79436 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(2)—Continued 

Title No. 

Passport Records ............................................................................................................................................................................. STATE–26. 

Personality Cross-Reference Index to the Secretariat Automated Data Index ............................................................................... STATE–28. 

Risk Analysis and Management Records ........................................................................................................................................ STATE–78. 

Security Records .............................................................................................................................................................................. STATE–36. 

Visa Records .................................................................................................................................................................................... STATE–39. 

(3) Exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(3). 

Records contained within the following 

systems of records are exempt under 

this section to the extent that they are 

maintained in connection with 

providing protective services pursuant 

to 18 U.S.C. 3056. 

TABLE 4 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(3) 

Title No. 

Extradition Records .......................................................................................................................................................................... STATE–11. 

Information Access Programs Records ............................................................................................................................................ STATE–35. 

Intelligence and Research Records ................................................................................................................................................. STATE–15. 

Overseas Citizens Services Records ............................................................................................................................................... STATE–05. 

Passport Records ............................................................................................................................................................................. STATE–26. 

Personality Cross-Reference Index to the Secretariat Automated Data Index ............................................................................... STATE–28. 

Security Records .............................................................................................................................................................................. STATE–36. 

Visa Records .................................................................................................................................................................................... STATE–39. 

* * * * * 

(7) Exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(7). 

Records contained within the following 

systems of records are exempt under 

this section to the extent that they 

consist of evaluation material used to 

determine potential for promotion in the 

armed services, but only to the extent 

that such disclosure would reveal the 

identity of a confidential informant. 

TABLE 8 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(7) 

Title No. 

Human Resources Records ............................................................................................................................................................. STATE–31. 

Information Access Programs Records ............................................................................................................................................ STATE–35. 

Overseas Citizens Services Records ............................................................................................................................................... STATE–25. 

Personality Cross-Reference Index to the Secretariat Automated Data Index ............................................................................... STATE–28. 

Security Records .............................................................................................................................................................................. STATE–36. 

Timothy J. Kootz, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Global 

Information Services (A/GIS), Department of 

State. 

[FR Doc. 2024–22297 Filed 9–27–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–24–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation 

and Enforcement 

30 CFR Part 935 

[SATS No. OH–259–FOR; Docket ID: OSM– 

2017–0002; S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 

234S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 

SX064A000 23XS501520] 

Ohio 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 

(OSMRE), are approving an amendment 

to the Ohio Abandoned Mine Land 

(AML) Reclamation Plan (Ohio Plan or 

Plan) under the Surface Mining Control 

and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA 

or the Act). Ohio proposed to amend its 

existing plan to reflect statutory, 

regulatory, policy, procedural, and 

organizational changes made since it 

was originally approved in 1982. Ohio 

also submitted relevant statutory 

provisions amended by the State 

legislature in 2016, as well as draft 

statutory revisions regarding what land 

and water resources are eligible for 

Federal grant funds and other proposed 

amendments for consistency with 

SMCRA, for OSMRE’s review and 

consideration. 

DATES: Effective October 30, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Koptchak, Field Office Director, 

Pittsburgh Field Office, Office of Surface 

Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 

Telephone: (814) 421–1438, email: 

tkoptchak@osmre.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background on the Ohio Plan 

II. Submission of the Amendment 

III. OSMRE’s Findings 

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments 

V. OSMRE’s Decision 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background on the Ohio Program 

The AML 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, in 

part, 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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 79437 

1 Generally, States do not request that OSMRE 

accept changes to AML statutes or regulations as 

amendments to an AML Plan, which is a narrative 

document that usually is not in the form of a statute 

or regulation. However, there is no provision in 

SMCRA or the Federal regulations governing 

submission and approval of AML Plans and 

amendments thereto that prohibits a State from 

including statutes or regulations in conjunction 

with its AML Plan. Therefore, when we approve a 

change or proposed change to a statutory provision 

in this rulemaking, we mean that we are approving 

that provision as an amendment to the AML Plan. 

