Bill Overview
Title: Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act Amendments of 2021
Description: This bill reauthorizes the Department of the Interior to collect fees on the production of coal through FY2036, expands the eligible uses of the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund, and revises requirements concerning the fund. Under current law, operators of active coal mines must pay such fees through FY2021. Revenue from the fees are deposited into the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund, which is used for the reclamation of abandoned coal mines. The bill authorizes Interior to reimburse states and tribal governments from the fund for the emergency restoration, reclamation, abatement, control, or prevention of adverse effects of coal mining practices. It also increases the minimum amount of funds from $3 million to $5 million that Interior must award to states and Indian tribes that have approved abandoned mine reclamation programs.
Sponsors: Rep. Cartwright, Matt [D-PA-8]
Target Audience
Population: People living in regions affected by coal mining and reclamation needs
Estimated Size: 60000000
- This legislation primarily impacts regions of the world where coal mining is prevalent, as it extends funding mechanisms for coal mine reclamation which is a common concern in coal-rich areas.
- The population affected globally includes those living near abandoned mine lands, as the legislation aims to mitigate adverse environmental impacts from past coal mining activities.
- There are numerous coal mining regions outside the United States, including countries like China, India, Australia, and others. These might adopt similar policies inspired by such legislation affecting at least parts of their population if engaged in similar reclamation or restoration activities.
Reasoning
- The target population primarily includes people in regions with significant coal mining history or active coal mining operations, particularly in Appalachia, the Midwest, and parts of the West.
- The impacts of the policy will involve direct economic and environmental improvements in these areas due to increased funding for mine restoration and reclamation projects.
- Potential beneficiaries include workers in coal industries, local businesses that may receive contracts for reclamation work, and residents who will see environmental improvements.
- Not everyone within these regions will be heavily impacted; some people, particularly those not directly involved in the coal industry or not living near disused mines, may experience little to no change in wellbeing.
- Awareness and opinion on the policy may vary, with individuals having different levels of trust in government interventions and differing priorities for community development.
Simulated Interviews
Coal Miner (West Virginia)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a good step toward restoring our land and creating more jobs.
- I've seen a lot of people suffer due to abandoned mines poisoning water supplies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
School Teacher (Kentucky)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increasing the funding for mine reclamation means a cleaner environment and healthier children.
- The community needs more efforts like this to recover from economic decline.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired (Pennsylvania)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy improves things, but it might be too late for our valleys.
- I worry about my grandchildren growing up in this environment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Environmental Activist (Ohio)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This amendment is crucial for our ongoing environmental efforts.
- It’s about time more funds were diverted to such initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Rancher (Wyoming)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any policy that cleans our water is welcome.
- I have seen too many livestock lost to polluted streams.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Coal Mining Engineer (North Dakota)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The funding is necessary for the projects we've been planning.
- This incentivizes innovation in mine reclamation methods.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Local Business Owner (Montana)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Supporting coal reclamation keeps our community economically viable.
- I expect more sales as projects pick up.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Software Developer (Virginia)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it’s great that there’s more funding for cleaning up past mistakes.
- Even though I’m not directly affected, I support these environmental measures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Student (Tennessee)
Age: 14 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It’s important that we fix the environmental damage caused by mining.
- I want my town to be cleaner and safer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Nurse (Illinois)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't know much about these policies, but I hope they help people.
- Healthcare services need more focus on pollution-related illnesses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $140000000)
Year 2: $124000000 (Low: $103000000, High: $145000000)
Year 3: $128000000 (Low: $107000000, High: $150000000)
Year 5: $136000000 (Low: $113000000, High: $160000000)
Year 10: $160000000 (Low: $133000000, High: $190000000)
Year 100: $250000000 (Low: $210000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- There may be legal and administrative costs involved in the reauthorization and revision of fund regulation.
- Potential resistance from coal production companies could impact the rate at which fees are collected or influence adjustments in the future.
- The impact on local economies in coal mining areas, which could benefit from both employment and environmental improvements.