Coal Mining Bill Could Put Pa. Streams in Jeopardy
Following a vote of 32-17 in the Senate earlier this month, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives Committee on Environmental Resources & Energy is considering an amendment to the Bituminous Mine Subsidence and Land Conservation Act of April 27, 1966, P.L. 31, as amended, 52 P.S. Sections 1406.1-1406.21 (BMSLCA or Mine Subsidence Act).
June 15, 2017 at 05:58 PM
13 minute read
Following a vote of 32-17 in the Senate earlier this month, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives Committee on Environmental Resources & Energy is considering an amendment to the Bituminous Mine Subsidence and Land Conservation Act of April 27, 1966, P.L. 31, as amended, 52 P.S. Sections 1406.1-1406.21 (BMSLCA or Mine Subsidence Act). The bill, SB 624 sponsored by Sens. Joseph B. Scarnati III and Gene Yaw, was introduced to clarify the interplay between the Mine Subsidence Act and The Clean Streams Law of June 22, 1937, P.L 1987, as amended, 35 P.S. Sections 691.1-691.1001 (Clean Streams Law).
If enacted as currently drafted, under SB 624, “planned subsidence in a predictable and controlled manner, which is not predicted to result in the permanent disruption of existing or designated uses of water of the commonwealth” is not to be considered presumptive evidence that a bituminous coal mine has the potential to cause pollution. Subsidence, or the sinking of land, has the potential to affect stream flow and other hydrological properties.
The bill provides, further, that such a determination shall apply only if a bituminous coal mine subject to the BMSLCA submits a plan to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) for the “mitigation of predicted subsidence-induced impacts,” and the plan is approved by the DEP.
|The BMSLCA and the Clean Streams Law
The Pennsylvania General Assembly enacted the BMSLCA, commonly known as Act 54, to “protect the public health and safety by regulating the mining of bituminous coal,” and “declare the existence of a public interest in the support of surface structures.” Section 5(e) of the BMSLCA requires coal mine operators applying for a permit to include a plan to “prevent subsidence causing material damage to the extent technologically and economically feasible, to maximize mine stability, and to maintain the value and reasonable foreseeable use of such surface land.” A proviso that follows, however, clarifies that an operator's plan may provide for some subsidence so long as it is planned and in a “predictable and controlled manner.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1State High Court Bucks Trend Favoring Insurers, Sides With Restaurants Seeking COVID-19 Coverage
- 2Remote Proceedings: A Gift for the Holidays
- 3Contested Engineer Cleared to Testify in Defective Pistol Suit, Federal Judge Rules
- 4How I Made Partner: 'Don’t Be Scared to Be Ambitious,' Says Aya Eguchi of Morrison Foerster
- 5People in the News—Dec. 18, 2024—Faegre Drinker, Antheil Maslow
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250