For clarity and ease of reference, we recommend 

that Ohio submit changes to its AML Plan narrative 

document that are consistent with these statutory 

amendments. 

and for other authorized activities. 

Section 405 of the Act allows States and 

Tribes to assume exclusive 

responsibility for reclamation activity 

within the State or on Tribal 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. Section 405 also requires that 

each State with an abandoned mine 

reclamation program must have an 

approved State regulatory program 

pursuant to section 503 of the Act. 

On August 10, 1982, the Secretary of 

the Interior approved the Ohio Plan. 

You can find background information 

on the Ohio Plan, including the 

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of 

comments, and conditions of approval 

of the Ohio Plan in the August 10, 1982, 

Federal Register (47 FR 34719). You can 

also find later actions concerning the 

Ohio Plan and Plan amendments at 30 

CFR 935.25. 

II. Submission of the Amendment 

By letter dated March 17, 2017 

(Administrative Record No. OH–2195– 

01), and in accordance with 30 CFR 

884.15(a), Ohio sent us an amendment 

to its Plan on its own initiative. By letter 

dated September 15, 2017 

(Administrative Record No. OH–2195– 

04), Ohio provided a revised 

amendment to describe the proposed 

revisions more clearly. By letter dated 

September 18, 2018 (Administrative 

Record No. Oh–2195–06), Ohio 

submitted an updated amendment with 

a revision to section XI of its Plan. 

We announced receipt of the 

proposed amendment in the May 10, 

2019, Federal Register (84 FR 20599). 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 June 10, 2019. We 

received a single comment that was not 

germane to the Plan amendment, and, 

therefore, we have not provided a 

response. 

III. OSMRE’s Findings 

The following are the findings we 

made concerning the amendment under 

SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 

30 CFR 884.14 and 884.15. We are 

approving the amendment as described 

below. Any revisions that we do not 

specifically discuss below concerning 

minor wording or editorial changes can 

be found in the full text of the Plan 

amendment available at 

www.regulations.gov. OSMRE also notes 

that we are separately reviewing State 

reclamation plans to identify any 

components that may need to be 

addressed in light of the Infrastructure 

Investment and Jobs Act, more 

commonly referred to as the Bipartisan 

Infrastructure Law (BIL) (Pub. L. 117– 

58). That review is ongoing and not 

reflected in our decision on Ohio’s 

amendment here. 

Amended Statutory Language 1

On December 19, 2016, Ohio’s 

Legislature amended the statutory 

language at sections 1515.27, 1513.28, 

1513.30, 1513.31, 1513.32, and 1513.37 

of the Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 

regarding the process of determining 

site eligibility for reclamation activities. 

See 2016 Sub. H.B. No. 471. The 

updated language eliminated references 

to the sunsetted Council on 

Unreclaimed Strip Mined Lands and 

designated the chief of the Division of 

Mineral Resource Management (DMRM) 

as the entity responsible for the 

prioritization and approval process of 

proposed projects eligible for the 

unreclaimed lands funds. This updated 

language reflects administrative changes 

made over time to the agency authorized 

to administer the State’s program for 

regulating surface coal mining and 

reclamation. The updated statutory 

language is in accordance with SMCRA 

and the Federal requirements of 30 CFR 

subchapter R, which does not proscribe 

a particular State administrative 

structure responsible for prioritizing 

and approving proposed projects. 

Therefore, we are approving the 

updated statutory language of the ORC 

as an amendment to the Ohio Plan. 

Draft Statutory Amendments 

Ohio’s amendment also includes 

additional draft statutory changes to 

ORC 1513.37 to clarify and elaborate 

upon the priority by which land and 

water resources are eligible to receive 

Federal grants for reclamation of 

abandoned mine lands in accordance 

with the 2006 SMCRA amendments. 

Ohio’s draft statutory language at ORC 

1513.37(B) revises several aspects of the 

priority criteria. The number of priority 

categories is reduced from six to three. 

