28996 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

or its elements in accordance with 

paragraphs (b)(1)(v) and (b)(2)(vi) of this 

section. 

(F) A description of internal and 

external controls that are recommended 

or provided and control procedures. The 

description must identify those control 

elements that are incorporated into the 

testing procedure. 

(iv) Information demonstrating 

analytical validity of the device 

according to analytical performance 

characteristics, evaluated either 

specifically for each gene/mutation or, 

when clinically and practically justified, 

using a representative approach based 

on other mutations of the same type, 

including: 

(A) Data that adequately supports the 

intended specimen type (e.g., formalinfixed, paraffin-embedded tumor tissue), 

specimen handling protocol, and 

nucleic acid purification for specific 

tumor types or for a pan-tumor claim. 

(B) A summary of the empirical 

evidence obtained to demonstrate how 

the analytical quality metrics and 

thresholds were optimized. 

(C) Device precision data using 

clinical samples to adequately evaluate 

intra-run, inter-run, and total variability. 

The samples must cover all mutation 

types tested (both positive and negative 

samples) and include samples near the 

limit of detection of the device. 

Precision must be assessed by 

agreement within replicates on the assay 

final result for each representative 

mutation, as applicable, and also 

supported by sequencing quality metrics 

for targeted regions across the panel. 

(D) Description of the protocols and/ 

or data adequately demonstrating the 

interchangeability of reagent lots and 

multiplexing barcodes. 

(E) A description of the nucleic acid 

assay input concentration range and the 

evidence to adequately support the 

range. 

(F) A description of the data 

adequately supporting the limit of 

detection of the device. 

(G) A description of the data to 

adequately support device accuracy 

using clinical specimens representing 

the intended specimen type and range 

of tumor types, as applicable. 

(1) Clinical specimens tested to 

support device accuracy must 

adequately represent the list of cancer 

mutations with evidence of clinical 

significance to be detected by the 

device. 

(2) For mutations that are designated 

as cancer mutations with evidence of 

clinical significance and that are based 

on evidence established in the intended 

specimen type (e.g., tumor tissues) but 

for a different analyte type (e.g., protein, 

RNA) and/or a measurement (e.g., 

incorporating a score or copy number) 

and/or with an alternative technology 

(e.g., IHC, RT-qPCR, FISH), evidence of 

accuracy must include clinically 

adequate concordance between results 

for the mutation and the medically 

established biomarker test (e.g., 

evidence generated from an 

appropriately sized method comparison 

study using clinical specimens from the 

target population). 

(3) For qualitative DNA mutations not 

described in paragraph (b)(1)(iv)(G)(2) of 

this section, accuracy studies must 

include both mutation-positive and 

wild-type results. 

(H) Adequate device stability 

information. 

(v) Information that adequately 

supports the clinical significance of the 

panel must include: 

(A) Criteria established on what types 

and levels of evidence will clinically 

validate a mutation as a cancer mutation 

with evidence of clinical significance 

versus a cancer mutation with potential 

clinical significance. 

(B) For representative mutations of 

those designated as cancer mutations 

with evidence of clinical significance, a 

description of the clinical evidence 

associated with such mutations, such as 

clinical evidence presented in 

professional guidelines, as appropriate, 

with method comparison performance 

data as described in paragraph 

(b)(1)(iv)(G) of this section. 

(C) For all other mutations designated 

as cancer mutations with potential 

clinical significance, a description of the 

rationale for reporting. 

(2) The 21 CFR 809.10 compliant 

labeling and any product information 

and test report generated, must include 

the following, as applicable: 

(i) The intended use statement must 

specify the following: 

(A) The test is indicated for 

previously diagnosed cancer patients. 

(B) The intended specimen type(s) 

and matrix (e.g., formalin-fixed, 

paraffin-embedded tumor tissue). 

(C) The mutation types (e.g., single 

nucleotide variant, insertion, deletion, 

copy number variation or gene 

rearrangement) for which validation 

data has been provided. 

(D) The name of the testing facility or 

facilities, as applicable. 

(ii) A description of the device and 

summary of the results of the 

performance studies performed in 

accordance with paragraphs (b)(1)(iii), 

(b)(1)(iv), and (b)(1)(v) of this section. 

