Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 70487

3. Section 906.16 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraphs (d)

and (e).

[FR Doc. 00–29970 Filed 11–22–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 943

[SPATS No. TX–047–FOR]

Texas Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of

amendment.

SUMMARY: The Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is

approving an amendment to the Texas

regulatory program (Texas program)

under the Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA).

Texas proposed revisions to and

additions of regulations concerning

remining, coal processing plants, and

procedures for processing petitions to

designate lands as unsuitable for

mining. Texas intends to revise its

program to be consistent with the

corresponding Federal regulations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 24, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael C. Wolfrom, Director, Tulsa

Field Office, Office of Surface Mining,

5100 East Skelly Drive, Suite 470, Tulsa,

Oklahoma 74135–6548. Telephone:

(918) 581–6430. Internet:

mwolfrom@tokgw.osmre.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Texas Program.

II. Submission of the Amendment.

III. Director’s Findings.

IV. Summary and Disposition of

Comments.

V. Director’s Decision.

VI. Procedural Determinations.

I. Background on the Texas Program

On February 16, 1980, the Secretary of

the Interior conditionally approved the

Texas program. You can find

background information on the Texas

program, including the Secretary’s

findings, the disposition of comments,

and the conditions of approval in the

February 27, 1980, Federal Register (45

FR 12998). You can find later actions

concerning the Texas program at 30 CFR

943.10, 943.15, and 943.16.

II. Submission of the Amendment

By letter dated August 24, 2000

(Administrative Record No. TX–650.01),

Texas sent us an amendment to its

program under SMCRA and the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(b). Texas

sent the amendment in response to our

letter dated November 22, 1999

(Administrative Record No. TX–650),

that we sent to Texas under 30 CFR

732.17(c). The amendment also includes

changes made at Texas’ own initiative.

We announced receipt of the

amendment in the September 12, 2000,

Federal Register (65 FR 54982). 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

proposed amendment. The public

comment period closed on October 12,

2000. Because no one requested a public

hearing or meeting, we did not hold

one.

III. Director’s Findings

Following, under SMCRA and the

Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15

and 732.17, are the Director’s findings

concerning the amendment to the Texas

program.

Any revisions that we do not discuss

below concern minor wording changes,

or revised cross-references and

paragraph notations to reflect

organizational changes resulting from

this amendment.

A. Revisions to Texas’ Regulations That

Have the Same Meaning as the

Corresponding Provisions of the Federal

Regulations

The State regulations listed in the

table below contain language that is the

same as or similar to the corresponding

sections of the Federal regulations.

Differences between the State

regulations and the Federal regulations

are minor.

Topic State regulation Federal counterpart regulation

Initial processing procedures .............................. TAC 12.80(a)(1) ............................................... 30 CFR 764.15(a)(1)

Backfilling and grading: General grading requirements.TAC 12.385(e)–(e)(2)(D) and TAC 12.552(e)–

(e)(2)(D).

30 CFR 816.106(a)–(b)(4) and 30 CFR

817.106(a)–(b)(4)

Coal processing plants: Performance standards TAC 12.651(13) ............................................... 30 CFR 827.12(l)

Because the above State regulations

have the same meaning as the

corresponding Federal regulations, we

find that they are no less effective than

the Federal regulations.

B. Revisions to Texas’ Regulations That

Are Not the Same as the Corresponding

Provisions of the Federal Regulations

1. TAC § 12.385(a) Backfilling and

Grading: General Grading Requirements.

Texas proposed to remove the

following language from this paragraph:

The requirements of this section may be

modified by the Commission where the

surface mining activities are reaffecting

previously mined lands that have not been

restored to the standards of §§ 12.330–12.384,

this section, and §§ 12.386–12.403 of this

title (relating to Permanent Program

Performance Standards—Surface Mining

Activities) and sufficient spoil is not

available to otherwise comply with this

section.