The highest priority categories (Priority 

1 and 2) are expanded to include the 

land and water resources adjacent to a 

prioritized site and the term ‘‘general 

welfare’’ has been struck from those 

priorities. Additionally, Ohio drafted 

revisions to the specifications of the 

priority categories to allow lower 

priority projects (Priority 3) to be 

initiated before the completion of higher 

priority projects (Priority 1 or 2), 

provided that the expenditure is done at 

eligible AML sites adjacent to higher 

priority projects (Priority 1 or 2). 

The SMCRA amendments were signed 

into law on December 20, 2006, as part 

of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 

2006. See Public Law 109–432. The 

2006 amendments substantially 

modified the AML reclamation program 

in Title IV of SMCRA, including, but not 

limited to, removing previous priorities 

4 and 5 and striking the term ‘‘general 

welfare’’ as components of priorities 1 

and 2. See U.S.C. 1233(a). In addition, 

the 2006 amendments also permitted 

the initiation of Priority 3 reclamation 

projects before completing all Priority 1 

and 2 projects if the Priority 3 

reclamation is performed in conjunction 

with a Priority 1 or 2 project. See 30 

U.S.C. 1232(g)(7). We note that our 

guidelines generally direct that 

reclamation of lower priority projects 

should not begin until the higher 

priority projects are at least in the 

process of being reclaimed. However, 

consistent with the 2006 amendments 

and associated changes to the 

implementing regulations, we also 

recognize that it can be economically 

and logistically advantageous to address 

lower priority problems as part of 

abating higher priority problems. 

Allowing a State to reclaim Priority 3 

problems (e.g., spoil ridges) as part of 

abating Priority 1 or 2 hazards (e.g., 

highwalls) leverages its limited funding 

to get the best reclamation at a lower 

cost. This approach also generally 

reclaims more AML problems overall, 

and in some cases can more effectively 

abate and reclaim hazards, while 

reducing the cost of reclaiming the 

higher and lower priority problems. 

Ohio offers draft statutory changes at 

ORC 1513.37(C)(3) regarding the 

eligibility of lands and waters affected 

by past coal mining. The Federal 

requirements at 30 CFR 874.14 were 

revised in 2008 (73 FR 67576), 

consistent with the 2006 SMCRA 

amendments, to remove the 30 percent 

limitation on grant funds that States and 

Indian Tribes could expend on water 

supply affected by coal mining. Ohio’s 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
79438 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

draft language at ORC 1513.37(C)(3) 

thus identifies the protection, repair, 

replacement, construction, or 

enhancement of facilities sourced by 

waters adversely affected by coal mining 

practices as projects eligible for funding. 

Ohio offers draft statutory changes at 

ORC 1513.37(C)(5) regarding the 

inventory of eligible lands and waters 

maintained by the Secretary of the 

Interior. The draft language allows for 

the chief to offer amendments to update 

the inventory as it applies to eligible 

lands under the jurisdiction of Ohio. 

This would allow Ohio to reclassify 

certain current Priority 3 lands and 

waters as Priority 1 or Priority 2 

expenditures, in line with the ORC 

1513.37 draft statutory language 

discussed above, which reflects the 

2006 SMCRA amendments. 

Ohio also offers draft revisions at ORC 

1513.37(E)(3) to remove the 50% match 

requirement for watershed groups 

requesting grant funding from the Acid 

Mine Drainage (AMD) Abatement and 

Treatment Fund for remediation 

projects. Ohio considers these 

watershed groups essential to AMD 

treatment and abatement projects, in 

part because they are often able to 

complete remediation projects at a 

fraction of the cost compared to DMRM 

staff or environmental consultants. The 

groups are typically citizen-based 

charitable organizations that do not 

have the funding for the 50% match 

currently required to receive grant 

money. Ohio recognizes the importance 

of these groups and the essential work 

that they do, primarily in distressed 

counties in Ohio. By eliminating the 

matching requirement, Ohio is removing 

a burden on the watershed groups that 

might prevent them from participating 

in the program. There is no Federal law 

or condition of the Federal award that 

requires a matching grant funds from 

subaward recipients. 

