36098 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

how these three holdings affect our

proposed rule. These three holdings are

described below.

First, the court held that ‘‘[f]or

violations of an operation that the

applicant ‘has controlled’ but no longer

does, * * * the Congress authorized

permit-blocking only if there is ‘a

demonstrated pattern of willful

violations’ ’’ under section 510(c) of

SMCRA. Id. at 5. In other words, if an

applicant severs its ownership or

control relationship to an operation

with a current violation, OSM, in

general, may not consider that violation

in making a permit eligibility decision

under section 510(c) of the Act. Stated

differently, in addition to the violation

being current and ongoing, the applicant

must also own or control the operation

with a violation at the time of

application; if the ownership or control

relationship has been terminated, OSM

may not deny a permit (absent a pattern

of willful violations), even if the

violation remains current and ongoing.

NMA v. DOI II, 177 F.3d at 5. OSM may

consider such past ownership or control

of operations with violations only in

determining whether there has been a

‘‘demonstrated pattern of willful

violations’’ warranting permanent

permit ineligibility under section510(c).

This holding affects 773.15(b)(3) and

773.16(a) of our proposed rule;

therefore, we invite your comments on

the effect of the court’s ruling on these

provisions.

Second, the court found that the IFR’s

provision requiring permit denials

based on indirect ownership or control

of operations with violations is

impermissibly retroactive because our

1988 ownership and control rule

imposed a ‘ ‘‘new disability,’ permit

ineligibility, based on ‘transactions or

considerations already past. . . .’ ’’ Id.

at 8. As such, the court held that the IFR

is retroactive ‘‘insofar as it block [sic]

permits based on transactions

(violations and control) antedating

November 2, 1988, the [1988]

Ownership and Control Rule’s effective

date.’’ Id.

However, the court explained that the

IFR is not retroactive to the extent it

allows permit denials when an

applicant acquires control of an

operation with an ongoing, pre-rule

violation on or after the effective date of

the 1988 ownership and control rule. Id.

at n.12. This is so because one of the

relevant transactions—assumption of

control—will have occurred on or after

November 2, 1988; as such, as of

November 2, 1988, the applicant would

be on notice that this type of

transaction, which post-dates the

effective date of the 1988 rule, could

affect his or her eligibility to receive a

permit. This holding affects sections

773.15(b)(3) and 773.16(a) of our

proposed rule; therefore, we invite your

comments on the effect of the court’s

ruling on these provisions. Finally, with regard to the IFR’s

suspension and rescission provisions

relative to improvidently issued

permits, the court agreed with OSM that

section 201(c) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C.

1211(c), expressly authorizes OSM to

suspend or rescind improvidently

issued permits. In addition to that

express authority, the court also found

that OSM retained ‘‘implied’’ authority

to suspend or rescind improvidently

issued permits ‘‘because of its express

authority to deny permits in the first

instance.’’ Id. at 9. However, the court

decided that OSM may only order

cessation of State-permitted operations

pursuant to the procedures established

under section 521 of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C.

1271. Specifically, OSM may order

immediate cessation of State-permitted

operations if those operations pose an

‘‘imminent danger to the health or safety

of the public, or is causing, or can

reasonably be expected to cause

significant, imminent environmental

harm . . .’’ SMCRA § 521(a)(2), 30

U.S.C. 1271(a)(2). Absent these

circumstances, and after OSM complies

with the ten-day notice procedure

contained in 30 CFR 843.21(c), OSM

may order cessation of a State-permitted

operation only if it: (1) Provides a notice

of violation to the permittee or his

agent; (2) establishes an abatement

period; (3) provides opportunity for a

public hearing and (4) makes a written

finding that abatement of the violation

has not occurred within the abatement

period. Id. at 9–10; SMCRA § 521(a)(3),

30 U.S.C. 1271(a)(3). This holding

affects section 843.21(d) of our proposed

rule; therefore, we invite your

comments on the effect of the court’s

ruling on these provisions. The court’s holdings in the rest of the

NMA v. DOI II litigation do not affect

our proposed rule because either; (1)

OSM prevailed on the particular issued;

or (2) the issue has become moot in that

our proposal does not contain a similar

provision. The court decision is

available from two commercial legal

research services (Lexis and Westlaw),

as well as from the United States Court

of Appeals for the District of Columbia

Circuit’s website (Internet address:

http://www.cadc.uscourt.gov). For your

convenience, we are posting a copy of

the court’s decision on our website at:

http//www.osmre.gov. We will also be

happy to mail or fax you a hard copy of

the decision at your request; please

address requests to the person listed

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.

Dated: June 1, 2000.

Kathrine L. Henry,

Acting Director, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 00–14355 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 906

[SPATS No. CO–032–FOR]

Colorado Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment

period and opportunity for public

hearing on proposed amendment.

SUMMARY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is

announcing receipt of a proposed

amendment to the Colorado regulatory

program (hereinafter, the ‘‘Colorado

program’’) under the Surface Mining

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977

(SMCRA). Colorado proposes revisions

to rules concerning definitions; permit

application requirements; comment

period for revisions; requirements for

permit approval or denial; and

performance standards for

sedimentation ponds, discharge

structures, impoundments, stream

buffer zones, coal exploration, and coal

processing plants and support facilities

not located at or near the mine site or

not within the permit area for the mine.

Colorado intends to revise its program

to be consistent with the corresponding

Federal regulations, clarify ambiguities,

and improve operational efficiency.

DATES: We will accept written

comments on this amendment until 4

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 p.m.,

m.d.t., on June 22, 2000.

ADDRESSES: You should mail or hand

deliver written comments and requests

to speak at the hearing to James F.

Fulton at the address listed below.

You may review copies of the

Colorado program, this 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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36099

one free copy of the amendment by

contacting OSM’s Denver Field

Division.

James F. Fulton, Chief, Denver Field

Division, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, 1999

Broadway, Suite 3320, Denver, CO

80202.

Michael B. Long, Director, Division of

Minerals and Geology, Department of

Natural Resources, 1313 Sherman St.,

Room 215, Denver, CO 80203,

Telephone: (303) 866–8106.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James F. Fulton, Telephone: (303) 844–

1400, extension 1424. Internet:

JFULTON@OSMRE.GOV.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Colorado Program.

II. Description of the Proposed Amendment.

III. Public Comment Procedures.

IV. Procedural Determinations.

I. Background on the Colorado

Program.

On December 15, 1980, the Secretary

of the Interior conditionally approved

the Colorado program. You can find

background information on the

Colorado program, including the

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of

comments, and the conditions of

approval of the Colorado program in the

December 15, 1980, Federal Register (45

FR 82173). You can also find later

actions concerning Colorado’s program

and program amendments at 30 CFR

906.11, 906.15, 906.16, and 906.30.

II. Description of the Proposed

Amendment

By letter dated May 12, 2000,

Colorado sent us a proposed

amendment to its program

(administrative record No. CO–691)

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

Colorado sent the amendment in

response to May 7, 1986, and June 19,

1997, letters (administrative record Nos.

CO–282 and CO–686) that we sent to

Colorado in accordance with 30 CFR

732.17(c); required program amendment

codified at 30 CFR 906.16(d) and (e);

and to include changes made at its own

initiative. The full text of the program

amendment is available for you to read

at the locations listed above under

ADDRESSES.

Colorado proposes to:

(1) Add, at Rule 1.04(31a), a definition

of ‘‘cumulative impact area’’ that means

the area which includes, at a minimum,

the entire projected lives through bond

release of: the proposed operation; all

existing operation; any operation for

which a permit application has been

submitted; all other operations required

to meet diligent development

requirements for leased federal coal, for

which there is actual mine development

information available;

(2) Revise, at Rule 1.04(71), the

definition of land use, to clarify that all

of the land uses described may include

land used for support facilities which

are adjacent to, or are in integral part of

the land use;

(3) Delete, at Rule 1.04(115a), the

definition of ‘‘sediment treatment

facilities and replace it with, at Rule

1.04(81a), a definition of ‘other

treatment facilities’ that means any

chemical treatments, such as

flocculation or neutralization, or

mechanical structures, such as, but not

limited to, clarifiers or precipitators,

that have a point source discharge and

are utilized: (i) to prevent additional

contributions of dissolved or suspended

solids to streamflow or runoff outside

the permit area; or (ii) to comply with

all applicable State and Federal waterqualify laws and regulations;’’

(4) Add, at Rule 1.04(86a), a definition

of ‘‘permit impoundment’’ that means a

impoundment which is approved, and if

required, by other State and Federal

agencies for retention as part of the postmining land use;

