FEBRUARY 6, 1975.  

  {1} THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, February 5, 1975,  

   The Honorable the Speaker, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C.  

   DEAR MR. SPEAKER: Our Nation is faced with the need to find the right balance among a
number of very desirable national objectives.  We must find the right balance because we simply
cannot achieve all desirable objectives at once.  

   In the case of legislation governing surface coal mining activities, we must strike a balance
between our desire for environmental protection and our need to increase domestic coal production. 
This consideration has taken on added significance over the past few months.  It has become clear
that our abundant domestic reserves of coal must become a growing part of our Nation's drive for
energy independence.  

   Last December, I concluded that it would not be in the Nation's best interests for me to approve the
surface coal mining bill which passed the 93rd Congress as S. 425.  That bill would have:  

   - Caused excessive coal production losses, including losses that are not necessary to achieve
reasonable environmental protection and reclamation requirements.  The Federal Energy
Administration estimated that the bill, during its first full year of operation would reduce coal
production between 48 and 141 million tons, or approximately 6 to 18 percent of the expected
production. Additional losses could result which cannot be quantified because of ambiguities in the
bill.  Losses of coal production are particularly important because each lost ton of coal can mean
importing four additional barrels of foreign oil.  

   - Caused inflationary impacts because of increased coal costs and Federal expenditures for
activities which, however desirable, are not necessary at this time.  

   - Failed to correct other deficiencies that had been pointed out in executive branch
communications concerning the bill.  

   The energy program that I outlined in my State of the Union Message contemplates the doubling
of our Nation's coal production by 1985.  Within the next ten years, my program envisions opening
250 [*] new coal mines, the majority of which must be surface mines, and the construction of
approximately 150 new coal fired electric generating plants.  I believe that we can achieve these
goals and still meet reasonable environmental protection standards.  

   I have again reviewed S. 425 as it passed the 93rd Congress (which has been reintroduced in the
94th Congress as S. 7 and H.R. 25) to identify those provisions of the bill where changes are critical
to overcome the objections which led to my disapproval last December.  I have also identified a
number of provisions of the bill where changes are needed to reduce further the potential for
unnecessary production impact and to make the legislation more workable and effective.  These few
but important changes will go a long way toward achieving precise and balanced legislation.  The
changes are summarized in the first enclosure to this letter and are incorporated in the enclosed draft
bill.  

    {2} With the exception of the changes described in the first enclosure, the bill follows S. 425.  

   I believe that surface mining legislation must be reconsidered in the context of our current national
needs.  I urge the Congress to consider the enclosed bill carefully and pass it promptly.  

   Sincerely,  

   GERALD R. FORD.  

    {3} SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL CHANGES FROM S. 425 (S. 7 AND H.R. 25)
INCORPORATED IN THE ADMINISTRATION'S SURFACE MINING BILL  

   The Administration bill follows the basic framework of S. 425 in establishing Federal standards
for the environmental protection and reclamation of surface coal mining operations.  Briefly, the
Administration bill, like S. 425:  

   - covers all coal surface mining operations and surface effects of underground coal mining;  

   - establishes minimum nationwide reclamation standards;  

   - places primary regulatory responsibility with the States with Federal backup in cases where the
States fail to act;  

   - creates a reclamation program for previously mined lands abandoned without reclamation;  

   - establishes reclamation standards on Federal lands.  

   Changes from S. 425 which have been incorporated in the Administration bill are summarized
below.  

   CRITICAL CHANGES  

   1.  Citizen suits. - S. 425 would allow citizen suits against any person for a "violation of the
provisions of this Act." This could undermine the integrity of the bill's permit mechanism and could
lead to mine-by-mine litigation of virtually every ambiguous aspect of the bill even if an operation is
in full compliance with existing regulations, standards and permits.  This is unnecessary and could
lead to production delays or curtailments.  Citizen suits are retained in the Administration bill, but
are modified (consistent with other environmental legislation) to provide for suits against (1) the
regulatory agency to enforce the act, and (2) mine operators where violations of regulations or
permits are alleged. 

   2.  Stream siltation. - S. 425 would prohibit increased stream siltation - a requirement which
would be extremely difficult or impossible to meet and thus could preclude mining activities.  In the
Administration's bill, this prohibition is modified to require the maximum practicable limitation on
siltation.  

