Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Proposed Rules 21185 

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. 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13175, we have evaluated the potential 

effects of this rule on Federallyrecognized Indian tribes and have 

determined that the rule does not have 

substantial direct effects on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian Tribes. 

The basis for this determination is that 

our decision is on a State regulatory 

program and does not involve a Federal 

program involving Indian lands. 

Executive Order 13211—Regulations 

That Significantly Affect the Supply, 

Distribution, or Use of Energy 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 which requires 

agencies to prepare a Statement of 

Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) 

considered significant under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Because 

this rule is exempt from review under 

Executive Order 12866 and is not 

expected to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects 

is not required. 

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 935 

Intergovernmental relations, Surface 

mining, Underground mining. 

Dated: March 21, 2007. 

H. Vann Weaver, 

Acting Regional Director Appalachian 

Region. 

[FR Doc. E7–8171 Filed 4–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation 

and Enforcement 

30 CFR Part 943 

[Docket No. TX–057–FOR] 

Texas Regulatory Program and 

Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation 

Plan 

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment 

period and opportunity for public 

hearing on proposed amendment. 

SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface 

Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 

(OSM), are announcing receipt of a 

proposed amendment to the Texas 

regulatory program (Texas program) and 

the Texas abandoned mine land plan 

(Texas plan) under the Surface Mining 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
21186 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 

(SMCRA or the Act). Texas proposes 

revisions to its regulations regarding 

postmining land uses; terms and 

conditions of the bond; topsoil 

redistribution; standards for 

revegetation success; public hearings; 

review of notice of violation or cessation 

order; determination of amount of 

penalty; assessment of separate 

violation for each day; request for 

hearing; and liens. Texas also proposes 

revisions to its statute regarding liens 

and administrative penalties for 

violation of permit conditions. Texas 

intends to revise its program to be 

consistent with the corresponding 

Federal regulations and/or SMCRA, to 

clarify ambiguities, and to improve 

operational efficiency. 

This document gives the times and 

locations that the Texas program and 

Texas plan and the proposed 

amendment are available for your 

inspection, the period during which you 

may submit written comments on the 

amendment, and the procedures that we 

will follow for the public hearing, if one 

is requested. 

DATES: We will accept written 

comments on this amendment until 4 

p.m., c.t. May 30, 2007. If requested, we 

will hold a public hearing on the 

amendment on May 25, 2007. We will 

accept requests to speak at a hearing 

until 4 p.m., c.t. on May 15, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. TX–057–FOR, 

by any of the following methods: 

• E-mail: athomas@osmre.gov. 

Include ‘‘Docket No. TX–057–FOR’’ in 

the subject line of the message. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery: A. Dwight 

Thomas, Acting Director, Tulsa Field 

Office, Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement, 1645 

South 101st East Avenue, Suite 145, 

Tulsa, Oklahoma 74128 

• Fax: (918) 581–6419 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this rulemaking. For 

detailed instructions on submitting 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Public Comment Procedures’’ heading 

of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

review copies of the Texas program and 

Texas plan, this amendment, a listing of 

any scheduled public hearings, and all 

written comments received in response 

to this document, you must go to the 

address listed below during normal 

business hours, Monday through Friday, 

excluding holidays. You may receive 

one free copy of the amendment by 

contacting OSM’s Tulsa Field Office. 

A. Dwight Thomas, Acting Director, 

Tulsa Field Office, Office of Surface 

Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 

1645 South 101st East Avenue, Suite 

145, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74128, 

Telephone: (918) 581–6430, E-mail: 

athomas@osmre.gov. 

In addition, you may review a copy of 

the amendment during regular business 

hours at the following location: 

Surface Mining and Reclamation 

Division, Railroad Commission of 

Texas, 1701 North Congress Avenue, 

Austin, Texas 78711–2967, Telephone: 

(512) 463–6900. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. 

