p. 1



# OAR Box 1837 Prepped by Keeia Richards



## Document

Number: 

# 188 ) IV-H-

5

Docket Number: 

# A-84-3 3

Printed 11/14/20083:48:12 PM

Sheet 188of 238P. 2

_• » 

### €290 Fedeia i Registe r / Vol . 53 , No . 21 6 /

Tuesday , Novembe r 8 , 198 8 / Rule s an d Regulatlon a
DEPARTMEN T O F TH E INTERIO R Offic e o f Surfac e Minin g Reclamatio n an d Enforcemen t 3 0 CF R Part e 701,780,784,815,816 , an d 81 7 Surfac e Coa l Minin g an d Reclamatio n Operations ; Permanen t Regulator y Program ; Reclamatio n an d Operatio n Plan ; Perfonnanc e Standards ; Road s AGENCY : Offic e o f

Surfac e Minin g Reclamatio n an d Enforcement , Interior
. ACTION : Fina l rule . SUMMARY

: Th e Offic e o f

Surfac e Minin g Reclamatio n an d Enforcemen t(OSMRE ) o f th e Departmen to f

th e Interio r (DOI ) i s amendin g it s rule s governin g road s a t
' surfac e an d undergroun d minin g operation s an d coa l exploratio n operations
. Th e provision s fo r road s ar e t o replac e rule s tha tpreviousl y wer e suspended . Thes e rule s defin e a road , establis h a roa d classificatio n system , an d se tfort h performanc e standard s tha tallo w regulator y authoritie s t o approv e design s tailore d t o loca l needs . Also , revise d informatio n requirement s fo r th e reclamatio n an d operation s pla n reflec tchange s i n th e performanc e standard s fo r roads. EFFECTIV E DAT E Decembe r 8.1988
. FO RFURTHE

RINFORMATIO

N CONTACT

: Rober tWiles , P.E. . Offic e o f Surfac e Minin g Reclamatio n an d Enforcemen t U.S
. Departmen to f

th e Interior , 195 1 Constitutio n Avenue , NW. , Washington , D C 20240 ; Telephon e (202 ) 343-1502
. SUPPLEMENTAR

Y INFORMATION

: I. Backgroun

d n . Discussio n o f

Fina l Rule and Comment

s DI . Procedura

l Matter s I . Backgroun d Sectio n 701(28)(B ) o f

th e Surfac e Minin g Contro l an d Reclamatio n Ac t (th e Act) , 3 0 U.S.C
. 120 1 et seq., define s "surfac e coa l minin g operations " t o includ e road s constructed , improve d o r use d fo r acces s t o th e min e sit e an d fo r haulage . Th e Ac tals o establishe s specifi c environmenta l protectio n performanc e standard s governin g road s use d fo r acces s int o an d acros s th e min e sit e durin g surfac e coa l minin g an d reclamatio n operation s i n sectio n 515(b ) (17 ) an d (18)
. Sectio n 515(b)(17 ) provide s tha tal l surfac e coa l minin g an d reclamatio n operation s shal l "insur e tha tth e construction , maintenance , an d postminin g condition s o f acces s road s int o an d acros s th e sit e o f operation s wil l contro l o r preven terosio n an d siltation , pollutio n o f

water , damag e t o fis h o r wildlif

e o r thei r habitat , o r publi c o r privat e property. " Sectio n 515(b)(18 ) provide s tha tal l operation s shal l "refrai n fro m th e constructio n o f road s o r othe r acces s way s u p a strea m be d o r drainag e channe l o r i n suc h proximit y t o suc h channe l s o a s t o seriousl y alte r th e norma l flo w o f

water. " Sectio n 516(b)(10 ) o f

th e Ac timpose s thes e sam e requirement s o n road s associate d wit h undergroun d mine s wit h suc h modification s a s ar e necessar y t o accommodat e th e distinc tdifference s betwee n surfac e an d undergroun d mining
. Th e permanen tregulator y progra m promulgate d o n Marc h 13,1979 , containe d expansiv e an d detaile d provision s pertainin g t o roa d construction , maintenanc e an d postminin g conditions
. Th e rul e a t3 0 CF R701. 5 define d road s fo r surfac e minin g operation s an d establishe d a three-tiere d roa d classificatio n syste m (4 4 F R15320 , Marc h 13,1979)
. Specifi c provision s fo r eac h classificatio n wer e establishe d a t3 0 CF

R816.150-17 6 (4 4 F

R 15416-15421)
. A tth e sam e time , simila r requirement s fo r undergroun d mine s wer e establishe d a t3 0 CF R817.150
- 817.17 8 (4 4 F

R15442-15447)
. Th e permanen tprogra m rule s wer e challenge d i n a sui tfile d wit h th e U.S
. Distric tCour tfo r di e Distric to f Columbia
. Th e cour tremande d th e rule s fo r furthe r consideratio n becaus e th e Secretar y ha d no tgive n adequat e notic e tha th e wa s considerin g a classificatio n system , In Re: Permanent Surface Mining Regulation Litigation, No . 79
- 1144 , sli p op . a t32-3 6 (D.D.C
. Ma y 16
. 1980)
. A s a resul to f

th e cour tdecision , OSMR E suspende d it s permanen t progra m rule s fo r road s (4 5 F R51547 , Augus t4,1980)
. Ne w rule s substantiall y differen tfro m th e remande d an d suspende d 197 9 rule s wer e propose d o n Januar y 4,198 2 (4 7 F R 56 ) an d Apri l 16.198 2 (4 7 F R16592 ) an d wer e finalize d i n a rul e publishe d Ma y 16,198 3 (4 8 F

R22110)
. Th e 198 3 rules , althoug h constitutin g a n extensiv e expansio n o f

th e statutor y performanc e standards , gav e regulator y authoritie s greate r flexibilit y a s t o th e detail s o f roa d desig n tha n di d th e remande d an d suspende d 197 9 rules . Upo n issuance , di e 198 3 rule s wer e challenge d i n di e U.S
. Distric tCour tfo r di e Distric to f Columbia
. I n respons e t o di e challenge , th e cour tremande d § 816.150(a ) (In Re: Permanent

Surface Mining Regulation Litigation II, No . 79-1144 , sli p op . a t24
- 2 8 (D.D.C
. Oct
. 1.1984) , hereafte r Round yll). Th e cour thel d tha tOSMRE , i n promulgatin g di e classificatio n syste m i n 3 0 CF R816.150(a) , violate d th e Administrativ e Procedur e Ac t(APA) , 5 U.S.C
. 553 , b y agai n no tprovidin g Subsequendy , i n a n amende d orde r file d Decembe r 10,1984 , th e cour t remande d al l o f

th e rule s governin g road s whic h wer e dependen tupo n th e roa d classificatio n system . OSMR E the n suspende d thos e rule s a s wel l a s th e definitio n o f

road a t§ 701. 5 (5 0 F

R7278 , Februar y 21,1985)
. Th e definitio n wa s suspende d t o giv e OSMRE a n opportunit y t o reconside r al l th e provision s i n th e rule s affectin g di e performanc e standard s fo r roads . OSMRE propose d ne w roa d rule s o n Novembe r 3,198 7 (5 2 F R42258 ) tha t wer e quit e simila r t o di e remande d an d suspende d 198 3 rules . Publi c hearing s wer e schedule d fo r Januar y 5,1988 , i n Washington , DC ; Denver , CO ; an d Knoxville , TN . Sinc e n o on e requeste d t o testif y a tdies e hearings , non e wer e held . Th e commen tperio d close d o n January 12,1988
. OSMRE receive d 15 2 individua l comment s fro m 2 3 sources : Te n industr y associations , eigh tStat e regulator y authorities , tw o publi c interes tgroups , an d thre e Federa l agencies
. OSMRE als o receive d comment s fro m di e Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA ) afte r di e commen tperio d ha d closed . Th e rule s adopte d toda y replac e di e rule s suspende d i n 198 5 (5 0 F R7278 , Februar y 21,1985)
. Th e mino r change s fro m di e propose d rul e ar e identifie d i n th e followin g discussio n o f th e fina l rule . OSMR E believes , base d o n analysi s o f th e issue s involved , di e legislativ e histor y o f

di e Ac tan d th e administrativ e recor d o f dii s rulemaking , includin g comment s received , dia tthi s final rul e i s a reasonabl e interpretatio n an d expansio n o f

di e provision s o f section s 515(b ) (17 ) an d (18 ) o f th e Act
. OSMRE ha s no tidentifie d an y difference s betwee n road s fo r surfac e an d undergroun d mine s dia twoul d appea r t o necessitat e differen t regulator y provision s unde r thi s rulemaking
. Therefore , th e final permittin g rul e applicabl e t o road s fo r surfac e minin g activitie s a t3 0 CF R 780.3 7 an d th e final rul e fo r undergroun d minin g activitie s a t3 0 CF R784.2 4 ar e identical
. Similarly , th e final performanc e standard s fo r surfac e minin g activitie s a t3 0 CF R816.15 0 an d 818.15 1 ar e identica l t o th e performanc e standard s fo r undergroun d minin g activitie s a t3 0 CF

R817.15 0 an d 817.15 1 respectively
. Th e final permittin g rul e applicabl e t o suppor tfacilitie s fo r surfac e minin g activitie s a t3 0 CF R 780.3 8 an d th e fina l rul e applicabl e t o suc h facilitie s fo r undergroun d minin g activitie s a t§ 784.3 0 ar e als o identical
. Th e discussio n o f

th e revision s t o 3 0 adequat e notice " an d opportunity.,toA J ccQE&780.37, 780.38,818.150
. an d 818.15 1 commen t(Sli p op . a t28)
. ^^rlv . P^ ° shoul d b e understoo d t o appl y als o t o



## JP H 

# \ 3 

# \?$

.rsr;^-- 1I

•, P. 3

Federa l Registe r

/ Vol

. 53 , No

. 21 6 /

Tuesday , Novembe r

8 V 198 8 /Rules

- an d Regtilat l on a4519 1
di e revisions to 3 0 CF

R784.24 , 784.30 , 817.150 , an d 817.151

. respectively

. (I

. Discussio n o f

Fina l Rul e an d Comment s Thi s portio n o

f th e preambl e consist s o f adescriptio n o

f di e rule s adopted , change s t o th e proposal , comment s received , an d OSMRE' s respons e t o comments

. .4

. General

Comments I n additio n t o receivin g comment s o n specifi c provision s o

f di e Novembe r

3 , 1987 , propose d rules , OSMR E receive d severa l genera l comments

. Tw o commenter s requeste d time extension s o f 3 0 day s to allo w adequat e time t o evaluat e th e propose d regulations

. OSMR E di d no t acced e t o di e time extensio n requests ; however , OSMR E di d giv e ful

l consideratio n t o al l comment s receive d o n di e propose d rul e regardles s o

f whethe r di e comment s wer e timel y o r

late

. Th e propose d rul e allowe d sevent y day s fo

r di e submissio n o f writte n comments

. OSMR E believe s ma t thi s amoun t

of time strike s a balanc e betwee n di e need s o f reviewer s an d di e agency' s responsibilit y t o implemen t

th e Ac t expeditiousl y diroug h regulations ; On e commente r

state d dia t

th e propose d regidation s d o no t provid e consisten t guidanc e t o regulatory authorities , o r

establis h minimum nationa l standard s fo

r construction , maintenance , o r

reclamatio n o

f roads

. Th e commente r

suggeste d tha t

di e propose d regulation s b e withdrawn , an d note d tha t OSMR E ha s amandator y obligatio n t o includ e standard s i n th e regulations , an d tha t

failur e t o provid e thes e standard s i s aviolatio n o f th e Act

. Th e commente r

state d tha t

Congres s enacte d section s 515(b ) (10) , (17) , an d (18) wit h th e intent

t o se t "appropriat e limits " fo r roa d construction , maintenance , an d reclamation

. Th e commente r

als o state d tha t

di e 197 9 regulation s implemente d thi s congressiona l inten t

t o provid e minimumstandards , bu t

tha t adequat e specifi c requirement s n o longe r exis t i n th e propose d regulations

. Th e commente r

argue d further

that , unde r thes e regulations

. Federa l an d Stat e agencies , particularl y State s whos e regulation s ca n b e "n o more stringen t than " th e Federa l programwil l b e unabl e to se t

meaningfu l standards

. Th e commente r

als o suggeste d dia t

th e propose d regulation s b e withdraw n pendin g th e outcom e o

f curren t litigatio n i n th e U.S

. Cour

t of Appeal s fo

r th e Distric t o f Columbi aCircui t

wher e th e issu e o f requirin g minimumnationa l standard s wa s unde r

consideration

. OSMR E disagrees

. Section s 515(b)(17 ) an d (18 ) o f di e Ac t establis h statutor y performanc e standard s fo r roads

. I n it s January 29,1988 , opinion , th e Court s o f Appeal s fo

r di e Distric t

o f Columbi a Circui t concurre d wit

h tiifr Secretar y o

f Lh e Interio r dia t di e Ac t doe s no t automaticall y an d inevitabl y requir e hi mto "fles h out " statutor y performanc e standard s excep t

i n limite d case s fo

r whic h suc h arequiremen t i s clearl y established , suc h a s section s 515(b)(13) , 516(b)(5 ) an d 517(a

) o f th e Ac t [NWF v. Hodel, 83 9 F.2nd 694 , 73 4 (DC Cir.

. 1988) , hereafte r NWF v. Hodel]. Th e cour

t wen t o n to say , "Th e Secretar y i s t o exercis e hi s informe d discretio n i n decidin g wha t

othe r statutor y performanc e standard s bea r elucidatio n o r elaboration

. In short , w e rea d th e Ac t * * * t o affor

d th e Secretar y discretion , absen t a n expres s statutor y instructio n to regulate , t o decid e whethe r fleshin g out i s appropriat e in ligh

t o f othe r concerns
. Chief

amon g thes e concern s i s anee d to accommodat e widel y varyin g local condition s tha t

wil l no t admi t o f a singl e nationwid e rule. " (id

. p
. 735 ) Additiona l materia l i n support o f th e legal sufficienc y o

f th e regulatory approac h take n i n dies e rule s appear s i n th e Secretary' s Marc h 5,198 4 distric t cour t brie f filed i n Round

II at p. 160- 166. Thi s discussio n concerne d di e Secretary' s eliminatio n i n 198 3 o f minimu mnationa l environmenta l standard s containe d i n th e 197 9 regulation s involving : (1 ) Th e contemporaneou s reclamation of mine d lands , (2 ) di e desig n o

f eart h "terraces " o n restore d land , an d (3 ) th e exemptio n fro mth e "approximat e origina l contour " requiremen t

o f land s featurin g unusuall y thic k o r thi n overburden

. Th e cour t wen t o n to say , "Unde r

[Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 46 3 U.S

. 29,4 3 (1983) ] th e agenc y mus t examin e th e relevan t

dat aan d articulat e asatisfactory explanatio n fo r th e revise d regulatio n i

f i t i s t o gai n judicia l approbation " (id.)

. Th e Secretary , dierefore , i s require d t o articulat e a satisfactory explanatio n fo r th e fina l rul e an d t o discus s th e specifi c comment s receive d o n th e propose d rule

. However , th e Secretar y i s no t require d to justif

y change s fro

meithe r th e 197 9 rul e o r

th e 198 3 rul e sinc e both wer e invalidate d upo n appeal

. OSMR E believe s thi s rulemakin g i s consisten t wid i th e abov e decisio n of th e Cour t o f Appeal s fo

r th e Distric t

o f Columbi aCircui t

an d tha t more specifi c minimumnationa l standard s fo r construction , maintenance , o r reclamatio n o

f road s ar e no t

necessary
. Th e rule s adopte d toda y constitut e a considerabl e expansio n an d fleshin g out o f di e statutor y requirement s o f sectio n 515(b)(17 ) an d (18 ) o

f th e Act

. However , in accordanc e wit

h sectio n 101(f

) o f th e Act , th e rule s tak e int o accoun t regional , physical , biological an d climati c diversity amon g di e State s b y providin g Stat e regulatory authoritie s wit h th e flexibilit y t o incorporat e regional an d local consideration s int o thei r programs , On e commente r

note d tha t

th e constructio n o

f road s an d support facilitie s associate d wit

h coal minin g an d exploratio n coul d hav e seriou s advers e effect s o n histori c properties

. Th e commente r

indicate d that , unde r thes e rules , regulatory authoritie s woul d no t adequatel y identif

y advers e effect s fo r consideratio n durin g permi t planning , review , an d approva l in orde r t o avoi d o r

mitigat e suc h effects

. Th e commente r

suggeste d tha t

ane w sectio n b e inserte d tha t

woul d requir e a descriptio n o

f th e method s to b e use d to identif y propertie s include d i n o r eligibl e t o b e i n di e Nationa l Registe r o f Histori c Places , an d th e effort s to b e take n t o preven t o r contro l damag e t o suc h properties

. OSMRE' s regulation s a t

3 0 CF RPart s 731 , 732

. 761

. 772

. 773 , 779 , 780 , 783

. an d 78 4 (5 2 F R4244-4263

. February 10,1987 ) includ e adequat e provision s fo r th e identificatio n of

histori c properties ' an d consideratio n o

f th e effect s o

f al l surfac e minin g activitie s o n suc h properties , includin g di e desig n an d constructio n o f roads

. T o includ e thes e provision s i n di e performanc e standard s fo r roads , o r fo r an y othe r specifi c activit y relate d t o surfac e mining , woul d b e redundant

. Tw o commenter s wer e concerne d that , i f th e road s regulation s wer e finalized , die y woul d b e applie d retroactively

. The y suggeste d tha t retroactiv e complianc e woul d b e expensiv e an d actuall y coul d increas e environmenta l harmdu e t o reconstructio n o

f existin g roads

. Th e commenter s als o suggeste d dia t OSMR E clarif y tha t th e regulation s appl y prospectivel y t o operator s requestin g a permi t a s o f th e dat e dia t

aStat e adopt s thes e final rules

. OSMR E anticipate s tha t

dies e rule s wil l b e applie d prospectivel y b y aStat e after aStat e ha s amende d it s regulatory progra mt o b e n o les s effectiv e tha n thes e regulations

. Tha t

is , aStat e woul d requir e propose d road s include d in a permi t o r permi t revisio n applicatio n to compl y with di e road s regulation s adopte d b y di e Stat e pursuan t to thes e Federa l regulations

. I

n accordanc e wit

h 3 0 CF R701.11(e) , existin g road s tha t mee t th e performanc e standards , bu t no t th e desig n requirements , ma y b e exempte d fro

mmeetin g desig nP. 4



### • r 

### m8& g|'

t 

### r|$gi8tiag

. /

Vol

. 53>-vNp

. 218

. /.Tuesday,

. November

- 8 , 198 8 / Rule s and Regulation s

I f > requirement s b y di e regulatory

authority

. Therefore , OSMR E doe s no t anticipat e dia t

regulatory authoritie s wil l requir e change s i n existin g road s i f die y mee t environmenta l performanc e standards

. Becaus e propose d bu t no t constructe d roads include d i n permit s approve d prio r

t o aState' s adoptio n o

f rule s pursuan t

t o thes e regulation s woul d compl y wit h existin g performanc e standard s an d desig n requirements , OSMR

E believe s dia t extensiv e reworkin g of

plan s woul d no t b e required

. On e commente r

contende d dia t

th e propose d regulation s d o nothin g for environmenta l protectio n othe r tiian t o restat e th e existin g performanc e standard s containe d withi n th e regulator y program
. Th e commente r wen t o n t o argu e tha t

th e prppose d regulation s creat e a h excessiv e amoun t o f unnecessar y paperwork

fo r industr y an d th e rgulatory audiorities

. Th e commente r

recommende d tha t

th e propose d regulation s shoul d ho t becom e final. OSMR E disagree s because , eve n thoug h genera l performanc e standard s hav e alread y bee n establishe d i n 3 0 CF R Subchapte r

K—Permanent

Program Performanc e Standards , ther e is' a significan t nee d t o hav e section s ' specifi c t o di e design , construction , reconstruction , improvement , an d maintenanc e o

f roads. Road s ca n hav e a significan t environmenta l impac t

i f the y ar e no t properl y manage d and , with thi s i n mind , OSMR

E beUeve s dia t

di e requirement s outline d i n thes e rule s justif y di e documentatio n required ; B. Section 701.5 Definitions: Road Th e definitio n otroad

i n fina l § 701. 5 i s identica l t o tha t

propose d o n Novembe r

3,198 7 (5 2 F

R42265) t excep t tha t th e exemptio n o

f "pionee r roads " containe d i n di e proposa l ha s bee n deleted

. Th e rul e define s road t o mea n a surfac e right-of-wa

y fo r purpose s o

f trave l b y lan d vehicles , includin g minin g equipment , use d i n surfac e coa l minin g an d reclamatio n operation s o r coa l exploration

. Th e termroad encompasse s di e entir e are aan d structure s withi n a surfac e right-of-wa

y tha t i s constructed , used , reconstructed , improved , o r maintaine d fo

r us e i n surfac e coa l minin g an d reclamatio n operation s o r coa l exploration ; includin g us e b y coa l haulin g vehicle s leadin g t o transfer , processing , o r

storag e areas
. Th e term specificall y exclude s ramp s an d route s o f trave l withi n th e immediat e minin g are a(discusse d below) an d withi n exces s spoi l o r

coa l min e wast e disposa l areas
. Th e propose d rul e exclude d pionee r roads , define d i n th e proposa l a s "temporar y route s use d fo r constructin g acces s o r hau l roads, " fro

mth e definitio n o

f road. Th e preambl e t o di e propose d rul e explaine d tha t pionee r road s provid e preliminary acces s fo r th e constructio n o

f permanen t

acces s an d hau l road s o r

equipmen t

road s an d no t fo r minin g purpose s an d dia t the y ar e eitiie r replace d b y aprimary o r ancillary roa d o r reclaime d onc e die y hav e fulfilled tiieir

purpose
. Th e final rul e doe s no t retai n th e exclusion

. OSMR E ha s reviewe d th e issu e an d believe s tha t pionee r road s ar e no t

aseparate , discret e category o

f roads , bu t

ar e merel y par t

o f di e proces s o

f constructin g primary an d ancillar y roads

. Therefore , pionee r road s ar e subjec t t o th e performanc e standard s o f dii s rul e applicabl e t o th e constructio n proces s bu t

no t t o thos e dia t

specif y standard s applicabl e t o complete d primar y o r

ancillar y roads

. Th e term"immediat e minin g area " refer s t o th e are awher e coa l i s bein g remove d fro

mth e sea man d t o othe r area s tha t shoul d no t

b e subjec t

t o the

. performanc e standard s fo r road s becaus e the y ar e subjec t

t o frequen t surfac e changes

. Thes e othe r area s includ e area s wher e topsoi l an d overburde n ar e bein g move d an d area s undergoin g activ e reclamation

. OSMR E intend s di e term"immediat e minin g area " t o refe r

t o suc h area s o

f frequen t surfac e change

. Man y area s i n aminin g operatio n contai n route s o f trave l dia t ar e move d every fe w day s a s th e minin g advance s durin g coa l remova l an d a s th e operato r

work s i n coa l wast e disposa l an d spoi l areas
. Thes e route s hav e ashor t

lif e an d ar e no t

include d i n th e definitio n o

f roa d o r subjec t t o di e roa d performanc e standards , bu t woul d b e subjec t t o th e othe r

performanc e standard s applicabl e t o al l surfac e coa l minin g an d recalamatio n operations

. Temporary route s withi n spoi l o r coa l min e wast e disposa l area s ar e exclude d fro mth e definitio n o

f road accordin g t o a n agreemen t

b y th e Secretar y i n Round //(sli p op
. a t

footnot e 14)

. Th e industr y plaintiff s contende d an d OSMR

E agree d tha t i t wa s no t reasonabl e t o requir e road s withi n coa l spoi l an d refus e disposa l area s t o b e surface d with nonacid

- o r

nontoxic-formin g substances , sinc e dies e area s often contai n acid

- an d toxic-formin g materials

. I n addition , al l o f di e surfac e drainag e fro

mthes e area s i s controlle d b y siltatio n structure s an d treatmen t facilities , wher e necessary , t o mitigat e an y potential advers e environmenta l effects

. On e commente r

suggeste d revision s t o th e definition s o

f affected area an d permit area in 3 0 CF

R701.5

. Th e commente r

wante d existin g o r

propose d road s unde r

th e jurisdictio n o

f aFedera l lan d managemen t

agenc y t o b e exclude d fro mdies e definitions

. Th e definition s oi affected area an d permit area ar e no t

par t o f thi s rulemaking

. OSMR

E believe s tha t

a revisio n t o eithe r

of thes e definition s i s no t necessary
. Th e definitio n o f road i s clea r o n it s ow n term s a s t o whic h road s ar e included

. Fo r

thi s reason , a referenc e t o affected

area ha s no t

bee n included

. O n th e specifi c concern relativ e t o Federa l land s roads , neithe r thi s definitio n no r

th e definitio n o

f affected area a s partiall y suspende d (5 1 F R41952 , Novembe r

20,1986 ) i s intende d t o expan d o r

limi t th e jurisdictiona l reac h o

f th e definitio n o

f "surfac e coa l minin g operations " containe d i n sectio n 701(28)(B ) o f th e Act , relativ e t o roads

. Tha t jurisdictiona l reac h mus t

b e determine d o n acase-by

cas e basi s b y th e regulatory authority

. On e commente r

suggeste d that OSMR E retai n th e "withi n th e affecte d area " phras e i n th e definitio n o f roa d to ensur e tha t

jurisdictio n ove r

existin g road s unde r

th e contro l o

f aFedera l lan d managemen t

agenc y i s no t transferre d t o th e Secretar y o r t o aStat e regulatory authority

. A s note d above , OSMR

E doe s no t agre e tha t addin g th e phras e "withi n th e affecte d area " wil l affec t

jurisdictio n ove r existin g roads

. On e commente r

requested tha t OSMR E restat e it s positio n wid i respec t t o th e definitio n o

f affected area an d publi c roads

. Anothe r

commente r suggeste d tha t

th e definitio n o

f road b e modifie d t o specificall y exclud e "publi c roads. " Th e commente r

argue d tha t road s maintaine d b y publi c fund s an d locate d o n propertie s dedicate d to publi c entitie s ar e no t

road s a s define d b y § 701. 5 and , eve n i

f th e permitte e s o desired , coul d no t

b e permitte d sinc e ownershi p i s no t

controlled

. Th e definitio n o

f affected area i s no t

a par t o f thi s rulemaking , no r

i s ther e an y referenc e t o affected

area i n th e definitio n otroad. Similarly , ther e wa s n o referenc e t o road s i

n th e 197 9 definitio n o

f affected area (4 4 F R15317 , Marc h 13,1979)

. Th e definitio n o f affected area wa s modifie d in 198 3 a s i t relate d t o publi c roads in orde r t o addres s th e practic e in som e state s o f operator s constructin g ne w acces s road s an d the n deedin g the mto apubli c entit y i n orde r t o kee p th e operatio n les s tha n tw o acre s i n are aan d thus avoi d applicabilit y o

f th e Ac t fo r th e entir e minin g operatio n (4 8 F

R14814 , Apri l 5

. 1983)

. Th e litigatio n o n thi s definitio n [tn Re: Permanent

Surface Mining Regulation Litigation, No

. 79-114 4 (D.D.C

. 1980) ) als o concerne d th e two

-.P. 5 

# •i ; ggatewil

- Efognotei r I Vol

. 53- , No.Jtto^Tuegday;/ ^ ^. g s

acr e exemption , and di e definitio n o f affected area wa s suspende d insofar a s i tmigh tlimi tjurisdictio n ove r road s covere d b y di e definitio n o f "surfac e coal minin

g operations, " (5 1 F

R41952, Novembe r 20,1988 ) The two-acre exemptio n ha s sine

© bee n eliminate d b y Congress
. Sinc e di e definitio n o f affected area a s partially suspende d n o longer provide s additiona l guidance a s t o whic h road s ar

e include d i n th e definition o

f "surfac e coal mining operations, " n o reference t o affected area i s include d i n th e definitio n o f road. Stat e law s var

y widel y i n thei r road classificatio n systems. . OSMR E i s concerned tiiatroad s constructe d t o serv e mining, operation s notavoid- • compliance wid i th e performanc e standard s b y bein g deede d t o publi c entities
. However , i ti s no tOSMRE' s intentio n automaticall y t

o exten d jurisdictio n ove r road s into di e existin g publi c road network . Jurisdiction unde r the Actand applicabilit

y o f th e performanc

e standard s ar

e bes t- determined o n a case-by-cas e basi s b y the regulator

y authority : Fo

r thi s reason , OSMR E did notaccep tth e commenter' s suggestion , tha

t"public-roads " b e specificall y exclude d from the . definitio n o f road. .'...,- ' Severa l commenter

s wer e concerne d aboutdie.ter

m ''immediat

e minin g area " and expresse d viewsconcemin g which road s withi n di e minin

g area shoul d b e exclude d fro

m di e definition , o

f road. One note d diatroad s leadin g U> transfer, processing, , o r storag e area s woul d b e subjectt o di e desig n and performanc e standard s o

f §780.37 , ye troutes withi n th e immediat

e minin g area ar e no t considere d road s unde

r thi s definition
. Thi s commenter wa s unsur e ho w OSMR E define s "immediat

e minin g area " and argue

d that , i f iti s assume d diat"immediat

e mining^aiea " include s an y roa d withi n th e permit.area , die n di e definitio n woul d be^as^defeating
. A secon d commenter ma^iajoe d tha tdi e us e o f theter m "wittun^a^giediate
. minin g area " i n di e excluci ^ par to f th e definitio n of

road&Jeave

s me.mjtanin

g opei&t o varying interpretatiohs-since the word "immeoUate " is;uiidjsfine d an d . vague.<*_';
. J

.. ; y . "!/'•..:
. . '.