   3.  Hydrologic disturbances. - S. 425 would establish absolute requirements to preserve the
hydrologic integrity of alluvial valley floors - and prevent offsite hydrologic disturbances.  Both
requirements would be impossible to meet, are unnecessary for reasonable environmental protection
and could preclude most mining activities.  In the Administration's bill, this provision is modified to
require that any such disturbances be prevented to the maximum extent practicable so that there will
be a balance between environmental protection and the need for coal production.  

   4.  Ambiguous terms. - In the case of S. 425, there is great potential for court interpretations of
ambiguous provisions which could lead to unnecessary or unanticipated adverse production impact. 
The Administration's bill provides explicit authority for the Secretary to define ambiguous terms so
as to clarify the regulatory process and minimize delays due to litigation.  

    {4} 5.  Abandoned land reclamation fund. - S. 425 would establish a tax of 35? per ton for
underground mined coal and 25? per ton for surface mined coal to create a fund for reclaiming
previously mined lands that have been abandoned without being reclaimed, and for other purposes. 
This tax is unnecessarily high to finance needed reclamation.  The Administration bill would set the
tax at 10? per ton for all coal, providing over $1 billion over ten years which should be ample to
reclaim that abandoned coal mined land in need of reclamation.  

   Under S. 425 funds accrued from the tax on coal could be used by the Federal government (1) for
financing construction of roads, utilities, and public buildings on reclaimed mined lands, and (2) for
distribution to States to finance roads, utilities and public buildings in any area where coal mining
activity is expanding.  This provision needlessly duplicates other Federal, State and local programs,
and establishes eligibility for Federal grant funding in a situation where facilities are normally
financed by local or State borrowing.  The need for such funding, including the new grant program,
has not been established.  The Administration bill does not provide authority for funding facilities.  

   6.  Impoundments. - S. 425 could prohibit or unduly restrict the use of most new or existing
impoundments, even though constructed to adequate safety standards.  In the Administration's bill,
the provisions on location of impoundments have been modified to permit their use where safety
standards are met.  

   7.  National forcsts. - S. 425 would prohibit mining in the national forests - a prohibition which is
inconsistent with multiple use principles and which could unnecessarily lock up 7 billion tons of
coal reserves (approximately 30% of the uncommitted Federal surfaceminable coal in the
contiguous States).  In the Administration bill, this provision is modified to permit the Agriculture
Secretary to waive the restriction in specific areas when multiple resource analysis indicates that
such mining would be in the public interest. 

   8.  Spccial unemployment provisions. - The unemployment provision of S. 425(1) would cause
unfair discrimination among classes of unemployed persons, (2) would be difficult to administer,
and (3) would set unacceptable precedents including unlimited benefit terms, and weak labor force
attachment requirements. This provision of S. 425 is inconsistent with P.L. 93-567 and P.L. 93-572
which were signed into law on December 31, 1974, and which significantly broaden and lengthen
general unemployment assistance.  The Administration's bill does not include a special
unemployment provision.  

   Other important changes: In addition to the critical changes from S. 425, listed above, there are a
number of provisions which should be modified to reduce adverse production impact, establish a
more workable reclamation and enforcement program, eliminate uncertainties, avoid unnecessary
Federal expenditures and Federal displacement of State enforcement activity, and solve selected
other problems.  

   1.  Antidegradation. - S. 425 contains a provision which, if literally interpreted by the courts, could
lead to a nondegradation standard (similar to that experienced with the Clean Air Act) far beyond
the environmental and reclamation requirements of the bill.  This could lead to production delays
and disruption.  Changes are included in the Administration bill to overcome this problem.  

    {5} 2.  Reclamation fund. - S. 425 would authorize the use of funds to assist private landowners
in reclaiming their lands mined in past years.  Such a program would result in windfall gains to the
private landowners who would maintain title to their lands while having them reclaimed at Federal
expense. The Administration bill deletes this provision.  

   3.  Interim program timing. - Under S. 425, mining operations could be forced to close down
simply because the regulatory authority had not completed action on a mining permit, through no
fault of the operator.  The Administration bill modifies the timing requirements of the interim
program to minimize unnecessary delays and production losses.  

