IMPAIRED. AGAIN, THESE CONCERNS ARE COVERED UNDER NEPA, THE CLEAN WATER ACT (SECTION 404 CORPS PERMIT, SECTION REGULATION IS THAT IT ALLOWS THE USE OF THE BEST APPROACH FOR EACH PROPERTY. UNDER RECLAMATION IN SECTION 201 (PG. 25), CLAIM HOLDERS ARE REQUIRED TO RECLAIM TO PRIOR LAND USE. HOWEVER EXISTING FEDERAL AND STATE RECLAMATION REQUIREMENTS ALREADY APPLY. THE DEVELOPER MAY PROPOSE A POST-MINING LAND USE DIFFERENT THAN BUT CONCEIVABLY A BETTER LAND USE, I.E., PRIORITY FOR WILDLIFE, HABITAT, SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE, NUCLEAR WASTE SITE USE. WITH ONLY ONE EXCEPTION, EVERY WESTERN STATE HAS IN PLACE RECLAMATION LAWS EITHER DIRECTLY OR AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF EXISTING WATER QUALITY LAWS (I.E. ARIZONA). I HAVE A DOCUMENT I 4 WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE FOR THE RECORD WHICH SHOWS HOW THAT "THE PUBLIC INTEREST WILL GENERALLY BEST BE SERVED RECLAMATION ARE DEFINED IN LAND USE OR MANAGEMENT PLANS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO LOCAL OR REGIONAL REQUIREMENTS". ADDITION, IT COULD PREVENT A HIGHER, BEST USE FOR WASTE PLACE OR PROPOSED WHICH COVER THESE CONCERNS ARE RCRA, CERCLA AND SARA. UNDER SECTION 202, INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT, ANY PERSON WHO IS OR MAY BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY MINERAL ACTIVITIES MAY REQUEST INSPECTIONS OR "SUGGEST" VIOLATIONS. THESE TYPES OF "PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT" OPPORTUNITIES EXACERBATE UNNECESSARY DUPLICATION AS PER THE CLEAN WATER ACT, CERCLA AND MOST STATE UNDER "COMPLIANCE" IN SECTION 202 (PG 29), ENFORCEMENT, WHICH ALREADY EXISTS, WOULD OCCUR THROUGH THE OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING, BLM AND FOREST SERVICE. THE PRESCRIBED PENALTIES ARE DUPLICATED IN THE CLEAN WATER ACT, RCRA, CERCLA, AND CLEAN AIR ACT, AMONG OTHERS. NO TIMEFRAMES ARE PROVIDED FOR HEARINGS RELATED TO CIVIL PENALTIES. 56–185 O - 92 - 12 6 CAUSATION FOR CITIZEN SUITS, SECTION 202 (PG31) CAN BE IMPROVED BY ADDING SPECIFIC CRITERIA. WE ARE CONCERNED IT CONTAINS AN OPEN INVITATION TO FRIVOLOUS LITIGATION AND AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN UPON OUR ALREADY CROWDED FEDERAL COURTS. THE ENTIRE SECTION PROVIDES AN ARENA FOR NEGATIVELY IMPACTING SCHEDULES WHERE "DELAY IS A VICTORY" FOR PROJECT OPPONENTS. INJUNCTIONS TO DELAY PROJECT STARTUPS SHOULD BE PERMITTED IN ONLY THE MOST EXTREME CASES WHERE PERMANENT, SIGNIFICANT, IRRESPONSIBLE DAMAGE WILL RESULT, MINING WASTES, ALREADY HIGHLY REGULATED BY FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS SHOULD NOT BE ADDRESSED UNDER THIS LEGISLATION. THE SAME HOLDS TRUE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF MINING ACTIVITIES. A BILL APPLICABLE TO LOCATABLE MINERALS ON PUBLIC LANDS SHOULD DEAL WITH MINING CLAIM PRINCIPLES; IT SHOULD NOT DIGRESS INTO ENVIRONMENTAL LAW. H.R. 918 ATTEMPTS TO INTERRELATE THE REGULATION OF LOCATABLE MINERALS WITH MINING WASTE MANAGEMENT. LEGISLATIVE ACTION ON SUBTITLE D OF THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT IS ON THE IMMEDIATE HORIZON, IT PROMISES TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE SUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MINING WASTES AND OTHER INDUSTRIAL WASTES. LEGISLATION SEPARATELY ADDRESSING EACH |