. On e commenter recommended diat• • the definitio n otroad

exclud e thos e acces s and haulroad s tha tar e locate d i n area s tha thav e been
- mined and ar e upstrea m fro m sedimentatio n pond s o r other siltatio n structures tha thav e bee n designe d t

o contai n o

r trea tthe runof

f fro m th e 10-year, 24-hou

r precipitatio n event . Sinc e dies e road s ar e i n area s tha talready hav e bee n disturbed and al l runof f fro m thes e area s i a controlled , the commenter maintaine d diatiti s no t necessary diatdies e road s meetth e performanc

e standard s i n § 816.150 and 816.151
. Another commenter suggeste d excludin g fro

m di e definitio n roads withi n the min

e area unles s a road i s t

o b e lef ta s a permanen

troa d and bond releas e i s bein g sough

ti n accordanc e wid i § 800.40
. The suggeste d language state d tha troad s shal l b e considere d t o b e withi n the mine area only where the drainag e fro m th e roa d i s commingled and treated wit

h other mine drainage throug h approved sedimentcontro l structures . A fift

h commenter suggeste d tha tdi e exclusio n b e limited t o road s which ar e constructe d withi n th e portion o f di e permi tarea whic

h i s controlled by siltatio n structures an

d treatmen

t facilitie s a s require

d b y 30 CF

R816.46
. Th e commenter als o suggeste d dia tthi s language woul d giv e a

n exac tmeaning t o tiie exclusio n sinc e the area o f th e permi trequire d t o b e controlle d b y siltatio n structur

e and treatmen

t facilitie s i s defined in 30 CF R816.46
. . Another commenter agreed wit h th e exclusion , bu

tfel tdiati twoul d exten d t o al l road s withi n th e min e area sinc e their drainage i s otherwis e treate d wit h diatof th e res tof

di e mine
. Anothe r commenter wa s als o concerne d ma t road s withi n di e mine area no t frequentl y changing shoul d notbe : include d in the definition
. .. . OSMR E ha s notmodified th e rule in respons e t

o thes e wide-rangin g comments . OSMR

E intend s th e ter

m "immediat

e minin g area " t o refer t o di e area o f di e mine tha

ti s subjectt

o frequen tsurfac e change s and where di e protectio n require

d by sectio n 515(b)(17

) o f th e Act , concerning controlling o r preventing erosion , siltation , pollutio n o f water , damage t o fis h an d wildlif e o r thei r habitato

r t o publi c o r privat e property , i s provided b y other applicabl e performanc

e standards . The constraint s o f sectio n 515(b)(18) o

f th e Ac twoul d notappl y t o thi s area becaus e an

y seriou s alteration s t

o th e norma

l flo w o f wate r and impac

to n natura

l strea m bed s and drainage channel s woul d hav e already occurred , The ter

m "immediat

e minin g area " i s notintende d t

o encompas s th e entir

e permi tarea and , therefore , woul d notcreat e a self
defeatin g definition
. OSMRE' s vie w i s in par tconsisten twid i th e vie w expresse d by several of

th e commenter

s concerning th e exclusio n o f road s withi n di e permi tarea'for which drainag

e contro l i s otherwis e provided
. Since all o f th e otiie r standard s o

f sectio n 515 o

f the Ac twoul d als o necessaril y appl y t o temporar y routes notconsidere d roads , the protectio n require

d b y sectio n 515(b)(17 ) o f the Actwoul d stil l b e achieved
. However , OSMR E ha s retaine d the concep to

f frequen tchange s t o ensur e tiiatal l road s ar

e adequately : reclaimed
. All routes subjectt o frequen t change s wil l b e obliterate d durin g tiie minin g process . However , route s n o longer changing nee d t

o b e include d in the definitio n otroad

t o ensur e tha tthey ar e adequatel y designed , constructed , maintaine d and reclaimed
. One commenter maintained diatthe definitio n o

f road s arbitraril

y restrict s di e applicabilit

y o f di e regulations fo

r certai n type s o

f road disturbances , and argue d dia tthi s i s a clea r contradictio n o f sectio n 701(28

) o f the Act
. Th

e commenter state d tha

tdi e deletio n of pionee r an

d construction roads fro

m the roads definition i s clearl y unlawful
. Th e commente r argue d tha tth e principa

l purpos e o f pionee r and constructio n road s i s t o gai n acces s t

o di e min e site
. The commenter als o note d tha tpionee r road s typicall y distur

b virgin area s and can lea d t o greatly increase d sedimentatio n fro

m a min e site (especiall y o n stee p slopes)
. Th a commenter asserte d dia tdii s wa s a loophol e tha

toffer s a potentia

l fo r substantia

l abuse . Th

e commenter maintaine d diatOSMR

E mustse tou

t clearl y i n th e recor

d the performanc

e standard s tiiat.mustb s me tl n di e design , construction , and reclamation o f pionee r roads . Tw o otiie r commenter s were concerne d dia

tdi e ter m "pionee r road" i s notdefined in the regulations and ma y no tb e universall y understood . I twa s suggeste d tha

tOSMR E shoul d eithe r define the ter

m "pion?e

r road" o r change th e language i n die
. definitio n of roads . I n respons e t

o tiiese comments , di e provisio n excludin g pionee r road s fro m th e definitio n o

f road ha s bee n delete d fro m th e rule . A s indicate d above , OSMR E ha s re-examined thi s issu e and believe s tha

tpionee r roads ar

e no ta separate , discret

e categor y o f roads, bu t ar e par to f di e proces s o

f constructing primar y and ancillar

y roads. A s such , pionee r road s ar

e subjectt

o the performanc

e standard s applicabl e t

o th e constructio n proces s suc

h a s thos e in
• I 816.150(b)(1 ) throug

h (8)
. Th a completed primar

y o r ancillar y roa d i s subjectt o di e remainin

g applicabl e performanc

e standards ; - On e commenter addresse d th e terr a "pionee r roads " in th e contex to

f roads fo r coal exploration
. Th e commenter assume d tha

tmos texploratio n road

o ar e simply unsurfaced,.cleare d path s tha tallo w acces s int

o th e area fo

r off
roa d exploratio n equipmen

tand woul d b e considere d "pionee

r roads" and , therefore , notsubjectt

o di e road regulations
. I

f thi s assumption i s correct,P. 6

Federaljleglste r

/ Vol pftj^my^et^iWovember

8

. 198 8 / Rule s an d Regulation s
di e commente r

woul d suppor t

Ui e curren t languag e wid i respec t

t o coa l exploratio n activitie s an d pionee r roads

. OSMR E ha adroppe d di e us e o

f th e term"pionee r

roads " fro

mdi e rul e t o avoi d di e kin d o

f confusio n reflecte d i n th e commen t

Al l road s use d fo r

coa l exploratio n activitie s tha t substantiall y distur b di e natura l lan d surfac e ar e subjec t t o di e standard s o

f 3 0 CF R 816.15 a On e commente r

agree d tha t

temporar y route s use d fo

r constructin g acces s o r haulroad ashoul d b e exclude d fromu e definitio n of

roads

. However , th e commente r

note d diat , jus t

a s temporar y route s ar e sometime s use d t o construc t roads, s o ar e temporar y routes use d t o construc t an y numbe r

o f structures , suc h a s sedimen t

ponds , stockpiles , an d s o - forth

. Tli e commente r

maintaine d tha t tiiese routes als o ahoul d b e exclude d fro mdi e definition

. OSMR E ha s delete d di e exclusio n fo r temporar y route s tha t

ar e par t of di e road constructio n process
. Temporary routes use d to construc t

othe r type s of structure s are , b y definition , ancillar y roads

. ' - On e commente r

suggeste d tha t

di e rul e stat e dia t

onl y dios e roads use d

. . exclusivel y for

di e sol e purpos e o

f surfac e coa l minin g reclamatio n an d exploratio n operations , shoul d b e include d i n th e definition

. Th e commenter

. als o suggeste d tha t di e definitio n shoul d stat e dia t onl y thos e acces s an d haulroad s constructed , used , reconstructed, improved, * o/?i / - maintaine d ar e included.The •'•?"

- cammenterargne d dia t

thi s languag e woul d clearl y sho w tha t

di e combinatio n o

f thes e activitie s i s necessary , i n orde r

for aroa d t o b e considere d a"road* ' unde r di e definition

. OSMR E di d no t accep t dies e suggestions , whic h ar e intende d t o limi t ' th e scop e o f

th e definitio n of

road; becaus e t o d o s o woul d b e inconsisten t wit h di e requirements-o f

section" ' 515(b)(17 ) o f

di e Act ; whic h require s contro l o r preventio n o f

environmenta l harm

- fro mdi e construction , - ;

-- j i » maintenanc e o r

postminin g condition s of

acces s roads int o an d across'th e sit e o f operations

. • - > ";.*•;

- On e commenter

. requeste d tha t - OSMR E clarif y th e definitio n of

road wit h respect

t o road s t o an d fro

m- transfer , processing ; o r

storag e areas ; Th e commente r

maintaine d ma t

al l roads fro mdies e area s woul d als o fall ' unde r di e definitio n o f

road. OSMR E agree s tha t

road s t o an d fro

m transfer , processing , o r

storag e area s ar e include d i n tins definition , i f thes e road s fal l withi n di e definitio n o f "surfac e coa l minin g operations. " Thi s wil l hav e t o b e determine d o n acase-by-cas e basi s consisten t wid i th e guidanc e previousl y state d i n dii s preamble

. C. Sections 780.37/784.24 Road Systems Fina l $ 780.3 7 i s di e sam e a s th e propose d rule , excep t

fo r som e mino r wordin g change s discusse d below , an d contain s permi t

applicatio n requirement s whic h specif y di e plan s an d drawing s tha t

a n applican t

i s require d t o submi t

fo r eac h road witiii n apropose d permi t

area
. Th e sectio n als o discusse s certificatio n o

f primary roads an d th e establishmen t

of standar d desig n plan s b y di e regulatory authority

. On e commente r

suggeste d tha t

th e requirement s o

f § 780.3 7 woul d accomplis h littl e mor e tha n additiona l excessiv e paperwork

for industr y an d th e regulatory authorit y becaus e environmenta l protectio n coul d b e accomplishe d b y requirin g road s t o mee t th e performanc e standard s of di e existin g regulations

. OSMR E believe s dia t

th e requirement s o f

§ 780.3 7 ar e di e minimumnecessar y t o provid e di e regulator y authorit y wit h th e permi t informatio n neede d t o fin d tha t th e performanc e standard s promulgate d with thi s rul e .wil

l b e me t s o tha t a permi t ma y b e issued

. Sections 780.37(a)/784.24(a) Plans and Drawings Final § 780.37(a

) require s th e permi t appUcatio n t o includ e plan s an d drawing s fo

r eac h roa d t o b e constructed , used , o r

maintaine d widri n di e propose d penni t

area
. OSMR

E believe s ma t

th e informatio n i n di e plan s an d drawing s enable s th e regulatory authorit y t o asses s th e impact s resultin g froman y road dia t woul d b e constructe d o r

use d a s par t

of di e surfac e minin g operation , an d determin e whethe r

di e operatio n an d reclamatio n pla n woul d b e effectiv e i n mitigatin g a s muc h o f

th e cumulativ e impact s o n di e environmen t a s possible , consisten t wid i th e purpos e o

f th e Ac t Fina l 5 780.37(a)(1 ) require s di e applican t t o submi t amap , an d a s appropriate , cros s sections , desig n drawings , an d specification s for road widths , gradients , surfacin g materials , cuts , fill embankments , culverts , bridges , drainag e ditches ; low-wate r crossings , an d drainag e structures

. OSMR E expect s tha t

th e amoun t

o f detai l submitte d b y th e applican t unde r dii s sectio n wil l b e appropriat e t o di e classificatio n of

di e road an d t o th e exten t of th e projecte d impac t

fro mdi e specifi c feature

. Fo r

example , les s detai l wil l b e required for

a n ancillar y road tha n fo r aprimary road , fo

r whic h th e drawing s an d specification s woul d b e

quit e detailed

. Fina l sectio n (a)(2 ) require s drawing s an d specification s o

f eac h propose d roa d tha t wil l b e locate d i n th e channe l o f a n intermitten t

o r perennia l strea mt

o giv e th e regulatory authorit y di e informatio n necessar y t o approv e th e road , consisten t

wit h di e performanc e standar d i n § 816.150(d)(1) , whic h wa s promulgate d pursuan t

t o sectio n 515(b)(18 ) o

f th e Act

. Fina l § 780.37(a)(3 ) require s tha t th e drawing s an d specification s for eac h propose d for

d o f perennia l o r intermitten t

stream s tha t

wil l b e use d a s atemporar y rout e provid e th e regulatory authorit y with sufficient

informatio n to revie w th e strea mfor

d an d decid e whethe r t o approv e i t

consisten t

wid i th e performanc e standar d i n § 816.151(c)(2)

. A mino r

wordin g change , discusse d below , wa s mad e i n th e final rul e t o mak e di e languag e i n § 780.37(a)(3 ) consisten t

with th e languag e i n 5 818.151(c)(2)

. Fina l § 780.37(a)(4 ) require s a descriptio n o

f measure s dia t

th e applican t mus t tak e t o obtai n th e approva l o

f th e regulatory authorit y fo r alteratio n o r

relocatio n o

f anatura l strea mchannel , consisten t wid i di e performanc e standar d i n propose d § 818.151(d)(5)

. A mino r

wordin g change , discusse d below , wa s mad e i n th e fina l rul e t o mak e di e languag e i n § 780.37(a)(4 ) consisten t

wid i di e langua g i n § 818.151(d)(5)

. Fina l $ 780.37(a)(5 ) require s drawing s an d specification s fo r

eac h low-wate r crossin g of

perennia l o r

intermitten t streams , t o enabl e di e regulator y authorit y t o maximiz e th e protectio n o f di e strea mi n accordanc e wid i th e performanc e standar d i n
_816.151(d)(6)

. A low-water , crossin g resemble s a bridg e i n dia t

wate r flow s unde r

th e structur e a t

norma l strea mlevel , bu t hig h wate r

goe s ove r

th e structur e durin g stormo r

floo d events

. A mino r wor d change , discusse d below , wa s mad e i n th e final rul e t o mak e di e languag e i n 9 780.37(a)(5 ) consisten t with di e languag e i n 5 816.151(d)(8)

. Fina l § 780.37(a)(6 ) require s informatio n o n di e applicant' s plan s t o remov e an d reclai meac h road , an d th e schedul e t o b e followe d for road reclamation , t o ensur e consistenc y with th e perfonnanc e standards

. Thi s informatio n wil l no t

b e require d fo

r a roa d uia t i s propose d t o b e retaine d fo r us e unde r a n approve d postminin g lan d use
. On e commente r

supporte d th e ne w languag e fo

r penni t informatio n requirement s fo

r roads an d suggeste d tha t i 780.37(a

) provide s neede dP. 7

informatio n fo

r di e regulatory authoritie s to mak e a n informe d decisio n wher e a n operato r propose s t o plac e road s i n strea mcourse s o r for d streambeds

. Anothe r

commente r suggeste d alanguag e chang e fo r § 780.3 7 an d odie r simila r section s tha t

referenc e th e preparatio n o

f plans , drawings , o r maps
. Th e commente r

suggeste d tha t eac h sectio n coul d includ e asentenc e notin g dia t

thes e requirement s may b e accomplishe d diroug h th e us e o f photogrammetri c metiiod s fo r aeria l survey s an d mapping

. Whil e thes e metiiod s ma y b e appropriat e t o fulfil

l some o f th e plans , drawings , an d ma p requirement s i n th e paragrap h an d othe r

sections , OSMR

E doe s no t believ e tha t

photogrammetri c metiiod s nee d t o b e specificall y reference d i n anationa l rule

. Th e State s ar e fre e t o specif

y di e type s o

f plans , drawing s an d map s tha t

will b e acceptabl e base d o n a n assessmen t o f th e quality , reliabilit y an d availabilit y of dat aprovide d b y variou s method s o f dat acollectio n an d presentation

. On e commente r

maintaine d tha t

di e requirement s i n § 780.37(a ) ar e redundan t

an d shoul d b e delete d becaus e die y ar e essentiall y foun d elsewher e i n di e regulations

. Th e commente r

note d tha t

3 0 CF R816.5 7 prohibit s an y activit y withi n 10 0 feet o f a n intermitten t

o r perennia l strea m unles s dia t

activit y i s approve d b y di e regulator y authorit y an d diversion s o f perennia l an d intermitten t streams , fo

r an y reaso n (includin g roads) ar e specificall y addresse d b y 3 0 CF R 816.43(b)

. Th e commente r argue d further dia t plan s for diversion s ar e require d t o b e include d i n th e permi t

b y 3 0 CF R 780.29 , an d th e effect s o

f al l propose d activities o n hydrolog y mus t b e addresse d i n di e permi t

unde r 3 0 CF R 780.21(171'? ' OSMRE'doe s no t

agre e tha t § 780.37(a)js*edundant

. I t contain s di e requiremen t

dia t th e permi t

applicatio n includ e plans , drawings , maps , descrptions , an d odie r

information ^ enabl e di e regulator y authorit y specificall y t o asses s th e impact s resulting fro

mroads dia t

woul d b e constructe d o r

use d a s par t

o f th e surfac e minin g operatio n relativ e t o th e specifi c performanc e standard s applicabl e t o roads

. Thes e informatio n requirement s wil l enabl e th e regulatory audiorit y t o determin e whethe r th e operatio n an d reclamatio n pla n wil l b e effectiv e i n mitigatin g th e impact s specifi c t o road s t o ensur e complianc e wit h thos e standards

. On e commente r

asserte d tha t

ther e wa s insufficient

protectio n fo

r strea m course s an d suggeste d tha t OSMR E se t minimumstandard s fo r determinin g allowabl e practices

. OSMR E doe s no t

agre e tha t

further minimumstandard s ar e appropriat e i n a nationa l rule , becaus e suc h standard s woul d fai l t o tak e int o accoun t regiona l difference s i n di e hydrologi c characteristic s o

f streams

. Furtiier , OSMR E believe s dia t

th e informatio n requirement s of

§ 780.3 7 provid e th e informatio n necessar y unde r th e Ac t fo r regulatory autiioritie s t o us e i n makin g permi t decision s concernin g di e locatio n o f road s i n strea mchannels

. Also , di e performanc e standard s fo r road s foun d i n § § 816.15 0 an d 816.151 , alon g wid i di e othe r genera l performanc e standard s found i n "Subchapte r

K-Permanen t Progra mPerformanc e Standards, " provid e sufficient

protectio n fo

r strea m courses
. Tw o commenter s suggeste d dia t th e technolog y use d i n § 780.37(a ) (2 ) diroug h (5 ) shoul d correspon d t o th e terminolog y use d i n th e performanc e standard s reference d b y eac h paragraph

. OSMR E agree s an d ha s mad e th e followin g change s t o di e rule

. I n § 780.37(a)(3) , "eac h propose d strea m ford " i s replace d b y "eac h propose d for d o f perennia l o r

intermitten t

streams " t o correspon d t o th e languag e i n 3 0 CF R 816.151(c)(2)

. I n § 780.37(a)(4) , "natura l drainageway " i s replace d b y "natura l strea mchannel " t o correspon d t o th e langaug e i n 3 0 CF

R818.151(d)(5) , In § 780.37(a)(5),"eac h low-wate r crossing " i s replace d b y "eac h low-wate r crossin g o f perennia l o r

intermitten t

strea m channels " t o correspon d t o th e languag e i n 3 0 CF R816.151(d)(6)

. Identica l change s wer e mad e i n § 784.24(a)(3 ) t o correspon d t o 3 0 CF

R817.151(c)(2) , i n § 784.24(a)(4 ) t o correspon d t o 3 0 CF R 817.151(d)(5) , an d i n § 784.24(a)(5 ) t o correspon d t o 3 0 CF

R817.151(d)(6)

. Thre e commenter s maintaine d dia t th e requiremen t

i n § 780.37(a

) t o prepar e plan s i s burdensome , doe s no t reflec t di e dynami c natur e o

f aminin g operation , an d doe s no t

produc e a commensurat e gai n i n environmenta l protection

. Th e commenter s suggeste d languag e change s an d alternat e concept s tiiat

include d requirin g onl y typica l desig n plans , plan s a s appropriate , o r

onl y detail s fo

r primary roads

. OSMR E doe s no t

agre e with di e commenters

. Th e informatio n require d fo r plan s an d drawing s i n § 780.37(a ) i s necessar y fo

r th e regulatory audiorit y t o asses s th e impact s expecte d fro mroad s associate d with apermi t

application

. Thi s evaluatio n o

f di e efficac y o

f th e propose d reclamatio n an d operation s pla n i n mitigatin g impact s o n th e environmen t i s consisten t

wit h th e purpose s o

f th e Act

. However , OSMR E expect s dia t

th e amoun t

o f detai l submitte d i n apermi t

applicatio n wil l b e appropriat e t o di e classificatio n o f th e roa d an d it s projecte d impacts

. On e commente r

suggeste d that , wher e strea mcrossing s ar e proposed , detaile d plan s fo r suc h crossing s shoul d b e submitte d s o dia t

th e regulator y audiorit y ca n evaluat e di e impact s o f thei r construction

. OSMR E agree s tha t

thi s coul d b e helpfu l t o di e regulatory audiority , an d th e regulatory authorit y ha s th e flexibilit y t o requir e dii s typ e o

f information

. Sectio n 780.3 7 require s th e applican t t o submi t plan s an d drawing s fo r eac h road , includin g amap , appropriat e cros s sections , desig n drawing s an d specification s fo r roa d widths , gradients , surfacin g materials , cuts , fill embankments , culverts , bridges , drainag e ditches , low-wate r crossing s an d drainag e structures

. Four commenter s suggeste d tha t th e requiremen t

i n § 780.37(a)(6 ) t o describ e roa d remova l an d reclamation an d provid e aschedul e fo

r th e wor k shoul d b e delete d o r

clarifie d t o ensur e tha t

th e detai l require d fo

r th e schedul e woul d b e commensurat e with th e dynami c natur e o f minin g operations

. Th e commenter s note d tiiat, du e t o th e variabl e natur e o

f minin g operations , a schedul e fo

r roa d remova l an d reclamatio n woul d b e speculativ e a t best

. OSMR E recognize s th e potentia l fo r change s i n th e road remova l an d reclamatio n pla n an d schedul e a s minin g progresses
. However , thi s potentia l fo

r change , whic h i s inheren t i n al l plan s an d schedules , dbe s no t obviat e th e nee d to hav e tins best-pla n informatio n availabl e t o th e regulatory authorit y durin g permi t

revie w t o ensur e consistenc y witi i th e performanc e standard s found i n 3 0 CF

R816.150(f)

. Sections 780.37(b)/784.24(b) Primary Road Certification Thi s provisio n i s identica l t o th e propose d rul e an d require s tiiat th e plan s an d drawing s fo

r eac h primary roa d b e prepare d b y o r

unde r th e directio n o

f aqualifie d registere d professiona l enginee r

experience d i n th e desig n an d constructio n o f roads

. I t als o require s tha t

th e enginee r

certif y dia t th e desig n meet s di e performanc e standard s o

f 3 0 CF RChapte r

VII , current , pruden t

engineerin g practices , an d an y desig n criteri aestblishe d b y di e regulator y authority