   4.  Federal preemption. - The Federal interim program role provided in S. 425 could (1) lead to
unnecessary Federal preemption, displacement or duplication of State regulatory activities, and (2)
discourage States from assuming an active permanent regulatory role, thus leaving such functions to
the Federal government.  During the past few years, nearly all major coal mining States have
improved their surface mining laws, regulations and enforcement activities.  In the Administration
bill, this requirement is revised to limit the Federal enforcement role during the interim program to
situations where a violation creates an imminent danger to public health and safety or significant
environmental harm.  

   5.  Surface owner consent. - The requirement in S. 425 for surface owner's consent would
substantially modify existing law by transferring to the surface owner coal rights that presently
reside with the Federal government.  S. 425 would give the surface owner the right to "veto" the
mining of Federally owned coal or possibly enable him to realize a substantial windfall.  In addition,
S. 425 leaves unclear the rights of prospectors under existing law.The Administration is opposed to
any provision which could (1) result in a lockup of coal reserves through surface owner veto or (2)
lead to windfalls.  In the Administration's bill surface owner and prospector rights would continue as
provided in existing law.  

   6.  Federal lands. - S. 425 would set an undesirable precedent by providing for State control over
mining of Federally owned coal on Federal lands.  In the Administration's bill, Federal regulations
governing such activities would not be preempted by State regulations.  

   7.  Reseach centers. - S. 425 would provide additional funding authorization for mining research
centers through a formula grant program for existing schools of mining.  This provision establishes
an unnecessary new spending program, duplicates existing authorities for conduct of reseach, and
could fragment existing research eforts already supported by the Federal government.  The provision
is deleted in the Administration bill.  

   8.  Prohibition on mining in allycial ralley floors. - S. 425 would extend the prohibition on surface
mining involving alluvial valley floors to areas that have the potential for farming or ranching.  This
is an unnecessary prohibition which could close some existing mines and which would lock up
significant coal reserves.  In the Administration's bill reclamation of such areas would be required,
making the prohibition unnecessary.  

    {6} 9.Potential moratorium on issuing mining permits. - S. 425 provides for (1) a ban on the
mining of lands under study for designation as unsuitable for coal mining, and (2) an automatic ban
whenever such a study is requested by anyone.  The Administration's bill modifies these provisions
to insure expeditious consideration of proposals for designating lands unsuitable for surface coal
mining and to insure that the requirement for review of Federal lands will not trigger such a ban.  

   10.  Hydrologic data. - Under S. 425, an applicant would have to provide hydrologic data even
where the data are already available - a potentially serious and unnecessary workload for small
miners.  The Administration's bill authorizes the regulatory authority to waive the requirement, in
whole or in part, when the data are already available.  

   11.  Variances. - S. 425 would not give the regulatory authority adequate flexibility to grant
variances from the lengthy and detailed performance specifications.  The Administration's bill would
allow limited variances - with strict environmental safeguards - to achieve specific post-mining land
uses and to accommodate equipment shortages during the interim program.  

   12.  Permit fee. - The requirement in S. 425 for payment of the mining fee before operations begin
could impose a large "front end" cost which could unnecessarily prevent some mine openings or
force some operators out of business.  In the Administration's bill, the regulatory authority would
have the authority to extend the fee over several years.  

   13.  Preferential contracting. - S. 425 would require that special preference be given in reclamation
contracts to operators who lose their jobs because of the bill.Such hiring should be based solely on
an operators reclamation capability.  The provision does not appear in the Administration's bill.  

   14.  Any class of buyer. - S. 425 would require that lessees of Federal coal not refuse to sell coal to
any class of buyer.  This could interfere unnecessarily with both planned and existing coal mining
operations, particularly in integrated facilities.  This provision is not included in the Administration's
bill.  

   15.  Contract authority. - S. 425 would provide contract authority rather than authorizing
appropriations for Federal costs in administering the legislation.  This is unnecessary and
inconsistent with the thrust of the Congressional Budget Reform and Impoundment Control Act.  In
the Administration's bill, such costs would be financed through appropriations.  

   16.  Indian lands. - S. 425 could be construed to require the Secretary of the Interior to regulate
coal mining on non-Federal Indian lands.  In the Administration bill, the definition of Indian lands is
modified to eliminate this possibility.  