These statutory revisions were not 

enacted through the legislative bills 

Ohio identified in its submissions (2016 

Sub. H.B. No. 471 and 2017 Am. Sub. 

H.B. No. 49) and are not currently part 

of the Ohio Revised Code. To the extent 

Ohio proceeds to enact these revisions, 

we find the draft statutory language 

meets the requirements of SMCRA and 

30 CFR subchapter R. These revisions 

are largely reflected in Ohio’s revised 

AML Plan, which we are approving. 

However, should Ohio actually enact 

statutory changes that require further 

revision to its Plan, the Plan revisions 

must be submitted for our review in 

accordance with 30 CFR part 884. 

Revisions to Ohio’s AML Plan 

Ohio is updating and replacing its 

AML Plan with a version that is 

structured similarly to the Federal AML 

plan content requirements for States 

found at 30 CFR 884.13. Ohio has made 

multiple editorial changes for brevity, 

structural alignment with the Federal 

requirements, consistency with the 2006 

changes to SMCRA under the Tax Relief 

and Health Care Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 

109–432) and the associated changes to 

the implementing Federal regulations 

on November 14, 2008 (73 FR 67576), 

and the ORC. In order to simplify the 

Plan, the new version omits 

documentation that is either 

incorporated by reference, is no longer 

applicable to Ohio’s AML Program, was 

replaced by updated information, or was 

never required to be included in the 

Plan. We also understand that 

additional revision and/or supplemental 

material concerning the Governor’s 

letter, the Legal Opinion, and other 

components of the plan referenced 

below may be submitted in the near 

future to encompass components of the 

BIL and section 801 of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2023 (commonly 

referred to as the Safeguarding 

Treatment for the Restoration of 

Ecosystems from Abandoned Mines 

(STREAM) Act) (Pub. L. 117–328). We 

are not addressing those various 

potential revisions in this review but are 

aware that they may generate additional 

plan amendments in the near future. 

1. Letter of Designation From the 

Governor 

Ohio’s revised plan references the 

Governor’s letters, dated November 21, 

1979, and amended February 3, 1981, 

designating the Department of Natural 

Resources, Division of Reclamation as 

the agency authorized to administer the 

State’s program for regulating surface 

coal mining and reclamation, and for 

receiving and administering reclamation 

grants under 30 CFR part 886. These 

letters were submitted and approved as 

part of the original State reclamation 

plan and are consistent with the Federal 

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

Therefore, we are approving their 

inclusion. However, the Division of 

Mines and Reclamation was combined 

with the Division of Oil and Gas (H.B. 

601, effective June 14, 2000) to create 

the DMRM in the Department of Natural 

Resources. As a result of these changes, 

the 1979 and 1981 Governor’s letters 

should be replaced with an updated 

version to designate DMRM as the 

agency responsible for the AML 

program, or a supplemental submission 

added to the Plan providing that 

additional context. 

2. Legal Opinion 

Ohio’s revised plan references the 

legal opinion from the State Attorney 

General, dated October 4, 1979, 

verifying that the Division of 

Reclamation had sufficient legal 

authority under Ohio State law to 

conduct the State reclamation program 

in accordance with the requirements of 

Title IV of SMCRA. This legal opinion 

was submitted and approved as part of 

the original State reclamation plan and 

is consistent with the Federal 

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

Therefore, we are approving its 

inclusion. However, the Division of 

Mines and Reclamation was combined 

with the Division of Oil and Gas (H.B. 

601, effective June 14, 2000) to create 

the DMRM in the Department of Natural 

Resources. As a result of this change, 

the legal opinion should be replaced 

with an updated version that reflects the 

designated agency, DMRM, as the 

agency responsible for the AML 

program and the agency that has the 

authority under State law to conduct the 

program in accordance with the 

requirements of Title IV of SMCRA, or 

Ohio should add a supplemental 

submission to the Plan providing that 

additional context. 