. Th e phas e "current , pruden t

engineerin g practices " include s dios e practice s well

establishe d b y engineerin g principle sP. 8

4S3rSS ^ &*$j£Q*&ig^Uh*< :m f Vol

. 53V'Nb/21ff'. /

"Tuesday , Novembe r

8 , 188 8 /

Rule s an d Regulation s

an d widel y recognize d b y expert s with experienc e i n th e subject

. Sectio n 780.37(b ) als o allow s desig n an d certificatio n b y aqualifie d registere d professiona l lan d surveyo r experience d i n th e desig n an d constructio n o

f road s i n an y Stat e whic h authorize s lan d surveyor s t o certif y th e desig n o f primar y roads. Thi s provisio n i s base d o n th e Novembe r 4,1983 , amendment s t o th e Ac t

whic h authoriz e lan d surveyor s t o prepar e an d certif y cros s sections , maps , an d plan s (Sec

. 115 , Pub

. L 98-146,9 7 Sta t 93 8 (1983))

. Th e amendmen t

provide s tha t

"no t withstandin g sectio n 507(b)(14 ) o f th e Surfac e Minin g an d Reclamatio n Ac t o f 197 7 (Pub

. L

. 95-87) , cros s sections , maps , o r plan s of lan d t o b e affecte d b y a n applicatio n for

surfac e minin g an d reclamatio n permi t

shal l b e prepare d b y o r unde r di e directio n of

aqualifie d registere d professiona l enginee r o r geologis t o r qualifie d registere d professiona l lan d surveyo r i n an y Stat e whic h autiiorize s lan d surveyor s t o prepar e an d certif

y suc h map s o r

plans. " Befor e alan d surveyo r

coul d certif

y th e desig n o f aprimary road unde r

thi s rule , Stat e la w als o woul d hav e t o gran t correspondin g audiority

. ~ ' On e commente r

indicate d suppor t

for § 780.37(b) , whic h reflect s the'198 3 amendmen t

t o di e Ac t

initiate d b y th e surveyin g professio n authorizin g a qualifie d registere d professiona l lan d surveyo r t o desig n an d certif

y plan s an d drawing s fo

r eac h primary road

. Tw o comment s maintaine d tha t a t di e tim e of permi t applicatio n preparation , a n operato r

ma y no t hav e determine d th e precis e locatio n an d desig n o f aroa d o r may no t hav e sufficient

site-specifi c field informatio n t o certif

y di e plan s an d drawing s fo

r aprimar y road

. The y suggeste d tha t

OSMR E chang e th e languag e i n § 780.37(b ) t o allo w fo r di e submissio n of.detaile d desig n an d plan s prio r t o construction , instea d o f requirin g submissio n wid i th e permi t application

. The y note d dia t thi s woul d reduc e th e likelihoo d o f

permit. ' modification s late r

durin g th e duratio n o f th e operation

. I n arelate d commen t it

. wa s suggeste d tha t

§ ' 780.3 7 contai n a provisio n requiring submissio n t o di e regulator y audiorit y b y di e permitte e of update d plan s an d drawing s t o accoun t fo r change s i n di e locatio n o r desig n of roads

. OSMR E di d no t accep t th e suggestio n tha t th e final rul e allo w submissio n o f detaile d desig n an d plan s a t th e tim e o

f roa d construction

. OSMR E believe s tha t in orde r t o adequatel y asses s th e impact s o f th e roads planne d for

a n operation , di e regulator y authorit y need s th e informatio n require d i n § 780.37(b ) durin g di e initia l permi t review

. Thi s i s particularl y importan t for primary road s du e to di e potentia l fo r environmenta l impac t

associate d wit

h thei r frequenc y o r

length o f usage
. Also , OSMR E anticipate s tha t

sufficient informatio n wil l b e presen t i n th e permi t applicatio n packag e t o ensur e complianc e with th e appropriat e performanc e standards

. OSMR E di d no t accep t di e suggestio n dia t

th e final rul e requir e th e submissio n o

f update d plan s an d drawing s t o accoun t

fo r change s i n th e locatio n o r

desig n o f roads

. I f change s occur , tiiey mus t

b e incorporate d int o di e penni t b y th e norma l permi t

revisio n proces s establishe d i n 3 0 CF

RPar t 77i. On e commente r

di d no t agree with th e languag e tiiat

authorize s lan d surveyor s t o certif y plan s an d drawing s fo

r roads

. Th e commente r

maintaine d tha t

th e desig n of road s wa s outsid e th e fiel d o f expertis e o

f lan d surveyors
. OSMR E recognizes tha t

no t al l lan d surveyor s hav e adequat e expertis e t o certif y plan s an d drawing s fo

r roa d designs , an d therefor e require s tha t di e registere d professiona l lan d surveyo r b e "qualifie d an d experience d i n th e desig n an d constructio n o

f roads. " This

. requiremen t

alon g wit h di e requirement ' fo r Stat e authorizatio n o f

surveyo r
. certificatio n o

f road design , i s sufficient t o ensur e tiiat

certifyin g lan d surveyor s wil l hav e appropriat e expertis e t o certfi y plan s an d drawing s fo r roads. On e commente r

argue d tiiat

th e certificatio n requiremen t

i n § 780.37(b ) wa s unnecessar y an d shoul d b e deleted

. Th e commente r

note d tha t

sinc e th e road s wer e par t

o f th e permi t

area , the y wer e alread y complete d b y aqualifie d enginee r o r lan d surveyo r

and , therefore , mus t compl y wit h th e approve d minin g pla n an d performanc e standards

. Th e commente r

argue d furthe r

tha t requirin g post-constructio n certificatio n of road s create s additiona l unnecessar y paperwork

with n o ne t

environmenta l protection

. OSMR E doe s no t

agre e with di e commente r

an d beUeve s di e desig n certificatio n requiremen t

fo r primary road s i s necessar y becaus e th e potentia l fo r environmenta l impact s fro mprimary road s ca n b e significan t

B y requirin g certificatio n tiiat

th e desig n o

f primar y road s meet s th e requirement s o f di e Ac t th e potentia l problem s associate d wit h desig n o f primar y road s wil l b e minimized

. Tw o commenter s suggeste d tha t geologist s b e authorize d t o certif y plan s an d drawing s fo

r primar y roads

. The y note d tha t th e Novembe r

4,1983 , amendmen t

t o th e Ac t

allow s cros s sections , maps , o r

plan s o f lan d to b e affecte d b y a n applicatio n fo r surfac e minin g an d reclamatio n permi t t o b e prepare d b y o r unde r th e directio n o

f a qualifie d registere d professiona l geologist

. OSMR E di d no t accep t dii s suggestio n becaus e di e existin g authorit y o f geologist s i s no t

affecte d b y thi s rulemaking ; therefore , thei r authorit y fo

r preparin g an d certifyin g cros s sections , map s an d plan s ha s no t

change d sinc e 198 5 (5 0 F R18195 , Apri l 24,1985)

. On e commente r

suggeste d tha t ancillar y road s shoul d als o b e designe d an d certifie d b y aqualifie d professiona l t o ensur e prope r

drainag e contro l an d stabilit y o f roa d embankments

. OSMR E di d no t accep t dii s suggestion

. I t

i s no t necessar y t o require desig n certificatio n o

f ancillar y roads becaus e usag e of

ancillar y roads ha s smalle r potentia l fo

r advers e environmenta l impac t

tha n usag e o

f primar y roads

. AncUlar

y roads ar e subjec t t o relativel y infrequen t

us e b y smaller , lighte r

weigh t vehicles

. Se e th e discussio n o f

di e road classificatio n syste mi n th e preambl e t o fina l 1816.150(a)(1)

. Sections 78Q37(c)/78£24(c) Standard Design Piano Fina l § 780.37(c ) i s identica l t o th e propose d rul e an d allow s di e regulator y authorit y t o establis h engineerin g desig n standard s fo

r primar y roads throug h ui e Stat e programapprova l process , i n lie u o f th e engineerin g test s dia t otherwis e woul d b e performe d t o estabUs h complianc e wit h di e mlnihrn mstatic

. . safety facto r

o f l.S , for al l primary , road embankments

. Suc h standard s mus t b e n o les s effectiv e tha n di e minimum stati c safety facto r

o f 1.3

. Suitabl e engineerin g desig n standard s ar e thos e tha t ar e accepte d i n di e engineerin g communit y a s di e basi s for

constructin g stabl e roads , an d ar e know n t o assur e prope r performanc e throug h testin g an d pas t practice

. Thi s provisio n enable s di e regulatory authorit y an d th e operato r t o sav e tim e an d effor

t durin g di e desig n an d revie w of

roa d plans , an d als o ensure s protectio n o

f di e environmen t throug h ui e applicatio n of standard s tha t hav e prove n effectiv e fo

r di e condition s prevalen t

i n eac h State

. Thre e commenter s supporte d propose d § 780.37(c)

. The y note d dia t b y aUowin g th e regulatory audiorit y t o establis h o r

us e engineerin g desig n standard s instea d o f

engineerin g tests , § 780.37(c) reinforce s di e Act' s findin g i n sectio n 101(f

) tha t becaus e o

f di e diversit y i n terrain

. cUmate , biologic , chemical , an d othe r

physica l condition s i n area s subjec t

t o minin g operations , th e primary govemmental responsibilit y fo r developing , authorizing , issuing , an d enforcin g regulation s fo

r surfac e minin g

# nP. 9



### / Vol

. 53 , No

. 21 8 /

Tuesday , Novembe

r 8 , 198 8 / Rule s an d Regulation s 4518 7

an d reclamatio n operation s shoul d res t wit h di e States
. D. Sections

780.38/784.30

Support Facilities Fina l g 780.3 8 addresse s the specifi c permi tapplicatio n requirement s fo r al l suppor tfacilitie s covere d b y § 816.18 1 of di e performanc

e standards . A permi

t applicantmus

tsubmi ta description , plan s and drawing s for each facilit y t o b e constructed , use d o

r maintained withi n th e propose d permi tarea . Th e plan s and drawing s includ e a map , appropriat

e cros s sections , desig n drawings , and specification s sufficient t o demonstrat

e complianc e wit

h § 816.18 1 fo

r eac h faciUty
. Th e fina

l rule i s adopte d a s proposed . Thi s rule expand s ne w g 780.3 8 t o cove r suppor

tfacilitie s i n general . Aldioug h existin g 30 CF

RPar t78 0 contain s a numbe

r o f requirement

s applicabl e t

o suppor tfaciUties , di e existin g rule s d o notcontai n a genera l requirementdiata permi tapplicatio n includ e plan s and drawing s fo r suppor t faciUties tiiatwoul d b e sufficientt o demonstrat

e compUanc

e wit h g 816.181
. T o remedy thi s deficiency , § 780.38 applie s t o a

U suppor tfaciUtie s i n additio n t o th e conveyor s and rai

l system s covere d b y previou s § 780.37
. On e commenter objecte d t o proposed § 780.38 becaus e i tappeared t o th e commenter t o conside r road s associate d wit h suppor tfacilitie s t

o b e distinctfro

m road s regulated b y g § 816.150 and 816.151
. The commenter state d tha tth e preamble provide d n o justificatio n for distinguishin g roads associate d wit h suppor tfaciUties a s distinc tfro

m road s associate d wit

h th e surface coal minin

g operatio n sinc e di e sam e equipmen t use s bot h roads. Fo

r thi s reason , th e commenter continued , al l road s shoul d b e designe d and maintained unde r a unifor m se to f performanc

e standard s and reclaimed t

o permanen

tprogra m standards . OSMR E agree s tha

tthi s rule shoul d notdistinguis h roads associate d widi : suppor tfaciUtie s from othe r roads. Hi e definitio n otroad

i n fina l §701.5 include s al l roadb-tha

tar e use d in surfac e coa l minin

g and reclamatio n operatio n withoutdifferentiating betwee n roa&

s for suppor

tfacilitie s an

d road s for coa l minin

g operations
. Sectio n 780.3

7 a s wel l a s th e performanc

e standard s i n § g 818.150 and 15 1 apply t

o al l road s atthe coa l minin g operatio n includin g thos e associate d with suppor

tfaciUties
. Therefore , a

U road s mustb e designe d

- and maintaine d under a unifor m se tof performanc

e standard s and reclaime d t o permanen tprogra m standards . Th e sam e commenter als o state d tha t proposed § 780.3

8 appeared t

o remove suppor tfacilities , including conveyor s an d rai l systems , fro

m di e permi

t information requirement

s and permanen tprogra m performanc

e standard s tha

twere applicabl e fo

r thes e facilitie s unde

r th e 198 3 rule and woul d b e applicabl e t

o road s unde

r the proposed rule . Th

e commenter state d tha t§ 780.3 8 mus tb e substantiaU

y rewritten t

o ensur e tha tconveyor s and rai l system s i n particular, and a U suppor tfacilitie s in general , meetal l permanen tprogra m applicatio n an

d perfonnance standar

d requirements
. OSMR E disagree s witii th

e commenter' s assessmen to f di e purpos e an d effec to f thi s final rule . Th

e final rul e doe s notchange o

r affec tin an y wa y th e performanc

e standard s for suppor tfacmtiefs
. Th

e rule bring

s th e forma tof th e permi tinformation requirement

s int o harmon y wit h th e forma to f the performanc

e b y placin g th e permi tinformation requirement s an d performanc

e standard s fo

r roads and suppor tfacUitie s i n separate , parallel sections
. OSMR E als o disagree s diat§ 780.3 8 shoul d b e rewritten t o indicate mor e clearly the performanc

e standard s applicabl e t o suppor

tfaciUties
. I

n fac t § 780.3 8 certifie s th e performanc e standard s applicabl e t

o suppor t faciUties (including rail system s and conveyors ) b y groupin

g di e permi

t information requirement

s and di e associate d performanc

e standar d referenc e i n th e sam e place . Previously , the permi tappUcan twoul d hav e ha d t o search throug

h § 780.3 7 t o determine di e requirement

s appUcable justt o roads an d thos e applicabl e t

o bot h suppor t facilitie s and roads . On e commenter state d tha tth e tide o

f § 780.38 shoul d b e "Othe

r Transportation Facilities " sinc e tha ti s th e section' s topi c o

f discussion
. OSMR E di d notaccep tthi s comment . Sinc e th e permittin

g requirements establishe d by thi s sectio n cove r al ) suppor tfacilities , and paraUe

l an d reference the performanc

e standard s i n g 818.181 , concerning suppor tfacilities , th e title i s appropriate
. Tw o commenter

s requested tha

t g 780.38 b e withdrawn fro m thi s rulemakin g becaus e OSMR

E ha s not defined "suppor

tfaciUties, " and iti s therefor e prematur

e for OSMR

E t o adop t dii s rule . The

y als o state d dia

tdi e proposa l substantiall y change s di e scop e o f thi s rul e fro m roads and conveyor s t

o a U facUities
. The

y state d tha ti twa s notpossibl e t

o commen to n g 780.3 8 withoutan

y guidance o n wha

t constitute s a suppor

tfacilit y until iti s defined in di e rules . Finally , di e

commenter

s suggeste d diatState s ar e capabl e o f determining dios e facilitie s relate d t o coal minin

g tha tshould b e regulated unde

r tiieir regulator

y program s and establishin g appropriat e performanc

e standard s a s necessary . OSMR E agree s i n par

tand disagree s in part . First , effectiv e Jul

y 11,1988 , OSMR E reinstate d th e suspende d definition ot

support facilities (5

3 F R 21764, Jun e 9,1988 ) pursuan

tt o th e Januar y 29,198 8 decisio n of

th e U.S
. Cour to f Appeal s fo

r di e Distric

to f Columbi a Circui t(NWFv. Hodel). However , OSMR

E agree s dia

tState regulator y authorities ar

e capabl e o

f identifying facilitie s tiiatshoul d b e subjec tt o di e provision s o

f th e Ac t withouthaving a definitio n o f suppor t facilitie s i n di e Federa

l regulations
. Therefore , OSMR

E ha s proposed t

o delet e th e recentl y reinstate d definitio n , o f support facilities fro

m 30 CF R701.5 (5 3 F R23522
. Jun

e 22,1988)
. However , whethe r ther

e i s o r i s nota Federa

l definitio n ot

support facilities i s irrelevantt

o thi s rule , th e purpos e of whic h i s t o specif y mor e clearl y the lin

k betwee n permi

tinformation requirement

s for such facUitie s and the applicabl e perfonnance standards , which ar e no tpar to f du s rulemaking
. Th e informatio

n require d in g 780.3

8 i s neede d t o demonstrat

e compliance b y eac h facUit

y wid i 3 0 CF R816.181
. One commente

r state d tiiatg 780.38 wa s unnecessary becaus e sufficient informatio

n i s authorized i n th e existin g regulations t

o sho w di e locatio n and dimension s of

a U suppor tarea s withi n the permi tboundary ; therefore , the propose d rule doe s Utti

e mor e tha n reinforc e the existin g regulations
. OSMR E disagree s tha

tg 780.3 8 i s unnecessar

y becaus e aldioug

h existin g 3 0 CF RPar t78 0 contain s a numbe

r o f requirements which ma

y b e appUcable t o suppor tfacilities , th e existin g rule s do notcontai n a specifi c requiremen ttha ta permi tapplicatio n includ e plan s and drawings fo

r suppor tfaciUties tha

t woul d b e sufficien

tt o demonstrat

e compliance wit

h g 8iai81
. By specifyin g di e degre e o

f detai l tha ti s neede d i n each permi

tapplication , g 780.38 provide s clea r directio n t

o the applican t E. Section

815.15(b)

Road Standards for Coal Exploration Fina l g 815.15(b ) requires al l road s o r other transportation facilitie s use d fo r coa l exploratio n t o compl y wid i di e applicabl e provision s o

f 3 0 CF R818.150 , 816.180
. and 816.181
. Th

e fina l rule i s unchanged fro

m di e proposal . OSMR E believe s die ti

ti s not necessary fo

r road s use d fo

r coa l

mMkiJ L _,_A__v.iM.^_ikMu__k_._.iliid .mM 1 1 IIT""" " IfaaJk^a^taU.JMMikUMt u i •* ;P.1 0



# m m / Vol

- 83 ; Nor

Zk@. f

. Tuesday,

. Novembe r

8 , 198 8 /

Rule s an d Regulation s

. » :
i ' exploratio n t o meetdi e performanc e standard s o

f g 818.15 1 fo

r primar y road s becaus e di e amoun

to f coal o r spoi l transported durin

g coa l exploratio n operation s i s relativel y small . OSMR E beUeve s tha

tdi e performanc

e standard s o f g 818.15 0 provid e sufficien

tprotectio n fo r di e environmen

tdurin g coal exploration
. Unde

r sectio n 512(a

) o f the Ac t3 0 CF R815.1 5 applie s onl y t

o "coa l exploratio n activitie s whic h substantiall y distur

b th e natura

l lan d surface. " Thus , a road mustcompl y wit h th e applical e provision s of 30 CF R 816.15 0 onl y t o the . exten ttha

tth e coal exploratio n activitie s substantiall y distur b th e lan d where th e roa

d i s located . OSMR

E ha s defined the ter

m substantially disturb i n 3 0 CF R701.5
. One commenter supported di e language i n g 815.15(b) because , in the commenter' s opinion , itallow s di e regulator y authorit y som e flexibilit

y in decidin g if

a coa l exploratio n roa

d shoul d b e designe d and constructe d t o primar y roa d standards . Th

e commente

r state d tha tsinc e thes e road s ar e generall y use d fo

r onl y a shor

ttime durin g coal exploratio n activities , especiaUy whe n 25

0 ton s o r les s o f coal i s removed , th e desig n and constructio n o f a road t o suc h stringen tstandard s i s notnecessary . ••.''
- OSMR E disagree s with th e commenter' s assessmen to f di e applicabilit

y of.th e rule . The rules , adopte d today d o no tappl y di e primar y road performanc

e standard s ii i § 816.15 1 t o coal exploratio n activities
. Furthermore

, th e coal exploratio n regulation s d o no trequir

e prio r approva l o f roads whe n 25

0 ton s o r les s o f coal i s t o b e removed. -••'.
. ~ Anothe r commenter state d tha t OSMR E ha s a responsibilit

y t o se t nationa l standard s for roads associate d wit h coal exploration , regardless o f th e amoun to f coal removed fro

m the site
. The commente

r suggeste d tha

t haulroad s fo

r coa l exploratio n i n steep slop e area s hav e th e potential for environmental.damage and requir e standard s t

o ensure tiiatenvironmenta l damage cause d b y constructio n and us e of thes e road s i s minimised
. Th e commenter als o state d tiiatOSMR E ha s n o basis : fo

r th e arugment-tha

tspecifi c desig n standards-only appl y t o primar

y road s becaus e OSMR

E ha s a statutor

y responsibilit

y t o provid e meaningfu

l national standard s fo

r al l surface coal minin g and reclamatio n operations
. Th e commenter conclude d tha tmeaningfu

l national standard s for road s associate d wit h coal exploratio n site s shoul d b e adopte d i n th e final rule . OSMR E ha s include d a ful

l discussio n o n th e necessity o

f promulgatin

g specifi c desig n standard s fo

r minin g road s i n th e discussio n o f g 816.150
. Neithe r sectio n 512 nor sectio n 515 o

f the Ac trequires the establishemen to

f desig n standard s fo r coa l exploratio n roads . The requiremen

tin g 818.150(c

) tha tth e roa d shal l incorporat

e appropriat

e limit s fo r grade , width , surface materials , surface drainag e control , culver

tplacementand culver tsize , and an

y necessar y design , criteria establishe d b y th e regulator y authorit y wil l provid e adequat

e environmenta

l protectio n t

o the are a o f coal exploratio n activities
. Enforcemen t o f thes e provision s wi

U provid e di e necessary protectio n i n steep-slop e areas . On e commenter recommended ma t the ter m substantially disturbed i n 3 0 CF R701.5 b e changed t

o exclud e th e constructio n o

f a roa d fo r coal exploratio n activitie s proposing t o remove les s tiian 25

0 ton s o f coal . OSMR E doe s notagree tha

tdi e constructio n o

f a roa d fo r suc h coal exploratio n activitie s coul d notinvolv e "substantia

l disturbance. " Th e determination o

f whe n "substantia

l disturbance " ha s occurre

d mus tb e mad e o n a site-by-sit e basis
. OSMR E doe s notbeliev e th e routine maintenance of

a n existin g roa

d use d fo r coa l exploratio n i s a substantial disturbance requiring th e roa d t o b e reclaime d i n accordanc e wit h th e preformanc

e standard s o

f sectio n 51 5 o

f the Act
. To us e a

n existin g roa

d tha ti s i n poor conditio n du

e t o lack o f maintenance , a coal exploratio n operato r ma

y nee d t o blad e the roa

d surface , replac e som e culverts , o r d o other mino

r routine maintenance
. Suc h routine maintenance o

f a n existin g roa

d woul d notb e considere d substantial disturbance o

f th e natura

l lan d surfac

e tha twoul d requir

e reclamatio n o

f th e road . Further

, i n som e case s coal exploratio n activitie s ar

e conducte d withoutroad s an d i n such a manne r tha t th e activitie s d o notsubstantiall y distur b the natura

l land surface
. F. Sections 818.150/817.150 Roads: General
. ...'" ' Fina l g 816.15 0 applie s t

o ai l road s a s define d b y 30 CF

R701.5
. I tinclude s a roa d classificatio n system , performanc e standards , desig n an

d constructio n limits , provisio n fo

r desig n criteria , an

d provision s o n road location , maintenance , and reclamation. Sectio n 816.150 i s identical t

o th e propose d rule excep tfo r a clarifyin

g change t

o g 818.150(b)(1 ) adopted a

tthe requesto

f EP A and minor change s t

o § 816;i50(d)(l ) and (f)
. Sections 818.150(a)/817.150(a) Road Classification System Fina l g 816.150(a

) i s identical t

o the proposed rul

e and establishe s classification s fo

r al l mine road s a s eitiie r primar

y o r ancillary
. Primar

y roads ar e defined a s an

y roads(l ) use d fo r transportin

g coal o r spoil , (2 ) frequenti y use d fo r acces s o r other purpose s fo

r a perio d i n exces s o

f si x months , o r (3 ) t o b e retained fo

r a n approved postmining land use . An ancillar y roa d i s any roa

d notclassifie d a s a primar

y road . OSMR

E believe s tha

t the potentia

l fo r environmenta

l har m associate d wit

h th e tw o type s o

f roads i s sufficiently differen

tt o requir e a two tiere d classificatio n system . Roads tha t ar e heavil y travelle d ove r a long period o f time ; use d b y large , heav y vehicles ; o r tha thav e a potentia

l fo r spillag e have a greate r potentia

l fo r environmenta

l har m tha n road s tha

tar e use d infrequentl

y b y small , ligh tvehicle s o

r fo r shor tperiod s o f time
. Thi s concep ti s supporte d by OSMRE' s experienc e and observation s ove r di e pas tten year s operating a regulator y program. Eac h of th e factors tha

tdistinguis h primar y road s fro

m ancillar

y roads i s relate d t o a n increase d potentia

l fo r environmenta

l harm . Roads use d fo

r haulage o f coal , overburden , spoil , etc . ar e classifie d a s primar

y roads unde

r di e final rules . Thes e roads ar e typically use d b y large , heav y vehicles
. I n orde r t o accommodat

e such'Vehicles , the roa

d mus tb e wide , generaly involvin g tw o lane s of traffic, and it s surface mus tb e capabl e o f supportin g the weigh to

f the traffic
. A wid e road involve s muc h mor e earthmoving i n its constructio n and expose s mor

e surface area , increasin g the potentia

l fo r erosion
. O

n heavil y travelle d roads , provisio n mus tb e made fo r vehicle s t

o pas s one another safely
. Th e desig n manuals recommen d wide r lane s where the abilit

y o f vehicle s t

o pas s on e another i s a concern . Se e Kaufma n and Ault, pp . 30-33
. O

n less travelle d roads , a singl e lan e woul d suffice
. The increase d potentia l fo r environmenta

l har m associate d witii frequentl y travelle d roads derive s fro m the greate r surfac

e area expose d an

d the greater dus tentrainmen

tassociate d wid i large r vehicle s and the greater volum e o f traffic
. Road s wit

h a highe r weigh tbearing capacit

y requir e a thicker subbase , s o tha

tmor e materia l mus tb e excavated , place d and compacted i

n constructing the road . Design manual s recommen d tha t road s use d b

y larg e haulage vehicles , fo

r example , in the 100,000-200,00 0 poun d range , minimize th

e severit y o f roa d grades . Se e Kaufma

n and Ault, pp . 8-11
. 

