Time Frames for Approving Plans Ranged from About 1 Month to Over 11 Years and Averaged 2 Years, with 19 Percent of Approved Mines Not Yet Operational Due to Various Factors

The average length of time it took BLM and the Forest Service to  complete the first three steps of the mine plan review process and  approve 68 mine plans from fiscal years 2010 through 2014 was  approximately 2 years. Of the 68 mine plans that BLM and the Forest Service approved over this  period, 13 (19 percent) have not begun operations as of November 2015,  according to the agencies’ data. BLM and Forest Service Officials in Our Review Experienced 13 Key Challenges That Affected the Time Needed to Review Mine Plans and Have Taken Some Actions but Could Do More

BLM and Forest Service officials we interviewed in the 23 offices (19 BLM  and 4 Forest Service) we selected for our review said they have  experienced one or more of the 13 key challenges we identified that  affected the length of time to review the hardrock mine plans approved  from fiscal years 2010 through 2014 (see table 4). BLM and Forest  Service officials said they have taken actions to address the two most  frequently cited key challenges—the low quality of information operators  provided in their mine plans and the agencies’ limited allocation of  resources for their hardrock mining programs—but the agencies could do  more. To address the  limited allocation of resources, BLM and Forest Service officials are  leveraging existing resources, but the agencies could more fully use their  authorities to collect fees and possibly expedite the time it takes to review  hardrock mine plans. However, some BLM and Forest Service officials in other states do not  always meet with operators prior to their mine plan submittals to help  mine operators to improve the quality of information in their mine plans. As  a result, use of these meetings varies among BLM offices. Federal standards for internal control state that management should  ensure there are adequate means of communicating with, and obtaining  information from, external stakeholders that may have a significant impact  on the agency achieving its goals. Without taking further actions  to improve the quality of mine plan submissions by, for example,  developing specific guidance to encourage offices to hold pre-mine plan  submittal meetings whenever possible, BLM and the Forest Service may  be missing opportunities to help expedite the mine plan review process. For  example, BLM has worked to leverage existing resources by collaborating  with other agencies, such as by requesting assistance from U.S. Further, the IOAA’s implementing guidance—Office of Management  and Budget Circular A-25—notes that legislative proposals to permit fees  to be retained by the agency may be appropriate. Without establishing fees for reviewing  mine plans and the authority to retain these fees, the Forest Service may  be missing opportunities to leverage additional revenue to bolster its  resources to review hardrock mine plans. In addition, we recommend that the Secretary of the Interior direct the  Director of BLM to  take actions to improve the quality of mine plan submissions by, for  example, developing guidance for mine operators and agency field  officials that instructs them to hold pre-plan submittal meetings  whenever possible;  issue a rule that assesses fees associated with reviewing hardrock  mine plans that involve conducting environmental assessments; and  create new codes in its LR2000 database distinguishing between  different types of mine plans to help track the length of time to  complete the mine plan review process. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

This report examines (1) the number of mine plans the Bureau of Land  Management (BLM) and the Forest Service approved from fiscal years  2010 through 2014, the time it took these agencies to complete the mine  plan review process, and the extent to which these agencies track this  process; and (2) the challenges, if any, that have affected the length of  time for BLM and the Forest Service to complete the review process, and  the actions, if any, these agencies have taken to address these  challenges. We selected locations in each of the 12 western  states where hardrock mining occurs.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Mining Law of 1872 encouraged development of the West by opening up federal land to exploration, extraction, and development of hardrock minerals such as gold, silver, and copper. Because mining creates the potential for serious health, safety, and environmental hazards, BLM and the Forest Service have processes for reviewing mine plans submitted by operators to help prevent and mitigate these hazards. A mine plan details the proposed mine's operations, such as the methods for mining and reclaiming the site once operations have concluded.
GAO was asked to assess the mine plan review process. This report examines (1) the number of mine plans BLM and the Forest Service approved from fiscal years 2010 through 2014, among other things, and (2) challenges that have affected the length of time for BLM and the Forest Service to complete the review process, as well as actions these agencies have taken to address these challenges. GAO obtained and analyzed mine plan review data from fiscal years 2010 through 2014, and interviewed agency officials in 23 offices, representing the 12 western states where hardrock mining occurs. The results are not generalizable to all locations conducting mine plan reviews.

What GAO Found

From fiscal years 2010 through 2014, the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Department of Agriculture's Forest Service approved 68 mine plans of operation. The length of time it took the agencies to approve the mine plans ranged from about 1 month to over 11 years, and averaged approximately 2 years. Of the 68 approved mine plans, 13 had not begun operations as of November 2015. Agency officials attribute this to difficulties mine operators may face, such as obtaining other required federal and state permits.
BLM and Forest Service officials GAO interviewed said they experienced 13 key challenges that affected the length of time to review hardrock mine plans. The two most frequently cited were (1) the low quality of information operators provided in their mine plans and (2) the agencies' limited allocation of resources for their hardrock mining programs. To address the low quality of information in mine plans, some BLM and Forest Service officials held pre-mine plan submittal meetings with operators. However, officials do not always do so because BLM does not have specific guidance on how to implement these meetings, and Forest Service does not have any guidance instructing them to do so. Federal standards for internal control state that management should ensure there are adequate means of communicating with, and obtaining information from, external stakeholders that may have a significant impact on the agency achieving its goals. Without taking further actions to improve the quality of mine plan submissions, BLM and the Forest Service may be missing opportunities to help expedite the review process. To address the limited allocation of resources, BLM and Forest Service officials are leveraging existing resources by collaborating with other agencies, among other actions, but neither agency has fully used its authority to collect fees for conducting mine plan reviews as authorized by law. In addition, Forest Service is not authorized to retain these fees, as BLM is, but has not proposed the legislative changes that would allow it to retain fees, as is suggested by Office of Management and Budget guidance. BLM officials said the agency has not prioritized cost recovery for certain types of environmental analyses, and Forest Service officials were unaware of these authorities. By not using these authorities, BLM and Forest Service may be missing opportunities to expedite the mine plan review process.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends, among other things, that the agencies take actions to improve the quality of mine plan submissions and seek additional recovery of the costs associated with conducting mine plan reviews. The agencies generally concurred with these recommendations.