   17.  Interest charge. - S. 425 would not provide a reasonable leved of interest charged on unpaid
penalties.The Administration's bill provides for an interest charge based on Treasury rates so as to
assure a sufficient incentive for prompt payment of penalties.  

    {7} 18.  I'rohibition on mining within 500 feet of an active mine. - This prohibition in S. 425
would unnecessarily restrict recovery of substantial coal resources even when mining of the areas
would be the best possible use of the areas involved.  Under the Administration's bill, mining would
be allowed in such areas as long as it can be done safely.  

   19.  Haul roads. - Requirements of S. 425 could preclude some mine operators from moving their
coal to market by preventing the connection of haul roads to public roads.  The Administration's bill
would modify this provision.  

   The attached listing shows the sections of S. 425 (or S. 7 and H.R. 25) which are affected by the
above changes.  
____________________________________________________________________________
____

F PRINCIPAL PROVISIONS IN
S. 425 (S. 7 AND H.R. 25)
THAT ARE CHANGED IN THE
ADMINISTRATION'S *3*BILL
                           Title or section, S. 425,
         Subject                 S. 7, H.R. 25           Administration bill
Critical changes:
1.  Clarily and the scope
of citizens' suits         520                        420.
2.Modity prohibition       515(b)(10)(B),             415(b)(10)(B),
against stream siltation   516(b)(9)(B).              416(b)(9)(B)
3.  Modity prohibition
against hydrological
disturbances               510(b)(3), 515(b)(10)(E).  410(b)(3), 415(b)(10)(E).
4.  Provide express
authority to define
ambiguous terms in the act None                       601(b).
5.  Reduce the tax on coal
to corform more nearly
with feclamation needs and
eliminalte fundirng for
facilities.                401(d)                     301(d).
6.  Modity the provisions
on impoundments            515(b)(13), 516(b)(5).     415(b)(13), 416(b)(5).
7.  Modity the prohibition
against mining in natioal
forests                    522(e)(2)                  422(e)(2).
8.  Delete special
unemployment provisions    708                        Nome.
Othier important changes
1.  Delete or clarity
language which could lead
to unintended
"antidegradation"
interpretations.           102(a) and (d)             102(a) and (c).
2.  Modity the abandoned
land reclamation program
to (1) provide both
Federal and State
acquisition and
reclamation with 50/50
cost sharing, and (2)
eliminate cost sharing for
private land owners.       Title IV                   Title III.
3.  Revise fiming
requirements for interim
program to minimize        502(a) through (c),
unanticipated delays.      506(a).                    402(a) and (b), 406(a).
4.  Reduce Federal
preemption of State role
during interim program     502(i), 521(a)(4)          402(c), 421(a)(4).
5.  Eliminate surface
owner consent requirement;
continue existing surface
and mineral rights.        716                        613.
6.  Eliminate requirement
that Federal lands adhere
to requirements of State
programs.                  523(a)                     423(a).
7.  Delete funding for
research centers           Title ill                  None.
8.  Revise the prohibition
on mining in alluvial
valley floors              510(b)(5)                  410(b)(5).
9.  Eliminate possible
delays relating to
designations as unsuitable
for mining.                510(b)(4), 522(c)          410(b)(4), 422(c).
10.  Provide authority to
waive hydrologic data
requirements when data
already available.         507(b)(11).                407(b)(11).
11.  Modify variance
provisions for certain
post-mining uses and
equipment shortages.       515(c)                     402(d), 415(c).
12.  Clarify that payment
of permit fee can be
spread over time           507(a)                     407(a).
13.  Delete preferntial

contracting on orphaned
land reclamation.          707                        None.
14.Delete requirement on
sales of coal by Fejeral
lessees                    523(e)                     None.
15.  Provide authority for
appropriations rather than
contracting authority for
pdministrative costs.      714                        612.
16.  Clarify definition of
Indian landc to assure
that the Secretaryof the
intrior does not control
non-Federal indian lands.  701(9)                     601(a)(9).
17.  Establish an adequate
inte rest charge on unpaid
penalties to minimize
incentive to delay
payments.                  518(d)                     418(d).
18.  Permit mining with
500 ft of an active mine
where this can be done
safely.                    515(b)(12)                 415(b)(12).
19.  Clarify the
restriction on haul roads
from mines connecting with
public toads.              522(e)(4)                  422(e)(4).