# 4P.1 1

iste g / Vol ; 53 , No

. 21 8 /

Tuesday,

. Novembe r

8 j 1888 * A Rules--aaa S
Buildin g road s t o accommodat e heavie r vehicles , therefore , often requires substantia l cu t

an d fill wor

k to limi t maximu man d sustaine d grade s i n additio n to providin g adequat e width fo r wid e vehicle s t o safel y pass
. Also/sinc e ther e i s acertai n amoun t

o f carg o spillag e associate d wit h haulag e roads , th e potentia l fo

r erosion , siltatio n o r damag e t o propert y o r

wildlif e habita t i s greate r fo r suc h primar y road s du e t o loos e coal , coa l wast e o r

spoi l o n th e roa d surface

. Road s no t

use d fo r haulag e wil l no t

typicall y generat e thi s potentia l problem

. Unde r th e classificatio n system , primary road s als o includ e road s frequenti y use d fo

r aperio d i n exces s o

f si x months ; Thi s facto r

i s include d du e to th e increase d risk

o f environmenta l harmassociate d witi i heav y traffi c ove r lon g period s of

time

. Duratio n o

f roa d us e i s als o a n importan t

predicto r o f potentia l environmenta l harm

. Th e longe r aroa d exists , di e greate r potentia l fo

r sUp s o r grad e failure s a s we U a s otiie r

impact s previousl y mentioned

. In OSMRE' s experience , th e potentia l fo

r erosio n an d siltatio n a s wel l a s roa d grad e failure s i s quit e seasonal , normall y occurrin g i n earl y spring

. Especiall y i n th e Easter n U.S. , th e increase d precipitatio n associate d with thi s perio d combine d with frequen t freezin g an d thawin g tend s t o degrad e roa d bed s a s wel l a s th e surface

. However , suc h problem s ar e frequentl y no t eviden t i n di e first

season
. Moreover , road s use d les s tiian si x month s wil l frequenti y ho t eve n b e i n plac e during.dii s season
. Therefore , OSMR E believes, ' du e t o th e increase d risk o f environmenta l harm , tha t longe r termroads mus t

b e subjec t

to di e mor e stringen t primary roa d desig n an d performanc e standards

. OSMR E strongl y believe s tha t

differentiatin g betwee n potentially greate r o r lesse r environmenta l impact s i n developin g regulatory requirement s i s full y consisten t wit h th e requirement

i n sectio n 102 o f

die , Ac t t o estabUs h a -grogra mt o protec t

societ y an d th e environment--an d t o strik e abalanc e betwee n protectio n o

f th e environmen t an d th e nation' s nee d fo

r coal

. OSMR

E i s basin g thes e roa d provisions , i n part , o n te n year s of

experienc e enforcin g th e surfac e minin g regulatory program
. OSMR E believe s tha t

thes e standard s ar e both necessar y an d adequat e t o achiev e th e purpose s of

th e Ac t Ancillary road s ar e a

U road s no t designate d a s primary

. AncUlar y road s
. ar e subjec t

t o relativel y infrequen t

us e b y smaller , lighter

weigh t vehicles

. Consequently , di e potentia l severit y an d ris k o f harmfro mus e b y suc h vehicle s i s smaller

. OSMR E ha s no t identifie d specifi c type s o

f road s i n di e rul e a s ancillary becaus e i t

woul d no t

b e possibl e t o mak e a n all-inclusiv e Ust

. Example s o

f ancillary road s ar e thos e whic h provid e acces s to ai r shafts , sedimen t ponds , an d locations fo

r hydrologi c sampling , equipmen t maintenance , monitoring , o r othe r simila r uses
. On e commente r

supporte d th e concep t o f tw o classification s fo

r road s a 3 wel l a s th e handlin g o

f performanc e standard s i n genera l terms

. Th e commente r

note d tha t

thi s give s th e regulatory authorit y more discretio n i n managin g permittin g an d enforcemen t programs
. On e commente r

suggeste d tha t

al l road s outsid e th e are acontroUe d b y siltatio n structure s an d treatmen t facilitie s b e considere d primar y roads

. OSMR E di d no t accep t thi s suggestio n becaus e i t

i s unnecessaril y rigid

. Suc h a syste mfo r designatin g primary roads woul d entai l substantia l design , constructio n an d maintenanc e cost s without , i n man y cases , aconcomitan t reductio n i n potentia l environmenta l harm

. Som e commenter s wer e concerne d tha t th e propose d two-tiere d syste mwa s overl y simplistic , especiaU y with resepct t o limite d us e road s tha t

exis t for extende d period s o

f time

. Th e commenter s felt

tha t suc h road s woul d b e inappropriatel y considere d primary roads

. OSMR E doe s no t

agre e dia t

th e two

tiered syste mi s overl y simplistic , no r doe s i t agree tha t

a"simple " syste mi s necessaril y inferio r

t o a"complex " one
. Th e fina l rul e balance s environmenta l protection , safety an d roa d stabilit y agains t design , constructio n an d

. maintenanc e cost s whil e providin g di e flexibilit y t o addres s amultitud e of varyin g sit e conditions

. Unde r th e final rule , infrequentl y use d aces s road s tha t wil l b e i n existenc e fo

r a n extende d perio d o f time wil l b e considere d ancillar y roads

. . Numerou s commenter s voice d thei r concern s abou t

ho w th e element s o

f th e definitio n o

f primary roa d i n § 816.150(a)(2) woul d b e interpreted

. Regardin g th e criterio n i n § 816.150{a)(2)(i) tha t

road s use d fo

r transportin g coa l o r

spoi l ar e primary roads , ther e wa s conce mtha t abon a fide ancillary roa d woul d automaticall y b e classifie d a s aprimary roa d i f a pickup truc k

loade d wit

h coa l use d th e road

. OSMR E di d no t modif y di e regulation in respons e to thi s concern becaus e i t i s confident tha t suc h situation s rarely , i

f ever , aris e an d tha t

regulatory authoritie s wil l us e reasoned judgemen t

i n applyin g th e definitio n t o achiev e it s intende d purpose
. Road s use d fo r coa l an d spoi l transportatio n mus t b e considere d primary road s becaus e o f th e generall y larg e truck s used , th e hig h frequenc y o

f trips , th e potential fo

r spillag e o f coa l o r spoi l ont o th e roa d surface , an d di e fac t

tha t coa l an d spoi l transpor t occur s throughou t

th e lif e o f th e operation

. Concernin g th e frequenc y o f us e criterio n containe d in § 818.150(a)(2)(H) , acommente r

suggeste d tha t

th e wor d "frequentiy " b e droppe d becaus e som e infrequentl y use d roa d coul d caus e more environmenta l harmtha n coa l haulroads

. It

wa s als o suggeste d tha t frequenc y b e defined

. OSMR E di d no t dro p th e frequenc y elemen t fro mth e definitio n o

f primary roa d becaus e i t

believe s tiiat

frequenc y o f us e i s ake y predictor , alon g wit h duratio n o

f use , o f potentia l environmenta l harm

. OSMR E di d no t ad d adefinitio n o

f "frequentl y used " to th e final rul e becaus e i t

i s no t possibl e o r advisabl e i n anationa l rul e t o devis e adefinitio n tha t

wil l fairl y addres s al l set s o f circumstances. Whethe r

aroa d i s "frequenti y used " i s adeterminatio n tha t shoul d b e mad e a t

groun d leve l o n a case-by-cas e basi s takin g int o accoun t th e probabl e environmenta l consequence s o

f th e anticipate d leve l o

f us e an d th e type s o

f vehicle s expecte d t o us e th e road A s a n example , OSMR E consider s tha t

aroad use d onl y onc e o r twic e eac h day , o r

onc e o r twic e eac h shift , fo r acces s t o astructur e housin g a fa n o r ventilato r

(fa n house ) fo

r th e purpos e o f monitorin g and/o r maintenanc e woul d no t

b e a'"frequentl y used " road

. Concernin g th e duratio n o f us e criterio n i n § 816.150(a)(2)(ii) , i t wa s
. suggeste d tha t

th e six-mont

h perio d shoul d b e delete d an d tha t th e primary roa d definitio n shoul d bette r reflec t th e typ e o f vehicula r us e an d primary purpos e o f th e road

. It

wa s argue d further tha t acces s an d servic e road s use d in exces s i s si x month s woul d b e classifie d a s primary road s thus burdenin g th e operato r

with unnecessar y desig n an d performanc e requirements. Th e conce mtha t

th e primary roa d definitio n shoul d bette r

reflec t th e typ e o f vehicular us e an d primary purpos e of th e roa d i s addresse d i n th e previou s ' discussio n explainin g th e basi s fo r th e roa d classificatio n system

. A s t o whic h road s ar e classifie d a s primary , th e commente r

may hav e misunderstoo d th e propose d regulation

. Duratio n o f us e i s a ke y predicto r

o f aroad' s potentia l fo

r environmenta l harm

. I

t i s generall y

,_,__. ........ . -.-.. ^

..... . - - ............. . .i m

_______ ___,i___._M..m_miu

___P.1 2



### i g / Vol

. 53rNo

. 21 8 /

Tuesday , Novembe

r 8 , 198 8 / Rule s an d Regulation s recognize d tha

tdi e longe r a road i s used , di e greate r di e potential for stabilit y problem s an d erosion
. However , a n infrequently use d road of mor e tha n si x montii s duration (which i s notuse d t o hau l coal o r spoti , and which wi U notb e retaine d fo

r postmining lan d use ) i s unlikely t

o caus e significant environmenta

l har m and , thus , i s not classifie d a s a primar

y road . Th e six
mont h limitestablishe s a reasonabl e balanc e betwee n long
- and short-ter m use . Thre e commenter

s suggeste d tha

t OSMR E revis e the roa

d classificatio n syste m i n g 818.150(a)(2)(iii) a s itrelate s t o road s thatwU

l b e retaine d for a

n approved postminin g lan d use . Th e commenter

s argue d tha tretainin g a road fo r a approved postmining lan d us e shoul d notb e a determining facto r i n classifyin g the road becaus e t o d o s o woul d subjectth e roa

d t o performanc

e standard s thatcoul d b e unrelate d t o di e us e of th e road durin

g th e minin

g operation
. The y fel ttiiatth e classificatio n shoul d b e determined solel y by the purpos e and frequenc y o f us e o f th e roa d durin g mining
. The sam e commenter

s wer e als o concerne d abou t ho w change s i n th e statu s b f a roa d woul d b e handled , e.g . a roa d classifie d a s ancillar

y durin g th e minin

g operatio n become s a primar

y roa d whe n the operato r retain s th e roa

d afte r minin g and reclamatio n i s completed . * OSMR E di d no taccep tthe commenters'argument

s an d continue s t o believ e tha

troads whic h are t o b e retaine d fo r a n approved postminin g land us e shoul d b e considere d primar y road s and b e subjectt

o th e associate d performanc

e standards . OSMR

E base s thi s belie f o n th e facttha

tafter final bon d release , protectio n fro m th e futur

e environmenta

l consequence s of

road us e and maintenance unde

r th e Ac tceases . The operato r ha s n o responsibilit y fo r subsequen tadvers e environmenta l impacts relate d t o di e road' s us e and maintenance
. I

n orde r t o provid e a reasonabl e assuranc e of

environmenta

l protectio n afte r th e sit e ha s bee n - reclaimed , and i n the absenc e of a n operator, OSMR

E believe s diat,

- postmining roads mustb e designe d and . constructe d i n complianc e with th e mor e stringen tprimar y roa d standards . Thi s wil l ensure , a s fa

r a s possible , dia tdi e location , design , constructio n and t maintenance o

f the roa d durin g minin g operation s wil l hav e minimu m advers e impacts after reclamation
. Concerning change s i n th e classificatio n of a road , OSMR E believe s tha

tdi e regulator

y authorit y mustapprove such change s base d o n th e road' s compUanc e wit h all standard s applicabl e t

o th e road . One commenter suggeste d tha t performanc

e standard s ar

e unnecessary becaus e primar

y roads ar

e require d a s par to f any operation , and th e regulation s ar

e onl y a duplicatio n of existin g performanc

e standards . OSMR E doe s notagree . Thes e regulations and performanc e standard s specifi c t o road s ar

e necessary t

o insur e tha tal l road s ar

e properl y classified , tha tpotential environmenta

l impac to f th e road s ar

e adequatel y evaluate d and tha troad s are located , designed , constructed , reconstructed , maintained , an d reclaimed s o a s t

o minimize their environmenta

l impacts
. One commenter maintained tha tsom e of th e requirement

s fo r primar y road s woul d b e burdensome t

o small operators . The commenter note d tha tat small operations , the equipmen tuse d t o transpor tthe coal ma

y onl y includ e small truck

s o f limite d capacity
. The commenter suggeste d tha tsom e allowanc e o

r exceptio n shoul d b e mad e whereb y us e of

a roa d t o transpor

tcoal doe s notautomaticall y caus e itt o b e a primar y road . OSMR E understand s the commenter' s concer n fo r sma U operators . However , a s discusse d above , OSMR E ha s conclude d tha

troad s use d for transportin

g coal o r spoi l hav e a potentia l fo r environmenta

l damage regardles s o

f whethe r thei r us e i s frequen to r long-term . Therefore , road s use d fo r transporting coal o

r spoi l hav e bee n include d i n th e definitio n of primar y road s and ar

e subjectt

o mor e stringen tperformanc

e standards . I

t shoul d b e note d dia

tOSMR E expect s tha troa d desig n wil l reflec

tthe anticipate d roa

d duration and usage . One commenter indicate d tha tth e ter m "ancillar

y road " requires a bette r definition
. Th e commenter wa s concerne d becaus e o

f the lac k o f an y permittin g o r reclamatio n requirements fo r ancillar y roads . OSMR E disagree s tha

t"ancillar

y road " i s poorly defined
. Taken together , th e definitio n otroad

atg 701.5 and th e definitio n of

primar y roa d at § 816.150(a)(2

) delineate ancillar

y roa d wit h a degree o

f specificit y appropriat

e t o a nationa

l rul e give n th e variet

y o f road s associate d wit

h minin g operations
. Th e permi

tinformation and reclamatio n requirement

s specificall y associate d wit

h ancillar y road s ar

e foun d i n g g 780.3

7 and 816.150, respectively
. On e commenter recommende d tha t th e classificatio n syste m b e changed t o accountfo

r the diversit

y i n servic e lif

e and use s o

f min e roads . Thi s commente

r als o suggeste d tha

tdesign s shoul d b e prepare d b y qualified professionals
. OSMR E agree s dia

tsom e for m o f categorizatio n o

f road s i s necessary fro m bot h the environmenta

l and economi c points o

f vie w du e t o th e diversit y of roa d use s and type s associate d wit

h minin g operations , bu

t did notmak

e an y change in th

e final rule becaus e the roa

d classificatio n syste m being adopte d toda y explicitl y differentiate s betwee n di e tw o type s o f road s o n the basi s o

f purpos e and frequenc y of use . Further

, g 780.3 7 requires the plan s and drawings fo r each primar

y roa d t o b e prepare

d by , o r unde r the directio n of

, qualified professionals
. Becaus e the ris k o f environmenta

l har m fro m ancillar

y road s i s les s tha

n tiiatfro m primar y roads , th e adde d expens e fo r desig n and constructio n certificatio n b y a registere d professiona

l i s notappropriate
. On e commenter felttha

tg 816.150(a

) shoul d explicitl y exclud e public roads . OSMR E disagrees
. Th e applicabilit y of thes e standard s t

o publi c road s i s discusse d elsewher e in thi s preamble . One commenter objecte d t o th e distinction s made betwee n primar y an d ancillar y road s fo r determinin

g whic h road s hav e t

o meetspecifi c performanc e standards . The commenter maintained tiiatOSMR

E ha s faile d t

o meetdi e mandat e of th e Ac tb y no testablishin g specifi c desig n criteria fo

r al l road s including ancillar

y roads , becaus e o

f the potential fo

r environmenta

l damage . Th

e commenter di d notaccep tOSMRE' s positio n tha

tancillar y road s d o not caus e a s muc

h damage a s primar

y roads . The commenter maintained tha t OSMR E i s using the classificatio n syste m t o allo w a n exceptio n fro

m th e statutor y standard s for ancillar

y roads . The commenter wa s particularl y concerne d wit

h di e potential environmenta

l damage cause d b y ancillar y road s in steep-slop e areas . Another commenter questione d the nee d t o classif y al l min e roads a s eithe r primar y o r ancillar y o n the basi s o

f purpos e and frequenc

y of use . The commenter argue

d tha tal l roads , regardles s o

f thei r intende d purpos e o

r frequenc y o f use , retain similar potentia l fo r environmenta

l damag e i f the y ar e notdesigned , constructed , maintained o r reclaime d properly . Th e commenter maintaine d tha

tth e additiona

l requirement

s i n g 818.15 1 ar

e essentiall y the bes tmanagemen

tpractice s tiiat shoul d appl

y t o all road s in orde

r t o achiev e the performanc

e standard s containe d i n § 818.150(b)
. Th e commenter contende d tha tth e two tiered classificatio n syste m woul d resul t in les s attentio n bein g paid t o ancillar y roads , whic

h ar e mor e numerou

s in a minin g operatio n tha

n primar y roads .P.1 3

*) ® B / Vol . 53 , No . 21 8 /

Tuesday, ; Novembe r 8
. 198 8 / Rule s an d Regulation s 452(11) 1
OSMR E believe s diatdi e roa

d , classificatio n syste m establishe d i n § 816.150(a

) appropriatel

y distinguishe s betwee n primar

y roads, which nee d mor e detaile d consideratio n i n thei r design , construction , maintenance , and reclamation ; and ancUlary. roads , which ar e likel y t o b e sma U and woul d generally no tb e use d fo

r carryin g heav y loads . Th e basi s fo

r th e distinctio n i s tha tth e potentia

l severit y and risk o

f har m associate d wid i smaller , les s use d (ancillary ) road s i s considerabl y les s tha n tha tassociate d wit

h larger, busie r (primary ) roads . Ancillar

y road s ar

e not . exempte d fro

m performanc

e standards ; al l roads , includin g ancUlar y roads , must compl y wid i th e standard s o

f g 816.150, , whic h i s a n expansio n of

th e statutor

y standard s containe d in sectio n 515(b) (17 ) and (18 ) of th e Ac t Sections 818.150(b)/817(b)

. Performance Standards Fina l g 816.150(b) establishe s performanc

e standard s tha

toperators mustmeetwhe n locating , designin g constructing , reconstructing, using , maintaining , and reclaiming roads associate d wit

h surface coal minin

g operation s a s defined b y 3 0 CF R701.5
. Sectio n 818.150(b) i s identical t o th e propose d rul e excep tfo

r a clarifying change t o g 818.150(b)(1 ) adopte d a tth e reques to f EPA
. Th e chang e i s discusse d belo w i n th e response s t

o comments . Th e performanc

e standar d i n sectio n (b)(1 ) requires di e contro

l o r preventio n o f erosion , sUtation , and th e air poUutio n attendantt o erosion , includin g road dus t a s we d a s dus toccuring o n the other expose d surfaces , b y measure s such as vegetating , watering , using chemica l o r other dus tsuppressant

s o r otherwis e stabilizin g al l expose d surface s in accordanc e wit

h currentpruden

t engineering practices
. Th e standard s i n section s (b ) (2 ) throug h (7) requir

e a n operato r t o - contro l o r preventdamag

e t o fish; wildlife , o r thei r habitatand relate d environmenta

l values ; control o

r preventadditiona l contributions o

f suspende d solid s t o stream.flow.o r runof

f outsid e the. permi tarea ; neither.caus e no

r contribute , directly o r indirectly , t o th e violatio n o

f State o r Federa l water , qualit y standard s appUcable t o receiving waters ; refrain fro m seriousl y altering th e norma

l flo w o f wate r in
. streajgped s o r drainage channels ; preven to r contro l damag e t o publi c o r p*!*|ta property , including di e . prevention-o r mitigation o f advers e effects t o land s withi n th e boundarie s of unit s o f th e Nationa l Par k System , the Nationa l Wildlif e Refug e System , th e Nationa l System o

f Trails , the Nationa

l Wilderness ! Preservation System , the Wil d and Sceni c River s system , including designate d study rivers, an d National Recreatio n Area s designate d b y Ac to f Congress ; and prohibi

tthe us e o f acidi c o r toxi c substance s i n road surfacing
. One commenter fel ttiiat g 616.15 0 fail s t o provid e meaningful, , nationa l standard s fo

r di e design , construction , maintenance , and reclamatio n of roads . Th e commenter refene d t

o a discussio n o f th e nee d fo

r detaile d perfonnance standard s i n the preamble t o th e 197 9 final rule wher

e OSMR E stated , in part

, tha tther e wer e man

y comment

s recommendin

g tha tOSMR E "Umi tthe Federa l performanc

e standard s t

o generalize d guideline s and suggestion s whic h woul d die n serv e a s th e nucleu s fo r th e Stat e regulator

y authorities t

o develo p standard s uniqu

e t o local conditions. " I

n respons e t o thes e recommendations , OSMR E "determine

d tha tsuch genera

l standards , incorporating broa

d interpretation capabilities , woul d notb e consisten t wit h th e intento

f th e Ac to r th e res to

f the regulator

y scheme " (4

4 F R14901 , 15246, Marc

h 13,1979)
. The commenter suggeste d tha

tth e propose d rule wa s inconsisten twit

h th e positio n expresse d in 1979
. Wher e iti s appropriat

e t o "fles h out " portions o f th e Ac ti n th e implementing regulations , OSMR

E ha s nothesitate d t

o d o so . OSMR

E believe s tha

tg 818.15 0 doe s provid e sufficientnationa l standard s fo

r th e design , construction , maintenance , and reclamatio n o f roads, whil e allowin g consideratio n o f di e variation s in site-specifi c condition s tha t can b e encountere d a

tdifferen t operation s throughou

tth e coal fields. Thes e standard s necessaril y allo w the regulator y authorit y th e flexibilit

y t o identif y the measure s tha

tar e appropriat

e for th e site-specifi c characteristic s o

f each surface coal minin g operation
. I

n 1979 , OSMR

E ha s les s then on e yea r of

experienc e regulating surface coal minin g operations
. Now , after te n year s of experience , mos to

f tha ti n oversighto

f approved State programs , which dea l wit h roads quit

e effectively , bu

tthroug h quit e varie d approaches , OSMR E feel s tiiatth e expansio n o

f th e statutor

y language being promulgate d toda y i s full y adequat e th e ensur e tha

tstatutor y standard s ar

e met. The same commenter and another commenter particularl

y note d the remova l o f the phras e "minimiz

e th e diminution t

o o r degradation o

f th e qualit y o r quantit y o f surfac e an d ground-water systems " fro m g 816.150(b)(5) o

f th e 198 3 rule . Th e commenter

s suggeste d tha

tspecifi c language fo r protectio n o

f bot h quantit y and qualit

y o f surfac e an d groundwater system s fro

m advers e impact

s o f roads shoul d b e reinstate d int

o di e fina l rule . A tiiird commenter wa s concerne d tha t the wate r qualit

y an d quantit y provision s removed fro

m g 816.150(b)(5) o f th e remande

d and suspende d 198

3 regulation s wer e notadequatel y covere d i n other regulations
. OSMR E did notpropos e a provisio n specificall y addressin g th e impac to f road s o n th e quantit

y and qualit

y o f surface an

d groundwater systems , suc h a s tha tcontaine d i n th e remande d an d suspende d 198

3 rule . Adequat

e standards t

o ensur e compliance wit

h sectio n 515(b)(17

) o f di e Actar

e provided by th

e other provision s o

f g g 816/817.150(b ) and b y 30 CF R780.2 1 and 784.14
. Afte

r considerin g the comments , OSMR

E doe s notbeliev e tha

t adding suc

h a standar

d specificall y fo

r road s woul d add t

o the effectivenes s o

f thi s rule . On e commenter suggeste d tha tth e final rule.shoul d b e clarified t o ensure tha titinclude s performanc

e standard s for road s tiiatwil l protec

tall privat

e propert y fro m damage . Th

e commenter wante d t o insur e tha tal l privat

e properties ar

e protecte d and notjust thos e area s liste d in sectio n 522(e ) o f SMCRA
. Anothe r commenter argue d tha tinserting int

o g 816.150(b)(6

) the land s Uste

d i n sectio n 522(e)(1 ) o

f th e Ac tinserts unsuitabilit

y criteria int

o thi s performanc

e standard . The commenter maintaine d diatOSMR

E lack s authorit

y t o includ e di e Us

tin g 818.150(b)(6)
. Tw o commenter

s suggeste d tha

tth e lis tb e delete d becaus e thes e land s already hav e provision s fo

r special consideration
. Fina l g 816.150(b)(6

) require s the operato r t o protec tbot h privat e propert y an d publi c property, placing special emphasi s o

n certain type s o

f public property . OSMR

E ha s enumerate

d thos e areas covere d by th

e minin g prohibitions o

f sectio n 522(e)(1 ) o

f th e Actt o ensur e tha tspecial consideratio n i s give n thes e publi c properties
. Thi s enumeration doe s notremove the operator' s requiremen

tt o protec tother public propert

y o r privat e propert y a s require d by sectio n 515(b)(17)
. OSMR E doe s notagree tha

tincluding the lis to

f areas covere d by sectio n 522(e)(1 ) o f th e Ac ti n § 816.150(b)(6

) constitute s a

n insertio n o

f unsuitabilit

y criteria
. OSMR E believe s tha

tinclusio n o

f thes e specifi c area s in § 816.150(b)(6 ) appropriatel

y emphasize s th

e importanc

e attache d t

o suc h area s by Congres s in draftin

g th e Act , without providin g les s protectio n fo

r other public

a d , U i ...i.fc.
. _.._l_h____

.. dOA
. _____i H .iti.M.IIM i i al i .UUk aP.1 4



### 4520 & Pederal-Registe r / Vo L 53 ? No

. 21 8 /

Tuesday ; •November

8
. 198& /

Rule s an d Regulation *

' ^ ^ ^ •^•^^^••^^^^^^•^••^•^^''^''»^^••M^^•^^^MM| > a^^i ^ ^ ^ ^ ••••^••r••^••••^^•••••^•^•••^^^ ^



