| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | SENATE RESOLUTION
| ||||||
2 | WHEREAS, The Department of the Interior's Office of Surface | ||||||
3 | Mining, Reclamation, and Enforcement (OSMRE) is considering | ||||||
4 | new sweeping regulations that would cut surface mining | ||||||
5 | production and jobs by 21-30%, cut underground coal mining jobs | ||||||
6 | up to 50%, and risk eliminating over 66,000 direct and indirect | ||||||
7 | jobs nationwide; and
| ||||||
8 | WHEREAS, Beginning in 2003, OSMRE conducted a 5-year | ||||||
9 | process, including public hearings, the submission of | ||||||
10 | thousands of public comments, and preparation of an | ||||||
11 | environmental impact statement, that culminated in final | ||||||
12 | regulations adding significant new environmental protections | ||||||
13 | regarding the placement of excess spoil and clarifying its | ||||||
14 | regulations relating to stream buffer zones pursuant to the | ||||||
15 | Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA); and
| ||||||
16 | WHEREAS, The Secretary of the Interior attempted to avoid a | ||||||
17 | public rulemaking process by asking a court to vacate the 2008 | ||||||
18 | OSMRE stream buffer zone rule without public comment as | ||||||
19 | required under the Administrative Procedure Act, but was | ||||||
20 | rebuked by a federal court which ruled that the Secretary may | ||||||
21 | not repeal the stream buffer zone rule without going through a | ||||||
22 | rulemaking process that includes public notice and comment; and
|
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | WHEREAS, OSMRE, in its own words, admitted that before any | ||||||
2 | public comments were even received on its proposals, it had | ||||||
3 | "already decided to change the (stream buffer zone) rule | ||||||
4 | following the change in administrations on January 20, 2009"; | ||||||
5 | the Office is calling the new rule the "stream protection | ||||||
6 | rule", and it is much broader in scope than the 2008 stream | ||||||
7 | buffer zone rule; and
| ||||||
8 | WHEREAS, OSMRE has failed to justify why a new stream | ||||||
9 | protection rule is necessary or to explain the problem that the | ||||||
10 | Office is attempting to fix, and such concerns have been echoed | ||||||
11 | by the Interstate Mining Compact Commission, an organization | ||||||
12 | representing state mining regulators with substantial | ||||||
13 | expertise in SMCRA regulation; and
| ||||||
14 | WHEREAS, OSMRE is inappropriately rushing to complete the | ||||||
15 | rulemaking because of a unilateral settlement agreement with | ||||||
16 | environmental groups, and is committing such flagrant | ||||||
17 | violations of the required National Environmental Policy Act | ||||||
18 | process that 8 of the state cooperating agencies have written | ||||||
19 | to the Office objecting to its quality, completeness and | ||||||
20 | accuracy, as well as calling the document "nonsensical and | ||||||
21 | difficult to follow", and ultimately threatening to pull out of | ||||||
22 | the process; and
| ||||||
23 | WHEREAS, The coal mining industry is critical to the |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | economic and social well being of the citizens of Illinois, | ||||||
2 | accounting for over 3,500 direct workers and another 24,500 | ||||||
3 | indirect jobs that have an impact of over $1 billion on the | ||||||
4 | State's economy; therefore, be it
| ||||||
5 | RESOLVED, BY THE SENATE OF THE NINETY-SEVENTH GENERAL | ||||||
6 | ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, that we express serious | ||||||
7 | concern about the scope, justification, and substance of the | ||||||
8 | OSMRE's stream protection rule, as well as about the procedure | ||||||
9 | and process that have been used to adopt that rule; and be it | ||||||
10 | further
| ||||||
11 | RESOLVED, That we call upon OSMRE to immediately suspend | ||||||
12 | work on the environmental impact statement and the stream | ||||||
13 | protection rule until such time as the Office: | ||||||
14 | (1) clearly and publicly articulates why the 2008 | ||||||
15 | regulation has not been implemented and provides specific | ||||||
16 | details regarding each of its provisions and why the Office | ||||||
17 | believes that they are insufficient; | ||||||
18 | (2) provides scientific data and other objective | ||||||
19 | information to justify each and every provision of the new | ||||||
20 | proposal; | ||||||
21 | (3) explains why the Office is contradicting its own | ||||||
22 | annual state inspection reports which indicate good | ||||||
23 | environmental performance and refute the need for this new | ||||||
24 | rule; |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | (4) justifies why a more limited approach would not | ||||||
2 | achieve the objectives of the Office; and | ||||||
3 | (5) surveys all of the state regulatory authorities to | ||||||
4 | determine whether they agree that such significant | ||||||
5 | regulatory changes are necessary; and be it further | ||||||
6 | RESOLVED, That we also urge Congress to oppose this | ||||||
7 | unwarranted effort by the present Presidential Administration | ||||||
8 | by withholding any further funding for OSMRE for the stream | ||||||
9 | protection rule and environmental impact statement until such | ||||||
10 | time as the Office justifies the need for new rules; and be it | ||||||
11 | further
| ||||||
12 | RESOLVED, That suitable copies of this resolution be sent | ||||||
13 | to President Barack Obama, the President pro tempore of the | ||||||
14 | United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of | ||||||
15 | Representatives, the Secretary of the Department of the | ||||||
16 | Interior, and each member of the Illinois congressional | ||||||
17 | delegation.
|