Laserfiche WebLink
• or did not quite understand about the last time this bill <br /> was considered." (123 Cong. Rec. 15704, 1977) <br />Senator Ford (KY), in offering an amendment providing <br />for variances from AOC requirements, noted: "... in some <br />cases, modification of the original contour has a desirable <br />end product that should not be denied by the inflexible <br />provision presently contained in this legislation." (123 <br />Cong.Rec. 15706, 1977). <br />Earlier consideration of H. R.2 (SidCP.A) included comments <br />on the House floor by Congressman Duncan (Tenn): "My first <br />concern is with the requirements for strip mined land reclama- <br />tion..... I do, though, feel it is unrealistic and counter- <br />productive, in many cases, to require that strip mined lands <br />• be returned to their approximate original contours...." <br />(123 Cong. Rec. 11403, 1977). <br />Difficulty in discerning congressional intent was <br />experienced also .by those who were assumedly closer to it, <br />the Agency charged with implementation of SMCRA, the Office <br />of Surface Mining. In responding to comments made in their <br />proposed regulations, the following statements are found: <br />In view of the confusion generated by the pro- <br />posed regulations, the sections dealing with slope <br />measurements have been revised to remove the word <br />"average." .... Long, uniform, uninterrupted slopes <br />are not generally desireable since they tend to erode <br />more readily than do ro11in9 non-uniform slopes. <br />Efforts to ascertain congressional intent were also <br />made by the "Committee on Highwalls and Approximate Original <br /> <br />-6 - <br />