### If f

l:.- i



### &< and privat

e propert y under thi s provision
. On e commenter wa s concerne d that § 818.150(b ) woul d requir e th e reconstructio n of

existin g permitted road s causin g extensiv e environmenta) damage . Th e commente r suggeste d diat the regulator

y audiorit y shoul d b e abl e t o waiv e certai n performanc e standards , e.g . drainage control , cutand fU l slopes , an d lan e widths , a s alon g a s erosio n and strea m sedimentatio n are controlled . OSMR E di d no tinclud e such a waive r provisio n i n th e fina

l rule . I n accordanc e wit h 3 0 CF R701.11(e) , existin g structures , including roads , diatmeetthe performanc

e standard s ma

y b e exempte d fro

m meetin g di e desig n requirements
. T o th e exten tthatchange s ma y b e require

d b y a regulatory audiorit y t o bring existin g permitted road s into compliance wit h thi s rule , n o significantreconstructio n and expens e o r increase d environmenta l har m i s expected . Existin g permitted roads shoul d alread y b e i n complianc e wit h th e performanc

e standard s o f

a State o r Federal regulator

y program. On e commenter note d that § 818.150(b ) refer

s t o erosio n requirement

s for roads , butlack s sedimentcontro

l standards . Th e commenter argue

d tha twithou tsom e guidanc e i twoul d b e difficul tfor state s t o b e "no les s effective " i n paralle l provision s o f

thei r regulations
. OSMR E di d no taccep tthi s commen t OSMR E believe s tiiatadequat e perfonnanc e standard s for sedimen t- control ca n b e found i n § S 816 / 817.150(b)
. Thes e standard s are folly consisten twid i di e requirement s o f sectio n 515(b)(17) of

ui e Ac tOSMR

E recognize s thatdi e mechanism s for achievin g tha

tstandar d vary widel y ove r th e wid e range o

f topographic , climatological an d geologi c conditions , and als o var

y accordin g t

o di e use s o

f the roads , where tiiese standard s wil l b e appUed . OSMR

E therefore feel s furthe

r guidanc e i s no tappropriat e o r necessary . State s ma

y o r ma y no t choos e t o elaborate upon thi s guidance i n way s specifi c t

o th e condition s i n thos e States
. S o lon g a s di e required results ar

e achieve d i n actual , implementation , such elaboratio n i s at th e States' s discretion
. On e commente r wa s unsur e if th e perfonnance standard s i n § 816.150(b ) wer e intende d t

o relieve coal mine operator s o f

di e general requirement

s t o meeteffluen

tlimitations
. Th e commente r though

ttiiat3 0 CF

R816.46, which prescribe s performanc e standard s fo r siltatio n structures , exclude d roads
fro m meetin g effluen

tlimits an d wondere d if

§ 816.150(b ) coul d b e interpreted th e sam e way . Anothe r commenter wa s confuse d abou tdi e applicatio n o

f performanc

e standard s fo r drainage contro

l system s fo

r roads. Th e commenter note d that , unde r 3 0 CF R816.46(a)(2) , drainage fro m road s fo r which the upstrea

m area i s no t otherwis e disturbe d b y th e operato r i s exemp tfro

m th e requiremen

to f passin g throug h a siltatio n structure . The commenter, however , als o note d dia tth e disturbance associate d wit h roads mus

t b e conducte d t o minimiz e disturbance t o th e hydrologi c balanc e a s require d i n § § 816.4 1 and 816.45
. Th e commenter wa s concerne d a s t

o wha tth e specifi c drainage control requirement s ar e for roads . Effluen tlimitation s onl y appl y to point, sourc e discharge s regulate d unde r sectio n 40 2 o f th e Clean Wate r Act
. Sectio n 818.150(b ) doe s no trequir e di e creatio n o f a poin tsource . However , i f a poin tsourc e i s created , a National Pollutan tDischarg e Elimination Syste m permi twoul d b e require

d and effluen

t limits woul d apply . A variet y o f othe r mechanism s ma

y als o b e an d ar

e being use d t o provid e di e required protectio n o f wate r quaUty. Tw o commenter

s wer e concerne d with th e word "prevent " i n § 818.150(b)(1 ) throug

h (3) and (6)
. i twa s suggeste d tiiati tb e delete d becaus e r t wa s the intento

f Congres s t o hav e OSMR E se tattainabl e standard s which woul d "minimize " erosio n an d "prevent " damage . Th e commenters felt thati twoul d b e unrealisti c t o requir e a n operato r t o "prevent " erosion , siltation , and air poUution
. Anotiie r commenter favore d deletio n o

f bou i "control " and "prevent " OSMR E di d no taccep tth e suggestion s and beUeve s tiiatth e languag e i n S 816.150(b ) i s consisten twiti i di e language i n the Ac ta tsectio n 515(b)(17 ) which requires the operatio n a s a minimu m t o insur e tha tdi e construction , maintenance , and postmining condition s of acces s roads into an d acros s th e sit e o f operation s wil l contro l o

r preven t erosio n an d sUtation , poUutio n of water , damag e t o fis h o r wildlif

e o r thei r habita to r pubU

c o r privat

e propert y (Emphasi s added)
. I

tshoul d b e note d . that§ 816.150(b ) allow s th e regulator y authorit y th e flexibilit

y t o determin e th e leve l o f protectio n necessar y t

o contro l o r preventerosion ; sUtation , o r ai r pollutio n attendantt

o erosion
. One commente r suggeste d tiiatth e language i n 5 816.150(b)(1 ) wit h respec t t o expose d surface s b e clarified b y adding di e wor

d "road " betwee n expose d an

d surfaces
. OSMR E doe s notagree tha

tthi s clarificatio n i s necessar y becaus e thos e surface s expose d i n connectio n wit h construction , use , reconstruction , maintenance , o r reclamatio n o f the roa d ar e properl y subjectt

o thi s requirement

. Fou r commenter

s responde d wit

h respec tt o th e contro

l o f ai r poUution
. One commenter supported tiie language in S 818.150(b)(1) , and asserte d tha t OSMR E i s di e appropriat

e agenc y t

o regulat e fugitive dus ta tcoal minin g operations
. On e commenter requeste d tha tOSMR E chang e the language in § 816.150(b ) i n its entirety
. Thi s commenter wa s concerne d tha tai r an d wate r qualit

y standard s were bein g intermixed
. The commenter als o note d tha tpreviou s districtcour

tdecision s clarifie d tiiatCongres s onl y intende d t o regulat e ai r poUutio

n relate d t

o erosion
. On e commenter state d tha tthe issu e o

f responsibiUt

y i n th e control o f

air pollutio n attendantt

o erosio n an d pollutio n cause d b y fugitive dus ta s par t o f a surface minin

g operatio n i s currentl y o n appeal . Anotiie r commenter wa s concerne d thatincluding specifi c air poUutio

n contro l measure s i n g 816.150(b ) woul d lea d t o tiiese measure s being interpreted a s di e exclusiv e mean s necessar y for compliance
. I

twa s suggeste d tha

tthes e measure s b e kep tonl y in th e preamble . OSMR E believe s tha

tth e languag e i n . § 816.150(b)(1 ) i s i n harmon y with th e inten to f Congress
. I

tia appropriat

e for OSMR E t o regulat

e road dus tconsisten t with sectio n 515{b)(17

) of di e Ac t becaus e o f di e nee d t o protec

tpubU c and privat

e property . I

ti s bein g appUe

d here i n a manne

r consisten twith sectio n 515(b)(4)
- Th e U.S
. Cour

tof Appeal s for th e Districtof

Columbia Circui

trecentl y issue d a decisio n concernin g Ui e issu e of responsibilit

y for contro l o f

ai r poUutio

n attendantt o erosio n (NWFv. Hodel, 83 9 F.2n d 694,785)
. Th e appeal s cour t conclude d tiiatth e Secretary' s interpretation o

f sectio n 515(b)(4) o

f the Ac ta s controllin g onl y di e unpact s of minin g o n ai r qualit

y du e t o erosion , i s reasonable . OSMR

E als o believe s diat the us e of th e term s "erosion, " "siltation, " and "ai

r pollutio n attendant t o erosion " i n } 818.150(b)(1 ) i s appropriat

e i n considerin g what measure s ar e necessar y t o mee tdi e performanc

e standards . OSMR

E doe s notintend thi s Us

tof measure s to exclud e th e us e of

otiie r measure s fo

r controllin g dus tattendantto erosio n and doe s notinten d thatth e language t n § 816.150(b)(1 ) b e interpreted tha tway . Th e phras e "suc

h as " make s thatclear . The EP A note d tha

tpropose d § 816.150(b)(1 ) state d tha

troa d shoul d b e buUt , use d and maintained t o contro l "ai r poUutio n attendantt

o erosion " an

d tha tdi e preambl e t

o th e proposal explaine d tha

tthi s phras e include s "roa d dust, a s wel ) a s dustoccurrin g o nP.1 5

Fsdsra l Registe r /

Vol . 53 , No . 21 6 /

Tuesday^Novembe r 8 , 1988 ' / Rule s an d Regulation s 4520)3 ' other expose d surfaces " (5 2 F R42262, Novembe r 3,1987)
. EP

A suggeste d tha

t the explanatio n shoul d b e include d i n th e final rul e language t

o clarif y tha tthe performanc

e standard s apply notonly t o win d erosion , bu

tals o t o dus tcreate d b y vehicl e traffic
. OSMR E ha s accepte d thi s commen t an d made th e suggeste d change t o clarif y the applicabilit

y o f the fina l rule . EP A note d als o tha

tproposed g 816.150(b)(1 ) state d tha

tair pollutio n shoul d b e controUe

d "i n accordanc e wit h current , pruden tengineering practices. " EP

A state d it s belief

tha tth e fina l rul e shoul d specif

y reasonabl e control level s an d technique s suitabl e unde r variou s condition s and requeste d th e additio n o

f a technical guidance documen ttha twoul d addres s curren

t practice s an d thei r effectivenes s unde r varying conditions
. Th

e agency suggeste d tha

tth e technical guidance coul d b e develope d in the nea r futur e and b e incorporated into th e regulation b y reference ata late r date . After givin g thi s recommendation seriou s consideration , OSMR E decide d no tt o accep tit
. Differin

g geologi c and climati c factors associate d wit h the coal fields throughou

tth e natio n mak

e i t impractica

l t o develo p a singl e se to

f dus tcontro

l standard s and technique s wit h nationwid e appUcabiUty
. I n accordanc e witi i th e concep to f primacy , whereb y th e State s hav e th e primar y responsibilit

y fo r th e regulation o

f coal mining , thi s final rule give s State regulator y authoritie s the flexibilit y t o estabUsh guidanc e tha

ti s appropriat

e t o regional and loca l conditions
. On request, OSMR

E wti l provid e technical assistanc e t

o th e State s concerning th e developmen to r appUcatio n of dus t contro l standard s and techniques
. The primar y purpos e o

f thi s rule i s t

o mak e clea r tha tregulator

y authoritie s hav e bot h th e authorit

y and obligatio n t o regulate roa

d dus twhil e recognizin g tiiatoperation s hav e a wid e rang e o f option s avaUable^ircontroUin g i t A s to di e EPA' s concer

n aboutthe
effectivenes s of

th e treatmen

tmethod s employe d b y di e operator, ; before a minin g penni ti s issued , th e regulator y authorit y has ' t o approve di e ai r poUution-contro

l plan submitted b y a perpi tapplicantunder 30 CF R780.1 5 o r 7C^3
. I n addition , monthly inspection s by^sgulator

y authorit y inspector s under

. 3OiSMaa0.l l and inspection s resulting fro m citizens ' complaint

s filed anytime under 3 0 CF

R840.1 5 and Par

t84 2 wil l ensur e tha tpotential on-the-groun

d problems ar

e resolve d quickl

y and efficiently ; On e commenter wa s concerne d tha t g 816.150(b)(5) woul d prohibi tplacement o f an y roa d anywhere itwoul d alte r flo w in a streambed o r drainag e channel . The commenter asserte d tha t the term s "streambe

d o r drainag e channel " coul d b e construed s o a s t o includ e eve n the smalles tephemera l flow
. Th e commenter suggeste d a language change tha

twoul d replac e "streambe d o r drainag e channel " wit

h "intermitten

to r perennia

l stream. " OSMR E did notaccep tthi s suggeste d language change sinc e iti s not consisten twit

h sectio n 515(b)(18

) o f di e Ac twhich use s th e phras e "streambe d o r drainag e channel. " Further

, OSMR E doe s notagre

e tha tg 816.150(b)(5) woul d necessaril y prohibi tplacemento

f any roa d where i twoul d alte r flo w i n streambed s o

r drainag e channel s becaus e th e language in thi s sectio n state s tha tthe road sha

U refrai n fro m "seriously " altering th e norma l flow
. OSMR E doe s notregar

d thi s language a s a stric tprohibition o n th e placemento f road s tha twoul d caus e mino

r alteration s i n norma

l flow. Sections 816.150(c)/817.150(c) Design and Construction Limits and Establishment

of Design Criteria Fina l g 816.150(c

) requires tiiat roads b e designe d and constructe d o r reconstructe d t

o meetcertai n criteria i n orde r t o ensur e environmenta

l protectio n appropriat

e fo r thei r planne d duratio n and use . Thes e criteria includ e Umit s fo r grade , width , surfac e materials , surface drainage control , culver tplacement, and culver

tsize , tha t ar e i n accordanc e wit

h current , pruden t engineering practices , and an y othe r necessar y desig n criteria estabUshed b y th e regulator

y authority
. Sectio n 816.150(c ) i s identical t

o th e proposed rule . One commenter agreed wit h the deletio n o f th e provision s addressin g roa d safet y tha thad previousl y bee n include d i n th e 198

3 rule , notin g tha

t roa d safet y fo r user s i s th e responsibilit

y o f th e Min e Safet y and Healt h Administration
. On e commenter raise d th e questio n o f whatstandard s fo

r road width , drainage control , culver

tplacemen tet c wti l appl y i n Federa

l progra m State s sinc e OSMR E set s fort h n o mor e detaUed Umit s fo r Federa l progra m State s unde

r g 816.150(c)
. Th

e commenter wa s als o concerned aboutinadequat e regulation b y State s wit

h "n o mor e stringent " provision s i n th e absenc e o f standard s i n the Federa

l rules . Concernin

g Federa l progra m States , where OSMR

E i s th e regulatory authority , OSMR

E wil l conside r o

n a program-b

y progra m basi s uniqu

e factors and regiona

l and loca l condition s presentin eac h Stat e an d wil l propos e and promulgat e appropriat e standard s in accordance witii 3 0 CF RPar t73 6 i f i tdetermine s tha tprogram-wid

e desig n criteria ar

e needed . Concerning State s thu thav e legislativel y prohibited their regulator y authoritie s fro

m promulgatin

g regulation s mor

e stringen ttha n the Federa l regulations , OSMR

E consider s tha tthe regulations adopte d toda y provid e a reasonabl e expansio n o f the statutor y requirement

s an d ar e adequat e fo r effectiv e regulation o

f surfac e coal minin g operations
. Furthe

r expansio n an d additiona

l regulations ma

y b e promulgate

d a tth e States ' discretion
. OSMR E doe s notbeliev e tha

tus e o f desig n standard s b y a Stat e i n its rules woul d necessaril y b e mor e stringen t tiian the Federa

l rules . Thi s issu e wa s als o addresse d by the Secretar y i n hi s Marc h 5,198 4 brie

f i n Round

II, referenced earlier
. On e commenter suggeste d tha tthe design , construction , and certificatio n o f ancillar y roads shoul d als o b e done b y a qualified registere d professional t o ensur e prope r drainage contro

l an d stabitit y of road embarkments . OSMR E believe s di e suggeste d requiremen

tt o hav e ancillar

y road s designed , constructed , and certified by a qualifie d professional i s notnecessar y t o ensure compliance wit

h di e performanc

e standard s becaus e such road s hav e muc

h les s potentia

l fo r environmenta

l har m tha n d o primar

y road s becaus e o

f difference s in size , us e and/o r duration
. AncUlar y roads ar

e generall y onl y on e lan e fo r small vehicles , thereb y involvin g fa r les s earthmoving i n thei r construction
. Vehicle s using anciUar

y roads ar

e generall y small witi i lightload s an d groun d pressures . Therefore , t

o require certificatio n o

f plan s and drawings fo

r ancillar y road s woul d plac e a burde n o n th e operato r tha

ti s unnecessary t o provide th e protectio n calle d for in sectio n 515(b)(17

) o f th e Act
. One commenter wa s concerned tha t th e us e of th e ter m "surfac e materials " i n g 818.150(c

) implied a requiremen

tfo r surfacing a

U roads. The commenter did notfee l tha

ta "blanket " surfacing requiremen

twa s appropriat

e becaus e i n man y instance s th e natura

l surface o

f a roa d wa s sufficientt

o meetdi e appropriat

e performanc

e standards . The commenter suggeste d tiiatth e word s "an y necessary " shoul d preced e th e ter m "surfac e materials " in the tex to

f th e rule . OSMR E doe s notagre

e tha tthe additio n o f thes e word s i s necessary becaus e th e language i

n g 818.150(c

) state s tiiatsurface material s appropriat e fo r th e planned us e o

f the roa d nee d t o b e incorporated int

o th e desig n an

dP.1 6

I ' 

### 452P&, Federa

l Registe r /

Vol

. 53 ; No

. 21 6 /

Tuesday , Novembe r

8 , 198 8 /

Rule s an d Regulation s
constructio n o

r reconstructio n t

o ensur e environmenta

l protection
. Thi s requiremen

tdoe s no tpreclud e a finding by th e regulator

y authorit y tha tth e natura l surfac e o

f di e roa d meet s di e performanc

e standards . Section B18.150(d)/817.150(d) Location Fma l S 816.150(d) set s tiie performanc

e standard s fo

r the locatio n o f a U roads . Thes e standard s prohibi t the placemen to

f an y par to f a roa d i n the channel of

a n intermitten

to r perennia l stream unles s di e regulator y authorit y specificall y approve s such a n actio n i n accordanc e with appUcable § § 818.4 1 throug

h 816.4 3 an d 816.57
. Also , roads mustb e locate d t o minimize downstrea

m sedimentatio n and flooding
. Th e languag e i n § 816.150(d ) i s identica l t o di e propose d rule excep t tha treference t o th e performanc e standard s i n accordanc e with whic h the regulator y audiorit y may approve placemen tb

f a roa d i n th e channel o

f a strea m ( 8 9 816.4 1 throug

h 81&4 3 an d 816.57 ) hav e bee n adde d t o di e final rule fo r clarity.. : On e commenter argue

d tiiatth e languagei n tihe proposedrul e prohibit s th e use-o f 'structure s suc h a s bridge s o r culverts . Tb e commente r considere d thi s a drasti c departur

e from di e Ac tand beyon d di e inten to f

sectio n 515(b)(18)
. The commenter provide d suggeste d languag e to bette r reflec tui e statutor y requirements
. Th e suggeste d language read , "(1 ) N o roa d sha

U b e buil ti n a streambe d o r drainag e channeL " OSMR E fid no taccep tdie
- > commenter' s suggestion
. Sectio n - 816.150(d) i s no tintende d t o establis h a stric tprohibitio n o n th e us e o f structure s such a s bridge s an d culverts . Sectio n 818.43 , Diversions , allow s th e regulator y authorit y t o specif

y desig n criteri a for th e diversio n of

intermittentand perennia l streams . Sectio n 816^4

3 als o require s th e regulator

y authorit y t o make a finding tha tdi e environmental , resource s o

f th e strea m wti l no tb e adverselyaffectedv i -.

. _. -.: On e commpnte

r note d that ' > § 81&15G(d)(l

) doe s no tcontai n a cros s reference to f-818.5

7 a s doe s . • i 81dM51(d)(5)
. Th e commente r was : unclea r i l tins wa s intended , o r wa s a n inadvertentomission.b y OSMRE.
. E n respons e t o thi s commen tOSMR E ha s reviewe d di e referenc e t o hydrologic
. balanc e protectio n an d stream buffer performanc

e standard s i n propose d § 818.151(d)(5) and determined tha t thos e perfonnanc e standard s shoul d b e applie d t o di e locatio n of

an y road i n th e channel o f a n intermitten

to r perennia

l stream , a a wel l a s t o th e alteratio n o r relocation o

f natura l strea m channels , b y primar y roads . Therefore , OSMR E ha s adde d th e reference t o the performanc

e standard s (§§816.4 1 throug h 818.4 3 and 816.57 ) t o § 816.150(d)(1 ) of

th e fina l rule . Section 818.150(e)/817.150(e) Maintenance Fina l § 816.150(e

) govern s di e genera

l maintenance responsibilitie s o f the operator. Under thi s section , a roa d mus tb e maintained t

o mee tthe performanc

e standard s an d any additiona l desig n criteria estabUshed b y th e regulator

y authority
. Sectio n 816.150(e ) als o requires tha ti n the even t o f damage due t o a catastrophi c event , a roa d mustb e repaired a s soo n a s i s practicabl e after th e damage ha s occurred . Th

e language i n § 816.150(e

) i s identical t

o th e propose d rule . On e commenter supported th e language foun

d i n § 818.150(e

) becaus e i t n o longe r contain s th e requiremen tfro m previou s remande

d and suspende d rule s t o maintain a roa

d throughou

tit s life
. Th e commenter agree s tha

tth e Ac tdoe s notimpos e a perpetua

l responsibilit

y fo r road s i n di e postmining us e period
. I n contrast , on e commente r wa s concerne d wit h the deletio n of

th e requiremen

tt o maintain a roa

d throughou

tit B life
. Th e commenter argue

d tha toperators are liabl e unde

r ui e Ac tfor road s an d suggeste d reinstatemento f th e requiremen

tto maintai n road s throughou tthei r tife. OSMR E di d no tpropos e thi s requiremen

tbecause , unde

r the Ac ta

n operato r ha s n o responsibiUt y for maintenanc e of

th e postminin g lan d us e afte r the performance bon d ha s bee n properl y release d fo r th e area i n which th e road i s locate d For thi s sam e reason , th e suggestio n tiiatdi e requiremen

tb e adde d wa s notaccepted . Section 818.150(f)/817.150(f) Reclamation Fina l § 816.150(f

) provide s tha

ta roa d whic h i s nott

o b e retaine d unde r a n approve d postminin g lan d us e mus tb e - reclaime d a s soo n a s practicabl e afte r it i s n o longe r neede d fo r minin g and reclamatio n operations
. Th e reclamatio n activitie s tiiatar

e required b y thi s paragrap h include : (1 ) Closin g di e roa d t o traffic ; (2) removing a

U bridge s and culvert s unles s approved a s par

tof th e postminin g lan d use ; (3 ) removing o r otherwis e disposin g of

road-surfacing material s tha

tar e incompatibl e witi i di e postminin g lan d us e an d th e revegetatio n requirement s o f di e regulation ; (4

) reshapin g cu

tand fill slope s a s necessar y t o b e compatibl e witi i th e postmining lan d us e and t o complemen

tth e natura

l drainage patter n of the surroundin

g terrain ; (5 ) protecting th e natura

l drainag e patter n b y installin g dike s o r cros s drain s a s necessary t o contro l surface runof

f an d erosion ; an

d (6 ) scarifyin g o

r rippin g th e roadbed , replacing topsoi l o r substitute material , and revegetatin g disturbed surface s i n accordance wit h 3 0 CF R 816.2 2 and 816.111-818.116
. A s discusse d below , the fina

l rul e differ s fro m the proposa l i n tha tthe phras e "a

s soo n a s practicable " ha s replace d th e wor d "immediately. " Thre e commenter

s were concerned wit h th e word "immediately " in th e phras e "shal

l b e reclaimed i

n accordanc e wid i the approved reclamatio n pla

n immediatel y afte

r i ti s no longer neede d fo

r minin g an d reclamatio n operations. " The commenter

s beUeved itt

o b e a n unreasonabl e requiremen ttha ti s subjectt o varying interpretations
. Th e commenter

s note d tha

ti tma y actuall y b e environmentally undesirabl e fo r a roa d t o b e reclaimed durin

g certai n time s ofth e year , due t

o problems wit

h runof f and sedimentcontrol . On e o f thes e commenter

s argue d tha tth e immediat e reclamatio n of

a roa d woul d eliminate neede d flexibiht y an d preclud e reus e of

th e road i

f minin g and reclamatio n condition s change . On e commenter note d thatimmediat e reclamatio n i s no tneede d t o enforc e the intento f th e regulation
. OSMR E agree s wit

h di e commenter

s and ha s substitute d th e phras e "a s soo n a s practicable " fo

r the wor d "immediately " i n § 816.150(f ) o f the final rule . OSMR

E beUeve s tiiatthe phras e "a s soo n a s practicable " i s i n keepin g wit h th e intention s of

th e Ac ta s expresse d in section s 102(e) , 515(b ) (2 ) and (16) , whic

h basicall y require reclamatio n t

o take plac e a s contemporaneously a s practicabl e wit h mining
. However , thi s requiremen tdoe s no tbecom e operabl e until di e roa d i s n o longer needed . T o postpon e reclamation , the permittee mustsho w a futur e nee d fo r o r continuing us e of

th e road a s a par to f hi s operation
. The operator i s require d t o maintai n th e roa

d durin g thi s period
. Th

e reclamatio n schedul e necessary t

o meetth e requiremen

tfo r timely reclamatio n shoul d b e containe d i n the permi

tand b e consisten twith the. intento f th e Ac tb y providing fo

r reclamatio n whic h i s a s contemporaneou s a s practicable , minimizing unreasonabl e delay s i n reclamatio n implementatio n an d proceedin g i n a n environmentally sound manner. On e commenter beUeve d tha t proposed § 818.150(f

) shoul d aUo

w coal exploratio n road s t

o remai n i f they compl y wit h th e postmining land use . I n the commenter' s opinion , i f retained, thes e roads woul d aUo

w fo r bette r



## mP.1 7



### Federa l Registe r /

Vol

. 53 , No

. 21 6 /

Tuesday , Novembejrj t

198 8 / Rule s and Regulation s 4520 5

managemen

tof di e fores treserv e throug h bette r acces s fo

r timber managemen

tand fir e fighting activities
. OSMR E agree s thatth e retentio n o f road s ca n b e beneficial and ha s made provisio n i n 30 CF

