36104 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 931

[SPATS NO NM–040–FOR]

New Mexico Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and

extension of public comment period and

opportunity for public hearing on

proposed amendment.

SUMMARY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is

announcing receipt of revisions

pertaining to a previously proposed

amendment to the New Mexico

regulatory program (hereinafter, the

‘‘New Mexico program’’) under the

Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The

revisions to New Mexico’s proposed

rules pertain to the Coal Mine

Reclamation Program Vegetation

Standards (including success standards,

sampling techniques, and normal

husbandry practices), time frames

within the liability period for

demonstrating success of revegetation,

and annual report requirements. The

amendment is intended to revise the

New Mexico program to be consistent

with the corresponding Federal

regulations.

DATE: Written comments must be

received by 4:00 p.m., m.d.t., July 7,

2000. If requested, we will hold a public

hearing on the amendment on July 3,

2000. We will accept requests to speak

until 4:00 p.m., m.d.t., on June 22, 2000.

ADDRESSES: You should mail or hand

deliver written comments to Willis L.

Gainer at the address listed below.

You may review copies of the New

Mexico program, the amendment, a

listing of any scheduled public hearings,

and all written comments received in

response to this document at the

addresses listed below during normal

business hours, Monday through Friday,

excluding holidays. You may receive

one free copy of the amendment by

contacting OSM’s Albuquerque Field

Office.

Willis L. Gainer, Director,

Albuquerque Field Office, Office of

Surface Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement, 505 Marquette Avenue,

NW., Suite 1200, Albuquerque, New

Mexico 87102.

Mining and Minerals Division, New

Mexico Energy & Minerals Department,

2040 South Pacheco Street, Santa Fe,

New Mexico 87505, Telephone: (505)

827–5970.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Willis L. Gainer, Telephone: (505) 248–

5096, Internet address:

WGAINER@OSMRE.GOV.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the New Mexico

Program

On December 31, 1980, the Secretary

of the Interior conditionally approved

the New Mexico program. General

background information on the New

Mexico program, including the

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of

comments, and the conditions of

approval of the New Mexico program

can be found in the December 31, 1980,

Federal Register (45 FR 86459).

Subsequent actions concerning New

Mexico’s program and program

amendments can be found at 30 CFR

931.11, 931.15, 931.16, and 931.30.

II. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated December 1, 1999

(administrative record No. NM–816),

New Mexico submitted a proposed

amendment to its program pursuant to

SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). New

Mexico submitted the proposed

amendment in response to the required

program amendments at 30 CFR

931.16(o), (w), (x), (y) and (aa), and at

its own initiative.

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the December

22, 1999 Federal Register (64 FR

71700), provided an opportunity for a

public hearing or meeting on its

substantive adequacy, and invited

public comment on its adequacy

(administrative record No. NM–819).

Because no one requested a public

hearing or meeting, none were held. The

public comment periods ended on

January 21, 2000.

During our review of the December 1,

1999, amendment, OSM identified

concerns and notified New Mexico of

the concerns by letter dated February

17, 2000 (administration record no.

NM–825). New Mexico responded in

two letters dated April 26, 2000, by

submitting (1) revisions to the December

1, 1999, amendment (administrative

record No. NM–830) and (2) additional

rule revisions never before submitted

(administrative record No. NM–828).

New Mexico proposes further

revisions to (1) sections I.D., II.B.1, and

IV of New Mexico’s proposed Coal Mine

Reclamation Program Vegetation

Standards; (2) requirements for

demonstrating success of ground cover

and productivity of revegetation at 19

NMAC 8.2 2065.B(1); and (3) the

definitions of ‘‘augmented seeding’’ and

‘‘interseeding’’ at 19 NMAC 8.2

107.A(20) and 107.I(8).

New Mexico proposes new revisions

to (1) the requirements for annual

reports at 19 NMAC 8.2 507.A(1); and

(2) the requirements for demonstrating

(a) that the land has the capability of

supporting livestock grazing at 19

NMAC 8.2 2064; (b) the success of

ground cover and productivity at 19

NMAC 8.2 1065.B(2) and (3); and (c) the

success of crop production at 19 NMAC

2065.B(5)(iii).