3. Policies and Procedures 

Federal regulations at 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3) require a description of the 

policies and procedures to be followed 

by the designated agency in conducting 

a Title IV reclamation program. Parts IV 

through XI of Ohio’s revised plan, as 

discussed in more detail below, provide 

descriptions of, and legal citations for, 

these requirements. 

Part IV, Purpose of the Program, 

provides a general overview of Ohio’s 

AML Program. Specifically, Ohio’s 

revised plan identifies inadequately 

reclaimed mine sites as risks to public 

safety and environmental quality and 

describes the goal of the revised plan as 

being to continue to reclaim land and 

water resources affected by coal mining, 

in accordance with State and Federal 

law and rules. This section is consistent 

with the requirements of 30 CFR 

884.13(a)(3)(i). 

Part V, Ranking Eligible Lands and 

Waters, provides the relevant eligibility 

and prioritization criteria to assess 

potential project areas for reclamation. 

These criteria are based on the updated 

requirements of section 403 and 404 of 

SMCRA, as well as several additional 

factors Ohio uses to assess and prioritize 

potential project areas for reclamation. 

Consistent with section 404 of SMCRA, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 79439 

coal lands and waters are deemed 

eligible if they were mined for coal or 

affected by such mining, waste banks, 

coal processing, or other coal mining 

processes, or abandoned/left in an 

inadequate state as outlined in this 

section. As a general matter, the ranking 

of eligible projects will be conducted in 

the following order of priority: 

emergency projects, as approved by us 

under section 410 of SMCRA; projects 

protecting public health, safety and 

property from extreme danger of adverse 

effects of coal mining practices (Priority 

1); projects protecting public health and 

safety from adverse effects of coal 

mining (Priority 2); and projects 

restoring land, waters, and the 

environment previously degraded by 

coal mining, for natural resource 

conservation and restoration (Priority 3). 

By providing the specific criteria for the 

eligibility and ranking projects to be 

funded, Ohio’s revised Plan is 

consistent with the requirements of 30 

CFR 884.13(a)(3)(ii). 

This section of the revised plan also 

includes guidelines for the annual grant 

application to be submitted to us as 

specified in section 405(f) and (h) of 

SMCRA and 30 CFR part 886; policies 

that address set-aside funds in 

accordance with section 402(g)(6) of 

SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1232(g)(6)) and 30 

CFR part 876; policies that address 

water supply projects in accordance 

with section 402(g)(1) and (5) of SMCRA 

(30 U.S.C. 1232(g)(1)–(5)); procedures 

for reclamation projects receiving less 

than 50% government funding, 

including adopting by reference 30 CFR 

part 707; and policies for handling 

emergency projects. 

Part VI, Coordination with Other 

Agencies, and Part VII, Coordination 

with OSMRE, describe Ohio’s 

coordination with various Federal and 

State agencies, watershed groups, local 

governments, universities, and others in 

order to achieve mutual reclamation 

goals. Additionally, Ohio will consult 

with the relevant State and Federal 

regulatory agencies as necessary to 

ensure all required permissions are in 

order prior to project commencement. 

These sections are consistent with the 

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

Part VIII, Policy for Land Acquisition, 

Management, and Disposition, describes 

the acquisition, management, and 

disposal of lands and waters adversely 

affected by past coal mining practices. 

Specifically, if it has been determined 

by both Ohio and us that acquisition of 

land is required for successful 

reclamation, the State will comply with 

30 CFR part 879 regarding the 

acquisition, management, and disposal 

of the lands and waters. This section is 

consistent with the requirements of 30 

CFR 884.13(a)(3)(iv). 

Ohio’s revised plan includes sections 

regarding work on private lands. In Part 

IX, Policy Regarding Reclamation on 

Private Lands, Ohio establishes policy 

provisions, including the completion of 

appraisals and filing of liens, for the 

reclamation projects on private land, in 

accordance with 30 CFR part 887. Part 

X, Policy Regarding Rights of Entry, 

describes Ohio’s policies and 

procedures regarding rights of entry to 

lands or property, which are in 

accordance with 30 CFR part 877. These 

sections are consistent with the 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(3)(v) 

and (vi). 

Part XI, Public Participation, indicates 

that Ohio is opting to use our public 

participation process, as outlined in 30 

CFR 884.14(a), for State Reclamation 

Plan amendments and updates rather 

than the public participation process 

established during the development and 

approval of the original State 

Reclamation Plan. 

Ohio’s revised plan describes that 

opportunities for public participation 

and involvement in specific AML 

projects will be provided during the 

development and implementation of the 

annual grant application and 

performance agreement between us and 

DMRM. In addition, Ohio provides that 

DMRM maintains ongoing outreach 

with local governments and businesses 

regarding building on or over 

abandoned mines as well as detailing 

significant activities related to AML 

projects on their website. This section is 

consistent with the requirements of 30 

CFR 884.13(a)(3)(vii). 

4. Program Administration and 

Management 

Part XII, Program Management and 

Administration, of Ohio’s revised Plan 

describes the administrative and 

management structure of the AML 

Program. Section B of part XII identifies 

the organization of the agency 

designated to reclaim abandoned mine 

lands affected by coal mining activities 

(DMRM) and describes DMRM’s major 

functions as responding to citizen 

concerns, environmental document 

preparation, grant writing and 

management, remediation design, 

bidding and contracting, and 

construction. Section C of part XII 

describes additional agencies of Ohio’s 

Department of Natural Resources that 

assist in the AML program, as well as 

the relationship between DMRM and 

other State agencies that play a relevant 

role in reclamation activities. Section D 

of part XII outlines the personnel 

staffing policies that DMRM will follow 

in the recruitment and retention for the 

AML Program. Section E describes the 

purchasing and procurement systems to 

be used by the agency, and section F 

describes the accounting system to be 

used by the agency. This section is 

consistent with the requirements of 30 

CFR 884.13(a)(4). 

5. Description of Reclamation Activities 

on Impacted Lands and Waters 

Part XIII, Description of Reclamation 

Activities on Impacted Land and 

Waters, includes general descriptions, 

derived from available data, of the 

reclamation activities to be conducted. 

Specifically, the plan includes: maps 

depicting the known and suspected 

abandoned coal mines in the State, the 

known and suspected watersheds 

impacted by mining, and the status of 

the State’s Acid Mine Drainage 

Abatement and Treatment projects; a 

description of the problems occurring 

on the identified lands and waters in 

Ohio; and how the Plan proposes to 

address each of the identified problems. 

Ohio recognizes that individual sites 

will vary in scope and breadth of 

adverse effects caused by mining and 

provides an extensive list of proven 

reclamation techniques and approaches 

that may be applied in any given site. 

This section is consistent with the 

requirements of 30 CFR 884.13(a)(5) 

6. Description of Conditions 

Part XIV, Description of Local 

Conditions, includes a general 

description, derived from available data, 

of the conditions prevailing in the 

geographic areas of the State where 

reclamation is planned. The Plan, in 

part XVI.A, describes the economic base 

of the Ohio counties affected by coal 

mining. Aesthetic, historical, and 

cultural elements of significance are 

considered in part XVI.B. The wide 

variety of recreational opportunities of 

the area are enumerated in part XVI.C. 

The ecosystem and ecology of the area, 

the adverse effects of coal mining on 

these systems, and how the Abandoned 

Mine Land Program works to address 

these effects is described in part XVI.D. 

This section is consistent with the 

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

Thus, we find Ohio’s Plan, as 

amended, meets all content 

requirements stipulated under 30 CFR 

884.13 while also updating the Plan 

consistent with changes made to the 

Federal program in 2006 and 2008. 