RPar t81 5 fo r th e retentio n o

f coa l exploratio n road s i n limited circumstances
. Specifically , § 815.15(d ) provide s a n exemptio n fro m the requirementtha

ta U facUities and equipmen tb e promptl

y removed fro

m the exploratio n area whe n they ar e n o longer neede d I

f th e regulator

y authorit y determine s tha

tth e facUitie s o r equipmen

twU l provid e additiona

l environmenta

l data , reduc e o r control the on-site an d off-sit

e effects o

f th e exploratio n operation , o r facilitate futur e surface rainin

g and reclamatio n operations , di e facUities (roads ) and equipmen tma y b e retained
. Th

e operato r mustappl y t

o the regulator

y authorit y for approva

l o f th e retentio n o n a case-by-cas e basis
. T o the exten t tha tcoa l exploratio n road s mee ton e o f thes e three criteria , they ma y b e exempte d from th e reclamation requiremen tHowever , i tshoul d b e note d thatdi e concep to f

a n approved po s training

, lan d us e i s no tappUcable t o

. coal exploratio n activitie s sinc e exploratio n i s no tmining
. Therefore , OSMR E di d no taccep ttiie suggeste d change . One commenter suggeste d tha tsom e language shoul d b e adde d t o § 816.150(f

) t o clarif y tha tbot h primar y and ancUlar y road s ar

e considere d t

o b e par t o f th e surfac e coa l mining operatio n and subjectt o th e performanc

e standards . OSMR E agree s tha

tbot h primar y and ancUlar y road s ar

e par to f the surface coal minin

g operation
. However , OSMR E beUeve s tha

tdi e wording o

f § 816.150 , Roads: General, i s sufficiently clea r i n applyin g thatsectio n t o all road s a s define d i n 30 CF R701.5
. Therefore , n o chang e ha s bee n made . One commenter supported th e phras e "a s necessary " i n th e requiremen ti n § 818.150(f)(4

) thafcreclamation o

f a road includ e "reshapiri

g Ctt^an d fil l slope s a s necessar y t o becomparrbl e wit h tiie postmining landus e ari d revegetatio n requirements.* Tne^cpmmente r note d tha tdii s languag e recognize s tha titi s no talway s a n approporiat e requirement t o redisturb a

n aresnfo r reshapin g where stabilit y of a slop e ha s bee n assure d t o the satisfactio n o f

tiie regulator

y authority ; I n contras ton e commenter

- tobjecte d to'th e phras e "a s necessary " becaus e itdilute s o r loosen s th e requirements containe d i n th e remanded and suspende d 198

3 rule t o reshap e cu

t an d Fd l slope s t o b e compatibl e wit

h di e postmining lan d us e and t o return th e land to di e approximat

e origina l contour. - I n developin g the proposed rul e OSMR E looke d a

tho w thi s issu e wa s handle d in th e remanded and suspende d 197 9 rule . OSMR

E state d i n the preamble t

o tha tfinal rul e tha t "obliteration of

th e roa d migh tin som e circumstance s create extensiv e environmenta

l har m du e t o excessiv e redisturbance of

th e road prism
. Therefore , the concep to

f blending th e roa d int o the topograph

y wa s incorporated [int

o the final rule ] base d o n comment

s receive d and wor

k practice s o n thousand s o

f mile s o f road s by the U.S
. ForestService " (Citation omitted. ) (4

4 F R14901,15259 , Marc

h 13 , 1979)
. OSMR

E wen to n t

o emphasiz e "tha tthi s blendin g i s no tt

o b e construe d a s a varianc e fro

m the requiremen

tt o restor e th e area t

o approximat

e origina l contour. " Also , th e statutor y definitio n o f "approximat

e origina l contour " allow s th e retentio n o

f tenance s (sectio n 701(2

) o f th e Act)
. Fo

r thes e reasons , OSMR

E propose d language similar t o tha tuse d i n 1979
. Afte

r consideratio n o

f the comments , OSMR

E feel s tha ttiie positio n state d i n 197 9 and repeate d here i s stil l vaU d Thus , OSMR E di d no tdelet e th e phras e "as necessary " fro

m th e fina

l rule . On e commenter supported propose d § 816.150(f)(8) , whic h allow s the us e of topsoil.substitute s i n reclaimin g roadbeds . Th e commenter state d tha t du s wti l accommodat

e th e beneficial practice o f redistributin g topso

U taken fro m roa d area s fo r us e i n permi

tarea s where i twti l promote bette r postmining land use . OSMR E agree s thattopsoi l substitute s ma y b e use d i n reclaiming roads and emphasize s tha

tan y such substitut

e materia l i s subjec tt

o th e requirement

s o f § 816.22
. G. Sections 818.151/817.151 Primary Roads Fina l § 818.15 1 establishe s a se to f performanc

e standard s for th e design , construction , and maintenance of primar y roads , i n additio n t

o thos e already estabUshe d for a

U road s i n $.816,150
. Thes e performanc e standard s ar e identical to tiie propose d rule excep t fo r § 818.151(b) an d (d

) whic h hav e bee n changed t o clarif

y tiie intentof

th e rule . Sections 816.151{a)/817.151(a) Certification Fina l § 816.151(a

) i s identical t

o th e proposed rul e and requires tha tprimar y roa d constructio n o r reconstructio n b e certified i n a reportt o th e regulatory authorit y b y a qualifie d registered_ professiona

l enginee r o

r land surveyor. The requiremen

tfo r professiona

l certification i s intende d t

o assure tha

t the roa d i s properl

y constructe d t

o meet th

e environmenta

l protection standard s o f the Act
. Certification b y a qualified registered professiona

l land surveyo r i s allowe d in an

y Stat e whic h authorizes land surveyor

s t o certif y th e constructio n o

r reconstruction o

f primar y roads . Thi s provisio n i s base d o n th e November 4,1983
. amendmen tt o th e Ac t(Sec
. 115 , Pub . L

. 98-146,9 7 Stat
. 938 (1983) ) which provide s tiiat"no t withstandin g sectio n 507(b) (14 ) o f th e Surfac e Minin g Contro l an d Reclamation Acto f 197 7 (Pub
. L . 95-87) , cros s sections , maps , o

r plan s o f lan d t o b e affecte d by a

n appUcatio

n fo r a surfac e minin g and reclamatio n penni tsha U b e prepare d b y o r unde r the directio n o

f a qualified registere d professional enginee r o

r geologis to

r quaUfie d registere d professiona

l lan d surveyo r in an y Stat e which authorize s lan d surveyors t

o prepar e and certif

y suc h map s o r plans. " A registere d lan d surveyo r mus

thav e experienc e in the desig n and constructio n of road s i n orde r t o b e eligibl e t

o provid e dii s certification
. Thi s authorit y i s give n onl y t o th e exten taUowe

d unde r State law . Thi s requirementi s equivalen tt o the experienc e requiremen

tfor registere d engineers
. Sectio n 816.151(a ) requires th e certifying professional t o prepar e and submi

tt o the regulator

y authorit y a repor tcertifying diatth e primar y roa d wa s constructe d o

r reconstructe d a s designe d and i n accordanc e wit h di e approved plan . On e commenter di d no tagree wit h the language tha

tautiiorize s lan d surveyors t o certif y the constructio n o r reconstructio n o f

primar y roads . Th e commenter note d tha

tth e desig n and engineering of

primar y road s i s outsid e th e area of

expertis e o

f lan d surveyors . Th e commenter wa s particularl y concerned wit

h th e adequacy o

f a land surveyor' s expertis e fo

r road s i n stee p slop e area s and th e frequen tus e of primar y road s by coal hauling vehicles
. OSMR E recognize s th e facttha

tno t a U land surveyor

s hav e adequat

e expertis e t o certif

y road constructio n o

r reconstructio n and . witi i thi s i n mind , use s th e term

s qualifie d an d experience d i n th e desig n and constructio n o f

roads . OSMR

E feel s tha

t thi s language coverin g di e experienc e an d qualification s o

f di e certifying individua l and th e additiona

l requiremen

ttha tthe Stat e mus t authorize a lan d surveyo r t o certif y ' primar y roa d constructio n o

r reconstruction provide s adequat e justification
. I

n vie w o f th e legislativ e histor y o f the November 3,198 3 amendmen

tt o th e Act , OSMR

E ha s conclude d tha

tthe Congres s intende d the amendmen

tto authoriz e certificationP.1 8

e«»f l Ragjgte g / Vol.
- 53,
. No.-21 8 /

Tuesday , Novembe r 8 , 198 8 / Rule s an d Regulation s

; ?

j

. becaus e iti s a ste p s o intimately relate d t o preparation of

cross-sections , map s and plan s tha

tauthorit y i s necessaril y implied b y th e term

s of th e legislation
. A s discusse d b y Senato r Byr d o n the floo r of th e Senate (12

9 Cong
. Rec . S12411 , Sept
. 19,1983) , the purpos e o f th e amendmen

twa s t o remed

y "conflict s wit h Stat e law s [wher

e the Act ] preempt

s registere d land surveyors from a lea d rol e i n th e preparation and certificatio n o

f maps , plans , and cross sections. " OSMR E believe s tha

tCongres s intende d t

o authoriz e qualified , registered , professiona

l land surveyors t o perfor m bot h of thes e functions a s lea d professionals
. I

f land surveyors wer e authorized merely t

o prepar e and certif y cros s sections , maps , and plans , bu twer e notauthorized t

o certif y associate d constructio n o r reconstruction , thei r statu s a s lea d professional s woul d b e seriousl y impaire d o r negated . Thus , thi s rule authorize s qualified , registered , professiona

l lan d surveyors t

o certif y th e constructio n o r reconstruction of primar y roads . On e commenter note d tha ta registere d lan d surveyo r woul d hav e t o hav e experienc e i n th e desig n and constructio n o

f road s i n orde

r t o hav e a State authoriz e the lan d surveyo r t o certif y such work . The commenter indicate d th e language "wit h experienc e i n th e desig n and constructio n of road " t o b e unnecessary . OSMR E beUeve s thatth e languag e i n § 818;151(a

) i s necessar y t

o ensure tha

t onl y thes e lan d surveyors wit h experienc e i n th e desig n an d constructio n of

roads b e aUowed t o certif y thi s work . On e commente

r suggeste d tha t landscap e architect

s shoul d als o b e aUowed t o certif y th e constructio n and reconstructio n o

f roads. The commenter note d tha tth e educatio n and experienc e o f landscap e architect

s couple d witi i thei r registration woul d qualif y the m t o develo p plan s an d manag e th e constructio n o

f a U type s o f

roads . associate d with coa l mining
. - r:,~. OSMR E doe s no thav e th e statutor y authorit y t o allo w landscap e architects t o certif y cros s sections , map s and plan s o r t o authoriz e the

m f o certif y tha ttiie constructio n o

r reconstructio n o

f primar y road s wa s i n accordanc e wit h . thos e plans . . Fou r commenter

s recommended tha

t the requirementi n g 816.151(a ) t o hav e th e certified repor

tsen tt o the regulator

y authorit y shoul d b e changed t

o allo w the reportt

o b e filed a

tthe min e site o r i n a repor tt o th e regulator

y authority
. The commenter

s note d tha

tth e repor

t shoul d b e availabl e t

o the inspector s at the min e sit e and , by filing the repor ta t the mine site , i twoul d reduce the amoun to f paperwor k tha tthe regulator

y authorit y woul d hav e t

o handle . OSMR E believe s tha

ti ti s necessary t o hav e th e certifie d repor

tsen tt o th e regulator y authorit y s o tha tan y problems ca

n b e brough

tt o th e State' s attentio n and s o tha

tthe Stat e ha s the opportunit

y t o adequatel y monitor conectiv e actio n tha

tma y b e necessary . Having the informatio

n o n file in th

e State office als o provide s advanc e informatio

n t o inspectors befor

e beginning a

n inspectio n trip
. Althoug h OSMR E i s sensitiv e t

o the concer

n tha t regulator y authorities ' paperwor

k burden s shoul d b e reduced where possible , OSMR

E doe s notagre

e tha t the limited tim

e involve d i n handling thi s certified repor

toutweigh s the nee d t o hav e itavailabl e a

tthe regulator

y authority' s office
. Sections 816.151(b)/817.151(b) Safety Factor Fina l § 816.151(b) requires tha ta U embankment

s hav e a minimu

m stati c safet y facto r o f 1. 3 o r meetth e requirement

s of g 780.37(c)
. Thi s sectio n applie s onl y t

o primar y roads . Rathe

r tha n specifyin g particular desig n criteria fo r roa d embankments , th e 1.

3 facto r o f safet y estabUshe s a performanc e standar d tha tmustb e attained
. Th

e operato r ha s th e flexibility t o selec tthe particula r desig n fo

r th e roa d tha tmeets thi s standard . Relate d g 780.37(c ) enable s th e regulator

y authorit y t o establis h engineering desig n standard s throug h th e State progra

m approva

l proces s i n lie u o

f engineering test s tha

t woul d b e performe

d t o establis h compliance wit

h th e safet

y factor
. Th

e language i n fina

l g 816.151(b ) ha s bee n changed from th e propose d language by adding a cross-reference t o g 780.37(c

) fo r clarity
. On e commenter di d notagree tha ta safet y facto r fo

r road embankment

s wa s necessary , excep tfo

r large embankment

s an d thos e embankment

s whic h coul d endanger lif

e o r propert y upo n fatiure
. The commenter suggeste d ne w language fo

r g 816.151(b) tha

t woul d remove th e minimu m safet y facto r requiremen

tand requir

e tha t primar y road embankment

s b e designe d i n accordanc e wit

h standar d engineering practice s o a s t

o b e stable . Two commenter

s agreed tha

tthe safet y facto r shoul d only b e applicabl e t o primar y roads . Th

e commenter

s note d that , i n general , ancillar

y road s ar

e muc h smalle r and les s frequentiy use d tha n primar y roads . The

y als o note d that , i f a n ancillar y roa d woul d experienc e a slop e o

r fill stabilit

y problem , the exten tof

thes e failure s and the significance o f th e associate d environmenta

l impact s woul d b e minimal
. On e commenter argue

d tha titi s necessar y t

o appl y the minimu

m safet y facto r t o ancillar y a s wel l a s primar

y roads . Th e commenter argue

d furthe r tha tthe differentiation betwee n primar y and ancillar

y road s wa s notbase d o

n the potentia

l fo r environmenta

l effect s t o th e pointo

f bein g consisten twit

h th e concep tin th e 197

9 rule , tha

tminimu m safet y factors shoul d apply onl y t o road s tha thav e greater environmenta l effects
. Th e commenter specificall y note d tha tthe existenc e o

f hig h embankments , a facto r specificall y discusse d b y OSMR

E a s relate d t

o th e degree o f environmenta

l risk fro m roads , i s no ta facto r which i s considere d in the proposed distinctio n betwee n primar y and ancillar

y roads . A s a result , th e commenter concluded , ancillar y road s wit h hig h embankment

s in stee p slop e areas , tiie failur

e o f whic h coul d hav e seriou s environmenta

l effects , woul d not b e subjec tt o stati c safet

y requirements
. A s discusse d previously in th e preambl e t o th e roa

d classificatio n system , ther

e ar e substantia

l differences betwee n primar

y and ancillar

y road s concerning road widt

h (an d thu s th e amoun tof cu tand fill involve d i n stee p slopes) , groun

d pressur e from traffic, and vehicl e frequency thatjustif y th e applicatio n o

f the stati c safet

y facto r t o ensur e stabl e primar

y roads tiiatwil l meetthe mandat

e o f sectio n 515(b)(17

) o f the Act
. Thi s reduce s the potentia l for slip s o r failure s o n thos e heavil y use d roads . O n th e other hand , the nanow , lightl y travelle d ancillar

y road s d o not typicall y hav e the hig

h embankment

s associate d wit

h primar y roads , eve n in stee p slop e areas , no

r ar e the y subjec t t o th e frequen

timpac tof hig h groun d pressures . Therefore , OSMR E i s finalizing th e rule a s proposed . A commenter expresse d confusio n abou tth e facttha

tproposed g g 780.37(c

) and 784.24(c

) appeared t

o allo w the regulator y authorit y t o develo p desig n standard s i n lie u o

f th e minimu

m safet y factor
. Th e commenter argue

d tha tthe language i n the proposa

l wa s confusing and shoul d b e clarified concerning th e regulator y authority' s flexibilit

y t o develo p desig n standard s unde r § 780.37(c ) i n lie u of

minimu m safet y facto r requirements
. Thre e additiona

l commenter

s suggeste d language change s t o § 818.151(b) t

o hel p clarif

y th e fac t tha tregulator

y authorities can establis h engineering design standard s i n lieu o f the minimu

m safet y facto r requirement

. Sectio n 780.37(c

) allow s the regulator

y authorit y t o establis h engineering design standard s fo

r primar y road s in lie u o

fP.1 9

th e engineerin g test s tha t

otherwis e woul d b e performe d t o establis h complianc e with th e minimu mstati c safety facto r

o f 1. 3 fo r al l primary roa d embankments

. Thi s provisio n enable s th e regulatory audiorit y an d th e operato r t o sav e tim e an d effor

t durin g th e desig n an d revie w of

road plan s an d als o ensure s protectio n of th e environmen t

throug h th e appUcatio n o f standard s tha t

hav e prove d effectiv e fo

r th e condition s prevalen t

i n tha t State

. Sectio n 780.37(c ) wa s no t

cross
reference d i n propose d § 816.151(b) , an d OSMR E recognizes, i n respons e t o th e comments , tha t

th e connectio n need s emphasis

. Fina l § 816.151(b ) include s a cross-referenc e t o § 780.37(c ) t o clarif y tha t embankment s mus t

eithe r hav e a minimu msafet y facto r

o f 1. 3 or , alternatively , mee t

th e desig n standard s develope d i n accordanc e wit h § 78037(c)

. Sections 818.151(c)/817.151(c) Location Fma l § 818.151(c ) require s primar y road s to b e locate d insofar a s i s practicable , o n th e mos t

stabl e avaUabl e surface s t o minimiz e erosion

. Sectio n 816.151(c)(2) prohibit s primar y road s fro musin g strea mford s o n perennia l o r intermitten t

stream s unles s specificall y approve d b y th e regulator y authorit y a s temporar y route s durin g road construction

. Thes e provision s ar e identica l t o th e propose d rule

. On e commente r

wa s concerne d abou t th e differenc e inth e languag e o f propose d g 816.151(c ) an d tha t o f th e 197 9 regulation s (4

4 F R15418 , Marc h 13 , 1979)

. Th e commente r

note d tiiat

th e languag e i n 816.151(c ) state s tha t primary roads ar e locate d insofar a s i s "practicable, " o n th e mos t stabl e avaUabl e surface , whil e th e 197 9 regulation s require road s t o b e place d o n th e mos t

stabl e surfac e insofa

r a s "possible. " TS e commente r propose d that , hrth e alternative , road s b e require d t o b e locate d o n ridges. OSMR E disagrees

. I n developin g th e propose d rule , OSMR

E chos e t o us e th e wor d "practicable " becaus e i t provide s a n adequat e standar d fo

r road locatio n t o achiev e th e required stabUity whe n applie d alon g witi i th e requirement fo r a I J stati c safet y factor

. OSMR E i s concerne d tha t

requiring locatio n o

f primary roads , insofar

a s i s "possible, " o n th e mos t

stabl e surfac e availabl e coul d resul t

i n roads bein g unnecessaril y lengthened

. I n th e preamble s t o bot h th e 197 9 (4 4 F R14901 , 15248 , Marc h 13,1S79 ) an d 198 3 (4 8 F R 22110,22120 , May 18,1983 ) suspende d rules , OSMR

E expresse d conce mtha t roa d locatio n requirements might undul y lengthe n road s a s well

. Concernin g th e commenter' s alternative , OSMR E agree s tha t

ridge s ar e ofte n th e mos t stabl e surfac e availabl e an d shoul d b e use d for road s wher e practicable

. However , ridge s ar e no t

alway s locate d wher e th e roa d i s intende d t o go
. Additionally , i n appropriat e circumstances , wildlif e disturbanc e ca n b e reduce d b y locatin g road s belo w ridgelines (Ambrose , e r ai., p
. 14)

. Sinc e thi s alternativ e woul d no t allo w sufficient

flexibiUt y i n th e locatio n o f roads , OSMR

E di d no t accep t i t Sections 816.151(d)/817.151(d) Drainage Control Fina l § 816.151(d

) requires tha t

surfac e wate r drainag e fo

r eac h primary roa d b e controUe d i n accordanc e with th e approve d reclamatio n an d operation s pla n specifie d i n § 789.37(a)

. Final sectio n (d)(1 ) requires tha t primary road s b e constructe d o r reconstructe d an d maintaine d t o hav e adequat e drainag e contro l b y usin g structure s suc h as , bu t

no t Umite d to, bridges , ditches , cros s drain s an d ditc h relie f drains

. Sectio n (d)(1 ) als o require s tha t a t aminimum , drainag e contro l system s b e designe d t o safel y pas s th e pea k runof f from aten-year , six-hou r precipitatio n event , o r

greate r even t a s specifie d b y th e regulator y authority

. Th e languag e i n final § 816.151(d)(1 ) has

. bee n change d fromth e propose d languag e i n a n effor

t to clarif y it o intent becaus e propose d g 816.151(d)(1 ) coul d b e rea d t o mea n tha t

th e regulator y authorit y ma y specif

y alesse r precipitatio n even t

tha n th e ten-year , six-hou r even t T o clarif y tha t th e ten

year , six-hou r

even t i s th e minimum precipatio n even t

tha t th e drainag e contro l syste mmus t

b e abl e t o handle , th e final rul e allow s onl y modificatio n t o ahighe r standar d b y th e regulatory authority

. Fina l g 818.151(d)(2 ) requires tha t drainag e pipe s an d culvert s b e instaUe d a s designed , an d maintaine d i n afree an d operatin g conditio n an d t o preven t o r contro l erosio n a t

inlet s an d outlets

. Final § 818.151(d)(3 ) requires tha t drainag e ditche s b e constructe d an d maintaine d t o preven t

uncontrolle d drainag e ove r

th e road surfac e an d embankmen t

Fina l % 818.151(d)(4 ) require s tha t

culvert s b e instaUe d an d maintaine d t o sustai n di e vertica l soi l pressure , th e passiv e resistance of th e foundation , an d di e weigh t o f vehicle s usin g th e road. Fina l § 818.(d){5 ) require s tha t natura l strea mchannel s no t b e altere d o r relocated withou t

prio r approva l o

f th e regulatory authorit y i n accordanc e with %% 818.4 1 throug h 816.4 3 an d 816.57

. Final § 816.151(d)(6 ) require s that , excep t a s provide d i n sectio n (c)(2) , strea mchanne l crossing s fo r perennia l an d intermitten t

stream s b e accomplishe d usin g bridges , culverts , low-wate r

crossings , o r

othe r structure s designed , constructe d an d maintaine d usin g curren t

pruden t engineerin g practices

. Th e requiremen t fo r drainag e structure s a t

perennia l an d intermitten t stream s i s include d t o ensur e consistenc y wit h § 818.150(d)(1 ) o f thi s part

. B y usin g current , pruden t engineerin g practice s t o design , construct , an d maintai n crossings , th e hydrologi c an d environmenta l balanc e o f th e strea mi s protecte d whil e th e crossin g i s i n place

. Sectio n 816.151(d)(6) include s languag e referrin g t o perennia l an d intermitten t

stream s fo

r consistenc y wit h th e languag e o

f perfonnanc e standar d i n g 818.150(d)

. Severa l commenter s requeste d a clarificatio n ao to th e intent o f propose d § 818.151(d)(1 ) whic h stated , "Th e drainag e contio l syste msha U b e designe d to safel y pas s th e pea k runof f fromaten-year , six-hou r o r greate r precipitatio n even t

unles s otherwis e specifie d b y th e regulatory authority. " Th e confusio n involve d whethe r th e regulatory audiorit y coul d specif y onl y a precipitatio n even t

greate r tha n tiie ten

year , six-Sho

w atarm

. o r

an y greate r

o r lesse r precipitatio n event

. On e comment® ? suggeste d tha t di e word s "o r greate r pjedpitBtiom " b e delete d s o th e regulatory authorit y coul d base d o n site-cpsdE c conditions , reduc e th e desig n storm.betor

w th e ten-year , six

hou r even t Fima l 8 818.151(dJ(l ) provide s flexibilit y t o regukitcs y authoritie s t o accoun t fo ? particula r

situation s likel y t o b e encountere d ows ? th e lif e o f th e min e o r relate d to specifi c dcamstrea m conditions

. Th e rul e allow s for modificatio n b y th e regulatory authorit y i n thos e situation s whe n th e ten-year , six-hou r precipitation

- even t

i s no t appropriate

. In order-t o eliminat e th e confusio n create d b y th e languag e i n propose d § 818.151(d)(1) , OSMR E ha s change d th e final rul e t o read "(1 ) Eac h primary roa d shal l b e constructe d o r reconstructe d an d maintaine d t o hav e adequat e draimag s control , usin g structure s o^d

n ao , mst no t limite d to , bridges , ditches , cros s drains , an d ditc h relie f drams

. Th e drainag e contro l syste mshal l b e designe d t o safel y pas s th e pea k runof f fro maten-year , six-hou r precipitatio n even t

o r e greate r even t a s specifie d b y m e regulatory authority. " Thi s wil l ensur e dia t

reduction s i n tiie require d stormeven t

ar e no t made

. Severa l commenter s suggeste d tha t th e desig n precipitatio n even t fo r th e drainag e contro l syste mshoul d b e modifie d fro

mth e ten-year , six-hou r even t i n th e propose d rule

. On e commente r

suggeste d th e us e o

f th e 25

-

_i_,_____._,*________!fefe • !P<d?3B&tl3cffc)fiiBg • / Vol. ' ' 53(?iMcv)2j8;i_/ ; Tuesday ; Novembe r 8 , 198 8 /

Rule s an d Regulation s
year , 24-hou

r stormeven t

tiie ten-year , six-hou r even t o r anothe r even t specifie d b y th e regulatory authority