Specifically, New Mexico proposes to

revise:

(1) Section I.D, Establishment and

Monitoring of Revegetation Success

Standards, of New Mexico’s proposed

Coal Mine Reclamation Program

Vegetation Standards to clarify that the

success of revegetation on reclaimed

lands will be measured against the

general revegetation requirements at 19

NMAC 8.2 2060 in addition to standards

derived from an unmined reference area

or technical standards;

(2) Section II.B.1, Sampling

Techniques, of New Mexico’s proposed

Coal Mine Reclamation Program

Vegetation Standards to require an

operator to implement techniques to

improve the reliability of the ocular

estimation method;

(3) Section IV, Normal Husbandry

Practices, of New Mexico’s proposed

Coal Mine Reclamation Program

Vegetation Standards to (a) specify the

land uses, time frames, and size

limitations, if any, applicable to each

approved normal husbandry practice,

and (b) to clarify that in order for repair

of erosional features to be considered a

normal husbandry practice, the

erosional features must be characteristic

of unmined lands in the regions and the

damage must not be caused by a lack of

planning, design, or implementation of

the mining and reclamation plan.

(4) 19 NMAC 8.2 2065.B(1) to provide

that ground cover and productivity may

be equal to the technical standards

developed in accordance with New

Mexico’s proposed Coal Mine

Reclamation Program Vegetation

Standards, as an alternative to an

approved reference area;

(5)(a) 19 NMAC 8.2 107.A(20), the

definition of ‘‘augmented seeding’’ to

mean ‘‘seeding in excess of the normal

husbandry practices approved in the

Director’s Coal Mine Reclamation

Program Vegetation Standards, or

reseeding with fertilization or irrigation,

or reseeding in response to unsuccessful

revegetation in terms of adequate

germination or establishment or

permanence,’’ and (b) 107.I(8), by

adding the definition ‘‘interseeding’’ to

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36105

mean ‘‘a secondary seeding practice into

established vegetation cover in order to

take advantage of climatic conditions

that favor species requiring special

conditions for germination and

establishment, or to improve or alter the

composition between forage species and

shrubs, or between warm and cool

season grasses;’’

(6) 19 NMAC 8.2 507.A(1), to require

in an annual report, a current

topographic or orthophotographic map

with five foot contour intervals of the

same scale as the mining and

reclamation sequence maps found in the

approved permit with five foot contour

intervals, on a single sheet, or series of

sheets, each sheet of the map being no

larger than four feet by four feet, with

the scale and all lines and symbols

clearly described in the legend;

(7) 19 NMAC 8.2 2064 to require that

an operator demonstrate, for at least two

of the last four years rather than the last

two years, that the reclaimed land has

the capability of supporting livestock

grazing at rates approximately equal to

that for similar non-mined lands when

the approved postmining land use is

range or pasture land;

(8) 19 NMAC 8.2 2065.B(2),

concerning the liability period in areas

of more than 26.0 inches average annual

precipitation, to require that ground

cover and productivity shall equal or

exceed the approved standard for two of

the last four years, rather than the last

two years, of the responsibility period;

(9) 19 NMAC 8.2 2065.B(3),

concerning the liability periods in areas

of less than or equal to 26.0 inches

average annual precipitation, to require

that ground cover and productivity shall

equal the approved standard for at least

two of the last four years, starting no

sooner than year eight, rather than the

last two years, of the responsibility

period; and

(10) 19 NMAC 8.2 2065.B(5)(iii),

concerning the demonstration of success

of areas to be used for cropland, to

require that crop production from the

mined area shall be equal to or greater

than that of the approved standard for

two of the last four growing seasons,

rather than the last two consecutive

growing seasons, of the five or ten year

liability period, starting no sooner than

year eight of the ten year liability

period.

III. Public Comment Procedures

Written Comments

Send your written comments to OSM

at the address given above. Your written

comments should be specific, pertain

only to the issues proposed in this

rulemaking, and include explanations in

support of your recommendations. In

the final rulemaking, we will not

necessarily consider or include in the

administrative record any comments

received after the time indicated under

DATES or at locations other than the

Albuquerque Field Office.

Electronic Comments

Please submit Internet comments as

an ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Please also include ‘‘Attn: SPATS No.

NM–040–FOR’’ and your name and

return address in your Internet message.

If you do not receive a confirmation that

we have received your Internet message,

contact the Albuquerque Field Office at

(505) 248–5096.

Availability of Comments

We will make comments, including

names and addresses of respondents,

available for public review during

normal business hours. We will not

consider anonymous comments. If

individual respondents request

confidentiality, we will honor their

request to the extent allowable by law.

Individual respondents who wish to

withhold their name or address from

public review, except for the city or

town, must state this prominently at the

beginning of their comments. We will

make all submissions from

organizations or businesses, and from

individuals identifying themselves as

representatives or officials of

organizations or businesses, available

for public review in their entirety.

Public Hearing

If you wish to speak at the public

hearing, contact the person listed under

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by

4:00 p.m., m.d.t. on June 22, 2000. If you

are disabled and need special

accommodations to attend a public

hearing, contact the person listed under

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We

will arrange the location and time of the

hearing with those persons requesting

the hearing. If no one requests an

opportunity to speak, we will not hold

the hearing.

To assist the transcriber and ensure an

accurate record, we request, if possible,

that each person who speaks at a public

hearing provide us with a written copy

of his or her comments. The public

hearing will continue on the specified

date until everyone scheduled to speak

has been heard. If you are in the

audience and have not been scheduled

to speak and wish to do so, you will be

allowed to speak after those who have

been scheduled. We will end the

hearing after everyone scheduled to

speak and others present in the

audience who wish to speak, have been

heard.

Public Meeting

If only one person requests an

opportunity to speak, we may hold a

public meeting rather than a public

hearing. If you wish to meet with us to

discuss the amendment, please request

a meeting by contacting the person

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. All such meetings are open to

the public and, if possible, we will post

notices of meetings at the locations

listed under ADDRESSES. We will make

a written summary of each meeting a

part of the administrative record.

IV. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12630—Takings

This rule does not have takings

implications. This determination is

based on the analysis performed for the

counterpart Federal regulations.

Executive Order 12866—Regulatory

Planning and Review

This rule is exempted from review by

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866.

Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice

Reform

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and

has determined that, to the extent

allowable by law, this rule meets the

applicable standards of subsections (a)

and (b) of that section. However, these

standards are not applicable to the

actual language of State regulatory

programs and program amendments

since each such program is drafted and

promulgated by a specific State, not by

OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of

SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and

the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),

decisions on proposed State regulatory

programs and program amendments

submitted by the States must be based

solely on a determination of whether the

submittal is consistent with SMCRA and

its implementing Federal regulations

and whether the other requirements of

30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have

been met.

Executive Order 13132—Federalism

This rule does not have Federalism

implication. SMCRA delineates the

roles of the Federal and State

governments with regard to the

regulation of surface coal mining and

reclamation operations. One of the

purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a

nationwide program to protect society

and the environment from the adverse

36106 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

effects of surface coal mining

operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of

SMCRA requires that State laws

regulating surface coal mining and

reclamation operations be ‘‘in

accordance with’’ the requirements of

SMCRA. Section 503(a)(7) requires that

State programs contain rules and

regulations ‘‘consistent with’’

regulations issued by the Secretary

pursuant to SMCRA.

National Environmental Policy Act

Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C.

1292(d)) provides that a decision on a

proposed State regulatory program

provision does not constitute a major

Federal action within the meaning of

section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C)). A determination has been

made that such decisions are

categorically excluded from the NEPA

process (516 DM 8.4.A).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by OMB under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department of the Interior has

determined that this rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal

that is the subject of this rule is based

upon counterpart Federal regulations for

which an economic analysis was

prepared and certification made that

such regulations would not have a

significant economic effect upon a

substantial number of small entities.

Accordingly, this rule will ensure that

existing requirements previously

promulgated by OSM will be

implemented by the State. In making the

determination as to whether this rule

would have a significant economic

impact, the Department relied upon the

data and assumptions for the

counterpart Federal regulations.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act

This rule is not a major rule under 5

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.

This rule: (a) Does not have an annual

effect on the economy of $100 million;

(b) Will not cause a major increase in

costs or prices for consumers,

individual industries, geographic

regions, or Federal, State or local

governmental agencies; and (c) Does not

have significant adverse effects on

competition, employment, investment,

productivity, innovation, or the ability

of U.S. based enterprises to compete

with foreign-based enterprises. This

determination is based upon the fact

that the State submittal which is the

subject of this rule is based upon

counterpart Federal regulations for

which an analysis was prepared and a

determination made that the Federal

regulation was not considered a major

rule.

Unfunded Mandates

This rule will not impose a cost of

$100 million or more in any given year

on any governmental entity or the

private sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 931

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: May 24, 2000.

Brent T. Wahlquist,

Regional Director, Western Regional

Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 00–14358 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 00–7145]

[RIN No. 2127–AH61]

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standards; Head Impact Protection

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Extension of comment period.

SUMMARY: This document grants a

request to extend the comment period

on an agency proposal to amend the

upper interior impact requirements of

its standard on occupant protection in

interior impact by modifying the

minimum distance between certain

target points on vertical surfaces inside

a vehicle and by adding target points for

pillar-like structures that do not meet

the definition of ‘‘pillar,’’ i.e., certain

door frames and vertical seat belt

mounting structures.

DATES: Extended comment closing date:

Comments on the April 5, 2000

proposal, 65 FR 17842, Docket No. 00–

7145, must be received by the agency on

or before close of business on July 5,

2000.

ADDRESSES: You should mention the

docket number of this document in your

comments and submit your comments

in writing to: Docket Management,

Room PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20590. Alternatively,

you may submit your comments

electronically by e-mail at http://

dms.dot.gov.

You may call the Docket at 202–366–

9324, and visit it from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00

p.m., Monday through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

non-legal issues, you may call Dr.

William Fan, Office of Crashworthiness

Standards, at (202) 366–4922, facsimile

(202) 366–4329, electronic mail

‘‘bfan@nhtsa.dot.gov’’. For legal issues,

you may call Otto Matheke, Office of the

Chief Counsel, at 202–366–5263.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April

5, 2000, NHTSA published a notice of

proposed rulemaking proposing to

amend the upper interior impact

requirements of Standard No. 201,

Occupant Protection in Interior Impact,

in several respects. One proposal

addressed the minimum distance

between certain target points on vertical

surfaces inside a vehicle. Compliance

with the upper interior impact

requirements is determined, in part, by

measuring the forces experienced by a

test device known as the Free Motion

Headform (FMH) when it impacts

certain target points in the vehicle

interior. To ensure that the damage

caused by the testing of one target point

does not overlap the testing of nearby

target points, the standard specifies that

tested targets be at least a certain

distance apart; currently 150 mm (6

inches). We proposed expanding this

minimum distance to 200 mm (8 inches)

for tests performed on certain vertical

surfaces in order to alleviate concerns

that the current distance is not large

enough to prevent the FMH impact area

for one target point from overlapping

the FMH impact areas for nearby target

points in the same vehicle. We also

proposed adding target points for pillarlike structures that do not meet the

definition of ‘‘pillar,’’ i.e., certain door

frames and vertical seat belt mounting

structures and are therefore not

currently subject to Standard No. 201.

We tentatively concluded that these

structures are the equivalent of ‘‘pillars’’

now covered by the Standard.

The NPRM specified a comment

closing date of June 5, 2000 (60 days

after date of publication). However, on

May 16, 2000, we received a request for

an extension of the comment closing

date from Advocates for Highway and

Auto Safety (Advocates). Advocates

stated that it wished to provide

comments on our proposal, but was

unable to do so in a timely fashion due