contractor 

Application Ffee 

Fund SHPO Interagency 

Agreement (MOA)

Landowner Follows 

Same Rules

Outside: No

In-house: No

Other Dept.: N/A 

Yes No MOA Yes 

ARKANSAS

Hire Staff or

Contractor 

Application Fee 

Fund SHPO Interagency 

Agreement (MOA)

Landowner Follows 

Same Rules

Outside: No

In-house: No

Other Dept.: N/A 

No No MOA Yes 

ILLINOIS

Hire Staff or

Contractor 

Application Fee 

Fund SHPO Interagency 

Agreement (MOA)

Landowner Follows 

Same Rules

Outside: No

In-house: Yes (1)

Other Dept.: N/A 

No No MOA but work 

together 

Yes 
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 13 of 15

INDIANA

Hire Staff or 

Contractor 

Application Ffee 

Fund 

SHPO 

Interagency 

Agreement (MOA)

Landowner Follows Same 

Rules

Outside: No

In-house: Yes (2)

Other Dept.: N/A 

Yes MOA being 

developed 

Yes 

KENTUCKY

Hire Staff or 

Contractor 

Application Ffee 

Fund 

SHPO 

Interagency 

Agreement (MOA)

Landowner Follows Same 

Rules

Outside: No

In-house: Yes (3)

Other Dept.: N/A 

Yes Have MOA Yes 

MISSOURI

Hire Staff or 

Contractor 

Application Ffee 

Fund 

SHPO 

Interagency 

Agreement (MOA)

Landowner Follows Same 

Rules

Outside: No

In-house: No

Other Dept.: N/A 

No No MOA but work 

together 

Yes 

OHIO

Hire Staff or 

Contractor 

Application Ffee 

Fund 

SHPO 

Interagency 

Agreement (MOA)

Landowner Follows Same 

Rules

Outside: No

In-house: Yes (1)

Other Dept.: N/A 

No Have MOA Yes 
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 14 of 15

NORTH CAROLINA

Hire Staff or 

Contractor 

Application Ffee 

Fund SHPO Interagency 

Agreement 

(MOA)

Landowner Follows Same 

Rules

Outside: No

In-house: No 

Other Dept.: Yes 

No Have MOA Yes 

PENNSYLVANIA

Hire Staff or 

Contractor 

Application Ffee 

Fund SHPO Interagency 

Agreement 

(MOA)

Landowner Follows Same 

Rules

Outside: No

In-house: N/A

Other Dept.: N/A 

Yes MOA being 

developed 

Yes 

SOUTH CAROLINA

Hire Staff or 

Contractor 

Application Ffee 

Fund SHPO Interagency 

Agreement 

(MOA)

Landowner Follows Same 

Rules

Outside: Yes*

In-house: N/A

Other Dept.: N/A 

*Outside contractors 

are hired by 

applicants 

N/A MOA being 

developed 

Yes 

VIRGINIA

Hire Staff or 

Contractor 

Application Ffee 

Fund SHPO Interagency 

Agreement 

(MOA)

Landowner Follows Same 

Rules

Outside: Yes

In-house: N/A

Other Dept.: N/A 

No MOA being 

developed 

Yes 
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

U.S. Department of the Interior

Search conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall Page 15 of 15

WEST VIRGINIA

Hire Staff or

Contractor 

Application 

Fee 

Fund SHPO Interagency Agreement 

(MOA)

Landowner Follows 

Same Rules

Outside: No

In-house: N/A

Other Dept.: 

N/A 

WVDEP is 

considering 

funding 2 

positions 

MOA being developed Yes