Dwight Thomas, Acting Director, Tulsa 

Field Office. Telephone: (918) 581–

6430. E-mail: athomas@osmre.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background on the Texas Program and 

Texas Plan 

II. Description of the Proposed Amendment 

III. Public Comment Procedures 

IV. Procedural Determinations 

I. Background on the Texas Program 

and Texas Plan 

Section 503(a) of the Act permits a 

State to assume primacy for the 

regulation of surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations on non-Federal 

and non-Indian lands within its borders 

by demonstrating that its program 

includes, among other things, ‘‘a State 

law which provides for the regulation of 

surface coal mining and reclamation 

operations in accordance with the 

requirements of this Act * * *; and 

rules and regulations consistent with 

regulations issued by the Secretary 

pursuant to this Act.’’ See 30 U.S.C. 

1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these 

criteria, the Secretary of the Interior 

(Secretary) conditionally approved the 

Texas program effective February 16, 

1980. You can find background 

information on the Texas program, 

including the Secretary’s findings, the 

disposition of comments, and the 

conditions of approval of the Texas 

program in the February 27, 1980, 

Federal Register (45 FR 12998). You can 

also find later actions concerning the 

Texas program and program 

amendments at 30 CFR 943.10, 943.15 

and 943.16. 

The Abandoned Mine Land 

Reclamation Program was established 

by Title IV of the Act (30 U.S.C. 1201 

et seq.) in response to concerns over 

extensive environmental damage caused 

by past coal mining activities. The 

program is funded by a reclamation fee 

collected on each ton of coal that is 

produced. The money collected is used 

to finance the reclamation of abandoned 

coal mines and for other authorized 

activities. Section 405 of the Act allows 

States and Indian Tribes to assume 

exclusive responsibility for reclamation 

activity within the State or on Indian 

lands if they develop and submit to the 

Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) for 

approval, a program (often referred to as 

a plan) for the reclamation of abandoned 

coal mines. On the basis of these 

criteria, the Secretary approved the 

Texas plan on June 23, 1980. You can 

find background information on the 

Texas plan, including the Secretary’s 

findings, the disposition of comments, 

and the approval of the plan in the June 

23, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR 

41937). You can find later actions 

concerning the Texas plan and 

amendments to the plan at 30 CFR 

943.25. 

II. Description of the Proposed 

Amendment 

By letter dated February 14, 2007 

(Administrative Record No. TX–662), 

and at its own initiative, Texas sent us 

an amendment to its program under 

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

is a summary of the changes proposed 

by Texas. The full text of the program 

amendment is available for you to read 

at the locations listed above under 

ADDRESSES. 

A. Revisions to Texas’ Regulations, Title 

16 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 

1. Section 12.147 Reclamation Plan: 

Postmining Land Uses 

Texas proposes to delete paragraph 

(a)(2) that requires permit applicants to 

submit a detailed management plan if 

the postmining land use is to be range 

or grazing. Texas also proposes to 

redesignate paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) 

as paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3). 

2. Section 12.309 Terms and 

Conditions of the Bond 

Texas proposes to add to paragraph 

(g)(2) a requirement that a letter of credit 

used as security in areas requiring 

continuous bond coverage must be 

forfeited and collected by the Railroad 

Commission of Texas if it is not 

replaced by other suitable bond or letter 

of credit at least 30 days before it 

expires. 

3. Section 12.337 Topsoil: 

Redistribution 

Texas proposes to revise subsections 

(a) and (b) to read as follows: 

(a) After final grading and before the 

replacement of topsoil, topsoil substitutes 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Proposed Rules 21187 

and other materials segregated in accordance 

with § 12.335 of this title (relating to Topsoil: 

Removal), regraded land shall be scarified or 

otherwise treated as required by the 

Commission to eliminate slippage surfaces 

and to promote root penetration. If the person 

who conducts the surface mining activities 

shows, through appropriate tests, and the 

Commission approves, that no harm will be 

caused to the topsoil and vegetation, 

scarification may be conducted after 

topsoiling. 

