Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 234 / Friday, December 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules 64327

The FHWA expects that these proposed

changes will create uniformity and

enhance safety and mobility at little

additional expense to public agencies or

the motoring public. Therefore, a full

regulatory evaluation is not required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

In compliance with the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–354, 5 U.S.C.

601–612), the FHWA has evaluated the

effects of this proposed action on small

entities. This notice of proposed

rulemaking adds some new and

alternative traffic control devices and

traffic control device applications. The

proposed new standards and other

changes are intended to improve traffic

operations, expand guidance, and

clarify application of traffic control

devices. As noted previously, any

expenses to public entities or the

motoring public to implement the

proposed changes would be minimal.

Therefore, the FHWA hereby certifies

that these proposed revisions would not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism

Assessment)

This action has been analyzed in

accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612, and it has been determined that

this action would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a federalism assessment.

The MUTCD is incorporated by

reference in 23 CFR part 655, subpart F,

which requires that changes to the

national standards issued by the FHWA

shall be adopted by the States or other

Federal agencies within two years of

issuance. The proposed amendment is

in keeping with the Secretary of

Transportation’s authority under 23

U.S.C. 109(d), 315, and 402(a) to

promulgate uniform guidelines to

promote the safe and efficient use of the

highway. To the extent that this

amendment would override any existing

State requirements regarding traffic

control devices, it does so in the

interests of national uniformity.

Executive Order 12372

(Intergovernmental Review)

Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance Program Number 20.205,

Highway Planning and Construction.

The regulations implementing Executive

Order 12372 regarding

intergovernmental consultation on

Federal programs and activities apply to

this program.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not contain a

collection of information requirement

for purposes of the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.

National Environmental Policy Act

The agency has analyzed this action

for the purpose of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has determined

that this action would not have any

effect on the quality of the environment.

Regulation Identification Number

A regulation identification number

(RIN) is assigned to each regulatory

action listed in the Unified Agenda of

Federal Regulations. The Regulatory

Information Service Center publishes

the Unified Agenda in April and

October of each year. The RIN contained

in the heading of this document can be

used to cross reference this action with

the Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects in 23 CFR 655

Design standards, Grant programs—

transportation, Highways and roads,

Incorporation by reference, Signs,

Traffic regulations.

(23 U.S.C. 109(d), 114(a), 315, and

402(a); 23 CFR 1.32, 655.601, 655.602,

and 655.603; 49 CFR 1.48)

Issued: November 25, 1997.

Kenneth R. Wykle,

Federal Highway Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–31911 Filed 12–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 926

[SPATS No. MT–017]

Montana Regulatory Program and

Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation

Plan

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and

extension of public comment period and

opportunity for public hearing on

proposed amendment.

SUMMARY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is

announcing receipt of revisions and

additional explanatory information

pertaining to a previously proposed

amendment to the Montana regulatory

program (hereinafter, the ‘‘Montana

program’’) and abandoned mine land

reclamation plan (hereinafter, the

‘‘Montana plan’’) under the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1977 (SMCRA). The revisions and

additional explanatory information for

Montana’s proposed statutes consist of

revisions to statutes pertaining to the

designation of the Montana State

Regulatory Authority and reclamation

agency under SMCRA, a statutory

definition of ‘‘prospecting,’’ revegetation

success criteria for bond release, and

prospecting under notices of intent. The

amendment is intended to revise the

Montana program to be consistent with

the corresponding Federal regulations

and SMCRA, and to improve program

efficiency.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by 4:00 p.m., m.s.t., December

22, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or hand delivered to Guy

Padgett at the address listed below.

Copies of the Montana program, the

proposed amendment, and all written

comments received in response to this

document will be available for public

review at the addresses listed below

during normal business hours, Monday

through Friday, excluding holidays.

Each requester may receive one free

copy of the proposed amendment by

contacting OSM’s Casper Field Office.

Guy Padgett, Director, Casper Field

Office, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, 100

East ‘‘B’’ Street, Room 2128, Casper,

WY, 82601–1918, Telephone: (307)

261–5776.