. Th e commente r

maintaine d tha t

th e 25

- year , 24-hour

even t i s consisten t

wit h curren t loca l practice s an d ha s no t cause d an y problems. Anothe r commente r

state d tha t

th e ten-year , six

hou r even t i s excessive , an d th e one
year , 24-hou

r even t shoul d b e use d t o desig n th e drainag e contro l system

. Th e commente r

argue d tha t

n o problem s hav e bee n experience d witi i excessiv e wate r overtoppin g th e roa d surfac e durin g majo r

stor mevent s whe n th e one-year , 24-hou

r standar d wa s used

. Tw o othe r

commenter s wer e satisfie d - tha t di e ten-year , six-hou r

stormwoul d b e appropriate

. . Anothe r commente r

contende d tha t th e drainag e contro l system s shoul d b e designe d for afen-year , 24-hou r storm even t rathe r tha n aten-year , six-hou r even t becaus e bette r

dat ai s avaUabl e fo r tiie 24-hour

events

. Also , the

. commente r

indicate d tha t

th e pea k flow s fo r ten-year , 24-hou

r event s an d ten-year , six-hou r

event s d o no t

diffe r significantly

. On e commente r beUeve d tha t th e ten-year , six-hou r

event

standar d coul d creat e complianc e problem s sinc e som e state s currentl y desig n fo r a25-year , 24-hou

r event

. I f th e ten-year , six-hou r

even t produce s highe r pea k runof f volume s tha n th e 25-year , 24-hou r even t tiie commente r

. ... , maintaine d tiiat

existin g approve d road s coul d b e foun d i anon-compUance

. (Se e th e discussio n imdss General Comments concernin g existin g structures. ) OSMR E beUeve s dia t

th e ten-year , six-hou r precipitatio n even t

i s
. appropriat e for

drainag e contro l system s fo r primar y roads. Thi s desig n even t makes th e roa d rule s consisten t wit h th e rule s for diversion s i n g 816.43

. OSMR E recognizes tha t

for som e basins, , dependin g o n location , th e 24-hou r duratio n stormma y resul t i n arunof

f volum e somewha t

highe r tha n th e six

hou r stormfor di e sam e are a(4

4 FR

. « j 15207 , Marc h 13,1979)

. However , fo r mos t minin g situations , asix-hou r even t i s mor e likel y f

o resul t i n ahighe r

pea k - • flow

. Se e di e Fina l Environmenta l - • * ' Statemen t

OSM-EIS^-1 : Supplement , , Volume 1 : Analysis , p
. IV-17

. Fo r a'<-

- give n stormfrequency , th e time o f • concentratio n an d watershe d shap e can
b e mor e influentia l i n determinin g th e pea k flo w tha n th e stor mduration

. Therefore , i n mos t

case s th e difference s i n an y increase d volum e o f pea k flo w wil l b e mino r

from apractica l desig n an d construction standpoint

. An y compute d increas e i n peak flow volum e woul d mos t

likel y no t resul t i n an y significan t chang e i n flo w deptho r

flow velocity and , conespondingly , an y alteratio n i n th e desig n o

f th e drainag e contro l system

. Thus , OSMR E di d no t find an y compellin g reasons t o chang e th e propose d desig n even t standar d i n respons e t o comment s o n th e propose d rule

. On e commente r

asserte d tha t drainag e contro l system s designe d t o pas s th e pea k

runof f from aten-year , six-hou r o r greate r precipitatio n even t a s require d i n propose d g 816.151(d)(1) , woul d b e inadequate

. Th e commente r argue d tha t

drainag e contro l system s fo r ancillar y roads, especiall y thos e with hig h embankments an d thos e i n stee p slop e areas , shoul d b e require d t o b e designe d t o safel y pas s th e pea k runof f fromsom e precipitatio n even t tha t i s greate r tha n th e ten-year , six-hou r storm

. Th e commente r

wa s als o particularl y concerne d with long-ter mo r permanen t

road s wher e ther e i s potentia l dange r

t o healt h and/o r

safety o r significan t

environmenta l impacts

. Th e commente r

suggeste d tha t

drainag e contro l system s fo

r long-ter mroad s hav e aminimu mo

f a25-yea r precipitatio n event , an d permanen t road s hav e aminimu mo

f a100-yea

r precipitatio n event

. Th e commente r als o suggeste d tha t

drainag e contro l system s o n roads wit h hig h potentia l fo r injur y o r significant environmenta l damag e shoul d b e designe d t o appropriat e precipitatio n even t

standards

. Anothe r commente r

suggeste d tha t ther e shoul d b e adistinctio n mad e i n th e desig n precipitatio n event s fo r temporary wate r

crossing s versu s permanen t

structures

. Th e commente r argue d tha t

permanen t

structure s hav e a longe r intende d lif

e an d shoul d b e designe d accordingly

. Th e commente r suggeste d tha t

th e desig n precipitatio n even t fo r permanen t

structure s shoul d b e th e 100-year , six-hou r

event , with th e exceptio n fo

r low-wate r

crossing s sinc e the y ar e designe d t o b e overtopped

. OSMR E believe s tha t

aminimu m standar d o

f aten-year , six-hou r precipitatio n even t

fo r th e desig n o

f drainag e contro l syste mi s adequat e t o protec t th e publi c an d th e environmen t fromsigmficant

damage

. Th e U.S

. Arm

y Corp s o f Engineer s an d Stat e highway department s us e ten-year storm s fo r desig n purposes
. Th e regulatory authorit y may specif

y agreate r precipitatio n even t

a s appropriat e fo

r site-specifi c condition s an d situations

. Concernin g ancillar y roads, OSMR E consider s tha t

th e standard s i n final § 816.150(b ) (2

) throug h (6

) ar e adequat e t o protec t th e environmen t

withou t detail s associate d wit

h th e standard s fo

r primary roads

. Th e standard s i n § 816.150(b) allo w th e operato r an d th e regulatory authorit y to us e avariet y o f method s t o minimiz e advers e environmenta l impact s fromancillar y roads

. On e commente r

suggeste d tha t propose d g 816.151(d)(1 ) b e revise d t o delet e th e wor d "reconstructed. " Th e commente r

argue d tha t

road s i n existenc e a t

th e tim e tha t

thi s rulemakin g i s adopte d shoul d no t b e require d t o b e reconstructed

. OSMR E doe s no t

agree
. Th e wor d "reconstructed " i n th e contex t o f thi s rul e refer s t o thos e situation s wher e a n operato r o n hi s ow n initiativ e decide s to upgrad e o r

improv e significantl y aroa d b y reconstructing i t

Th e applicatio n o

f thes e standard s t o existin g road s i s covere d b y th e provision s o f 3 0 CF R 701.11(e) , concernin g existin g structures

. On e commente r

suggeste d tha t

th e wor d "avoid " i n propose d § 816.151(d)(2) b e replace d b y th e wor d "control. " Th e commente r note d that , becaus e som e erosio n i s unavoidable , th e us e o f th e wor d "avoid " makes i t possibl e fo

r a n operato r

t o mee t thi s requirement

. Sinc e th e languag e o

f sectio n 515[b)(17 ) o

f th e Ac t require s contro l o r prevention o

f erosion , no t

avoidanc e of erosion , OSMR

E ha s delete d th e wor d "avoid " an d replace d i t

wit h "preven t

o r control " i n th e .fina

l rule

. On e commente r

note d tha t

th e performanc e standard s fo r diversion s ar e foun d i n 3 0 CF

R816.43 , bu t

th e definitio n o

f "diversion " i n 3 0 CF

R701. 5 doe s no t explicitl y includ e strea m channe l crossings

. Th e commente r suggeste d revisin g th e definitio n o f "diversion " t o clarif

y tha t strea m channe l crossing s (i.e. , culverts , bridges , fords , etc. ) ar e include d i n th e definitio n an d tha t th e requirement s o

f § 816.4 3 appl y t o roads

. Th e commente r als o suggeste d tha t

specifi c reclamatio n desig n criteri afo

r restoratio n o

f channe l crossing s b e added

. Th e definitio n o

f "diversion " doe s no t includ e strea mchanne l crossings , an d OSMR E doe s no t

agre e tha t

th e definitio n shoul d b e changed

. Culverts , bridges , an d ford s ar e man-mad e structure s tha t

cros s astrea man d d o no t "divert " wate r

to achanne l i n ane w location

. OSMR

E doe s no t

agre e tha t specifi c desig n criteri afo

r restoratio n o

f strea mchanne l crossing s shoul d b e Include d i n th e fina

l rule

. Th e performanc e standard s adopte d toda y an d othe r permanen t

program regulations , e.g
. 3 0 CF

R816.43 , ar e adequat e t o minimiz e environmenta l harm

. Further , specifi c desig n criteri a woul d limi t

th e regulatory authority' s flexibilit y i n approvin g effectiv e reclamatio n designs

.

ll ___,A___m__mm___m ____,_!_. • lA

. ..... . —..••.•..

.P.2 1 \ 

### .Fsdega l RagteSag.-

/ VoL 53

. No

. 21 8 /

Tuesday , November

. 8,4988 ; / Rules

- aadS-Regtele^on s
On e commente r

felt tha t th e additio n o f low-wate r

crossing s t o th e Us

t o f structure s tha t

ar e allowe d fo

r strea m crossing s wa s no t

acceptabl e becaus e o

f potentia l problem s with erosio n an d increase d sediment , an d th e fac t tha t the y ar e inundate d b y hig h flows. Th e commente r

note d further

tha t ther e i s a nee d fo r detaile d nationa l standard s fo r erosio n prevention an d sedimen t control

. OSMR E note s tha t

th e regulation s requir e tha t

th e operato r

preven t erosio n an d sedimen t

problem s with low-wate r crossings. Fina l g 818.151(d)(6) specificall y state s tha t

"th e regulatory authorit y sha

U ensur e tha t

low-wate r crossing s ar e designed , constructed , an d maintaine d t o preven t

erosio n o f th e structur e o r

streambe d an d additiona l contribution s o

f suspende d solid s t o streamflow. " OSMR

E agree s tha t

b y design , low-wate r

crossing s wil l b e inundate d durin g hig h flows whic h wil l restric t thei r use
. OSMR

E doe s no t

agre e tha t thi s create s aproble mexcep t tha t i t necessaril y wil l caus e th e operato r t o alte r minin g operation s t o accommodat e th e inundation

. On e commente r

wa s concerne d with th e us e o f th e wor d "prevent " i n propose d g 816.151(d)(6) with respec t t o erosio n associate d with low-wate r structures

. Th e commente r suggeste d tha t th e wor d "prevent " b e replace d b y th e wor d "control " becaus e a n operato r canno t preven t erosio n entirely

. OSMR E kep t th e wor d "prevent " i n final g 816.151(d)(8 ) becaus e b y design , a low-wate r structur e wil l b e inundate d durin g high-wate r

flo w periods , an d thi s high-wate r

flo w wil l hav e greate r velocitie s an d erosio n potentia l tha n durin g period s o

f lo w water

. Therefore , th e design , construction , an d maintenanc e o

f low-wate r

structure s mus t preven t erosio n o f th e structur e an d streambe d durin g a

U anticipate d flo w conations

. On e commente r

inquire d i

f i t wa s th e inten t o f OSMR E t o allo w retentio n of low-wate r

crossing s a s permanen t structures

. ! '4

- OSMR E believe s tha t

th e decisio n o n

. retention , o

f low-wate r

crossing s a s permanen t

structure s i s th e responsibilit y o

f th e regulatory " authority/Thi s decisio n mus t conside r th e requirement s o

f 3 0 CF R816.13 3 an d othe r associate d permanen t

structur e performanc e requirements

. Sections 816.151(e)/817.151(e) Surfeiting^ Filial g 816.151(e

) i s identica l t o th e propose d rul e an d require s tha t primary road s b e surface d witi i materia l approve d b y th e regulatory authorit y a s bein g sufficientl y durabl e fo r th e anticipate d volum e o f trafi c an d th e weigh t an d spee d o

f vehicle s usin g th e road

. Th e fina

l rul e doe s no t

specif y th e kind s o f material s whic h mus t

b e use d fo r surfacin g primary road s an d doe s no t lis t routine maintenanc e responsibilitie s fo r primary roads

. Sinc e th e regulatory authorit y ma

y approv e onl y surfacin g material s tha t

mee t th e requirement s o

f thi s section , i t

i s no t necessar y to lis t

th e material s tha t

ma y b e used

. Th e regulatory authorit y shoul d hav e th e flexibilit y to approv e an y materia l whic h wil l satisf

y thes e requirements

. Th e fina l rul e establishe s adequat e maintenanc e requirement s fo r al l road s and

. therefore , i t

i s no t necessar y t o establis h separat e requirement s fo r primary roads

. Th e regulatory authorit y ma y specif y additiona l maintenanc e criteri afo r primar y roads , a s necessary
. On e commente r

wa s concerne d tha t th e requirement s in propose d § 816.151(e

) wer e to o general

. Th e commente r

questione d i

f economic s woul d b e take n int o accoun t whe n th e regulatory authorit y come s to adecisio n o n th e typ e o

f materia l tha t

wil l b e "sufficientl y durable. " Th e commente r raise d th e possibility tha t appropriat e surfac e material s may no t b e availabl e a t o r nea r th e min e site , an d th e cost s t o obtai n th e require d material s coul d b e prohibitive

. Tw o commenter s argue d tha t propose d § 816.151(e

) wa s a "blanket " surfacin g requiremen t tha t would , i n every case , requir e som e typ e o f additiona l surfac e material

. Th e commenter s contende d that , i n man y instances , th e natura l surfac e o f th e roa d may b e sufficient

t o mee t th e performanc e standards

. Th e commenter s suggeste d tha t th e languag e i n § 816.151(e

) b e change d b y takin g ou t th e phras e "approve d b y th e regulatory authority. " OSMR E doe s no t

forese e tha t

a regulatory authorit y woul d tak e economic s int o accoun t

i n approvin g roa d surfacin g material

. In th e first place , th e regulatory experienc e OSMR E ha s accumulate d ove r

th e pas t te n year s indicate s tha t

durabl e surfacin g materia l i s usuall y presen t

i n sufficient

quantitie s a t th e vas t majorit y o f coa l minin g operations , particularl y whe n use d i n associatio n with periodi c chemica l treatmen t to maintai n acompacted , dust-fre e surface

. Secondly , th e purpos e o f th e provisio n i s t o protec t th e environment , tha t

is , t o ensur e tha t

th e roa d surfacin g materia l i s sufficiently durabl e t o avoi d problem s wit h excessiv e dus t

an d erosio n du e to breakdow n o

f th e roa d surface

. Whil e OSMR E agree s that , in som e instances , th e natura l surfac e o

f th e roa d ma

y b e sufficient t o mee t th e performanc e standards , th e commenter' s suggeste d chang e wa s no t accepted

. Fina l g 816.151(e

) doe s no t preclud e th e acceptabilit y o

f th e natura l roa d surfac e i n meetin g th e durability requiremen t On e commente r

objecte d t o th e lac k o f ajustificatio n fo

r th e requiremen t

t o hav e th e surfac e material s approve d i n advance

. OSMR E believe s tha t

th e regulatory authorit y mus t

revie w th e typ e o

f surfac e materia l propose d fo r th e constructio n o

f eac h primary roa d prio r t o th e constructio n o

f th e road

. Froma practica l standpoint , prio r approva l wil l ensur e tha t

environmenta l damag e doe s no t resul t fro msurfacin g with substandar d materia l an d wil l avoi d th e problem s an d cost s associate d wit h havin g to remov e an y substandar d materia l and/o r

resurfac e th e road

. H. References In additio n t o th e literatur e cite d with previou s rulemaking s o n thi s subjec t (4 3 F R41739 , Septembe r

18,1978 ; 4

4 F R 15245

. Marc h 13,1979 ; an d 47 F R16595 , Apri l 16,1982 ) whic h wa s use d a s genera l backgroun d material, th e followin g item s wer e use d i n th e preparatio n o

f thi s final rule : Ambrose , R.E.

. C.R

. Hinkle , an

d C.R

. Wenzel , 1983 , Practice s fo

r protectin g an d enhancin g fis h an d wildlif e o n coa l surface

mine d land s i n th e Southcehtra

l U.S. , U.S

. Departmen t o f th e Interior, Fis

h an d Wildlif e Service , FWS/OBS-83/ll , 22 9 pp
. Kaufman , W.K

. an d J.C

. Ault , 1977, Desig

n o f Surfac e Min e Haulag e Roads— A Manual , U.S

. Departmen

t o f th e Interior, Burea

u o f Mines , Informatio

n Circula r No

. 8758, 8 8 pp
. U.S

. Departmen

t o f th e Interior, Offic

e o f Surfac e Minin g Reclamatio

n an d Enforcement

, 1983 , Propose

d revision s t

o th e Permanen t Progra mRegulations Implementin

g sectio n 501(b ) o f th e Surfac e Minin g Contro l an d Reclamatio

n Ac t o f 1977 , Fina l Environmenta

l Statement

. OSM-EIS-1 : Supplement

, 3 vols

. III

. Procedura l Matter s Effect in Federal

Program States and

on Indian Lands Th e rul e applie s throug h cross
referencing , t o thos e state s with Federa l progams
. Thi s include s CaUfomi a(a s o f Augus t 12,1988 ; 5 3 F

R26570 , Jul

y 13

. 1988) , Georgia , Idaho , Massachusetts , Michigan , Nort

h Carolina , Oregon , Rhod e Island , Sout

h Dakota , Tennessee , an d Washington

. Th e Federa l program s fo r thes e State s appea r

a t 3 0 CF RPart s 905

. 910

. 912 , 921 , 922 , 933 , 937 , 939 , 941

. 942 , an d 947 , respectively

. Th e rul e als o applies , throug h cross-referencing , t o India n land s unde r

th e Federa l progra

m fo r India n land s a s provide d i n 3 0 CF R Par t 750

.

"-•-• " -.^J.-

- ..... . .__•______,_._.___.. .» M .-*±t___\.m4Efo O Federa l Registe r / , Vol

. 58;{No

. 21 8 / Tuesday

. Novembe r

8 , 198 8 /

Rule s an d Regulation s Effect on State Programs FoUowing promulgatio n of di e final rule , OSMR

E wU l evaluat e permanen t Stat e regulatory program s approve d unde r sectio n 50 3 o

f SMCR A t o
' determin e whethe r

an y change s i n thes e program s wti l b e necessary
. I f th e Directo r determine s tha t

certai n Stat e programprovision s shoul d b e amende d i n orde r t o b e mad e n o les s effectiv e tha n th e revise d Federa l rules , th e individua l state s wti l b e notifie d i n accordanc e wit h th e provision s o f 3 0 CFR73&17

. Executive Order12291 Th e Departmen t

o f th e Interio r

ha s examine d tins final rul e accordin g t o th e criteri aof Executiv e Orde r

1229 1 (February 17,1981 ) an d ha s determine d tha t thi s i s no t

amajo r rul e an d doe s no t require aregulator y impac t analysis

. Th e final rul e wti l impos e onl y mino r cost s o n th e coa l industr y an d coa l

. consumer s becaus e i t

emphasize s th e us e o f performanc e standard s instea d of desig n criteri awhic h wti l aUow operator s to us e th e mos t

cost-effectiv e mean s o f achievin g di e minimiim standards

. Regulatory Flexibility Act Th e Departmen t

of.th e Interio r

ha s als o determined , pursuan t t o th e Regulator y FlexibiUt

y Ac t 5 U.S.C

. 80 1 et seq., tha t dii s final rul e will no t

hav e asignifican t

economi c impac t

o n a substantia l numbe r

of smal l entities

. Th e fund s tha t asmal l operato r

wil l hav e to

- inves t i n di e constructio n o f

road s t o comply , wid i thi s final rul e will onl y b e minimall y increase d ove r wha t woul d normaU y b e spen t

t o ensur e efficient transportatio n an d minima l vehicl e damage

. Th e cos t

of buildin g road s wti l b e defraye d b y lowere d maintenanc e cost s for roads an d vehicles

. Th e operato r wi U als o avoi d losse s fro

ma shutdow n o

f operation s du e t o impassabl e roads

. Federal Paperwork Reduction Act Th e informatio n coUectio n requirement s containe d i n S § 780.3 7 an d 7803 8 hav e bee n approve d b y di e Offic e o f Managemen t

an d Budge t

(OMB }

. unde r 4 4 U.S. C 350 1 et

seq. an d assigne d clearanc e numbe r 1029-0038

. Th e informatio n coUectio n requirement s containe d i n S S 784.2

4 an d 784.3 0 hav e bee n approve d b y OM

B unde r 44 U.S. C 350 1 et seq. an d assigne d clearanc e numbe r 1029-0039

. PubUc reportin g burde n far thi s informatio n i s estimate d t o averag e a s foUows: S 780-37—17. 0 hours , 3 780.38 — 12. 0 hours , S 784.24—0. 7 hours , an d S 784.30—12. 0 hours , pe r

response , includin g di e timre for reviewin g instructions , searchin g existin g dat a sources , gatherin g an d maintainin g th e dat aneeded , an d completin g an d reviewin g th e coUectio n o f information

. Sen d comment s regarding thi s burde n estimat e o r

an y othe r aspec t o f thi s coUectio n information , includin g suggestion s for

reducin g th e burden , t o Informatio n Collectio n Clearanc e Officer , OSMRE , 195 1 Constitutio n Avenue , NW. , Washington , D C 20240 ; an d th e Offic e o

f Informatio n an d Regulator y Affairs , OMB , Washington , D C 20503

. National Environmental

Policy Act OSMR E ha s prepare d a n environmenta l assessmen t an d ha s mad e afinding tha t

th e final rule s wti l no t significantl y affec t

th e qualit y of

th e human environmen t

unde r sectio n 102(2 ) (C ) o f th e Nationa l Environmenta l Polic y Ac t

o f 1969 , 4 2 U.S.C

. 4332(2)(C)

. Th e environmenta l assessmen t i s o n file i n th e OSMR

E Administrativ e Record , Room5131,110 0 L Stree t

NW. , Washington , DC

. Agency Approval Sectio n 516(a

) require s tha t

wit h regar d t o rule s directe d towar d th e surfac e effect s o

f undergroun d mining , OSMR E mus t obtai n writte n concurrenc e fro

mth e hea d of

th e departmen t

whic h administer s th e Federa l Min e Safet

y an d Healt h Ac t

o f 1977 , th e successo r

t o th e Federa l Coa l Min e Health an d Safet

y Ac t of 1969

. OSMR E ha s obtaine d th e writte n concurrenc e o

f th e Assistan t

Secretar y fo r Min e Safet

y an d Health

. U.S

. Departmen t

o f Labor

. Authors Th e author s o

f thi s rul e ar e Robert

A

. Wiles , P.E.

. an d Donal d E

. Stump , Jr. , P.E. , wit h assistanc e fromPatric k W

. Boyd ; OSMRE , 195 1 Constitutio n Avenue , NW. , Washington , D C 20240 ; Telephone : 202-343-150 2 (Commercial o r FTS)

. Lis t o f Subject s 30 CFR Part

701 La w enforcemen t

Surfac e mining , Undergroun d mining

. 30CFRPart780 Reportin g an d recordkeeping requirements

. Surfac e mining

. 30CFRPart784 Reportin g an d recordkeepin g requirements , Undergroun d mining

. 30 CFR Part

815 Reportin g an d recordkeeping requirements , Surfac e mining

. 30 CFR Part 818 Environmenta l protection

. Reportin g an d recordkeepin g requirements

. Surfac e mining

. 30CFR Part

817 Coa l mining , Environmenta l protection , Reportin g an d recordkeepin g requirements , Undergroun d mining

. Accordingly , 3 0 CF

RPart s 701.780 , 784,815,818 , an d 81 7 ar e amende d a s se t fort h below : Dated : Septembe

r 14,1988

. - )

. Steve n Griles , Assistant Secretary—Land

and Minerals Management PAR T 701—PERMANEN T REGULATOR Y PROGRA M 1

. Th e authorit y citatio n fo r Par t 70 1 i s revised t o rea d a s foUows : Authority : Pub

. L 95-87 , 3

0 U.S. C 120 1 et seg , a s amended , an

d Pub

. L

. 100-34

. §701. 5 [Amended] 2

. In S 701.5 , th e definitio n o f road i s reinstate d an d revise d t o read a s follows : Road mean s asurfac e right-of-way fo r purpose s o f

trave l b y lan d vehicle s use d i n surfac e coa l minin g an d reclamatio n operation s o r

coa l exploration

. A road consist s o f th e entir e are awithi n th e right-of-way , includin g th e roadbed, shoulders , parkin g an d sid e areas , approaches,Jitructures

. ditches , an d surface

. Th e ter minclude s acces s and

. haulroad s constructed , used , reconstructed , improved , o r maintaine d fo r us e i n surfac e coa l minin g an d reclamatio n operation s o r coa l exploration , includin g us e b y coa l haulin g vehicle s t o an d fro mtransfer , processing , o r

storag e areas
. Th e ter

m doe s no t includ e ramp s an d routes o f trave l withi n th e immediat e minin g are a o r withi n spo

U o r coa l min e wast e disposa l areas
.