Therefore, we are approving Ohio’s 

revised Abandoned Mine Land 

reclamation plan. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
79440 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

IV. Summary and Disposition of 

Comments 

Public Comments 

In the May 10, 2019, Federal Register 

document announcing our receipt of 

this amendment, we asked for public 

comments (Administrative Record No. 

OH–2195–08). The comment period 

closed on June 10, 2019. No requests for 

public meetings or hearings were 

received. We received a single comment 

that was not germane to the program 

amendment and therefore we have not 

provided a response. 

Federal Agency Comments 

On March 22, 2017, under 30 CFR 

884.14(a)(2) and 884.15(a), we requested 

comments on the amendment from 

various Federal agencies with an actual 

or potential interest in the Ohio Plan 

(Administrative Record No. OH–2195– 

02). We did not receive any comments. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Concurrence and Comments 

On March 22, 2019, OSMRE solicited 

comments on the proposed amendment 

from EPA (Administrative Record No. 

OH–2195–02). The EPA did not respond 

to our request. 

State Historical Preservation Officer 

(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation (ACHP) 

On March 22, 2019, OSMRE solicited 

comments on the proposed amendment 

from the Ohio SHPO and ACHP 

(Administrative Record No. OH–2195– 

02). We did not receive comments from 

the SHPO or ACHP. 

V. OSMRE’s Decision 

Based on the above findings, we are 

approving Ohio’s AML Plan amendment 

that was sent to us on March 17, 2017 

(Administrative Record No. 2195–01), 

and subsequent submittals providing 

clarification on September 15, 2017 

(Administrative Record No. 2195–04), 

and an addition to the amendment 

request on September 18, 2018 

(Administrative Record No. 2195–06). 

To implement this decision, we are 

amending the Federal regulations at 30 

CFR part 935 that codify decisions 

concerning the Ohio program. In 

accordance with the Administrative 

Procedure Act, this rule will take effect 

30 days after the date of publication. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Executive Order 12630—Governmental 

Actions and Interference With 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights 

This rule would not effect a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications that would result in 

private property being taken for 

government use without just 

compensation under the law. Therefore, 

a takings implication assessment is not 

required. This determination is based on 

an analysis of the corresponding Federal 

regulations. 

Executive Order 12866—Regulatory 

Planning and Review, Executive Order 

13563—Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review, and Executive Order 

14094—Modernizing Regulatory Review 

Executive Order 12866, as amended 

by Executive Order 14094, provides that 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs in the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) will review all significant 

rules. Pursuant to OMB guidance, dated 

October 12, 1993 (OMB Memo M–94–3), 

the approval of plan amendments is 

exempted from OMB review under 

Executive Order 12866, as amended by 

Executive Order 14094. Executive Order 

13563, which reaffirms and 

supplements Executive Order 12866, 

retains this exemption. 

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 review 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 Ohio 

Plan or to the Plan amendment that 

Ohio drafted. 

Executive Order 13132—Federalism 

This rule has potential federalism 

implications as defined by section 1(a) 

of Executive Order 13132. Executive 

Order 13132 directs agencies to ‘‘grant 

the States the maximum administrative 

discretion possible’’ with respect to 

Federal statutes and regulations 

administered by the States. Ohio, 

through its approved reclamation 

program, implements and administers 

SMCRA and its implementing 

regulations at the State level. This rule 

approves an amendment to the Ohio 

Plan submitted and drafted by Ohio, 

and thus, is consistent with the 

direction to provide maximum 

administrative discretion to States. 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

The Department of the Interior strives 

to strengthen its government-togovernment relationship with Tribes 

through a commitment to consultation 

with Tribes and recognition of their 

right to self-governance and Tribal 

sovereignty. We have evaluated this rule 

under the Department’s consultation 

policy and under the criteria in 

Executive Order 13175 and have 

determined that it has no substantial 

direct effects on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Tribes. The 

basis for this determination is that our 

decision is on the Ohio Plan that does 

not include Indian lands, as defined by 

SMCRA, or reclamation on Indian lands. 

Indian lands are regulated 

independently under the applicable 

Federal reclamation program. The 

Department’s consultation policy also 

acknowledges that our rules may have 

Tribal implications where the State 

proposing the amendment encompasses 

ancestral lands in areas with minable 

coal. We are currently working to 

identify and engage appropriate Tribal 

stakeholders to devise a constructive 

approach for consulting on these 

amendments. 

Executive Order 13211—Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

Executive Order 13211 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 

significant energy action under the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 79441 

definition in Executive Order 13211, a 

Statement of Energy Effects is not 

required. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

This rule does not constitute a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment. We 

are not required to provide a detailed 

statement under NEPA because this rule 

qualifies for a categorical exclusion 

under the U.S. Department of the 

Interior Departmental Manual, part 516, 

section 13.5(B)(29). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not include requests 

and requirements of an individual, 

partnership, or corporation to obtain 

information and report it to a Federal 

agency. As this rule does not contain 

information collection requirements, a 

submission to the Office of Management 

and Budget under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

is not required. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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 

corresponding 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 rule would have a significant 

economic impact, the Department relied 

upon the data and assumptions for the 

corresponding 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; 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 on an analysis of 

the corresponding Federal regulations, 

which were determined not to 

constitute a major rule. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This rule does not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

Tribal governments, or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. The 

rule does not have a significant or 

unique effect on State, local, or Tribal 

governments or the private sector. This 

determination is based on an analysis of 

the corresponding Federal regulations, 

which were determined not to impose 

an unfunded mandate. Therefore, a 

statement containing the information 

required by the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not 

required. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 935 

Intergovernmental relations, Surface 

mining, Underground mining. 

Ben Owens, 

Acting Regional Director, North Atlantic– 

Appalachian Region. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 30 CFR part 935 is amended 

as set forth below: 

PART 935—OHIO 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 935 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Amend section 935.25 in the table 

by adding an entry in chronological 

order by ‘‘Date of final publication’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 935.25 Approval of Ohio abandoned 

mine land reclamation plan amendments. 

* * * * * 

Original amendment 

submission date Date of final publication Citation/description 

*******

March 17, 2017 .............................. September 30, 2024 ...................... Repeal and replace Certified AML Plan to be consistent with changes 

to Federal program and update to reflect current agency conditions/ 

practices, structure and organization. 

Revision of ORC 1513.27, 1513.28, 1513.30, 1513.31, 1513.32, 

1513.37. 

[FR Doc. 2024–22327 Filed 9–27–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

POSTAL SERVICE 

39 CFR Part 111 

Address Correction Notices IMpb 

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Postal Service is 

amending Mailing Standards of the 

United States Postal Service, Domestic 

Mail Manual (DMM®) in various 

sections to remove the hardcopy address 

correction notice option for all packages 

bearing an Intelligent Mail® package 

barcode (IMpb®). 

DATES: Effective: March 5, 2025. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michelle Evans at (901) 681–4474 or 

Garry Rodriguez at (202) 268–7281. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

6, 2024, the Postal Service published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (89 FR 

63850–63851) to remove the option to 

request PS Forms 3547, Notice to Mailer 

of Correction in Address, and PS Form 

3579, Notice of Undeliverable 

Periodical, for packages with an IMpb. 

In response to the proposed rule, the 

Postal Service received one formal 

response containing two comments. The 

commenter asked if a customer does not 

register for Electronic Service Requested 

and leaves Change Service Requested on 

their shipping label, how will the 

package be treated and then had two 

questions as follows: 

Comment: The first comment 

questioned whether packages with 

Change Service Requested will be just 

disposed of? 

Response: Yes, Change Service 

Requested will cause packages that are 

undeliverable as addressed (UAA) to be 

disposed of by USPS. 

Comment: The second comment 

questioned if packages not having an 

endorsement would be treated as 

Forwarding Service Requested? 

Response: No, the disposition of the 

package will be based on the printed 

endorsement when present, however a 

separate notice, when applicable, would 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1