Bills
| 3.23.22

Should The EPA Be Stopped From Retroactively Revoking Mining Permits? (S. 54)

Do you support or oppose this bill?

What is S. 54?

(Updated March 15, 2018)

The bill changes the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ability to regulate whether or not mining companies can dispose of waste in bodies of water. In simpler terms, once a permit is issued, the EPA can’t get rid of it and all past cases of the EPA doing so are nullified.

Specifically, the bill does 4 things:

  • Removes the EPA’s power to restrict or revoke a permit for dumping waste materials after the permit is issued to a company by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE);

  • Requires the EPA to make all information involved in making its decision to restrict or revoke a permit publicly available;

  • Prevents the EPA from redefining designated waste sites;

  • Nullifies any past decisions the EPA made that occurred after a permit was issued.

Argument in favor

The EPA's current regulatory process threatens to choke the growth of an industry that has seen enormous job and profit loss over the last decade.

Argument opposed

Environmental assessments are not static. The EPA should have the flexibility to restrict or revoke permits that could endanger the surrounding environment.

Impact

Mining companies that need permits; local communities around dumping sites; EPA regulators; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other related agencies.

Cost of S. 54

A CBO cost is unavailable.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. David Vitter (R-LA) argued in his press release that the bill would protect business projects from being impacted by the EPA’s political goals:

“EPA has clearly taken liberties with its authority during the permitting process for important job creating projects, and I am very concerned the trend will continue. Reintroducing this legislation is crucial to protecting the rights of American businesses and preventing a disincentive to investing in America.”

Opponents of the the bill argue that it is overly-restrictive and prevents the EPA from stopping potential safety hazards from becoming a reality. Additionally, the clause to undo past EPA decisions leaves the agency toothless to keep further dumping at bay.


Of Note: This isn’t the first time a bill like this has been introduced. In 2011, the EPA used its power to close the Spruce No. 1 coal mine in West Virginia. In response, the House introduced a bill to curtail the EPA’s power to retroactively reject permits.

In 2014, the EPA considered revoking the permit for a gold and copper mine in Alaska that would have impacted the nearby bay. In response, Vitter introduced a bill identical to this one.

Media: 
Summary by: Chris Conrad
(Photo Credit: Flickr user beyondcoalandgas)