(iii) A description of applicable test 

limitations, including, for device 

specific mutations validated with 

method comparison data to a medically 

established test in the same intended 

specimen type, appropriate description 

of the level of evidence and/or the 

differences between next generation 

sequencing results and results from the 

medically established test (e.g., as 

described in professional guidelines). 

(iv) A listing of all somatic mutations 

that are intended to be detected by the 

device and that are reported in the test 

results under the following two 

categories or equivalent designations, as 

appropriate: ‘‘cancer mutations panel 

with evidence of clinical significance’’ 

or ‘‘cancer mutations panel with 

potential clinical significance.’’ 

(v) For mutations reported under the 

category of ‘‘cancer mutations panel 

with potential clinical significance,’’ a 

limiting statement that states ‘‘For the 

mutations listed in [cancer mutations 

panel with potential clinical 

significance or equivalent designation], 

the clinical significance has not been 

demonstrated [with adequate clinical 

evidence (e.g., by professional 

guidelines) in accordance with 

paragraph (b)(1)(v) of this section] or 

with this test.’’ 

(vi) For mutations under the category 

of ‘‘cancer mutations panel with 

evidence of clinical significance,’’ or 

equivalent designation, link(s) for 

physicians to access internal or external 

information concerning decision rules 

or conclusions about the level of 

evidence for clinical significance that is 

associated with the marker in 

accordance with paragraph (b)(1)(v) of 

this section. 

Dated: June 18, 2018. 

Leslie Kux, 

Associate Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13406 Filed 6–21–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4164–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation 

and Enforcement 

30 CFR Part 901 

[SATS No. AL–080–FOR; Docket ID: OSM– 

2016–0011; S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 

189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 

SX064A000 18XS501520] 

Alabama Abandoned Mine Land 

Reclamation Plan 

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule; approval of 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface 

Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 28997 

(OSMRE), are approving an amendment 

to the Alabama Abandoned Mine Land 

Reclamation (AMLR) Plan (hereinafter, 

the Plan) under the Surface Mining 

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 

(SMCRA or the Act). Alabama proposed 

updates to their Plan with changes 

required by the 2006 Amendments to 

SMCRA. 

DATES: The effective date is July 23, 

2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William L. Joseph, Acting Director, 

Birmingham Field Office, Office of 

Surface Mining Reclamation and 

Enforcement, 135 Gemini Circle, Suite 

215, Homewood, Alabama 35209. 

Telephone: (205) 290–7282. Email: 

bjoseph@osmre.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background on the Alabama Plan 

II. Submission of the Amendment 

III. OSMRE’s Findings 

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments 

V. OSMRE’s Decision 

VI. Procedural Determinations 

I. Background on the Alabama Plan 

The Abandoned Mine Land 

Reclamation Program was established 

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

et seq.) in response to concerns over 

extensive environmental damage caused 

by past coal mining activities. The 

program is funded by a reclamation fee 

collected on each ton of coal that is 

produced. The money collected is used 

to finance the reclamation of abandoned 

coal mines and for other authorized 

activities. Section 405 of the Act allows 

States and Indian tribes to assume 

exclusive responsibility for reclamation 

activity within the State or on Indian 

lands if they develop and submit to the 

Secretary of the Interior for approval, a 

program (often referred to as a plan) for 

the reclamation of abandoned coal 

mines. Background information on the 

Alabama Plan, including the Secretary’s 

findings, the disposition of comments, 

and the approval of the Plan, is found 

in the May 20, 1982, Federal Register 

(47 FR 22057). Later actions concerning 

the Alabama Plan and amendments to 

the Plan, are found at 30 CFR 901.20 

and 901.25. 

II. Submission of the Amendment 

By letter dated June 7, 2016 

(Administrative Record No. AL–0670), 

Alabama sent OSMRE an amendment to 

its Plan under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 

et seq.) at its own initiative. 

We announced receipt of the 

proposed amendment in the April 7, 

2017, Federal Register (82 FR 16975). In 

the same document, we opened the 

public comment period and provided an 

opportunity for a public hearing or 

meeting on the adequacy of the 

amendment. We did not hold a public 

hearing or meeting because no one 

requested one. The public comment 

period ended on May 8, 2017. We did 

not receive any public comments. 

During OSMRE’s review, several 

minor deficiencies were noted, 

including section numbering 

inconsistencies and the lien language in 

the ‘‘Reclamation of Private Land’’ 

section. By letter dated July 17, 2017 

(Administrative Record No. AL–0670– 

02), OSMRE requested that Alabama 

address these minor deficiencies. 

Because these requested changes were 

minor, Alabama was given the option to 

either incorporate the changes or 

withdraw the amendment and resubmit 

the Plan amendment at a later date. By 

letter dated July 28, 2017 

(Administrative Record No. AL–0670– 

03), Alabama returned a revised Plan 

amendment correcting the deficiencies 

and the amendment process resumed. 

III. OSMRE’s Findings 

We are approving the amendment as 

described below. The following are the 

findings we made concerning Alabama’s 

amendment under SMCRA and the 

Federal regulations at 30 CFR 884.14 

and 884.15. Any revisions that we do 

not specifically discuss below 

concerning non-substantive wording or 

editorial changes can be found in the 

full text of the Plan amendment 

available at www.regulations.gov. 

Alabama Reclamation Plan 

1. Governor’s Letter of Designation [30 

CFR 884.13(a)(1)] 

Alabama included a 1979 letter from 

the Governor designating the Alabama 

Department of Industrial Relations, now 

known as the Alabama Department of 

Labor (ADOL), as the agency responsible 

for the abandoned mine lands 

reclamation program in the state of 

Alabama. This letter was submitted and 

approved as part of the original 

proposed reclamation plan and is 

consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(1). 

Therefore, we are approving its 

inclusion. 

2. Legal Opinion [30 CFR 884.13(a)(2)] 

Alabama included a 1981 legal 

opinion from the Attorney General of 

Alabama authorizing the Alabama 

Department of Industrial Relations, 

under the legal authority of Alabama 

law, to conduct its reclamation program 

in accordance with the requirements of 

Title IV of the Act. This legal opinion 

was submitted and approved as part of 

the original proposed reclamation plan 

and is consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(2). 

Therefore, we are approving its 

inclusion. 

3. Purpose, Goals and Objectives [30 

CFR 884.13(a)(3)(i)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(3)(i) of 

the Plan, stated that the goal of its 

AMLR Plan is to amend those adverse 

effects of past coal mining conducted 

prior to August 3, 1977, which impact 

public health, safety, or general welfare, 

and cause environmental degradation. 

The stated objectives of the AMLR Plan 

are to identify and prioritize these 

adverse impacts, provide planning 

procedures, and affect their ultimate 

reclamation. Alabama also stated that, 

although the primary purpose of the 

program is the reclamation of coal mine 

lands, any non-coal AML issues will be 

dealt with in accordance with OSMRE 

policies. ADOL elected to set aside up 

to the maximum amount allowed by 

OSMRE of each year’s allocation of 

AML funds into a separate fund for the 

abatement of the causes and treatment 

of the effects of acid mine drainage. 

These funds are used in accordance 

with all applicable State and Federal 

regulations and are used to achieve the 

priorities of SMCRA. The program 

purpose, goals, and objectives are 

consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(3)(i). 

Therefore, we are approving their 

inclusion. 

4. Project Ranking, Selection and 

Development Procedures [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(ii)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(3)(ii) of 

the Plan, described the priority system 

and the specific criteria for identifying 

and ranking all sites eligible for 

reclamation under Title IV of the Act. 

Examples of eligible site problems 

include: Open and unprotected mine 

entries; open shafts; hazardous 

highwalls and other steep 

embankments; hazardous mine 

structures; underground mine 

subsidence; trash dumps on mine lands; 

water bodies adversely affected by coal 

mine drainage; dangerous 

impoundments; and any other mine 

related danger. The sites given highest 

priority are those exhibiting extreme 

danger to public health, safety, and 

property from adverse effects of coal 

mining practices. The sites given the 

second highest priority are those 

exhibiting adverse effects of coal mining 

practices that may impact public health 

and safety. The sites given third priority 

for restoration are those land and water 

resources previously degraded by 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
28998 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

adverse effects of coal mining, including 

measures for the conservation and 

development of soil, water, woodland, 

fish and wildlife, recreational resources, 

and agricultural productivity. The three 

priority categories described are 

consistent with Section 403(a) of 

SMCRA. Alabama also describes 

ADOL’s data acquisition procedures in 

determining site eligibility, which 

include the review of past mining 

records (available in the OSMRE’s 

Abandoned Mine Land Inventory 

System (e-AMLIS)), site inventories, 

field investigations, and public input. 

Alabama states that site priority will be 

determined for all eligible sites, 

regardless of resource recovery 

potential, and that any resource 

recovery will be undertaken in 

accordance with Federal rules. Any 

remined sites will remain eligible for 

AML reclamation. These descriptions 

are consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(3)(ii). 

Therefore, we are approving their 

inclusion. 

5. Coordination With Other Programs 

[30 CFR 884.13(a)(3)(iii)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(3)(iii) of 

the Plan, described ADOL’s 

coordination with other agencies. The 

ADOL AML Program coordinates with 

other State divisions such as the 

Alabama Department of Environmental 

Management (ADEM), the State Historic 

Preservation Office (SHPO), and the 

Alabama Department of Conservation 

and Natural Resources (ADCNR), to 

review proposed reclamation projects, 

provide assistance, and offer expertise 

to ensure that reclamation activities 

restore adversely impacted land and 

water to a productive state while 

protecting natural and historic/cultural 

resources. ADOL maintains an annual 

cooperative agreement with a non-profit 

organization, the Walker County Soil 

and Water Conservation District Board 

(WCB), which funds and oversees a 

reclamation group that performs 

reclamation and maintenance on AML 

sites and responds to AML emergencies. 

Historically, several major and minor 

tribes occupied Alabama; however, no 

tribal reservations were historically or 

are currently located in the areas where 

AML reclamation presently takes place 

within the Alabama Coal Region. 

Consultations concerning potential 

cultural resource impacts are conducted 

through the SHPO’s Alabama Historical 

Commission through the NEPA review 

process. Alabama also describes the 

purpose of its AML Emergency Program, 

which is to stabilize the emergency 

aspects of an AML problem by 

eliminating the immediate danger to 

public health, safety, or general welfare. 

The AML Emergency Program is 

discussed further in Section 8, ‘‘Rights 

of Entry.’’ This description of agency 

coordination is consistent with the 

Federal requirements of 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(iii). Therefore, we are 

approving its inclusion. 

6. Land Acquisition, Management, and 

Disposal [30 CFR 884.13(a)(3)(iv)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(3)(iv) of 

the Plan, stated that ADOL may acquire, 

manage, and dispose of lands that have 

been adversely affected by coal mining 

activity, if deemed necessary, pursuant 

to Section 407 of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. 

1237, and Code of Alabama Section 

9–16–127. These acquisition, 

management, and disposition policies 

and procedures are consistent with the 

Federal requirements of 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(iv). Therefore, we are 

approving their inclusion. 

7. Reclamation of Private Land [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(v)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(3)(v) of 

the Plan, described its policies and 

procedures for reclamation on private 

land. Under its Plan, the ADOL State 

Programs Administrator has the 

authority to place or waive a lien against 

private property if the owner has 

consented to, participated in, or 

exercised control over the mining 

operation, and if reclamation will result 

in a significant increase in property 

value. If an initial evaluation suggests 

an increase in property value of $25,000 

or more, the land appraisal may be 

conducted by an independent appraiser. 

The Administrator will determine 

whether to place or waive a lien based 

on both the independent appraisal 

findings and other relevant facts, in 

accordance with Code of Alabama 

Section 9–16–129. During OSMRE’s 

review, it was noted that this section of 

the Plan, as well as the referenced 

Alabama state law (Code of Alabama 

Section 9–16–129), fails to address the 

full requirements of 30 CFR 882.13(b) in 

regard to notifying the landowner of the 

proposed lien and allowing the 

landowner a reasonable time to pay that 

amount in lieu of filing the lien. On July 

17, 2017 (Administrative Record No. 

AL–0670–02), OSMRE requested that 

Alabama add this lien language to its 

proposed Plan. On July 28, 2017, 

Alabama returned a revised Plan which 

incorporated the additional lien 

language. These revised policies and 

procedures are consistent with the 

Federal requirements of 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(v) and 882.13(b). Therefore, 

we are approving this inclusion. 

8. Rights of Entry [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(vi)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(3)(vi) 

and (iii) of the Plan, stated its policies 

and procedures regarding rights of entry 

to lands or property. Pursuant to Code 

of Alabama Section 9–16–126, ADOL 

will take all reasonable actions to obtain 

advance written consent from the 

property owner for the purposes of 

reclamation. In the event that 

permission cannot be obtained on 

properties where reclamation is needed 

and there is an immediate danger to 

public health, safety, or general welfare, 

police power entry is authorized under 

the AML Emergency Program. If police 

power entry is necessary, a written 

notice must be mailed to the property 

owner at least 30 days prior to entry. If 

the property owner’s address is not 

known, the notice must be posted on the 

property and advertised in the 

newspaper. These policies and 

procedures are consistent with the 

Federal requirements of 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(vi). Therefore, we are 

approving their inclusion. 

9. Public Participation Policies [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(vii)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(3)(vii) 

of the Plan, described its public 

participation policies in the 

development and operation of its Plan. 

The ADOL encourages the public to 

contact its office with any questions or 

concerns regarding mining related 

problems or the AML program, or to 

visit the ADOL Inspections Division 

Abandoned Mine Lands Program Office. 

For future projects, ADOL distributes 

notifications to Federal, State, and local 

elected officials, and publishes public 

notices to news outlets within the 

county where the proposed activity is 

located. If sufficient public response is 

received, a public meeting may be 

scheduled to provide information on 

proposed activities and address the 

concerns of the citizens. Additional 

public involvement in the preparation 

of any revisions or amendments to the 

AML Plan will be coordinated and 

executed by OSMRE during the public 

comment and review period. These 

policies and procedures are consistent 

with the Federal requirements of 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(vii). Therefore, we are 

approving their inclusion. 

10. Organization of the Designated 

Agency [30 CFR 884.13(a)(4)(i)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(4)(i) of 

the Plan, described the organization of 

ADOL and its relationship to other State 

organizations that may become involved 

in its reclamation program. ADOL also 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 28999 

attached an updated organizational 

chart. The Inspections Division of 

ADOL reports to the Commissioner, via 

the State Programs Administrator. The 

Commissioner for ADOL reports directly 

to the Governor. The ADOL AML 

Program also coordinates with other 

State divisions such as the ADEM, 

SHPO, and the ADCNR to review 

proposed reclamation projects, provide 

assistance, and offer expertise to ensure 

that reclamation activities restore 

adversely impacted land and water to a 

productive state while protecting 

natural and historic/cultural resources. 

This description of agency organization 

is consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(4)(i). 

Therefore, we are approving its 

inclusion. 

11. Personnel Staffing Policies [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(4)(ii)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(4)(ii) of 

the Plan, described the personnel 

staffing policies that will govern the 

assignment of personnel to its 

reclamation program. The program’s 

staff is selected on the basis of 

applicable academic and professional 

experience. ADOL will be responsible 

for complying with all pertinent Federal 

and State laws. This description of 

agency personnel policies is consistent 

with the Federal requirements of 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(4)(ii). Therefore, we are 

approving its inclusion. 

12. Purchasing and Procurement [30 

CFR 884.13(a)(4)(iii)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(4)(iii) of 

the Plan, stated that the purchasing and 

procurement systems used by ADOL 

will be in accordance with the 

requirements of Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) Circular A–102, 

Attachment 0. Purchasing and 

procurement program staff is trained in 

all applicable State and Federal 

regulations and larger transactions are 

reviewed, if necessary, by the Alabama 

Department of Finance, the State 

Attorney General, the Alabama 

Department of Examiners of Public 

Accounts, and the State Auditor. 

Alabama also described its AML 

Applicant/Violator System (AVS), 

which ensures that no company owners, 

directors, or major shareholders bidding 

on AML Federally funded projects have 

any Federal coal mining violations or 

state cessation orders that would render 

them ineligible. Emergency program 

contractors are also required to meet 

AVS clearance requirements, unless an 

overriding need to proceed is 

determined. These systems are 

consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(4)(iii). 

Therefore, we are approving their 

inclusion. 

13. Accounting [30 CFR 884.13(a)(4)(iv)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(4)(iv) of 

the Plan, described the ADOL’s 

accounting system, including 

procedures for the operation of the State 

Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund. 

The ADOL Finance Division is 

responsible for the proper accounting of 

Federal draws, income, and expenses, 

including the maintenance of records 

for annual audits conducted by the 

Alabama Department of Examiners of 

Public Accounts. AML projects, 

including administrative, operational, 

and construction costs, are grant-funded 

and detailed financial records are 

maintained for auditing purposes, in 

accordance with 30 CFR part 886 and 

OMB Circular A–102, Attachment 0. 

This system description is consistent 

with the Federal requirements of 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(4)(iv). Therefore, we are 

approving its inclusion. 

14. Eligible Lands and Waters [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(5)] [30 CFR 884.13(a)(5)(i)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(5) and 

(a)(5)(i) of the Plan, included a list of 

documents and data sources offering 

general descriptions of known or 

suspected eligible lands and waters 

within the State of Alabama which 

potentially required reclamation at the 

time of publication. Alabama also 

included a list of counties, in order of 

significance which have either reported 

coal mining prior to 1978, currently 

have conditions associated with past 

surface mining practices, or currently 

have physical hazards or environmental 

conditions associated with past 

underground mining practices. Alabama 

also included a mine map repository 

showing the general location of known 

or suspected eligible lands and waters 

within the State which require 

reclamation. These descriptions are 

consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(5) and 

(a)(5)(i). Therefore, we are approving 

their inclusion. 

15. Environmental Problems and 

Reclamation Techniques [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(5)(ii)] [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(5)(iii)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(5) 

through (a)(5)(iii) of the Plan, described 

the problems occurring on known or 

suspected lands and waters which 

require reclamation, including a table 

expressing the percentage of total 

abandoned mine lands affected by each 

problem or source. Examples of such 

problems include: Open shafts and 

portals; subsidence; highwalls; 

abandoned structures and equipment; 

insect or vermin vectors; water 

impoundments; waste banks; minerelated fires; landslide and flood 

hazards; pollution of domestic water 

supplies; erosion; sedimentation; 

reduced land potential; and aesthetic 

disamenities. Reclamation techniques to 

restore the site to an environmentally 

stable condition will be based on 

ADOL’s site specific assessments, 

current industry construction standards, 

and the reclamation cost estimate 

procedures outlined in OSMRE 

Directive AML–1. These descriptions 

are consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(5)(ii) 

and (iii). Therefore, we are approving 

their inclusion. 

16. The Economic Base [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(6)(i)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(6)(i) of 

the Plan, described the economic base 

for the state’s primary coal producing 

region, including population size, 

market accessibility, economic 

activities, such as agricultural products 

and manufacturing, and available 

mining resources. This description is 

consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(6)(i). 

Therefore, we are approving its 

inclusion. 

17. Significant Aesthetic, Historic, and 

Recreational Values [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(6)(ii)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(6)(ii) of 

the Plan, described the aesthetic, 

historic, and recreational values of 

Alabama. Alabama stated that, to ensure 

that all potential impacts of the 

reclamation process are mitigated, 

ADOL’s Planning and Maintenance 

Branch will consult with the SHPO’s 

Alabama Historical Commission. This 

statement is consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(6)(ii). 

Therefore, we are approving its 

inclusion. 

18. Flora and Fauna of the Northern 

One-Half of Alabama [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(6)(iii)] 

Alabama, in section 884.13(a)(6)(iii) of 

the Plan, stated that, during the 

planning stages of proposed AML 

reclamation projects, evaluations are 

conducted by the Planning and 

Maintenance Branch to determine the 

presence of wetlands, endangered 

species, and other environmental 

concerns. Recommendations are 

provided to enhance or improve wildlife 

habitat, and to preserve wetlands and 

other critical wildlife habitat during 

construction. During this process, ADOL 

consults with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
29000 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

Service to determine whether the 

project will adversely affect any 

Federally-listed threatened or 

endangered species and to develop 

appropriate mitigation measures and 

minimize disturbance, if necessary. 

ADOL also coordinates with the ADCNR 

and reviews the Outdoor Alabama 

Watchable Wildlife database to 

determine whether any important 

natural features are recorded at or near 

the proposed reclamation project. These 

descriptions are consistent with the 

Federal requirements of 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(6)(iii). Therefore, we are 

approving their inclusion. 

19. Locations of Documented Coal 

Mines in Alabama [30 CFR 

884.13(a)(5)(i)] 

Alabama included a mine map 

repository showing the general location 

of known or suspected eligible lands 

and waters within the State which 

require reclamation. This map 

repository is consistent with the Federal 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(5)(i). 

Therefore, we are approving its 

inclusion. 

IV. Summary and Disposition of 

Comments 

Public Comments 

We asked for public comments on the 

amendment but did not receive any. 

Federal Agency Comments 

On June 27, 2016, under 30 CFR 

884.14(a), we requested comments on 

the amendment from various Federal 

agencies with an actual or potential 

interest in the Alabama plan 

(Administrative Record No. AL–0670). 

We did not receive any comments. 

State Historical Preservation Officer 

(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation (ACHP) 

Under 30 CFR 884.14(a)(2), we are 

required to request comments from the 

SHPO and ACHP on amendments that 

may have an effect on historic 

properties. On June 27, 2016, we 

requested comments on Alabama’s 

amendment (Administrative Record No. 

AL–0670), but neither the SHPO nor 

ACHP responded to our request. 

V. OSMRE’s Decision 

Based on the above findings, we 

approve the revised amendment 

Alabama sent us on July 28, 2017 

(Administrative Record No. AL–0670– 

03). 

To implement this decision, we are 

amending the Federal regulations at 30 

CFR part 901, that codify decisions 

concerning the Alabama Plan. In 

accordance with the Administrative 

Procedure Act, this rule will take effect 

30 days after the date of publication. 

Section 405 of SMCRA requires that 

each state with an abandoned mine 

reclamation program must have an 

approved State regulatory program 

pursuant to Section 503 of the Act. 

Section 503(a) of the Act requires that 

the State’s program demonstrate that the 

State has the capability of carrying out 

the provisions of the Act and meeting its 

purposes. SMCRA requires consistency 

of State and Federal standards. 

VI. Procedural Determinations 

Executive Order 12630—Takings 

This rulemaking does not have 

takings implications. This 

determination is based on the analysis 

performed for the counterpart Federal 

regulation. 

Executive Order 12866—Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Pursuant to Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) guidance, dated October 

12, 1993, the approval of state program 

amendments is exempted from OMB 

review under Executive Order 12866. 

Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice 

Reform 

The Department of the Interior has 

reviewed this rule as required by 

Section 3 of Executive Order 12988. The 

Department determined that this 

Federal Register document meets the 

criteria of Section 3 of Executive Order 

12988, which is intended to ensure that 

the agency reviews its legislation and 

proposed regulations to eliminate 

drafting errors and ambiguity, that the 

agency write its legislation and 

regulations to minimize litigation, and 

that the agency’s legislation and 

regulations provide a clear legal 

standard for affected conduct rather 

than a general standard, and promote 

simplification and burden reduction. 

Because Section 3 focuses on the quality 

of Federal legislation and regulations, 

the Department limited its review under 

this Executive Order to the quality of 

this Federal Register document and to 

changes to the Federal regulations. The 

review under this Executive Order did 

not extend to the language of the State 

AML program or to the Plan amendment 

that the State of Alabama drafted. 

Executive Order 13132—Federalism 

This rule is not a ‘‘[p]olicy that [has] 

Federalism implications’’ as defined by 

Section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132 

because it does not have ‘‘substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’ Instead, this rule 

approves an amendment to the Alabama 

Plan submitted and drafted by that 

State. OSMRE reviewed the submission 

with fundamental federalism principles 

in mind as set forth in Sections 2 and 

3 of the Executive Order and with the 

principles of cooperative federalism as 

set forth in SMCRA. See, e.g., 30 U.S.C. 

1201(f). As such, pursuant to Section 

503(a)(1) and (7) (30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) 

and (7)), OSMRE reviewed the plan 

amendment to ensure that it is ‘‘in 

accordance with’’ the requirements of 

SMCRA and ‘‘consistent with’’ the 

regulations issued by the Secretary 

pursuant to SMCRA. 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13175, we have evaluated the potential 

effects of this rulemaking on Federallyrecognized Indian tribes and have 

determined that the rulemaking does 

not have substantial direct effects on 

one or more Indian tribes, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. The basis 

for this determination is that our 

decision is on a State AML program and 

does not involve Federal regulations 

involving Indian lands. 