Steve Welch, Chief, Industrial and

Energy Minerals Bureau, Montana

Department of Environmental Quality,

P.O. Box 200901, Helena, MT 59620–

0901, Telephone: (406) 444–4964.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy

Padgett, Telephone: (307) 261–5776.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Montana Program

and Montana Plan

On April 1, 1980, the Secretary of the

Interior conditionally approved the

Montana program as administrated by

the Department of State Lands. General

background information on the Montana

program, including the Secretary’s

findings, the disposition of comments,

and conditions of approval of the

Montana program can be found in the

April 1, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR

21560). Subsequent actions concerning

Montana’s program and program

amendments can be found at 30 CFR

926.15, 926.16, and 926.30.

On October 24, 1980, the Secretary of

the Interior conditionally approved the
64328 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 234 / Friday, December 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Montana plan as administered by the

Department of State Lands. General

background information on the Montana

program, including the Secretary’s

findings, the disposition of comments,

and conditions of approval of the

Montana plan can be found in the

October 24, 1980, Federal Register (45

FR 70445). Subsequent actions

concerning Montana’s program and

program amendments can be found at

30 CFR 926.20.

II. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated May 16, 1995,

Montana submitted a proposed

amendment to its program pursuant to

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

(Administrative Record No. MT–14–01).

Montana submitted the proposed

amendment in response to required

program amendments at 30 CFR 926.16

(f) and (g), and at its own initiative. The

provisions of Montana Code Annotated

(MCA) that Montana proposed to revise

were: 82–4–203, MCA (definitions); 82–

4–204, MCA (rulemaking authority); 82–

4–205, MCA (administration by

Department of Environmental Quality);

82–4–221, MCA (mining permit

required); 82–4–223, MCA (permit fee

and surety bond); 82–4–226(8), MCA

(prospecting permit); 82–4–226, MCA

(prospecting permit); 82–4–227, MCA

(refusal of permit); 82–4–231, MCA

(submission of and action on

reclamation plan); 82–4–232, MCA (area

mining; bond; alternate plan); 82–4–235,

MCA (inspection of vegetation—final

bond release); 82–4–239, MCA

(reclamation by regulatory authority);

82–4–240, MCA (reclamation after bond

forfeiture); 82–4–242, MCA (funds

received by regulatory authority); 82–4–

251, MCA (noncompliance; suspension

of permits); 82–4–254, MCA (violation;

penalty; waiver). The proposed

amendment consisted of statutory

revisions enacted by the 1995 Montana

Legislature.

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the June 5,

1995, Federal Register (60 FR 29521),

provided an opportunity for a public

hearing or meeting on its substantive

adequacy, and invited public comment

on its adequacy (Administrative Record

No. MT–14–06). Because no one

requested a public hearing or meeting,

none was held. The public comment

period ended on July 5, 1995.

During its review of the amendment,

OSM identified concerns relating to the

definitions of ‘‘Board,’’

‘‘Commissioner,’’ and ‘‘Director’’ at

(MCA) 82–4–203 (6), (10), and (12);

Board rules and Administration by

Department at (MCA) 82–4–205;

Inspection of vegetation—final bond

release at (MCA) 82–4–235; the

definition of ‘‘prospecting’’ at (MCA)

82–4–226(8); and Prospecting permit at

(MCA) 82–4–226. OSM also addressed

outstanding required program

amendments at 30 CFR 926.16 (h), (i),

and (j) as they related to prospecting.

OSM notified Montana of the concerns

by letter dated December 5, 1996

(Administrative Record No. MT–14–08).

Montana responded in a letter dated

November 6, 1997, by submitting a

revised amendment and additional

explanatory information

(Administrative Record No. MT–14–11).

The revisions to the amendment consist

of new statutory language enacted by

the 1997 Montana Legislature.

Montana proposes revisions to, and

additional explanatory information for,

the definitions of ‘‘Board,’’

‘‘Commissioner,’’ and ‘‘Director’’ at

(MCA) 82–4–203 (6), (10), and (12);

Board rules and Administration by

Department at (MCA) 82–4–205;

Inspection of vegetation—final bond

release at (MCA) 82–4–235; the

definition of ‘‘prospecting’’ at (MCA)

82–4–226(8); and Prospecting permit at

(MCA) 82–4–226.

Specifically, the revisions and

additional explanatory information

submitted by Montana includes the

following:

1. Definition of ‘‘Director’’ in the

Department of Environmental Quality at

(MCA) 82–4–203(12)

Montana has defined the role of the

‘‘Director’’ in the newly created

Department of Environmental Quality.

Montana has provided explanatory

information concerning the Department

of Environmental Quality

responsibilities in the implementation

of the Montana program under SMCRA.

2. Board Rules and Administration by

Department at (MCA) 82–4–204 and 82–

4–205

Montana has revised the

responsibilities of the ‘‘Board’’ and the

‘‘Department’’ to alleviate a duplication

of duties.

3. Revegetation Criteria for Bond

Release at (MCA) 82–4–235

The 1997 Montana Legislature revised

82–4–235(a) to delete language which

would have allowed final bond release

(in some cases) with introduced species

providing a major or dominant

component of the reclaimed vegetation.

4. Definition of ‘‘Prospecting’’ and

Prospecting Permit at (MCA) 82–4–

203(5) and 82–4–226(8)

Montana has submitted a revised

definition of ‘‘prospecting.’’ In addition,

Montana has revised 82–4–226(8) to

provide that prospecting under a notice

of intent would only be allowed in those

situations in which less than 250 tons

of coal would be removed and on lands

not determined to be unsuitable for

mining.

5. Required Program Amendments at 30

CFR 926.16 (h), (i), and (j)

Montana has presented a revision to

address required program amendment

(h) concerning the removal of more than

250 tons of coal. (See above discussion.)

Montana has presented explanatory

information concerning required

program amendments (i) and (j).

III. Public Comment Procedures

OSM is reopening the comment

period on the proposed Montana

program amendment to provide the

public an opportunity to reconsider the

adequacy of the proposed amendment

in light of the additional materials

submitted. In accordance with the

provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), OSM is

seeking comments on whether the

proposed amendment satisfies the

applicable program approval criteria of

30 CFR 732.15. If the amendment is

deemed adequate, it will become part of

the Montana program.

Written comments should be specific,

pertain only to the issues proposed in

this rulemaking, and include

explanations in support of the

commenter’s recommendations.

Comments received after the time

indicated under DATES or at locations

other than the Casper Field Office will

not necessarily be considered in the

final rulemaking or included in the

administrative record.

IV. Procedural Determinations

1. Executive Order 12866

This rule is exempted from review by

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866

(Regulatory Planning and Review).

2. Executive Order 12988

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988

(Civil Justice Reform) and has

determined that this rule meets the

applicable standards of subsections (a)

and (b) of that section. However, these

standards are not applicable to the

actual language of State regulatory

programs and program amendments

since each such program is drafted and

promulgated by a specific State, not by

OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of

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

the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 234 / Friday, December 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules 64329

1 In the 1990 base year planning (winter)

inventory for the South Coast, onroad vehicles

accounted for approximately 80 percent of CO

emissions, while nonroad engines and stationary

sources contributed roughly 18 and 2 percent,

respectively. Despite continued growth in vehicle

use, the percent of CO emissions from onroad

vehicles is predicted to decline to about 50 percent

by the year 2010, as a result of the cleaner motor

vehicles mandated by the California low-emission

vehicle program.

2For a description of the boundaries of the Los

Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, see 40 CFR 81.305.

The nonattainment area includes all of Orange

Continued

decisions on proposed State regulatory

programs and program amendments

submitted by the States must be based

solely on a determination of whether the

submittal is consistent with SMCRA and

its implementing Federal regulations

and whether the other requirements of

30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have

been met.

3. National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is

required for this rule since section

702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d))

provides that agency decisions on

proposed State regulatory program

provisions do not constitute major

Federal actions within the meaning of

section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C)).

4. Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by OMB under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

5. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department of the Interior has

determined that this rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

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

that is the subject of this rule is based

upon counterpart Federal regulations for

which an economic analysis was

prepared and certification made that

such regulations would not have a

significant economic effect upon a

substantial number of small entities.

Accordingly, this rule will ensure that

existing requirements previously

promulgated by OSM will be

implemented by the State. In making the

determination as to whether this rule

would have a significant economic

impact, the Department relied upon the

data and assumptions for the

counterpart Federal regulations.

6. Unfunded Mandates

This rule will not impose a cost of

$100 million or more in any given year

on any governmental entity or the

private sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 926

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: November 23, 1997.

Richard J. Seibel,

Regional Director, Western Regional

Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 97–31810 Filed 12–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA–189–0059; FRL–5932–3]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans; California;

South Coast Air Quality Management

District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

a state implementation plan (SIP)

revision submitted by the State of

California to provide for attainment of

the carbon monoxide (CO) national

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)

in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air

Basin Area (South Coast). EPA is

proposing to approve the SIP revision

under provisions of the Clean Air Act

(CAA) regarding EPA action on SIP

submittals, SIPs for national primary

and secondary ambient air quality

standards, and plan requirements for

nonattainment areas. The demonstration

of attainment in the SIP depends, in

part, upon reductions from an enhanced

inspection and maintenance (I/M)

program for motor vehicles. Since EPA

has previously granted interim approval

to the California I/M program, the

Agency is proposing interim approval of

the CO attainment demonstration

portion of the plan.

DATES: Written comments on this

proposal must be received by January 5,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to the EPA contact below.

The rulemaking docket for this notice,

Docket No. 97–17, may be inspected and

copied at the following location during

normal business hours. A reasonable fee

may be charged for copying parts of the

docket. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 9, Air Division, Air

Planning Office, 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

Copies of the SIP materials are also

available for inspection at the addresses

listed below:

California Air Resources Board, 2020 L

Street, Sacramento, California

South Coast Air Quality Management

District, 21865 E. Copley Drive,

Diamond Bar, California

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dave Jesson (415) 744–1288, Air

Planning Office (AIR–2), Air Division,

U.S. EPA, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, California, 94105–

3901.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. The Carbon Monoxide Problem

Carbon monoxide is a colorless,

odorless gas emitted in combustion

processes. In the South Coast, like most

urban areas, CO comes primarily from

tailpipe emissions of cars and trucks. 1

Exposure to elevated CO levels is

associated with impairment of visual

perception, work capacity, manual

dexterity, and learning ability, and with

illness and death for those who already

suffer from cardiovascular disease,

particularly angina or peripheral

vascular disease.

Under section 109 of the CAA, EPA

has established primary, health-related

NAAQS for CO: 9 parts per million

(ppm) averaged over an 8-hour period,

and 35 ppm averaged over 1 hour.

Attainment of the 8-hour CO NAAQS is

achieved if not more than one nonoverlapping 8-hour average in any

consecutive 2-year period per

monitoring site exceeds 9 ppm (values

below 9.5 are rounded down to 9.0 and

are not considered exceedances).

The South Coast has continuously

achieved the 1-hour NAAQS for the past

6 years. For this reason, the South Coast

SIP and this action address primarily

the 8-hour NAAQS. In 1995, the South

Central Los Angeles County area

recorded 13 exceedances of the 8-hour

NAAQS, the largest number of CO

exceedances within the SCAB and, in

fact, within the country. Most of the CO

exceedances in the SCAB occur during

the months of January, November, and

December, with peak concentrations

typically around 7 a.m. and 10 p.m.

B. Clean Air Act Requirements

The Federal CAA was substantially

amended in 1990 to establish new

planning requirements and attainment

deadlines for the NAAQS. Under

section 107(d)(1)(C) of the Act, areas

designated nonattainment prior to

enactment of the 1990 amendments,

including the South Coast, were

designated nonattainment by operation

of law.2 Under section 186(a) of the Act,