9076 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

will not have a significant economic

impact, positive or negative, on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing amendment 39–9255 (60 FR

28715, June 2, 1995), and by adding a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

amendment 39–9951, to read as follows:

97–05–07 Lockheed: Amendment 39–9951.

Docket 96–NM–35–AD. Supersedes AD

95–12–05, Amendment 39–9255.

Applicability: Model 382, 382E, and 382G

series airplanes; equipped with a servo-type

valve housing assembly having part number

714325–3 or –7 installed on any outboard

engine; certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To ensure that the airplane maintains

adequate thrust decay characteristics in the

event of critical engine failure during takeoff,

accomplish the following:

(a) Within 60 days after August 10, 1994

(the effective date of AD 94–14–09,

amendment 39–8961), revise the Limitations

and Performance Data Sections of the FAAapproved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to

include information specified in Lockheed

Airplane Flight Manual Supplement 382–16,

dated August 11, 1993, and operate the

airplane accordingly thereafter. The

requirements of this paragraph may be

accomplished by inserting AFM Supplement

382–16 into the AFM.

(b) Within 12 months after the effective

date of this AD, replace the servo-type valve

housing assemblies having part number

714325–3 or –7 with a governor assembly

control number 577888 on the propeller

governors installed on the outboard engines,

in accordance with Lockheed Document

SMP–515C, Card No. CO–135. Replacement

of these assemblies with governor assembly

control numbers 577888, constitutes

terminating action for the requirements of

paragraph (a) of this AD; once the

replacement is accomplished, the AFM

revision may be removed.

Note 2: Propeller governors with servo-type

valve housing assemblies having part number

714325–3 or –7 may be retained or replaced

with a governor assembly control number

577888 for use on the inboard engine

positions.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Atlanta

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Small Airplane Directorate. Operators shall

submit their requests through an appropriate

FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who

may add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Atlanta ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Atlanta ACO.

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

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.

(e) The AFM revision shall be done in

accordance with Lockheed Airplane Flight

Manual Supplement 382–16, dated August

11, 1993. This incorporation by reference was

approved previously by the Director of the

Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 as of August 10,

1994 (59 FR 35236, July 11, 1994). Copies

may be obtained from Lockheed Aeronautical

Systems Support Company (LASSC), Field

Support Department, Dept. 693, Zone 0755,

2251 Lake Park Drive, Smyrna, Georgia

30080. Copies may be inspected at the FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the

FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office,

Small Airplane Directorate, Campus

Building, 1701 Columbia Avenue, Suite 2–

160, College Park, Georgia; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

April 4, 1997.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

21, 1997.

James V. Devany,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–4946 Filed 2–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 935

[OH–239; Amendment Number 73]

Ohio Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of

amendment.

SUMMARY: OSM is approving a proposed

amendment to the Ohio regulatory

program (hereinafter referred to as the

‘‘Ohio program’’) under the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1977 (SMCRA). The proposed

amendment consists of regulatory

changes to implement the remining

standards of the Federal Energy Policy

Act of 1992. The amendment is

intended to revise the Ohio program to

be consistent with the corresponding

Federal regulations as amended on

November 27, 1995. (60 FR 58480).

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 28, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Rieger, Field Branch Chief,

Appalachian Regional Coordinating

Center, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, 3

Parkway Center, Pittsburgh, PA 15220,

Telephone: (412) 937–2153.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Ohio Program

II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

III. Director’s Findings

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

V. Director’s Decision

VI. Procedural Determinations

I. Background on the Ohio Program

On August 16, 1982, the Secretary of

the Interior conditionally approved the

Ohio program. Background information

on the Ohio program, including the

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of

comments, and the conditions of

approval can be found in the August 10,

1982, Federal Register (47 FR 34688).

Subsequent actions concerning

conditions of approval and program

amendments can be found at 30 CFR

935.11, 935.15, and 935.16.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 9077

II. Submission of the Proposed

Amendment

By letter dated July 23, 1996,

(Administrative Record No. OH–2168–

00) Ohio submitted a proposed

amendment to its program pursuant to

SMCRA. Ohio submitted the proposed

amendment at its own initiative. The

Ohio amendment proposes to

implement the remining standards of

the Federal Energy Policy Act of 1992

and the corresponding Federal

regulations as amended on November

27, 1995. (60 FR 58480). OSM

announced receipt of the proposed

amendment in the August 26, 1996,

Federal Register (61 FR 43696) and in

the same document opened the public

comment period and provided an

opportunity for a public hearing on the

adequacy of the proposed amendment.

The public comment period closed on

September 25, 1996. However, a

complete description of certain

amendments concerning permit

application requirements and

revegetation time frames was

inadvertently omitted from that notice.

Also, Ohio submitted corrections to its

proposed amendments by letter dated

October 4, 1996, (Administrative Record

No. OH–2168–07). Therefore, OSM

announced these items in the October

18, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR

54375) and reopened the public

comment period until November 4,

1996. On January 23, 1997, Ohio

submitted additional changes

(Administrative Record No. OH–2168–

12) as a result of discussions with OSM.

III. Director’s Findings

Set forth below, pursuant to SMCRA

and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

732.15 and 732.17, are the Director’s

findings concerning the proposed

amendment. Revisions not specifically

discussed below concern

nonsubstantive wording changes, or

revised cross-references and paragraph

notations to reflect organizational

changes resulting from this amendment.

A. Revisions to Ohio Regulations That

Are Substantively Identical to the

Corresponding Federal Regulations

1. OAC 1501:13–1–02 Definitions.

(a) New paragraph (OOO) ‘‘Lands

eligible for remining’’ has been added to

mean those lands that would otherwise

be eligible for expenditures under

section 1513.37 of the Revised Code.

(b) New paragraph (JJJJJJ)

‘‘Unanticipated event or conditions’’ has

been added to mean (as used in

1501:13–5–01 of the Administrative

Code) an event or condition related to

prior mining activity which arises from

a surface coal mining and reclamation

operation on lands eligible for remining

and was not contemplated in the

applicable permit.

The proposed changes are found to be

substantively identical to the

corresponding Federal Regulations at 30

CFR 701.5.

2. OAC 1501:13–5–01 Review, public

participation, and approval or

disapproval of permit applications and

permit terms and conditions.

(a) New paragraph (D)(7) has been

added to provide that subsequent to the

effective date of this rule, the

prohibitions of paragraph (D)(3) of this

section regarding the issuance of a new

permit, shall not apply to any violation

that occurs after that date; is unabated;

and results from an unanticipated event

or condition that arises from a surface

coal mining and reclamation operation

on lands that are eligible for remining

under a permit issued pursuant to OAC

1501:13–4–12(L) and held by the person

making application for the new permit.

(b) New paragraph (D)(7)(D) provides

that for permits issued under OAC

1501:13–4–12(L), an event or condition

shall be presumed to be unanticipated

for the purposes of this paragraph if it:

arose after permit issuance; was related

to prior mining; and was not identified

in the permit.

(c) New paragraph (E)(19) and

subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), are

added to require that, for operations

which will include remining areas

under 1501:13–4–12(L) of the

Administrative Code, the application

includes (A) Lands eligible for remining;

(B) an identification of the potential

environmental and safety problems

related to prior mining activity which

could reasonably be anticipated to occur

at the site; and (C) mitigation plans to

sufficiently address these potential

environmental and safety problems so

that reclamation as required by the

applicable requirements of Chapter 1513

of the Revised Code can be

accomplished. Additionally, a

semicolon and the word ‘‘and’’ are

added at the end of paragraph (E)(18).

The proposed changes are found to be

substantively identical to the

corresponding Federal regulations at 30

CFR 773.15(b) and (c)(13).

3. OAC 1501:13–9–15 Revegetation.

Paragraph (F)(2) is revised, and

subparagraph (F)(2)(A) is added, to

provide that the required period of

extended responsibility on lands

eligible for remining shall be not less

than two full years for permits issued

pursuant to the requirements of OAC

1501:13–4–12 and renewals thereof.

The Director finds that these revisions

are substantively identical to portions of

the corresponding Federal regulations at

30 CFR 816 and 817.116(c)(2)(i) and (ii).

B. Revisions to Ohio Regulations That

Are Not Substantively Identical to the

Corresponding Federal Regulations

1. OAC 1501:13–4–12 Requirements

for permits for special categories of

mining.

(a) New paragraph (L) has been added

to include the requirements for any

person who submits a permit

application to conduct a surface coal

mining operation on lands eligible for

remining. The requirements of

paragraph (L) shall apply until

September 30, 2004, or any later date

authorized by federal law. The permit

application must include: (1) A

description of the proposed lands

eligible for remining and a

demonstration, to the satisfaction of the

Chief, how such lands meet the

eligibility requirements specified by

Revised Code Section 1513.37; (2)

Identification, to the extent not

otherwise addressed in the permit

application, of any potential

environmental and safety problems

related to the prior mining activity at

the site which could be reasonably

expected to occur. This identification

shall be based on a due diligence

investigation which shall include visual

observations at the site, a record review

of past mining at the site, and

environmental sampling tailored to

current site conditions; and (3) A

description, with regard to potential

environmental and safety problems

identified in paragraph (2), of the

mitigative measures that will be taken to

ensure that the applicable reclamation

requirements of Revised Code Chapter

1513 and these rules can be met.

The federal regulation at 30 CFR

785.25(b) requires that the remining

application permit be made in

accordance with the requirements of

subchapter G, which are the permitting

requirements. The Ohio rule at OAC

1501:13–4–12(L) does not include this

requirement, however, OAC 1501:13–4–

12(A) does require all special categories

of mining to comply with the general

permitting requirements of OAC

1501:13–4, therefore the Director finds

that the proposed change at paragraph

(L) is no less effective than the

corresponding Federal regulations at 30

CFR 785.25 (b) and (c) when read in

conjunction with OAC 1501:13–4–

12(A).

(b) The Director also finds that

paragraphs (L)(1) and (L)(3) are

substantively identical to 30 CFR

785.25(a) and (b)(2), respectively.

Paragraph (L)(2) is nearly identical to 30

CFR 785.25(b)(1) except that Ohio did
9078 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

not include the word ‘‘review’’ in OAC

1501:13–4–12(L)(2) when describing the

evaluation of past mining at the site that

is required during the permitting

process. 30 CFR 785.25(b)(1) requires a

record review of past mining at the site.

Ohio has addressed this item by

including the word ‘‘review’’ in the

version of OAC 1510:13–4–12(L)(2) that

was officially filed through the Ohio

rule promulgation process with the

Ohio Legislative Service Commission on

January 16, 1997. Ohio provided a copy

of this letter to OSM on January 23,

1997. Therefore the amendment is

found to be as effective as 30 CFR

785.25(b)(1) based on this revision.

2. OAC 1501:13–9–15 Revegetation.

(a) Ohio’s revegation performance

standards for lands eligible for remining

generally cross-reference the

performance standards for previously

undisturbed lands, thus, to avoid

confusion, Ohio deleted the references

to ‘‘five years’’ for the period of

responsibility. While the period of

responsibility will remain five years for

most mining operations, the deletions

are consistent with the change in 30

CFR 816/817.116(c)(2)(i) which allows

remining operations to have a shorter

period of responsibility. Affected

paragraphs and subparagraphs are:

(F)(3), (F)(3)(a), (G)(3)(a), (I)(6), (J)(1)(b),

(F)(4)(d), (H)(2), (L)(2), and (M)(4).

(b) Subparagraph (H)(2) is further

amended by adding the words ‘‘and hay

crops also meet, at a minimum, the

ground cover standards of paragraph

(G)(3)(B) during the last year of the

period of extended responsibility.’’ The

current rule could have been interpreted

to allow cropland with hay as the

approved crop to only meet productivity

requirements without a ground cover.

Ohio is adding a ground cover

requirement on cropland when hay is

the required crop. While the federal

rules at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(2) only

require a success standard approved by

the regulatory authority for cropland,

the Director finds the success standard

to be consistent with the revegetation

requirements of 30 CFR 816/817.111.

(c) Paragraph (L) is amended by

deleting the words ‘‘undeveloped land’’

from the revegetation success standards

for forest land, fish and wildlife habitat

and other postmining land uses that

have woody vegetation. Specific

revegetation success standards for

undeveloped land are provided under in

OAC 1510:13–9–15(M). OSM previously

approved Ohio’s program amendment

#67 to change OAC 1501:13–9–17(B)(2)

to allow undeveloped land as a post

mining land use only if the pre-mining

land use was undeveloped. That

amendment also eliminated OAC

1501:13–9–17(D)(8) which provided that

proposals for a post mining land use of

undeveloped land would be treated as if

the post mining land use were forest

land/fish and wildlife habitat.

Therefore, including undeveloped land

with the forest land/fish and wildlife

land use revegetation standards in OAC

1501:13–9–15(L) is no longer necessary.

The deletion of ‘‘undeveloped land’’ in

paragraph (L) is consistent with the

earlier deletion that was approved by

OSM on July 27, 1994 (59 FR 38123,

38124). Thus, the Director finds that this

deletion is not inconsistent with 30 CFR

816./817.116(b).

(d) New paragraph (O) is added to

include revegetation standards for areas

eligible for remining in each land use

category. New subparagraph (1)(A)

includes standards for revegetation of

pasture and grazing lands and requires

that for Phase II bond release,

revegetation standards for remined

lands are the same as those for

previously unmined lands as required

by paragraph (G)(2) of this rule. For

Phase III bond release, however, new

subparagraph (1)(B) requires that

remined lands in this category must

have ground cover equal to or exceeding

seventy percent cover and be adequate

to control erosion with no single area

with less than thirty percent cover

exceeding the lesser of three thousand

square feet or .3 percent of the land

affected.

New subparagraph (2)(A) includes

standards for revegetation of agricultural

cropland, other than prime farmland,

and requires that for Phase II bond

release, revegetation standards for

remined lands are the same as those for

previously unmined lands as required

by paragraph (G)(2) of this rule. New

subparagraph (2)(B) includes for Phase

III bond release, crop yield data must at

a minimum equal the average county

yield for any year of the responsibility

period except the first year and, hay

crops also must have ground cover

equal to or exceeding seventy percent

cover and be adequate to control erosion

with no single area with less than thirty

percent cover exceeding the lesser of

three thousand square feet or .3 percent

of the land affected.

New subparagraph (3)(A) includes

standards for revegetation of industrial,

residential, or commercial land use,

other than commercial forest land, and

requires that for Phase II bond release,

revegetation standards for remined

lands are the same as those for

previously unmined lands as required

by paragraph (G)(2) of this rule. For

Phase III bond release, however, new

subparagraph (3)(B) requires that

remined lands in this category must

have ground cover equal to or exceeding

seventy percent cover and be adequate

to control erosion with no single area

with less than thirty percent cover

exceeding the lesser of three thousand

square feet or .3 percent of the land

affected.

New subparagraph (4)(A) includes

standards for revegetation of forest land,

fish and wildlife habitat, or other land

which requires the establishment of

woody vegetation, and requires that for

Phase II bond release, revegetation

standards for remined lands are the

same as those for previously unmined

lands as required by paragraph (L)(1) of

this rule. For Phase III bond release,

however, new subparagraph (4)(B)

requires that remined lands in this

category must meet the requirements of

paragraph (L)(2) of this rule except that,

of the minimum countable trees per

acre, eighty (80) percent have been in

place for at least two (2) years, on each

acre on which trees or shrubs are to be

planted.

New subparagraph (5)(A) includes

standards for revegetation of

undeveloped land and requires that for

determining success of revegetation and

for Phase II bond release, revegetation

standards for remined lands are the

same as those for previously unmined

lands as required by paragraph (M)(1),

(2) and (3) of this rule. For Phase III

bond release, however, new

subparagraph (5)(B) requires that

remined lands in this category must

meet the requirements of paragraph

(M)(3) of this rule except that the

herbaceous ground cover on areas not

planted with trees or shrubs must have

ground cover equal to or exceeding

seventy percent cover and be adequate

to control erosion with no single area

with less than thirty percent cover

exceeding the lesser of three thousand

square feet or .3 percent of the land

affected.

New subparagraph (6)(A) includes

standards for revegetation of

recreational areas where herbaceous

vegetation comprises the ground cover,

and requires that for Phase II bond

release, revegetation standards for

remined lands are the same as those for

previously unmined lands as required

by paragraph (G)(2) of this rule. For

Phase III bond release, however, new

subparagraph (6)(B) requires that

remined lands in this category must

have ground cover equal to or exceeding

seventy percent cover and be adequate

to control erosion with no single area

with less than thirty percent cover

exceeding the lesser of three thousand

square feet or .3 percent of the land.

New subparagraph (6)(C) includes

standards for revegetation of recreation
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 9079

areas which require the planting of

woody vegetation, and requires that for

Phase II bond release, revegetation

standards for remined lands are the

same as those for previously unmined

lands as required by paragraph (L)(1) of

this rule. For Phase III bond release,

new subparagraph (6)(D) requires that

remined lands must meet the same

requirements of paragraph (L)(2) of this

rule which pertain to previously

unmined lands in this category.

The proposed rules discussed above

pertaining to Phase II bond release for

each appropriate land use category for

remined areas are the same rules that

Ohio applies for Phase II bond release

for previously unmined areas. The

proposed rules in (O)(1)(B), (O)(2)(B),

(O)(3)(B), (O)(5)(B) and (O)(6)(B)

pertaining to Phase III bond release for

each appropriate land use category

require ground cover to equal or exceed

70 percent and adequately control

erosion in the last year of the extended

responsibility period on remining sites.

The corresponding Federal rule at

816.116(b)(5) requires the vegetative

ground cover shall be not less than the

ground cover existing before

redisturbance and shall be adequate to

control erosion. The Federal rule does

not specify required percentages of

ground cover. The question is whether

or not 70 percent cover is adequate,

especially if the ground cover was

greater than 70 percent before remining.

To evaluate the adequacy of the

proposed rule it is necessary to look at

the entire Ohio rule as it pertains to

revegetation success standards. Ohio’s

general requirements in OAC 1501:13–

9–15(B)(3) and (4) require vegetation to

be at least equal in extent of cover to the

natural vegetation of the area; and

control surface erosion. When OAC

1501:13–9–15(O) is considered in

conjunction with these provisions of the

Ohio rule, the proposed success

standards for remining meet the

requirements of the Federal rule at 30

CFR 816.116(b)(5). Therefore, in the rare

case of an area being eligible for

remining having greater than 70 percent

ground cover before remining, the

mining operator would be held to the

general requirements of OAC 1501:13–

9–15(B)(3) & (4) that vegetation be at

least equal to the natural vegetation of

the area and capable of controlling

surface erosion. Additionally, the

requirements that ground cover meet or

exceed 70 percent in the last year of the

period of extended responsibility is

consistent with the Federal rule at 30

CFR 816.116/817.116(c)(2)(ii).

The Director finds that Ohio’s

proposed rules listed above are no less

effective than the corresponding Federal

Regulations at 30 CFR 816.116 and 30

CFR 817.116.

The following non-substantive

changes are also proposed by Ohio:

(d) Paragraph (M) is further amended

by separating the first sentence into two

items with the second item being

labeled as (1) and re-numbering the

subsequent items accordingly. No word

changes were made to these items.

(e) Definitions of ‘‘abatement plan’’,

‘‘base line pollution load’’, ‘‘best

available technology economically

achievable’’, ‘‘pollution abatement

area’’, ‘‘pre-existing discharge’’, and

‘‘remining NPDES permit’’ are relocated

from OAC 1501:13–4–15 to OAC

1501:13–1–02, without revision, and

remaining paragraphs in both sections

are re-lettered accordingly.

C. Revisions to Ohio’s Regulations With

No Corresponding Federal Regulations

1. OAC 1501:13–4–08 Hydrologic map

and cross-sections.

New paragraph (A)(15) has been

added to include in the hydrologic map

any land determined to be eligible for

remining.

2. OAC 1501:13–4–10 Uniform color

code and map symbols.

New paragraph (A)(6) has been added

to include any area determined to be

eligible for remining shall have its

perimeter designated with a dashed

black line and the areas therein clearly

labeled ‘‘Remine’’.

3. OAC 1501:13–4–15.

(a) The title of this section is changed

from ‘‘Authorization to conduct coal

mining on previously mined areas’’ to

‘‘Authorization to conduct coal mining

on pollution abatement areas’’.

While there are no direct Federal

counterparts to these revisions, the

Director finds that they are not

inconsistent with SMCRA or its

corresponding Federal regulations, and

do not render the State program any less

effective than the federal regulations.

IV. Summary and Disposition of

Comments

The Director solicited public

comments and provided an opportunity

for a public hearing on the proposed

amendment. Because no one requested

an opportunity to speak at a public

hearing, no hearing was held.

Comments were received from the Ohio

Historic Preservation Office in a letter

dated September 13. The commenter

stated that ongoing coordination with

the Ohio Historical Preservation Office

is necessary to address preservation

concerns. The Director notes that OAC

1501:13–4–01(B) requires coordination

of review and issuance of permits with

other federal or state laws which

includes the National Historic

Preservation Act of 1966 and that OAC

1501:13–5–01(A)(3) requires that a

written notification of a permit

application, renewal or revision be sent

to all federal, state and local

governmental agencies that have an

interest in the area of the proposed

operations. There are no remining

operations that are not included in the

permit application process. The

program amendment does not propose

to change any coordination that

currently exists between OHPO and

DMR concerning review of cultural and

historical resources. Additionally, the

commenter was concerned that

remining permit applications will not be

reviewed by Ohio to determine if the

proposed permit area is included within

an area designated as unsuitable for

mining. The Director disagrees with the

commenter. Pursuant to OAC 1501:13–

5–01(E)(4), all mining applications,

including remining sites, cannot be

approved if the proposed permit area is

included within an area designated

unsuitable for coal mining operations.

Federal Agency Comments

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(I),

the Director solicited comments on the

proposed amendment from various

Federal agencies with an actual or

potential interest in the Ohio program.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

responded that the changes were

satisfactory. No other comments were

received.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii),

OSM is required to obtain the written

concurrence of the EPA with respect to

those provisions of the proposed

program amendment that relate to air or

water quality standards promulgated

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 Ohio proposed to

make in this amendment pertain to air

or water quality standards. Therefore,

OSM did not request EPA’s

concurrence.

V. Director’s Decision

Based on the above finding(s), the

Director approves the proposed

amendment as submitted by Ohio on

July 23, 1996, and revised on October 4,

1996 and January 23, 1997. The Director

is approving the proposed regulations

with the understanding that they be

promulgated in a form identical to that

submitted to OSM. Any differences

between these regulations and the

State’s final regulations will be
9080 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

processed as a separate amendment

subject to public review at a later date.

The Federal regulations at 30 CFR

Part 935, codifying decisions concerning

the Ohio program, are being amended to

implement this decision. This final rule

is being made effective immediately to

expedite the State program amendment

process and to encourage States to bring

their programs into conformity with the

Federal standards without undue delay.

Consistency of State and Federal

standards is required by SMCRA.

VI. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12866

This rule is exempted from review by

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866

(Regulatory Planning and Review).

Executive Order 12988

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews by section 3 of

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice

Reform) 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

Federal regulations and whether the

other requirements of 30 CFR Parts 730,

731, and 732 have been met.

National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is

required for this rule since section

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

provides that agency decisions on

proposed State regulatory program

provisions do not constitute major

Federal actions within the meaning of

section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C)).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by OMB under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

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 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.

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

corresponding Federal regulations.

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 935

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: February 7, 1997.

Allen D. Klein,

Regional Director, Appalachian Regional

Coordinating Center.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, Title 30, Chapter VII,

Subchapter T of the Code of Federal

Regulations 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. Section 935.15 is amended by

adding paragraph (eeee) to read as

follows:

§ 935.15 Approval of regulatory program

amendments.

* * * * *

(eeee) The following rules, as

submitted to OSM on August 26, 1996,

and revised on October 4, 1996, and

January 23, 1997, are approved effective

February 28, 1997:

OAC 1501:13–1–02 (000) and (JJJJJJ) ...................................................... Definitions.

OAC 1501:13–4–08 (A)(15) ..................................................................... Hydrologic map and cross sections.

OAC 1501:13–4–10 (A)(6) ....................................................................... Uniform color code and map symbols.

OAC 1501:13–4–12 (L) ............................................................................ Requirements for permits for special categories of mining.

OAC 1501:13–4–15 (deletion of (B)) ...................................................... Authorization to conduct coal mining on pollution abatement areas.

OAC 1501:13–5–01 (D)(7), (D)(7)(D), (E)(19) and (E)(19) (A), (B) and

(C).

Review, public participation, and approval or disapproval of permit

applications and permit terms and conditions.

OAC 1501:13–9–15 (F)(2), (F)(2)(A), (F)(3), (F)(3)(a), (F)(4)(d),

(G)(3)(a), (H)(2), (I)(6), (J)(1)(b), (L), (L)(2), (M)(4), (O), and (O) (1)

through (6).

Revegetation.

[FR Doc. 97–5038 Filed 2–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[FRL–5693–8]

Clean Air Act (Act) Approval and

Promulgation of State Implementation

Plans; Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (PSD); Louisiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; Correction.

SUMMARY: This document contains a

correction to the direct final rule

concerning the State of Louisiana PSD

increments for PM–10 (particulate

matter 10 micrometers or less in

diameter) published Tuesday, October

15, 1996 (61 FR 53639). In the October

15, 1996, Federal Register document,

Section I.8.a of Regulation Louisiana

Administrative Code 33:III. Chapter 5,

Section 509, effective February 20, 1995,

was erroneously cited as Section E.8.a.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 28, 1997.