ACHE Act Freezes New Mountain Removal Mining Permits Until Health Safety is Proven

The Appalachian Communities Health Equity Act of 2025, or the ACHE Act, is hitting the pause button hard on a specific type of coal mining. This bill immediately freezes the issuance or renewal of federal permits for all new or expanded mountaintop removal coal mining operations in Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Virginia. This moratorium stays in place until the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) officially determines that this mining method poses absolutely no health risks to nearby residents. The bill is rooted in findings that link this mining practice—which involves extensive blasting and valley fills—to serious health concerns, including higher rates of birth defects and chronic diseases in surrounding communities.

The Immediate Freeze: Permits on Ice

Section 4 of the ACHE Act is the big one for the energy sector. It essentially tells several key federal agencies—the Army Corps of Engineers (for dredge and fill permits), the EPA (for water discharge permits), and the Office of Surface Mining (for mining approvals)—that they cannot issue or renew any permits necessary to start or expand a mountaintop removal operation. This isn't a temporary delay; it’s an indefinite freeze that only thaws if the HHS Secretary signs off that the mining is 100% safe. For mining companies currently operating or planning new projects, this means instant regulatory gridlock, potentially halting expansions and making routine permit renewals impossible until the health question is settled. This is a massive, immediate restriction on business operations tied directly to a scientific finding that could take years to complete.

The Health Study and the 'Zero Risk' Standard

The entire regulatory freeze hinges on a comprehensive health study mandated by Section 3, to be led by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS). This study will investigate the health effects of mountaintop removal mining on residents. Once the report is delivered, the HHS Secretary must publish a formal determination on whether the mining poses a risk. Here’s the catch: the moratorium only lifts if the Secretary finds the mining poses absolutely no health risks. Proving a negative—that something carries zero risk—is a scientifically challenging, if not impossible, standard. This high bar suggests the moratorium could last for a very long time, which is a huge win for residents concerned about pollution but a massive headache for the industry.

Mandatory Monitoring and Public Data Access

For existing mining operations, the bill introduces tough new accountability rules in Section 5. Operators must now continuously monitor water, air, noise, and soil pollution, and then identify exactly how local residents might be exposed to these pollutants. Crucially, they must submit these monitoring results monthly to the HHS Secretary, who then has to make the data public in a searchable database within seven days. Think of it as real-time, public pollution tracking. If an operator fails to conduct this monitoring or submit the monthly reports, they immediately lose the ability to renew any federal permits, effectively shutting down their operation. This provision offers unprecedented transparency for local communities, allowing them to see pollution levels almost immediately.

Who Pays for the Oversight?

Section 6 tackles the cost of this new federal oversight. The bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to charge a one-time fee to every entity that is currently performing or has already completed a mountaintop removal coal mining project since the bill's passage. This fee is designed to cover the total federal cost of the NIEHS health study and the new monitoring enforcement activities. Essentially, the government is making the industry pay for the investigation and the required public monitoring. While this ensures taxpayers aren't footing the bill for the study, it’s a targeted financial burden on companies—even those that may have finished their operations—to fund the very regulatory actions that are restricting their activities.