(b) Topsoil material, and topsoil substitutes 

and other supplements shall be redistributed 

in a manner that: 

(1) Achieves an approximate uniform, 

stable thickness consistent with the approved 

postmining land uses, contours, and surface 

water drainage system. Soil thickness may 

also be varied to the extent such variations 

help meet the specific revegetation goals 

identified in the permit; 

(2) Prevents excess compaction of the 

topsoil, topsoil substitutes and supplements; 

and 

(3) Protects the topsoil, topsoil substitutes 

and supplements from wind and water 

erosion before and after it is seeded and 

planted. 

4. Section 12.395 Revegetation: 

Standards for Success 

a. Texas proposes to revise paragraph 

(a)(1) to require standards for success 

and statistically valid sampling 

techniques for measuring success to be 

described in writing and made available 

to the public. 

b. Texas proposes to revise paragraph 

(b)(1) to read as follows: 

(1) For areas developed as grazingland or 

pastureland, the ground cover and 

production of living plants on the revegetated 

area shall be at least equal to that of a 

reference area or such other success 

standards approved by the Commission; 

c. Paragraph (b)(3) lists the kinds of 

areas whose success of vegetation is to 

be determined on the basis of tree and 

shrub stocking and vegetative ground 

cover. Texas proposes to revise this 

paragraph by adding ‘‘undeveloped 

land’’ as an area requiring this 

determination and by removing ‘‘shelter 

belts.’’

d. For areas to be developed for fish 

and wildlife habitat, recreation, 

undeveloped land, or forest products, 

Texas proposes to revise paragraph 

(b)(3)(A) to allow consultation with and 

approval by the State agencies 

responsible for the administration of 

forestry and wildlife programs to occur 

on either a program-wide or permitspecific basis. 

e. Texas proposes to revise paragraph 

(b)(3)(B) by adding instructions 

explaining how to meet the 

requirements for determining the 

success of stocking and the adequacy of 

the planting arrangement for trees and 

shrubs. 

f. Texas proposes to revise paragraph 

(c)(3) to read as follows: 

(3) In areas of 26.0 inches or less average 

annual precipitation, the period of 

responsibility shall continue for a period of 

not less than 10 full years. Vegetation 

parameters identified in § 12.395(b) of this 

title (relating to Revegetation: Standards for 

Success) for grazingland, pastureland, or 

cropland shall equal or exceed the approved 

success standard during the growing season 

of any two years after year six of the 

responsibility period. Areas approved for the 

other uses identified in § 12.395(b) of this 

title (relating to Revegetation: Standards for 

Success) shall equal or exceed the applicable 

success standard during the growing season 

of the last year of the responsibility period. 

g. Texas proposes to revise paragraph 

(c)(4) by clarifying that selective 

husbandry practices may be approved if 

the discontinuance of the practice ‘‘after 

the liability period expires’’ will not 

reduce the probability of permanent 

revegetation success. Texas also 

proposes to clarify that the unmined 

land, for which the selective husbandry 

practices are normal, must be land that 

has a land use similar to that of the 

approved postmining land use of the 

disturbed land. 

5. Section 12.681 Public Hearing 

a. Texas proposes to revise the title of 

this section to read ‘‘Informal Public 

Hearing.’’

b. Texas proposes to revise subsection 

(a) so that a notice of violation or 

cessation order which requires cessation 

of mining will expire within 30 days 

after it is served unless an informal 

public hearing has been held within that 

time. Texas also proposes to clarify that 

the expiration of the notice or order will 

not affect the Commission’s right to 

assess civil penalties with respect to the 

period during which the notice or order 

was in effect. In addition, Texas 

proposes that no hearing will be 

required where the condition, practice, 

or violation has been abated or the 

hearing has been waived. Furthermore, 

Texas proposes to clarify, for the 

purpose of this section, what is 

included in ‘‘mining.’’