(5) Add, at Rule 1.04(93a), a definition

of ‘‘point of compliance’’ that means

any geographic location at which

compliance with applicable ground

water quality standards established by

the Water Quality Control Commission

must be attained and where this

compliance will be demonstrated by

compliance monitoring of the

groundwater or by other valid means;

(6) Revise, at Rule 1.04(115), the

definition of ‘‘sedimentation pond’’ to

clarify that it is an impoundment used

as a primary sediment control structure

to remove solids from water to meet

water-quality standards or effluent

limitations before the water leaves the

permit area;

(7) Add, at Rule 1.04(137a), a

definition of ‘‘temporary impoundment’’

that means an impoundment used

during surface coal mining and

reclamation operations, but not

approved to remain as part of the

approved post-mining land use;

(8) Revise Rule 2.05.2(1) through (6),

concerning water quality standards and

effluent limitations, to add references to

other treatment facilities;

(9) Revise Rule 2.05.3(4)(a),

concerning permit application

requirements, to require information

concerning other treatment facilities;

(10) Revise Rule 2.05.3(4)(a)(iii),

concerning permit application

requirements, to (1) refer to an

impoundment with a capacity of more

than 100 acre-feet rather than a reservoir

with a capacity of more than 1000 acrefeet, and (2) incorporate by reference the

applicable requirements of the State

Engineer codified at C.R.S. 37–87–105;

(11) Revise Rule 2.05.3(4)(a)(iv),

concerning permit application

requirements, to incorporate by

reference (for sedimentation ponds or

impoundments that meet or exceed the

criteria of the Mine Safety and Health

Administration (MSHA)), the MSHA

requirements codified at 30 CFR

77.216(a), 77–216–1 and 77.216–2;

(12) Add, at Rules 2.05.3(4)(a)(v), (vi)

and (vii), concerning permit application

requirements, to require (1) submission

of any plans that must be submitted to

and approved by with the State

Engineer or MSHA, (2) that all

impoundments meeting the Class B or

Class C criteria for dams in the Soil

Conservation Service Technical Release

No. 60 (TR60) comply with the

requirements for impoundments that

meet or exceed the size or other criteria

of 30 CFR 77.216(a) (and to incorporate

by reference TR60), and (3) require a

stability analysis for each impoundment

that either meets the Class B or Class C

criteria for dams in TR60 or meets the

size or other criteria of 30 CFR

77.216(a);

(13) Make editorial revisions at Rule

2.05.3(4)(b), concerning design

requirements for sedimentation ponds;

(14) Revise Rule 2.05.3(8)(a)(iii),

concerning permit application

requirements for plans for coal mine

waste and non-coal processing waste, to

refer to impoundments with a capacity

of 100 acre-feet rather than reservoirs

with a capacity of more than 1000 acrefeet;

(15) Add Rules 2.05.3(8)(a)(v) and (vi),

concerning plans for coal mine waste

and non-coal processing waste, to

require (1) that all impoundments

meeting the Class B or Class C criteria

for dams in the Soil Conservation

Service TR60 comply with the

requirements for impoundments that

meet or exceed the size or other criteria

of 30 CFR 77.216(a), and (2) require a

stability analysis for each impoundment

that either meets the Class B or Class C

criteria for dams in TR60 or meets the

size or other criteria of 30 CFR

77.216(a);

(16) Revise Rule 2.05.6(3)(b)(iv) and

(iv)(A), concerning the plan for surface

and ground water monitoring, to require

(1) identification of points of

compliance and (2) monitoring of

manganese;

(17) Make editorial revisions at Rule

2.06.8(5)(b)(ii)(B), concerning

underground mining activities;

(18) Revise Rule 2.07.3(3)(b) to refer to

the National Resource Conservation

36100 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Service rather than the Soil

Conservation Service;

(19) Revise Rule 2.07.3(3)(c) to clarify

that written comments regarding

technical revisions may be submitted

within 10 days of the initial newspaper

publication;

(20) Revise Rule 2.07.6(2)(c),

concerning the assessment (for permit

approval or denial) of probable

cumulative impacts of all anticipated

mining on the hydrologic balance, to

add references to cumulative impact

area and material damages;

(21) Revise Rule 4.05.6, concerning

sedimentation ponds, to (1) apply the

requirements to other treatment

facilities and (2) simplify by

reorganizing the section and removing

certain requirements that are applicable

to impoundments in general and are not

specific to sedimentation ponds or other

treatment facilities (these requirements

are set forth at Rule 4.05.9 which is

applicable to impoundments in general);

(22) Revise Rule 5.05.7, concerning

discharge structures, to add a reference

to other treatment facilities;

(23) Revise Rule 4.05.9, concerning

impoundments, to (1) clarify and

simplify by reorganizing and removing

redundant requirements and (2) add, at

Rules 4.05.9(2)(d), (e)(i), and (ii), (6),

(8)(a), (10), and (21) requirements,

concerning spillways, embankments,

freeboard, and inspections, for

impoundments meeting the Class B or

Class C criteria for dams in the Soil

Conservation Service TR60;

(24) Revise Rule 4.05.9, concerning

impoundments, to add a new Rule

4.05.9(18) that (1) waives the

requirement for quarterly inspections by

a registered engineer, but requires

annual inspections by a qualified

person, for impoundments which are (a)

not the primary sediment control for

area, (b) located in reclaimed terrain to

enhance the postmining land use, and

(c) either completely incised or do not

exceed 2 acre-feet in capacity and do

not have embankments larger than five

feet in height; and (2) requires that (a)

the above waiver be approved and (b)

such a waiver cannot be approved

unless a written safety demonstration is

submitted by a professional engineer

which shows that the impoundments

will not present any threat to human

health and safety, or significant threat to

the environment (all other

impoundments-related rules are

applicable and Colorado is required to

field verify the safety demonstration and

may rescind the waiver, for good cause

if conditions change over time);

(25) Revise Rule 4.05.13(1),

concerning ground water monitoring, to

add requirements concerning

monitoring points of compliance;

(26) Revise Rule 4.05.18, concerning

stream buffer zones, to (1) require that

no land within 100 feet, or greater

distance if required, of a perennial

stream, an intermittent stream, or an

ephemeral stream with a drainage area

greater than one square mile, by surface

and underground coal mining

operations, unless authorized, and (2)

require, upon a waiver of buffer zone,

Colorado to find that (a) surface coal

mining operations will not cause or

contribute to the violation of applicable

water quality standards, (b) during and

after mining, the water quantity and

quality, and other environmental

resources of the stream shall not be

adversely affected, and, (c) if there will

be a temporary or permanent stream

channel diversion, the diversion will

comply with Rules 4.05.3 and 4.05.4;

(27) Revise Rule 4.21.4(10),

concerning performance standards for

coal exploration, to add the

requirements that coal exploration (1)

include sediment control measures such

as those listed in 4.05.5 or

sedimentation ponds which comply

with 4.05.6 and 4.05.9, and (2) if the

operation has the potential to negatively

impact the quality of groundwater for

which quality standards have been

established by the Water Quality

Control Commission, be conducted so as

to ensure compliance with applicable

ground water standards at points of

compliance which shall be established

according to the provisions of

4.05.13(1); and

(28) Revise Rule 4.28.3, concerning

coal processing plants and support

facilities not located at or near the mine

site or not within the permit area for the

mine, by adding paragraph (16) that

requires establishment of points of

compliance, if the operation has the

potential to negatively impact the

quality of groundwater for which

quality standards have been established

by the Water Quality Control

Commission.

III. Public Comment Procedures

Under the provisions of 30 CFR

732.17(h), OSM requests your comments

on whether the amendment satisfies the

applicable program approval criteria of

30 CFR 732.15. If we approve the

amendment, it will become part of the

Colorado program.

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

Denver Field Division.

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.

CO–032–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 Denver Field Division at

(303) 844-1400, extension 1424.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36101

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 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

implications. 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

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 906

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: June 30, 2000.

Brent T. Wahlquist,

Regional Director, Western Regional

Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 00–14356 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 931

[SPATS NO NM–039–FOR]

New Mexico Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and

extension of public comment period 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 definitions of

‘‘material damage’’ and‘‘occupied

residential dwelling and associated

structures’’ and subsidence control

during underground mining. The

amendment is intended to revise the

New Mexico program to be consistent

with the corresponding Federal

regulations.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by 4:00 p.m., m.d.t. June 22,

2000.