PAR T 780—SURFAC E MININ G PERMI T APPLICATIONS-MINIMU M REQUIREMENT S FO R RECLAMATIO N AN D OPERATION S PLA N 3

. Th e authorit y citatio n for Part 78 0 is , revise d t o read a s foUows : Authority : Pub

. L

. 95-67 , 3 0 U.S. C 120 1 et seq., a s amended ; sec
. 11 5 o f Pub

. L

. 98-148 , 3 0 U.S.C

. 1257 ; 1 6 U.S. C 47

0 et seq-: an d Pub

. L

. 100-34

. 4

. Sectio n 780.3 7 i s revised t o read a s follows :P.2 3 f'V ,

•'• V 

### e g / Vol

. 53

. NO

. 21 8 /Tuesday , Novembe r 8,-1088 /

Rule s -and

- Regulation s 41521 1
§780.3 7 Roa d oyotomo

. . (a ) Plans and

drawings. Eac h applican t fo r asurfac e coa l minin g an d reclamatio n permi t

shal l submi t

plan s an d drawing s fo

r eac h road , a s define d i n g 701. 5 o

f thi s chapter , t o b e constructed , used , o r

maintaine d withi n th e propose d permi t

area
. Th e plan s an d drawing s shall — (1 ) Includ e amap , appropriat e cros s sections , desig n drawing s an d specification s fo

r roa d widths , gradients , surfacin g materials , cuts , fil l embankments , culverts , bridges , drainag e ditches , low-wate r crossings , an d drainag e structures ; (2) Contai n th e drawing s an d specification s o f

eac h prppose d roa d tha t i s locate d i n th e channe l o f a n intermitten t

o r perennia l stream , a s necessar y fo

r approva l o

f th e roa d b y th e regulatory authorit y i n accordanc e witi i g 818.150(d)(1 ) o

f thi s chapter ; (3 ) Contai n th e drawing s an d specification s fo

r eac h propose d for

d o f perennia l o r

intermitten t

stream s tha t

i s use d a s atemporar y route , a s necessar y fo r approva l o

f th e for d b y th e regulatory authorit y i n accordanc e with g 818.151(c)(2) o

f thi s chapter ; (4 ) Contai n adescriptio n o f measure s to b e take n t o obtai n approva l o f th e regulator y authorit y fo

r alteratio n o r relocation o

f anatura l strea mchanne l unde r g 816.151(d)(5 ) o

f thi s chapter ; (5 ) Contai n th e drawing s an d specification s fo

r eac h low-wate r crossin g o f perennia l o r

intermitten t strea mchannel s s o tha t

th e regulatory authority , ca n maximiz e th e protectio n of th e strea mi n accordanc e with g 816.151(d)(6 ) o

f thi s chapte r

an d (6) Describ e th e plan s t o remov e an d reclai meac h road tiiat

woul d no t

b e retaine d unde r

a n approve d postminin g lan d use , an d th e schedul e fo r thi s remova l an d reclamation

. (b ) Primary road

certification. Th e plan s and,.drawing s fo

r eac h primar y roa d shal l b e prepare d by , o r unde r th e directio n of

, an d certifie d b y aqualifie d registere d professiona l engineer , o r i n an y Stat e whic h authorize s lan d Surveyor s t o certif

y th e desig n of

. ' primary road s aqualifie d registere d

. professiona l lan d surveyor , wit h experienc e inth e desig n an d constructio n o

f roads, a s meetin g th e y requirement s o

f thi s chapter ; current ,

. r apruden t

engineerin g practices ; an d an y desig n criteri aestablishe d b y th e regulatory authority

. (c ) Standard

design plans. Th e regulatory authorit y may establis h engineerin g desig n standard s fo r primary road s throug h th e Stat e program approva l process , i n lieu o f engineerin g tests , t o establis h complianc e wit h th e minimumstati c safet

y facto r o f 1. 3 fo r al l embankments specifie d i n § 818.151(b ) o

f thi s chapter

. 5

. Sectio n 780.3 8 i s adde d to rea d a s follows : §780.3 8 Suppor t facilltlo a Eac h applican t

fo r asurfac e coa l minin g an d reclamatio n permi t shal l submi t adescription , plans , an d drawing s fo

r eac h support

facilit y t o b e constructed , used , o r

maintaine d withi n th e propose d permi t

area
. Th e plan s an d drawing s shal l includ e amap , appropriat e cros s sections , desig n drawings , an d specification s sufficient to demonstrat e complianc e wit h § 816.18 1 o

f thi s chapte r

for eac h facility

. PAR T 784—UN0ERGROUN © MMM© ' PERMI T APPUCATIOMS=MIMIKlU M REQUIREMENT S FOR I RECLAMATIO N AN D OPERATION S PLA N 6

. Th e authorit y citatio n fo r Part 78 4 i s revise d t o rea d a s follows : Authority : Pub

. L

. 95-87 , 3 0 U.S.C

. 120 1 et seq., a s amended ; sec
. 11 5 o f Pub

. L

. 98-140, 3 0 U.S.C

. 1257 ; 1 8 U.S.C

. 47

0 et seq.; an d Pub

. L

. 100-34

. 7

. Sectio n 784.2

4 i s revise d t o rea d a s follows : § 780.2 0 Roa d cystom a (a) Plans and

drawings. Eac h applican t fo r a n undergroun d coa l minin g an d reclamatio n permi t shal l submi t plan s an d drawing s fo

r eac h road , a s define d i n g 701. 5 o f thi s chapter , t o b e constructed , used , o r maintaine d withi n th e propose d permi t area
. Th e plan s an d drawing s shaU — (1 ) Includ e amap , appropriat e cros s sections , desig n drawings , an d specification s for

roa d widths , gradients , surfacin g materials , cuts , fil l embankments , culverts , bridges , drainag e ditches , low-wate r crossings , an d drainag e structures ; (2 ) Contai n th e drawing s an d specification s o

f eac h propose d roa d tha t i s locate d i n th e channe l o f a n intermitten t

o r perennia l stream , a s necessar y fo

r approva l o

f th e roa d b y th e regulatory authorit y i n accordanc e with § 817.150(d)(1 ) ofthi s chapter ; (3 ) Contai n th e drawing s an d specification s fo

r eac h propose d for

d o f perennia l o r

intermitten t

stream s tha t

i s use d a s atemporary route , a s necessar y fo r approva l o

f th e for d b y th e regulatory authorit y i n accordanc e wit h § 817.151(c)(2) o

f thi s chapter ; (4) Contai n adescriptio n o f measure s to b e take n to obtai n approva l o f th e regulatory authorit y fo

r alteratio n o r relocatio n o

f anatura l strea mchanne l unde r § 817.151(d)(5 ) o

f thi s chapter ; (5 ) Contai n th e drawing s an d specification s fo

r eac h low-wate r crossin g o f perennia l o r

intermitten t strea mchannel s s o tha t

th e regualtor

y authorit y ca n maximiz e th e protectio n o f th e strea mi n accordanc e wit h g 817.151(d)(6) o

f thi s chapter ; an d (6 ) Describ e th e plan s to remov e an d reclai meac h roa d tha t

woul d no t

b e retaine d unde r

a n approve d postminin g lan d use , an d th e schedul e fo r thi s remova l an d reclamation

. (b ) Primary road

certification. Th e plan s an d drawing s fo

r eac h primary roa d sha U b e prepare d by , o r

unde r th e directio n of

, an d certifie d b y aqualifie d registere d professiona l engineer , o r i n an y Stat e whic h authorize s lan d surveyor s t o certif

y th e desig n o

f primary road s aqualifie d registered professiona l lan d surveyor , experience d i n th e desig n an d constructio n o f roads , a s meetin g th e requirement s o f thi s chapter ; current , pruden t

engineerin g practices ; an d an y desig n criteri a establishe d b y th e regulatory authority

. (c ) Standard

design plans. Th e regulatory authorit y ma

y establis h engineerin g desig n standard s fo r primary roads throug h th e Stat e program approva l process , i n lieu o f engineerin g tests , t o establis h complianc e wit h th e minimumstati c safety facto r o f 1. 3 fo r a U embankment s specifie d l n g 817.151(b ) o

f thi s chapter

. 8

. Sectio n 784.3 0 i s adde d t o rea d a s
. follows : g 78&S Q SujRpDr

t fccHoo

. Eac h appUcant

fo r a n undergroun d coa l minin g an d reclamation permi t shal l submi t

adescription , plans , an d drawing s fo

r eac h support

faciUt y t o b e constructed , used , o r

maintaine d withi n th e propose d permi t

area
. Th e plan s an d drawing s shal l includ e amap , appropriat e cros s sections , desig n drawings , an d specification s sufficien t t o demonstrat e complianc e wit h § 817.18 1 o

f thi s chapte r

fo r eac h facility

. 

### PAR T ©15—PERMANEN

T PROGRA

M STANDARDS—COA L EKPLORATOO N 9

. Th e authorit y citatio n fo r Par t 81 5 i s revise d t o rea d a s follows : Authority : Pub

. L

. 95-87 , U.S. C 120 1 else., a s amended ; an

d Pub

. t » 100-34

. 10

. Sectio n 815.1 5 i s amende d b y revisin g paragrap h (b ) tojea d a s follows : § 815.1 9 Portosroortc o otejitfosret o Vc ? co d
(b ) All roads o r

othe r transportatio n facilitie s use d fo

r coa l exploratio n shal l comply wit

h th e applicabl e provision s o f g g 816.15 0 (b ) throug h (f) , 816.180 , an d 818.18 1 o f thi s chapter

.



### v -4521 2 Fsdtarsi ! Keglstei ? / Vo L 53 , No

. 21 ® /

Tuesday

. Novembe r

8 , 198 3 /

Rule s an d Regulation s

PERFORMANC E STAMDARDS = SURFAC E MININ G ACTMTIS S 11

. Th e authorit y citatio n for Par t 81 8 i s revise d t o rea d a s follows : Authority : Pub

. L 95-87 , 30 U.S. C 120 1 et seq., a s amended ; se c 11 5 o f Pub

. L 88-148 , 30 U.S.C

. 1257 ; an

d Pub

. L lCtt-34

. 12

. Sectio n 816.15 0 i s reinstate d an d revise d t o rea d a s follows : §610.15 ® Roods : garcarcfl

L (a ) Road classification system. (1 ) Eac h road , a s define d i n g 701. 5 of thi s chapter , sha

U b e classifie d a s eithe r

a primary roa d o r

a n ancUlar

y road

. (2) A primar y roa d i s an y road whic h is

- (i ) Use d for

transportin g coa l o r

spoil ; (ii ) Frequenti y use d for

acces s o r otiie r purpose s fo r

aperio d i n exces s of

si x months ; o r (iii ) T o b e retaine d for

a n approve d postminin g lan d use
. (3 ) A n ancillar y road i s an y roa d no t classifie d a s aprimar y road

. (b ) Performance standards. Eac h roa d shal l b e located , designed , constructed , reconstructed , used , maintained , and

. reclaime d s o a s to : (1 ) Contro l o r

preven t erosion,

- siltation , an d th e ai r

poUutio n attendan t t o erosion , includin g roa d dus t a s we U a s dus t occurrin g o n othe r

expose d surfaces , b y measure s suc h a s vegetating , watering , usin g chemica l o r othe r dus t suppressants , o r

otherwis e stabilizin g a

U expose d surface s i n accordanc e wit

h curren t pruden t engineerin g practices ; (2 ) Contro l o r

preven t damag e t o fish , wildlife , o r

thei r habita t an d relate d environmenta l values ; (3 ) Contro l o r

preven t additiona l contribution s of

suspende d solid s t o strea mflow o r

runof f outsid e th e penni t area ; (4 ) Neithe r caus e no r

contribut e to , directl y o r indirectly , th e violatio n o f Stat e o r Federa l wate r

qualit y standard s applicabl e t o receivin g waters ; (5 ) Refrai n fro

mseriousl y alterin g th e norma l flo w of

wate r in streambed s o r drainag e channels ; (8 ) Preven t

o r contro l damag e t o publi c o r privat e property , includin g di e preventio n o r

mitigatio n of

advers e effect s o n land s withi n th e boundarie s o f unit s o f th e Nationa l Par

k System , th e Nationa l Wildlif

e Refuge System , di e Nationa l Syste mo

f Trails , th e Nationa l Wildernes s Preservatio n System , th e Wil d an d Sceni c River s System , includin g designate d stud y rivers, an d Nationa l Recreatio n Area s designate d b y Ac t o f Congress ; (7 ) Us e nonacid

- an d nontoxic-formin g substance s in roa d surfacing

. (c ) Design and construction limits and establishment

ofdssign criteria. T o ensur e environmenta l protectio n appropriat e fo

r thei r planne d durationa

l an d use , includin g consideratio n of di e typ e an d siz e o f

equipmen t

used , the ' desig n an d construction as reconstruction of

roads shal l incorporat e appropriat e Umit s for

grade , widui , surfac e materials , surfac e drainag s control , culvert

placemen t

an d culver t size , i n accordanc e wit h curren t pruden t engineerin g practices , an d an y necessar y desig n criteri aestablishe d b y ui e regulatory audiority

. (d ) Location. (1 ) N o par t

o f an y roa d shal l b e locate d i n di e channe l o f a n intermitten t

o r perennia l strea munles s specificaUy approve d b y di e regulator y audiorit y i n accordanc e wid i appUcabl e § § 818.4 1 diroug h 818.4 3 an d 818.5 7 o f thi s chapter

. (2) Road s shal l b e locate d to minimiz e downstrea msedimentatio n an d flooding

. (e ) Maintenance. (1 ) A road shal l b e maintaine d t o mee t

th e perfonnanc e standard s o

f tins par t an d an y additiona l criteri aspecifie d b y di e regulatory authority

. (2 ) A roa d damage d b y acatastrophi c even t suc h a s afloo d o r

earthquake , shal l b e repaire d a s soo n a s i s practicabl e afte r

th e damag e has occurred

. (f ) Reclamation, A roa d no t to b e retaine d unde r

a n approve d postmining

. lan d us e sha

U b e reclaime d i n accordanc e witi i di e approve d reclamatio n pla n a s soo n a s practicabl e afte r i t i s n o longe r

neede d for

minin g an d reclamation operations

. Thi s reclamatio n shal l include : (1 ) Closin g th e roa d t o traffic ; (2 ) Removin g a

U bridge s an d culvert s unles s approve d a s par t

of th e postminin g lan d use ; (3 ) Removin g o r

otherwis e disposin g o f road-9urfacing material s dia t ar e incompatibl e wit h th e postminin g lan d us e an d revegetation requirements; (4 ) Reshapin g cut

an d fill slope s a s necessar y to b e compatibl e witi i th e postminin g lan d us e an d to complemen t di e natura l drainag e patter n o f di e surroundin g terrain ; (5 ) Protectin g th e natura l drainag e pattern s b y installin g dike s o r eros a drain s a s necessar y t o contro l surfac e runof f an d erosion ; an d (6 ) Scarifyin g o r

ripping di e roadbed ; replacin g topsoi l o r

substitut e material , an d revegetatin g disturbe d surface s i n accordanc e wit

h g g 816.2 2 an d 816.11 1 throug h 816.11 6 of

thi s chapter

. 12

. Sectio n 816.15 1 i s reinstate d an d revise d t o rea d a s follows : Primary road s shal l mee t di e requirement s o f

sectio n 818.15 0 an d tiie additiona l requirement s o f thi o section

. (a ) Certification. Th e construction o r reconstruction o f

primar y roads shal l b e certifie d i n arepor t

to ui e regulator y authorit y b y aqualifie d registere d professiona l engineer , o r

i n an y Stat e whic h autiiorize s lan d surveyor s t o certif y th e construction ©

? reconstructio n o f

primar y roads , a qualifie d registere d professiona l lan d surveyo r witi i experienc e i n di e desig n an d construction of

roads

. Th e repor t

. sha U indicat e dia t

th e primar y roa d ha s bee n constructe d o r

reconstructed a o designe d an d i n accordanc e wit h th e approve d plan

. (b ) Safety Factor. Each primar y road embankmen t

shal l hav e aminimum stati c facto r

of 1. 3 o r mee t di e requirements estabUshe d unde r § 780.37(c ) o f

thi s chapter

. (c ) Location. (1 ) T o minimiz e erosion , aprimar y roa d sha

U b e located , insofar as-i s practicable , o n th e mos t stabl e availabl e surface

. (2) Ford s o r

perennia l o r

intermitten t stream s b y primar y road s ar e prohibite d unles s the y ar e specificall y approve d b y th e regulator y audiorit y a s temporar y route s durin g period s o

f roa d construction

. (d ) Drainage control. I n accordanc e wit h th e approve d plan— (1 ) Bac h primar y roa d shal l b e constructe d o r

reconstructed , an d maintaine d t o hav e adequat e drainag e control , usin g structure s suc h as , bu t no t limite d t o bridges , ditches , cros s drains , an d ditc h relief

drains

. Th e drainag e contro l syste msha

U b e designe d t o safel y pas s th e pea k

runof f fro ma10

- year , 8-hou

r precipitatio n event , o r greate r even t a s specifie d b y di e regulator y audiority ; (2) Drainag e pipe s an d culvert s shal l b e installe d a s designed , an d maintaine d i n afre e an d operatin g conditio n an d t o preven t

o r contro l erosio n a t inlet s an d outlets ; (3 ) Drainag e ditche s sha

U b e constructe d an d maintaine d t o preven t uncontrolle d drainag e ove r th e roa d surfac e an d embankment ; (4 ) Culvert s sha

U b e instaUe d an d maintaine d t o sustai n th e vertica l soi l pressure , th e passiv e resistance o f th e foundation , an d th e weigh t of vehicle s usin g th e road ; (5 ) Natura l strea mchannel s sha U no t b e altere d o r

relocated withou t

th e prio r approva l of

di e regulatory authorit y i n accordanc e wit

h applicabl e g 818.4 1 throug h 816.4 3 an d 816.5 7 o f thi s chapter ; an dP.2 5

Federa l Registe r

/ Vol

. No

. 21 6 /

Tuesday , Novej.'o.; r

8 , V_J8jRule s an d Regulation s 4521 3 -riTg-gw—a—ar—a—•——MraaciaBSftif l MIII I i <r^jsMmse^^2sxammBmMmmmmmmtmmmmmmmmmaamrmmmtmmgmrr^a

„. (6) Excep t

a s provide d i n paragrap h (c)(2 ) o f thi s sectio n structure s for perennia l o r

intermitten t

strea mchanne l crossing s shal l b e mad e usin g bridges , culverts , low-wate r

crossings , o r

othe r structure s designed , constructed , an d maintaine d usin g current , pruden t engineerin g practices

. Th e regulatoiy audiorit y shal l ensur e dia t low-wate r crossing s ar e designed , constructed , an d maintaine d to preven t

erosio n ofth e structur e o r

streambe d an d additiona l contribution s o f

suspende d solid s to steamflow

. (2) Surfacing. Primary road s shal l b e surface d wit

h materia l approve d b y th e regulatory authorit y a s bein g sufficientl y durabl e fo r th e anticipate d volum e of traffi c an d th e weigh t

an d spee d o

f vehicle s usin g th e road

. PAR T 817—PERMANEN T PROGRA M PERFORMANC E STANDARDS UNDERGROUN D MININ G ACTIVITIE S 13

. Th e audiorit y citatio n fo r Par t 81 7 i s revise d t o rea d a s follows : Authority : Pub . 1_. 95-87 , 3 0 U.S.C
. 120 1 et seq., a s amended ; sec . 11 5 o f Pub . L . 98-146 , 30 U.S.C
. 1257 ; and Pub . L 100-34
. 14

. Sectio n 817.15 0 i s reinstate d an d revise d t o rea d a s follows : §817.15 0 Roads : general

. (a ) Road classification system. (1 ) Eac h road , a s define d i n § 701. 5 o f thi s chapter , shal l b e classifie d a s eithe r a primar y roa d o r

a n ancillar y road

. (2 ) A primar y roa d i s an y roa d whic h is — (i ) Use d fo

r transportin g coa l o r

spoil ; (ii ) Frequenti y use d fo r

acces s o r othe r purpose s for

aperio d i n exces s o

f si x months ; o r (iii ) T o b e retained fo

r a n approva l postminin g lan d use
. (3 ) A n ancillar y roa d i s an y roa d no t classifie d a s aprimar y roa d (b ) Performance standards. Eac h roa d shal l b e located , designed , constructed , reconstructed , used , maintained , an d reclaimed s o a s to : (1 ) Contro l o r

preven t erosion , siltation

. an d th e ai r

pollutio n attendan t t o erosion , includin g roa d dus t an d dus t occurrin g o n othe r

expose d surfaces , b y measure s suc h a s vegetating , watering , usin g chemica l o r

othe r dus t suppressants , o r

otherwis e stabilizin g al l expose d surface s i n accordanc e wit h curren t pruden t engineerin g practices ; (2 ) Contro l o r

preven t damag e t o fish, wildlife , o r

othei r habita t an d relate d environmenta l values ; (3 ) Contro l o r

preven t additiona l contribution s o f

suspende d solid s to streamflo w o r

runof f outsid e th e permi t area ; (4 ) Neiuie r caus e no r

contribut e to

. directl y o r

indirectly , th e violatio n o f Stat e o r Federa l wate r

qualit y standar d appUcabl e t o receivin g waters ; (5 ) Refrai n fro

mseriousl y alterin g th e norma l flo w of

wate r i n streambed s o r drainag e channels ; (6 ) Preven t

o r contro l damag e t o publi c o r privat e property , includin g th e preventio n or

mitigatio n o f

advers e effect s o n land s withi n th e boundarie s of unit s o f di e Nationa l Park

System , di e Nationa l Wildlif

e Refug e System , th e Nationa l Syste mo f

Trails , di e Nationa l WUdernes s Preservatio n System , th e Wti d an d Sceni c River s System , includin g designate d stud y rivers, an d Nationa l Recreatio n Area s designate d b y Ac t o f Congress ; an d (7 ) Us e nonacid

- an d nontoxic-formin g substance s i n roa d surfacing

. (c ) Design and

construction limits and establishment

of design criteria. T o ensur e environmenta l protectio n appropriat e for

thei r planne d duratio n an d use , includin g consideratio n o f th e typ e an d siz e of

equipmen t

used , th e desig n an d constructio n o r reconstructio n o f

road s shal l incorporat e appropriat e limit s fo

r grade , width , surfac e materials , surfac e drainag e control , culvert

placement , an d culvert size , i n accordanc e wid i current , pruden t engineerin g practices , an d an y necessar y desig n criteri aestablishe d b y th e regulatory authority

. (d ) Location. (1 ) N o par t

of an y roa d sha U b e locate d i n th e channe l of a n intermitten t

o r perennia l strea munles s specificall y approve d b y th e regulatory authorit y i n accordanc e with applicabl e § § 817.4 1 throug h 817.4 3 an d 817.5 7 of thi s chapter

. (2) Road s shal l b e locate d t o minimiz e downstrea msedimentatio n an d flooding

. (e ) Maintenance. (1 ) A roa d shal l b e maintaine d t o mee t

th e performanc e standard s o f

thi s par t an d an y additiona l criteri aspecifie d b y th e regulator y authority ; (2) A roa d damage d b y acatastrophi c even t suc h a s afloo d o r

earthquake , shal l b e repaire d a s soo n a s i s practicabl e after

th e damag e ha s occurred

.

. (f ) Reclamation. A roa d no t t o b e retained unde r

a n approve d postminin g lan d us e shal l b e reclaime d i n accordanc e with th e approve d reclamatio n pla n a s soo n a s practicabl e afte r i t i s n o longe r

neede d for

minin g an d reclamatio n operations

. Thi s reclamation shal l include : (1 ) Closin g th e road t o traffic ; (2 ) Removin g a

U bridge s an d culvert s unles s approve d a s par t

of th e postminin g lan d use ; (3 ) Removin g o r otherwis e disposin g o f road-surfacin g material s tha t ar e incompatibl e wit h th e postminin g lan d us e an d revegetatio n requirements; (4) Reshapin g cut

an d fill slope s a s necessar y to b e compatibl e wit h th e postminin g lan d us e an d t o complemen t th e natura l drainag e patter n o f th e surroundin g terrain ; (5 ) Protectin g di e natura l drainag e pattern s b y installin g dike s o r cros s drain s a s necessar y t o contro l surfac e runof f an d erosion ; an d (6 ) Scarifyin g o r

rippin g th e roadbed , replacin g topsoi l o r

substitut e materia l an d revegetatin g disturbe d surface s i n accordanc e wit

h g § 617.2

2 an d 817.11 1 throug h 817.11 6 o

f thi s chapter

. 15

. Sectio n 817.15 1 i s reinstate d an d revise d t o rea d a s follows : § 817.15 1 Primar

y roads

. Primary road s shal l mee t

th e requirement s o f

_817.15 0 an d th e additiona l requirement s of thi s section

. (a ) Certification. Th e constructio n o r reconstructio n of

primar y road s sha

U b e certifie d i n arepor t

t o th e regulatory authorit y b y aqualifie d registere d professiona l engineer , o r

i n an y Stat e whic h authorize s lan d surveyor s t o certif y th e constructio n o r reconstruction of

primary roads , a qualifie d registere d professiona l lan d surveyor , with experienc e i n th e desig n an d constructio n of

roads

. Th e report shal l indicat e tha t

th e primar y roa d ha s bee n constructe d o r

reconstructe d a s designe d an d i n accordanc e wit h th e approve d plan

. (b ) Safety Factor. Eac h primary roa d embankmen t

shal l hav e aminimum stati c facto r

of 1. 3 o r mee t th e requirements establishe d unde r § 784.24(c)

. (c ) Location. (1 ) T o minimiz e erosion , aprimar y roa d shal l b e located , insofa r a s i s practicable , o n th e mos t stabl e availabl e surface

. (2 ) Ford s of

perennia l o r

intermitten t stream s b y primar y road s ar e prohibite d unles s the y ar e specificall y approve d b y th e regulator y authorit y a s temporar y route s durin g period s o

f roa d construction

. (d ) Drainage control. I n accordanc e with th e approve d plan— (1 ) Eac h primar y roa d shal l b e constructe d o r

reconstructed , an d maintaine d t o hav e adequat e drainag e control , usin g structure s suc h as , bu t no t limite d t o bridges , ditches , cros s drains , an d ditc h relie f

drains

. Th e drainag e contro l syste mshal l b e designe d t o safel y pas s th e pea k

runof f fro ma10

- year , 6-hour

precipitatio n event , o r greate r even t a s specifie d b y th e regulatory authority ;4521 4 Federa l Registe r / Vol . 53 , No . 21 6 /

Tuesday , Novembe r 8 , 198 8 / Rule s an d Regulation s (2) Drainage pipe s and culverts shal l b e installe d a s designed , an d maintained i n a fre e and operating conditio n and t

o prevento r control erosio n a tinlet s and outlets ; (3 ) Drainage ditche s sha

U b e constructed and maintaine d t o prevent uncontrolled drainage ove r th e road surface and embankment ; (4) Culvert

s sha U b e instaUed and maintained t o sustai n th e vertical so U pressure , th e passiv e resistanc e o f th e foundation , and th e weigh to f vehicle s usin g di e road ; (5 ) Natura l strea m channel s shal l no t b e altere d o

r relocate d witiiou tth e prio r approva l o f the regulator

y authorit y i n accordanc e wit

h applicabl e § § 818.4 1 throug h 816.4 3 and 816.5

7 of dii s chapter ; and (6 ) Excep ta s provide d i n paragrap h (c)(2) of dii s section , structures fo r perennia l o r intermitten

tstrea m channel crossing s sha

U b e mad e usin g bridges , culverts , low-wate r crossings , o r othe r structures designed , constructed , and maintaine d usin g curren tpruden t engineerin g practices
. Th e regulator y authorit

y sha U ensure tiiatlow-wate r crossing s ar

a designed , constructed , and maintaine d to preventerosio n o f di e

. structur e o r streambe d and additional contribution s of

suspende d solid s t o - streamflow
. (e ) Surfacing. Primar

y road s shal l b e surface d wid i materia

l approved b y th e regulator y authorit y a s bein g sufficientl y durable for th e anticipate d volum e of traffi c and the weigh tand spee d o f vehicle s usin g the road . (F RDoc . 88-2568 8 File d 11-7-68 ; 8:4 5 am j BlUJN a COD

E 4310-OS-

M