Executive Order 13211—Regulations 

That Significantly Affect the Supply, 

Distribution, or Use of Energy 

Executive Order 13211 of May 18, 

2001, requires agencies to prepare a 

Statement of Energy Effects for a 

rulemaking that is (1) considered 

significant under Executive Order 

12866, and (2) likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Because 

this rule is exempt from review under 

Executive Order 12866 and is not 

expected to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects 

is not required. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

This rulemaking does not require an 

environmental impact statement 

because it falls within a categorical 

exclusion within the meaning of the 

National Environmental Policy Act (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). It is documented in 

the DOI Departmental Manual, 516 DM 

13.5(B)(29), that agency decisions on 

approval of state reclamation plans for 

abandoned mine lands do not constitute 

major Federal Actions. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 29001 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rulemaking does not contain 

information collection requirements that 

require approval by OMB under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3507 et seq.). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that this rulemaking will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

which is the subject of this rulemaking, 

is based upon counterpart Federal 

regulations for which an economic 

analysis was prepared and certification 

made that such regulations would not 

have a significant economic effect upon 

a substantial number of small entities. 

In making the determination as to 

whether this rulemaking would have a 

significant economic impact, the 

Department relied upon the data and 

assumptions for the counterpart Federal 

regulations. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rulemaking is not a major rule 

under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act. This rulemaking: (a) Does 

not have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million; (b) Will not 

cause a major increase in costs or prices 

for consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, State, or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions; and (c) 

Does not have significant adverse effects 

on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

This determination is based upon the 

fact that the State submittal, which is 

the subject of this rulemaking, is based 

upon counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an analysis was prepared and a 

determination made that the Federal 

regulation was not considered a major 

rulemaking. 

Unfunded Mandates 

This rulemaking will not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of $100 million or more in any given 

year. This determination is based upon 

the fact that the State submittal, which 

is the subject of this rulemaking, is 

based upon counterpart Federal 

regulations for which an analysis was 

prepared and a determination made that 

the Federal regulation did not impose 

an unfunded mandate. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 901 

Intergovernmental relations, Surface 

mining, Underground mining. 

Dated: May 31, 2018. 

Paul Ehret, 

Acting Regional Director, Mid-Continent 

Region. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 30 CFR part 901 is amended 

as set forth below: 

PART 901—ALABAMA 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 901 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq. 

■ 2. Section 901.25 is amended in the 

table by adding a new entry in 

chronological order by ‘‘Date of final 

publication’’ to read as follows: 

§ 901.25 Approval of Alabama abandoned 

mine land reclamation plan amendments. 

* * * * * 

Original amendment 

submission date Date of final publication Citation/description 

*******

June 7, 2016 .................................. June 22, 2018 ................................ Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Plan for the State of Alabama. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13434 Filed 6–21–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Navy 

32 CFR Part 736 

[Docket ID: USN–2018–HQ–0002] 

RIN 0703–AB05 

Disposition of Property 

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, 

Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule removes 

Department of the Navy regulations 

governing disposition of property, 

including surplus real property, 

warships, other surface vessels, personal 

property, and strategic materials. The 

disposal of surplus property is governed 

by standing authorities found within the 

U.S. Code. Further, disposal of surplus 

property is also governed by Department 

of Defense regulations entitled ‘‘Defense 

Material Disposition.’’ Therefore, this 

rule can be removed from the CFR. 

DATES: This rule is effective on June 22, 

2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James Omans at 703–614–5848. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: It has been 

determined that publication of this CFR 

part removal for public comment is 

impracticable, unnecessary, and 

contrary to public interest since it is 

based on removing a duplicative CFR 

part. 

Removal of this part does not add or 

reduce the burden or cost on the public 

in any way. The cost of disposal of 

surplus property will remain the same 

with removal of the part. 

This rule is not significant under 

Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ 

therefore, E.O. 13771, ‘‘Reducing 

Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs’’ does not apply. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 736 

Surplus Government property. 

PART 736—[REMOVED] 

■ Accordingly, by the authority of 5 

U.S.C. 301, 32 CFR part 736 is removed. 

Dated: June 12, 2018. 

E.K. Baldini, 

Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate 

General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register 

Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13409 Filed 6–21–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2018–0541] 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Cape Fear River, North Carolina, 

Wilmington, NC 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES