59150 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 4, 2000 / Proposed Rules

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on

September 28, 2000.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–25434 Filed 10–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 920

[MD–046–FOR]

Maryland Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: OSM is reopening the public

comment period on a proposed

amendment to the Maryland permanent

regulatory program.(Maryland program)

under the Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The

proposed amendment consists of

revisions to the Maryland regulations

regarding a definition of previously

mined area, termination of jurisdiction,

permitting requirements, bond release

requirements and performance

standards for inspections. The

amendment is intended to revise the

Maryland program to be no less effective

than the corresponding Federal

regulations.

DATES: If you submit written comments,

they must be received by 4 p.m., E.D.T.,

October 19, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand-deliver your

written comments to Mr. George Rieger,

Manager, Oversight and Inspection

Office, at the address listed below. You

may review copies of the Maryland

program, the proposed amendment, a

listing of any scheduled public hearings,

and all written comments received in

response to this document at the

addresses listed below during normal

business hours, Monday through Friday,

excluding holidays. You may receive

one free copy of the proposed

amendment by contacting OSM’s

Appalachian Regional Coordinating

Center.

George Rieger, Manager, Oversight and

Inspection Office, Appalachian

Regional Coordinating Center, Office

of Surface Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement, 3 Parkway Center,

Pittsburgh PA 15220, Telephone:

(412) 937–2153, E-mail:

grieger@osmre.gov.

Maryland Bureau of Mines, 160 South

Water Street, Frostburg, Maryland

21532, Telephone: (301) 689–4136.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Rieger, Manager, Oversight and

Inspection Office, Appalachian Regional

Coordinating Center, Telephone: (412)

937–2153.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Maryland

Program

On February 18, 1982, the Secretary of

the Interior approved the Maryland

program. You can find background

information on the Maryland program,

including the Secretary’s findings, the

disposition of comments, and the

conditions of approval in the February

18, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR 7214).

You can find subsequent actions

concerning the conditions of approval

and program amendments at 30 CFR

920.15 and 920.16.

II. Description of the Proposed

Amendment

By letter dated September 14, 1999

(Administrative Record No. 577–04),

Maryland provided an informal

amendment to OSM regarding a

definition of previously mined area,

termination of jurisdiction, permitting

requirements, bond release

requirements and performance

standards for inspections. Maryland

submitted the informal amendment in

response to requests made by OSM as

required under 30 CFR 732.17(d) in

letters dated July 8, 1997, and August

11, 1999 (Administrative Record Nos.

577–01 and 577–03, respectively). OSM

completed its review of the informal

amendment and submitted comments to

Maryland in a letter dated March 20,

2000 (Administrative Record No. 577–

05). By letter dated April 11, 2000

(Administrative Record No. MD–577–

06), Maryland submitted its response to

OSM’s comments in the form of a

proposed amendment to the Code of

Maryland Regulations (COMAR). The

proposed amendments were announced

in the April 28, 2000, Federal Register

(65 FR 24897). However, OSM’s review

determined that the proposed revisions

to COMAR 26.20.31.02H regarding the

inspection frequency on reclaimed bond

forfeiture sites were inconsistent with

30 CFR 840.11 and 700.11(d). As a

result, a letter requesting clarification

was sent to Maryland dated August 17,

2000 (Administrative Record No. MD–

577–12). Maryland responded in its

letter dated August 31, 2000

(Administrative Record No. MD 577–13)

with a new revision to COMAR

26.20.31.02H regarding the inspection

frequency on reclaimed bond forfeiture

sites. Therefore, OSM is reopening the

public comment period regarding the

following proposed amendments to

Maryland’s regulatory program:

1. COMAR 26.20.31.02 Inspections.

Maryland proposes to delete the

existing paragraph H. in its entirety and

substitute the following new paragraph

H:

H. An abandoned site means a surface

coal mining and reclamation operation

for which the Bureau has found in

writing that:

(1) All surface and underground coal

mining and reclamation activities at the

site have ceased;

(2) At least one notice of violation has

been issued and the notice could not be

served in accordance with Regulation

.08 of this chapter or the notice was

served and has progressed to a failureto-abate cessation order;

(3) Action is being taken to ensure

that the permittee and the operator, and

owners and controllers of the permittee

and the operator, will be precluded from

receiving future permits while the

violations continue at the site;

(4) Action is being taken in

accordance with the requirements of the

Regulatory Program to ensure that

abatement occurs or that there will not

be a recurrence of the failure-to-abate,

except where after evaluating the

circumstances it is concluded that

further enforcement offers little or no

likelihood of successfully compelling

abatement or recovering any

reclamation costs; and

(5) Where the site is or was permitted

and bonded and the permit has either

expired or been revoked, the forfeiture

of any available performance bond is

being diligently pursued or has been

forfeited.

Maryland also proposes to add new

paragraph I .as follows:

I. Instead of the inspection frequency

required in § A and B of this regulation,

the Bureau shall inspect each

abandoned site on a set frequency

commensurate with the public health

and safety and environmental

considerations present at each specific

site. However, in no case shall the

inspection frequency be set at less than

one complete inspection per calendar

year.

Maryland also proposes to add new

paragraph J. as follows:

J. The Bureau shall conduct a

complete inspection of the abandoned

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 4, 2000 / Proposed Rules 59151

site and provide the public notice

required under § K of this regulation in

order to select an alternative inspection

frequency authorized under § I of this

regulation. Following the inspection

and public notice the Bureau shall

prepare and maintain for public review

a written finding that justifies the

selected alternative inspection

frequency. The written finding shall

justify the new inspection frequency by

addressing in detail all of the following

criteria:

(1) How the site meets each of the

criteria under the definition of

abandoned site under § H of this

regulation and thereby qualifies for a

reduction in inspection frequency;

(2) Whether there exists on the site,

and to what extent, impoundments,

earthen structures, or other conditions

that pose, or may reasonably be

expected to ripen into, imminent

dangers to the health and safety of the

public or significant environmental

harms to land, air, or water resources;

(3) The extent to which existing

impoundments or earthen structures

were constructed in accordance with

prudent engineering designs approved

in the permit;

(4) The degree to which erosion and

sediment control is present and

functioning;

(5) The extent to which the site is

located near or above urbanized areas,

communities, occupied dwellings,

schools, and other public or commercial

buildings and facilities;

(6) The extent of reclamation

completed prior to abandonment and

the degree of stability of unreclaimed

areas taking into consideration the

physical characteristics of the land

mined and the extent of settlement or

revegetation that has occurred naturally

with them; and

(7) Based on a review of the complete

and the partial inspection report record

for the site during at least the last two

consecutive years, the rate at which

adverse environmental or public health

and safety conditions can be expected to

progressively deteriorate.

Maryland also proposes to add new

paragraph K. as follows:

K. Public Notice

(1) The Bureau shall place a notice in

the newspaper with the broadest

circulation in the locality of the

abandoned site providing the public

with a 30-day period in which to submit

written comments concerning the

alternative inspection frequency.

(2) The public notice shall contain

the:

(a) Permittee’s name and permit

number;

(b) Precise location of the land

affected.

(c) Inspection frequency proposed.

(d) General reasons for reducing the

inspection frequency;

(e) Bond status of the permit;

(f) Telephone number and address of

the Bureau where written comments on

the reduced inspection frequency may

be submitted; and

(g) Closing date of the comment

period.

III. Public Comment Procedures

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. Specifically, OSM is seeking

comments on the revisions to the State’s

regulations that were submitted on

August 31, 2000 (Administrative Record

No. MD–577–13). Comments should

address whether the proposed

amendment with these revisions

satisfies the applicable program

approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If the

amendment is deemed adequate, it will

become part of the Maryland program.

Written Comments: If you submit

written or electronic comments on the

proposed rule during the 15-day

comment period, they should be

specific, should be confined to issues

pertinent to the notice, and should

explain the reason for your

recommendation(s). We may not be able

to consider or include in the

Administrative Record comments

delivered to an address other than the

one listed above (see ADDRESSES).

Electronic comments: Please submit

Internet comments as an ASCII,

WordPerfect, or Word file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption. Please also include ‘‘Attn:

SPATS NO. MD–046–FOR’’ and your

name and return address in your

Internet message. If you do not receive

a confirmation that we have received

your Internet message, contact the

Appalachian Regional Coordinating

Center at (412) 937–2153.

Availability of Comments: Our

practice is to make comments, including

names and home addresses of

respondents, available for public review

during regular business hours at the

OSM Administrative Record Room (see

ADDRESSES). Individual respondents

may request that we withhold their

home address from the rulemaking

record, which we will honor to the

extent allowable by law. There also may

be circumstances in which we would

withhold from the rulemaking record a

respondent’s identity, as allowable by

law. If you wish us to withhold your

name and/or address, you must state

this prominently at the beginning of

your comment. However, we will not

consider anonymous comments. We

will make all submissions from

organizations or businesses, and from

individuals identifying themselves as

representatives or officials of

organizations or businesses, available

for public inspection in their entirety.

IV. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12866—Regulatory

Planning and Review

This rule is exempted from review by

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866.

Executive Order 12630—Takings

This rule does not have takings

implications. This determination is

based on the analysis performed for the

counterpart federal regulation.

Executive Order 13132—Federalism

This rule does not have federalism

implications. SMCRA delineates the

roles of the federal and state

governments with regard to the

regulation of surface coal mining and

reclamation operations. One of the

purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a

nationwide program to protect society

and the environment from the adverse

effects of surface coal mining

operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of

SMCRA requires that state laws

regulating surface coal mining and

reclamation operations be ‘‘in

accordance with’’ the requirements of

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

that state programs contain rules and

regulations ‘‘consistent with’’

regulations issued by the Secretary

pursuant to SMCRA.

Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice

Reform

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and

has determined that, to the extent

allowed by law, this rule meets the

applicable standards of subsections (a)

and (b) of that section. However, these

standards are not applicable to the

actual language of state regulatory

programs and program amendments

since each such program is drafted and

promulgated by a specific state, not by

OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of

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

30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and

732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed

state regulatory programs and program

amendments submitted by the states

must be based solely on a determination

of whether the submittal is consistent

with SMCRA and its implementing

59152 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 4, 2000 / Proposed Rules

federal regulations and whether the

other requirements of 30 CFR Parts 730,

731, and 732 have been met.

National Environmental Policy Act

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

1292(d)) provides that a decision on a

proposed state regulatory program

provision does not constitute a major

federal action within the meaning of

section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). A determination has

been made that such decisions are

categorically excluded from the NEPA

process (516 DM 8.4.A).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by the Office of

Management and Budget under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department of the Interior has

determined that this rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

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

which is the subject of this rule is based

upon counterpart Federal regulations for

which an economic analysis was

prepared and certification made that

such regulations would not have a

significant economic effect upon a

substantial number of small entities.

Accordingly, this rule will ensure that

existing requirements previously

promulgated by OSM will be

implemented by the State. In making the

determination as to whether this rule

would have a significant economic

impact, the Department relied upon the

data and assumptions for the

counterpart Federal regulations.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act

This rule is not a major rule under 5

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.

This rule:

a. Does not have an annual effect on

the economy of $100 million.

b. Will not cause a major increase in

costs or prices for consumers,

individual industries, federal, state, or

local government agencies, or

geographic regions.

c. Does not have significant adverse

effects on competition, employment,

investment, productivity, innovation, or

the ability of U.S. based enterprises to

compete with foreign-based enterprises.

This determination is based upon the

fact that the state submittal which is the

subject of this rule is based upon

counterpart federal regulations for

which an analysis was prepared and a

determination made that the federal

regulation was not considered a major

rule.

Unfunded Mandates

This rule will not impose a cost of

$100 million or more in any given year

on any governmental entity or the

private sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 920

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: September 22, 2000.

Michael K. Robinson,

Acting Regional Director, Appalachian

Regional Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 00–25404 Filed 10–3–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 946

[VA–119–FOR]

Virginia Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment

period and opportunity for public

hearing.

SUMMARY: OSM is announcing receipt of

a proposed amendment to the Virginia

regulatory program under the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1977 (SMCRA). The program

amendment consists of changes to the

Virginia Surface Mining Reclamation

Regulations concerning letters of credit.

The amendment is intended to revise

the Virginia program to be consistent

with the corresponding Federal

regulations.

DATES: If you submit written comments,

they must be received on or before 4

p.m. (local time), on November 3, 2000.

If requested, a public hearing on the

proposed amendment will be held on

October 30, 2000. Requests to speak at

the hearing must be received by 4:00

p.m. (local time), on October 19, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand-deliver your

written comments and requests to speak

at the hearing to Mr. Robert A. Penn,

Director, Big Stone Gap Field Office at

the address listed below.

You may review copies of the Virginia

program, the proposed amendment, a

listing of any scheduled hearings, and

all written comments received in

response to this document at the

addresses below during normal business

hours, Monday through Friday,

excluding holidays. You may receive

one free copy of the proposed

amendment by contacting OSM’s Big

Stone Gap Field Office.

Mr. Robert A. Penn, Director, Office of

Surface Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement, Big Stone Gap Field

Office, 1941 Neeley Road, Suite 201,

Compartment 116,

Big Stone Gap, Virginia 24219,

Telephone: (540) 523–4303, E-mail:

rpenn@osmre.gov.

Virginia Division of Mined Land

Reclamation, P. O. Drawer 900, Big

Stone Gap, Virginia 24219,

Telephone: (540) 523–8100, E-mail:

whb@mme.state.va.us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Robert A. Penn, Director, Big Stone Gap

Field Office; Telephone: (540) 523–

4303.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Virginia Program

On December 15, 1981, the Secretary

of the Interior conditionally approved

the Virginia program. You can find

background information on the Virginia

program, including the Secretary’s

findings, the disposition of comments,

and the conditions of approval in the

December 15, 1981, Federal Register (46

FR 61085–61115). You can find later

actions concerning the conditions of

approval and program amendments at

30 CFR 946.12, 946.13, 946.15, and

946.16.

II. Discussion of the Proposed

Amendment

By letter dated September 22, 2000

(Administrative Record Number VA–

1008) the Virginia Department of Mines,

Minerals and Energy (DMME) submitted

an amendment to the Virginia program.

In its letter, the DMME stated that the

program amendment changes the

Virginia program rules at 4 VAC 25–

130–700.5 and 4 VAC 25–130–800.21 in

response to amendments required by

OSM in the May 3, 1999, Federal

Register (64 FR 23542).

On May 3, 1999, OSM approved an

amendment to the Virginia program

which amended the Virginia Coal

Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act by adding ‘‘letter of

credit’’ as an acceptable form of

collateral bond to satisfy the

performance bonding requirements of

the Virginia Act. In our approval of the

Virginia amendment, we required that

the Virginia program regulations be