COALEX REPORT 246

	Coalex Report 246

This is the Office of Surface Mining's library of COALEX Research Reports. COALEX is a database of mining and reclamation information, including the Surface Mining Law and regulations, maintained in LEXIS-NEXIS -- a commercial, on-line research service. These reports have been compiled under a cooperative agreement between the Office of Surface Mining and the Interstate Mining Compact Commission, which represents most U.S. coal producing states. The following report includes an analysis of a specific issue requested by a state regulatory authority with responsibility for carrying out the Surface Mining Law. Copies of the research reports and attachments are available to the public, upon request. For additional information, or to obtain copies of the listed attachments, contact Ron Tarquinio by phone at (202) 208-2882 or by e-mail at rtarquin@osmre.gov.

                   

COALEX State Comparison Report - 246
February, 1993

Karen Jacobs, Esquire
Illinois Department of Mines and Minerals
300 West Jefferson Street - Suite 300
P.O. Box 10137
Springfield, Illinois 62791-0137

TOPIC: PRIME FARMLAND CONVERSION

INQUIRY: The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) intends to route a state road through
prime farmland owned by a coal company. The prime farmland has been mined and revegetation
has been established; however, productivity requirements have not yet been met. IDOT intends
to purchase the land from the coal company rather than use its eminent domain powers. Does
the state's purchase of the prime farmland and subsequent conversion of the land to some use
other than farmland relieve the coal company from the prohibition against decreasing aggregate
prime farmland acreage? Or, is the coal company obligated to make up for the "converted"
farmland by constructing it elsewhere on the permit area? Has any IMCC member state dealt with
this or similar issues?

SURVEY RESULTS: A survey of seven IMCC member states was conducted by telephone. None of
the states contacted has experienced this situation. Responses can be divided into four
categories. These are as follows:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1. State's purchase of the land releases the coal company from the prime farmland requirements.

     ALABAMA
     INDIANA*


2. Coal company should request a change of the postmining land use to highway.

*INDIANA: A land use change would facilitate bond release.

PENNSYLVANIA: If the land use is changed to highway, the operator would not have to meet the
prime farmland productivity standards. Bond could be released once construction began on the
highway.

VIRGINIA: Change the postmining land use to state road; make sure EIS and other required
studies are conducted.

WEST VIRGINIA: Revise the land use for the entire permit or only the section required for the
road, as needed. 


3. Revise the permit to delete the proposed road acreage; release the bond for the area deleted.

KENTUCKY: There should be cooperation, not competition, between branches of state
government, especially since IDOT could use its powers of eminent domain to acquire the right-of-way for the road.


4. Acquire the land by eminent domain.

OHIO: This would be the clearest way to address the problem if restoring other areas on or
adjacent to the permit is not an option. If something less than eminent domain is used, clear
documentation would be required that the state took action beyond the control of the coal
company.


Those surveyed stated that one of SMCRA's aims is to prevent the reduction of prime farmland
because of mining. Nothing in SMCRA would prevent a state from reducing prime farmland by
building a highway after successful productivity standards are met. 

One federal decision, EAGLE FOUNDATION, INC. v DOLE, 813 F2d 798 (7th Cir 1987), is
enclosed. The court found that the routing of a limited access highway running through a county
conservation area was reasonable where there was proper planning to minimize harm and there
were no other feasible alternatives.


ATTACHMENTS
EAGLE FOUNDATION, INC. v DOLE, 813 F2d 798 (7th Cir 1987).


Survey and research conducted by: Joyce Zweben Scall

(Home Page)

Office of Surface Mining
1951 Constitution Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20240
202-208-2719
getinfo@osmre.gov