We are approving the removal of this

language because it is not as effective as

the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

816.106 concerning the backfilling and

grading of previously mined areas. Also,

in this rulemaking, Texas proposed and

we are approving an amendment to its

regulations that include provisions for

backfilling and grading of previously

mined areas that are as effective as the

Federal regulations. Please refer to the

table listed in III. Director’s Findings, A.

Backfilling and grading: General grading

requirements.

2. TAC § 12.552(a) Backfilling and

Grading: General Grading Requirements.

Texas proposed to remove the

following language from this paragraph:

The requirements of this section may be

modified by the Commission where the

surface mining activities are reaffecting

previously mined lands that have not been

restored to the standards of §§ 12.500–12.551,

this section, and §§ 12.553–12.572 of this

title (relating to Permanent Program

Performance Standards—Underground

Mining Activities) and sufficient spoil is not

available to otherwise comply with this

section.

We are approving the removal of this

language because it is not as effective as

the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

817.106 concerning the backfilling and

grading of previously mined areas. Also,

in this rulemaking, Texas proposed and

70488 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

we are approving an amendment to its

regulations that include provisions for

backfilling and grading of previously

mined areas that are as effective as the

Federal regulations. Please refer to the

table listed in III. Director’s Findings, A.

Backfilling and grading: General grading

requirements.

C. Revisions to Texas’ Regulations With

No Corresponding Federal Regulations

1. TAC § 12.80(a)(3)–(a)(7) Initial

Processing Procedures

Texas proposed to remove paragraph

(a)(3) which reads as follows:

(3) The Commission may reject petitions

for designations or terminations of

designations which are frivolous. Once the

petition requirements for completeness are

met, no party shall bear any burden of proof,

but each accepted petition shall be

considered and acted upon by the

Commission pursuant to the procedures of

this subchapter (relating to Lands Unsuitable

for Mining).

As a result of this removal, Texas is

redesignating paragraphs (a)(4) through

(a)(7) as paragraphs (a)(3) through (a)(6).

We are approving the removal and

redesignations of the above regulations

because there is no Federal counterpart

regulation to paragraph (a)(3) and its

removal and the subsequent

redesignation of paragraphs (a)(4)

through (a)(7) as paragraphs (a)(3)

through (a)(6) will not make the Texas

regulations less effective than the

Federal regulations.

Also, Texas proposed to revise

paragraph (a)(4) [redesignated as

paragraph (a)(3)] by adding new

language (shown in bold) to read as

follows:

(3) If the Commission determines that the

petition is incomplete, frivolous, or that the

petitioner does not meet the requirement of

§ 12.79(a) of this title (relating to Procedures:

Petitions), it shall return the petition to the

petitioner with a written statement of the

reasons for the determination and the

categories of information needed to make the

petition complete. A frivolous petition is one

in which the allegations of harm lack serious

merit or available information shows that

either no mineable coal resources exist in

the petitioned area or the petitioned area is

not or could not be subject to related surface

coal mining operations and surface impacts

incident to an underground coal mine or an

adjoining surface mine.

There is no Federal counterpart

regulation to the language that is added

to the above paragraph. However, we are

approving the addition of the new

language because it is not inconsistent

with the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

764.15 pertaining to initial processing,

recordkeeping, and notification

requirements for petitions concerning

lands unsuitable for mining.

2. TAC § 12.80(b)(2) Public Notice and

Hearing Procedures

Texas proposed to remove paragraph

(b)(2) that allows the Commission to

provide for a hearing or a period of

written comments on the completeness

of petitions for designating areas as

unsuitable for surface coal mining

operations. As a result of the removal of

this paragraph, Texas is redesignating

paragraph (b)(3) as (b)(2). We are

approving the amendments because

there is no counterpart Federal

regulation to paragraph (b)(2) and the

removal of this paragraph and the

redesignation of paragraph (b)(3) as

(b)(2) will not make the Texas

regulations less effective than the

Federal regulations.

IV. Summary and Disposition of

Comments

Federal Agency Comments

On September 6, 2000, under section

503(b) of SMCRA and 30 CFR

732.17(h)(11)(i) of the Federal

regulations, we requested comments on

the amendment from various Federal

agencies with an actual or potential

interest in the Texas program

(Administrative Record No. TX–650.02).

The Texas Parks and Wildlife

Department Resource Protection

Division responded on October 6, 2000

(Administrative Record No. TX–650.04),

that its review of the proposed

amendment indicates minimum impacts

to fish and wildlife resources.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we

are required to obtain the written

concurrence of the EPA for those

provisions of the program amendment

that relate to air or water quality

standards issued under the authority of

the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et

seq.) or the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.

7401 et seq.). None of the revisions that

Texas proposed to make in this

amendment pertain to air or water

quality standards. Therefore, we did not

ask the EPA for its concurrence.

Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we

requested comments on the amendment

from the EPA (Administrative Record

No. TX–650.02) on September 6, 2000.

The EPA did not respond to our request.

State Historical Preservation Officer

(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on

Historic Preservation (ACHP)

Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are

required to request comments from the

SHPO and ACHP on amendments that

may have an effect on historic

properties. On September 6, 2000, we

requested comments on Texas’

amendment (Administrative Record No.

TX–650.02), but neither responded to

our request.

Public Comments

We asked for public comments on the

amendment, but did not receive any.

V. Director’s Decision

Based on the above findings, we

approve the amendment as sent to us by

Texas on August 24, 2000. We approve

the regulations that Texas proposed

with the provision that they be

published in identical form to the

regulations sent to and reviewed by

OSM and the public.

To implement this decision, we are

amending the Federal regulations at 30

CFR Part 943, which codify decisions

concerning the Texas program. We are

making this final rule effective

immediately to expedite the State

program amendment process and to

encourage Texas to bring its program

into conformity with the Federal

standards. SMCRA requires consistency

of State and Federal standards.

VI. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12866—Regulatory

Planning and Review

This rule is exempted from review by

the Office of Management and Budget

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 regulations.

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

under 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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 70489

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

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 943

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: November 8, 2000.

Charles E. Sandberg,

Acting Regional Director, Mid-Continent

Regional Coordinating Center.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 30 CFR Part 943 is amended

as set forth below:

PART 943—TEXAS

1. The authority citation for Part 943

continues to read as follows:

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

2. Section 943.15 is amended in the

table by adding a new entry in

chronological order by ‘‘Date of final

publication’’ to read as follows:

§ 943.15 Approval of Texas regulatory

program amendments.

* * * * *

Original amendment

submission date Date of final publication Citation/description

*******

August 24, 2000 .......... November 24, 2000 ..... TAC § 12.80(a)(1), (3)–(7); (b)(2)–(3); § 12.385(a); (e)–(e)(2)(D); § 12.552(a); (e)–(e)(2)(D);

and § 12.651(13).

[FR Doc. 00–29969 Filed 11–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

United States Patent and Trademark

Office

37 CFR Part 1

RIN 0651–AB15

Simplification of Certain Requirements

in Patent Interference Practice

AGENCY: United States Patent and

Trademark Office, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and

Trademark Office amends its rules of

practice in patent interferences to

simplify certain requirements relating to

the declaration of interferences and the

presentation of evidence.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 26, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred

McKelvey or Richard Torczon at 703–

308–9797.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

An interim final version of this

rulemaking was published at 65 FR

56792, Sept. 20, 2000, and also at U.S.

Patent and Trademark Office, 1239 Off.

Gaz. 125 (Oct. 17, 2000). The rationale

for the rulemaking appears with the

interim rule.

Comments

The interim rule elicited two

comments. One comment notes a

reference in 37 CFR 1.671(e) to a rule

that was deleted. That reference is

eliminated in this final rule. Any other

references to deleted rules in subpart E

of this title should be considered

obsolete. They will be eliminated in a

future rulemaking.