c. Texas proposes to revise subsection 

(b) to clarify that a notice of violation or 

cessation order will not expire as 

provided in subsection (a) if the 

informal public hearing has been 

waived or if, with the consent of the 

person to whom the notice or order was 

issued, the informal public hearing is 

held later than 30 days after the notice 

or order is served. Texas also proposes 

to set forth the conditions under which 

the informal public hearing is deemed 

to be waived. 

d. Texas proposes to revise 

subsections (c), (e), (f), and (g) to change 

the name of the ‘‘public hearing’’ to 

‘‘informal public hearing.’’ Also, Texas 

proposes to revise subsection (g) to 

clarify that the ‘‘review’’ mentioned in 

this subsection is a ‘‘formal review.’’

e. Texas proposes to add new 

subsection (h) to read as follows: 

(h) The person conducting the informal 

hearing for the Commission shall determine 

whether or not the mine site should be 

viewed during the hearing. In making this 

determination the only consideration shall be 

whether a view of the mine site will assist 

the persons conducting the hearing in 

reviewing the appropriateness of the 

enforcement action or of the required 

remedial action. 

6. Section 12.682 Review of Notice of 

Violation or Cessation Order 

a. Texas proposes to revise the title of 

this section to read, ‘‘Formal Review of 

Notice of Violation or Cessation Order.’’

b. Texas proposes to revise subsection 

(a) and to add new subsection (b) to read 

as follows: 

(a) A person issued a notice of violation or 

cessation order under § 12.677 or § 12.678 of 

this title, or a person having an interest 

which may be adversely affected by the 

issuance, modification, vacation or 

termination of a notice or order, may request 

review of that action by filing an application 

for review and request for a hearing pursuant 

to the requisites of §§ 134.168–134.172 of the 

Act and the APA, within 30 days after 

receiving notice of the action. 

(b) The filing of an application for review 

and request for a hearing under this section 

shall not operate as a stay of any notice or 

order, or any modification, termination or 

vacation, of either. 

7. Section 12.688 Determination of 

Amount of Penalty 

Texas’ penalty schedule currently 

begins with a minimum penalty of $20 

and increases to a maximum penalty of 

$5,000. Texas proposes to change the 

penalty schedule so that it starts with a 

minimum penalty of $550 and increases 

to a maximum penalty of $13,000. Texas 

proposes to increase the penalties to 

reflect the decreased value in the dollar 

since the penalty schedule was 

promulgated in 1979. 

8. Section 12.689 Assessment of 

Separate Violation for Each Day 

Texas proposes to revise subsection 

(b) to increase the per day civil penalty 

from $750 to $1,025 and to make 

additions and/or corrections regarding 

regulatory and statutory citations. Texas 

also proposes to add new paragraph 

(b)(3) to clarify that the daily penalty 

will not be assessed for more than 30 

days and that if the permittee has not 

abated the violation within the 30-day 

period, it will take appropriate action to 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
21188 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

ensure that abatement occurs or that 

there will not be a reoccurrence of the 

failure to abate. 

9. Section 12.693 Request for Hearing 

Texas proposes to revise this section 

to read as follows: 

The person charged with the violation may 

contest the proposed penalty or the fact of 

the violation by submitting a petition and an 

amount equal to the proposed penalty or, if 

an assessment conference has been held, the 

reassessed or affirmed penalty to the 

Commission, to be held in escrow, within 30 

days from receipt of the proposed assessment 

or reassessment or 30 days from the date of 

service of the assessment conference 

examiner’s action, whichever is later. The 

fact of the violation may not be contested if 

it has been decided in a review proceeding 

commenced under § 12.682 of this title. 

10. Section 12.816 Liens 

Texas proposes to revise subsection 

(c) to remove the requirement that the 

landowner must own the surface before 

May 2, 1977, before he or she is exempt 

from having a lien placed against his or 

her property because reclamation 

resulted in a significant increase in the 

fair market value of the property. 

B. Revisions to Texas’ Statute, Chapter 

134 Texas Natural Resources Code 

1. Section 134.150 Lien 

Texas proposes to revise subsection 

(c) to read as follows: 

(c) A lien may not be filed under this 

section against the property of a person who 

did not consent to, participate in, or exercise 

control over the mining operation that 

necessitated the reclamation performed 

under this chapter. 

2. Section 134.174 Administrative 

Penalty for Violation of Permit 

Condition of This Chapter 

Texas proposes to revise subsection 

(b) to read as follows: 

(b) The penalty may not exceed $13,000 for 

each violation. Each day a violation 

continues may be considered a separate 

violation for purposes of penalty 

assessments. 

III. Public Comment Procedures 

Under the provisions of 30 CFR 

732.17(h), we are seeking 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 State program. 

Written Comments 

Send your written or electronic 

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. We will not consider 

or respond to your comments when 

developing the final rule if they are 

received after the close of the comment 

period (see DATES). We will make every 

attempt to log all comments into the 

administrative record, but comments 

delivered to an address other than the 

Tulsa Field Office may not be logged in. 

Electronic Comments 

Please submit Internet comments as 

an ASCII or Word file, avoiding the use 

of special characters and any form of 

encryption. Please also include ‘‘Attn: 

Docket No. TX–057–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 Tulsa 

Field Office at (918) 581–6430. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Public Hearing 

If you wish to speak at the public 

hearing, contact the person listed under 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4 

p.m., c.t. on May 15, 2007. 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 

a hearing. 

To assist the transcriber and ensure an 

accurate record, we request, if possible, 

that each person who speaks at the 

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 given an opportunity to be 

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 regulation. 

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 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 

because each 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 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Proposed Rules 21189 

regulating surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations be ‘‘in 

accordance with’’ the requirements of 

SMCRA, and section 503(a)(7) requires 

that State programs contain rules and 

regulations ‘‘consistent with’’

regulations issued by the Secretary 

pursuant to SMCRA. 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13175, we have evaluated the potential 

effects of this rule on Federallyrecognized Indian tribes and have 

determined that the rule does not have 

substantial direct effects on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

This determination is based on the fact 

that the Texas program does not regulate 

coal exploration and surface coal 

mining and reclamation operations on 

Indian lands. Therefore, the Texas 

program has no effect on Federallyrecognized Indian tribes. 

Executive Order 13211—Regulations 

That Significantly Affect the Supply, 

Distribution, or Use of Energy 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 which requires 

agencies to prepare a Statement of 

Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) 

considered significant under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Because 

this rule is exempt from review under 

Executive Order 12866 and is not 

expected to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects 

is not required. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

This rule does not require an 

environmental impact statement 

because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 

U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency 

decisions on proposed State regulatory 

program provisions do not constitute 

major Federal actions within the 

meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the 

National Environmental Policy Act (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). 

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 

certifies 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, 

which 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. 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, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions; 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 an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of $100 million or more in any given 

year. 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 did not impose an unfunded 

mandate. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 943 

Intergovernmental relations, Surface 

mining, Underground mining. 

Dated: March 23, 2007. 

Ervin J. Barchenger, 

Acting Regional Director, Mid-Continent 

Region. 

[FR Doc. E7–8156 Filed 4–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2007–0138; FRL–8302–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the incorporation of revised air 

pollution permitting and emissions 

standards rules into the Illinois State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). The State 

submitted this request for revision to its 

State Implementation Plan to EPA on 

May 31, 2006. Approval would make 

the State’s rules federally enforceable. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 30, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–

OAR–2007–0138, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Air 

Permits Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Air Permits Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office normal hours 

of operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. The Regional Office official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Constantine Blathras, Air Permits 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL