Abandoned mine land funds.
In one sentence
Not clearly identified in the stored source.
No additional limitations are listed.
Official record
Summary for LSO115 Bill No.: SF0040 Effective : 3/15/2016 LSO No.: 16LSO-0283 Enrolled Act No.: SEA No. 0062 Chapter No.: 116 Prime Sponsor: Joint Appropriations Interim Committee Catch Title: Abandoned mine land funds. Subject: Appropriations for Projects with Abandoned Mine Land Funds Summary/Major Elements: Authorizes the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to submit applications to the Federal Office of Surface Mining for Wyoming’s share of the Abandoned Mine Land (AML) grant funds . Funds in the S ta te Abandoned Mine Land Reserve A ccount are appropriated to the DEQ for the following projects: $ 76, 40 0 ,000 to DEQ for reclamation p rojects; $162,300,000 to the Highway Fund (with priority given to projects addressing the impacts of mineral development) ; $1,300,000 to DEQ Air Quality Division; and $1,800,000 to DEQ Solid Waste Division. Authorizes DEQ to submit new grant applications or modify existing gr ant applications to the Federal Office of Surface M ining to reappropriate previously authorized funds for DEQ projects of $3,867,359 and $1,500,000 to the Department of Administration and Information for the Mike Enzi STEM Building at the University of Wyoming . Directs DEQ to submit applications for authority to redirect up to $1,729,849 of previously appropriated and reverted funds to the highway fund for highway projects, with priority given to projects addressing the impacts of mineral development. Extends prior appropriations of AML funds for DEQ Solid Waste Orphaned Site Program and Office of the Governor to develop and implement a permitting process to further a carbon dioxide pipeline network across federal lands in Wyoming. Reverts unexpended and unobligated funds appropriated in the 2013 AML Bill (2013 Wyoming Session Laws, Chapter 156) on March 15, 2016 , totaling $10,000,000 . Requires DEQ to assist the City of Rock Springs, Sweetwater County or other appropriate governmental entity in preparing an application to the Office of Surface Mining for th e use of reclamation funds for the Bitter Creek Restoration Project and for the Governor’s for funding of the Bitter Creek restoration project as a public facility as provided by W.S. 35-11-1202(c) . DEQ is also required to submit to the federal office of surface mining in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000.00 from any unexpended, unobligated funds reverted from AML appropriations to DEQ for solid waste projects and the University of Wyoming for the Enzi STEM building. The above summary is not an official publication of the Wyoming Legislature and is not an official statement of legislative intent. While the Legislative Service Office endeavored to provide accurate information in this summary, it should not be relied upon as a comprehensive abstract of the bill .
Public statements
Last checked Aug 7, 12:39 AM
S04
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the bill because he believes a statute limits Abandoned Mine Land funds to reclamation of land and water resources affected by coal mining, which he argues does not clearly apply to the Bitter Creek project.
S14
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports concurring with the House amendments because he asserts that Bitter Creek was diverted for coal mining and polluted by those operations, making it a valid reclamation project.
S13
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker encourages support for the amendment because he agrees that Bitter Creek was diverted to enable coal mining in Sweetwater County, confirming a direct relationship.
S03
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes concurring because he believes using 'in lieu of' funds for this project risks jeopardizing all Abandoned Mine Land funding due to federal audit concerns and statutory requirements.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker urges consideration for the project because she believes it is related to historic coal mining and has been partially funded by the legislature since 2008.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the project because he believes historical evidence shows it is mining-related and fits the intended use of Abandoned Mine Land funds.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker suggests voting no and discussing the matter further because he believes current reclamation projects will be completed by 2018, making this appropriation unnecessary at that time.
R · H08
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because the project has not been properly vetted or understood by the legislature, and he believes it is inappropriate to approve funding without knowing exactly what the money will be used for.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because he believes funding requests for community projects should have been made earlier when there was more money available, rather than now.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because his county has a long history of coal mining dating back to before statehood, implying the project is relevant but he prefers another upcoming amendment.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because there is no committee hearing or testimony for this project, previous funding has already been spent without clear cost estimates, and further vetting through a committee process is needed.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because he believes the project is a necessary reclamation effort to mitigate damage caused by historic mining operations that disrupted groundwater and endangered other mines.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because he is uncomfortable with how this large sum of money from an uncertain source is being financed and brought forward without following standard procedures.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because he believes the project qualifies for AML funds as it has been studied extensively and addresses damage from mining operations.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because he believes individual projects should be funded through general AML accounts rather than being specifically spelled out in a bill.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because she considers this a worthy project involving people and businesses that should be a top priority for abandoned mine land funding.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because she believes spending AML money on damage caused by mining operations is consistent with the purpose of these funds, especially for a county that has suffered long-term consequences.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because he believes it is not abusive to fund a project that a community desperately needs using AML funds.
H48
Why they voted this way
The speaker supports the amendment because it addresses concerns raised in recent discussions by ensuring funds are used only for reclamation and not for beautification or private land acquisition.
If a lawmaker is not listed, we couldn't find a published reason.
Wyoming roll calls
10 roll calls
Official activity
Changes
11 stored
Adopted 2nd reading by Connolly
Corrected, Adopted 2nd reading by Baker
Failed 3rd reading by Nicholas, B.
Corrected, Withdrawn 3rd reading by Blake
Corrected, Adopted 3rd reading by Baker
Adopted Standing Committee by HAC
Withdrawn 2nd reading by Hicks
Adopted 2nd reading by Ross
Adopted 3rd reading by Ross
Adopted Committee of the Whole by Von Flatern
Corrected, S Adopted, H Adopted Conference Committee