Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 66 / Monday, April 7, 1997 / Proposed Rules 16507

within Montana under the permanent

regulatory program.

DATE: Written comments: Written

comments must be received by 4:00

p.m., m.s.t. on May 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or hand delivered to Ranvir

Singh, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Western

Regional Coordinating Center, Suite

3320, 1999 Broadway, Denver, CO

80202–5733.

Copies of the Montana program,

proposed amendments to the

cooperative agreement and the related

information required under 30 CFR Part

745 will be available for public review

at the addresses listed below during

normal business hours, Monday through

Friday, excluding holidays. Each

requester may receive one free copy of

the proposed revisions by contacting

any one of the following persons:

Ranvir Singh, Western Regional

Coordinating Center, Office of Surface

Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement, 1999 Broadway, Suite

3320, Denver, CO 80202–5733,

Telephone: (303) 844–1489;

Guy Padgett, Director, Casper Field

Office, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, 100

East ‘‘B’’ Street, Room 2128, Casper,

WY 82601–1918, Telephone: (307)

261–6550;

Jan Sensibaugh, Montana Department of

Environmental Quality, 1520 East

Sixth Avenue, Helena, MT 59620–

0901, Telephone: (406) 444–5270.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ranvir Singh, Western Regional

Coordinating Center, Office of Surface

Mining Reclamation and Enforcement,

1999 Broadway, Suite 3320, Denver, CO

80202–5733, Telephone: (303) 844–

1489.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 4,

1980, the Governor of Montana

submitted a request for a cooperative

agreement between the Department of

the Interior and the State of Montana to

give the State primacy in the

administration of its approved

regulatory program on Federal lands

within Montana. The Secretary

approved the cooperative agreement on

January 19, 1981 (46 FR 20983, April 8,

1981). The text of the existing

cooperative agreement can be found at

30 CFR 926.30.

On July 5, 1994, the Governor,

pursuant to 30 CFR 745.14, and, at the

recommendation of OSM, submitted a

proposed revision to the approved

cooperative agreement. The proposed

revision would streamline the

permitting process in Montana by

delegating to Montana the sole

responsibility to issue permits for coal

mining and reclamation operations on

Federal lands under the revised Federal

lands program regulations, and would

eliminate duplicative permitting

requirements, thereby increasing

governmental efficiency, which is one of

the purposes of the cooperative

agreement. This revision would also

update the cooperative agreement to

reflect current regulations and agency

structures.

OSM published a proposed rule

which would incorporate the revisions

into the cooperative agreement. See 62

FR 1408, January 10, 1997. The public

comment period closed on March 11,

1997. OSM is reopening the comment

period for an additional 30 days.

Anyone wishing to comment should

send them to OSM. See ADDRESSES

above.

Dated: March 31, 1997.

Mary Josie Blanchard,

Assistant Director, Program Support.

[FR Doc. 97–8786 Filed 4–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 944

[SPATS No. UT–032–FOR]

Utah Abandoned Mine Land

Reclamation Plan

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and

extension of public comment period on

proposed amendment.

SUMMARY: The Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is

announcing receipt of revisions and

additional explanatory information

pertaining to a previously proposed

amendment to the Utah abandoned

mine land reclamation (AMLR) plan

(hereinafter, the ‘‘Utah plan’’) under the

Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The

revisions and additional explanatory

information for Utah’s proposed rules

pertain to definitions of ‘‘eligible lands

and water’’ and ‘‘left or abandoned in

either an unreclaimed or inadequately

reclaimed condition,’’ and general

reclamation requirements. The

amendment is intended to revise the

Utah plan to meet the requirements of

the corresponding Federal regulations,

to incorporate the additional flexibility

afforded by the revised Federal

regulations, to clarify ambiguities, and

to improve operational efficiency.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by 4:00 p.m., m.d.t., April 22,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or hand delivered to James F.

Fulton at the address listed below.

Copies of the Utah plan, the proposed

amendment, and all written comments

received in response to this document

will be available for public review at the

addresses listed below during the

normal business hours, Monday through

Friday, excluding holidays. Each

requester may receive one free copy of

the proposed amendment by contacting

OSM’s Denver Field Division:

James F. Fulton, Chief, Denver Field

Division, Western Regional

Coordinating Center, Office of Surface

Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement, 1999 Broadway, Suite

3300, Denver, Colorado 80202.

Mark R. Mesch, Administrator,

Abandoned Mine Reclamation

Program, Division of Oil, Gas and

Mining, 1594 West North Temple,

Suite 1210, Box 145801, Salt Lake

City, Utah 84114–5801, (801) 538–

5340.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James F. Fulton, Telephone: (303) 844–

1424.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Utah Plan

On June 3, 1983, the Secretary of the

Interior approved the Utah plan.

General background information on the

Utah plan, including the Secretary’s

findings and the disposition of

comments, can be found in the June 3,

1983, Federal Register (48 FR 24876).

Subsequent actions concerning Utah’s

plan and plan amendments can be

found at 30 CFR 944.25.

II. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated August 2, 1995, Utah

submitted a proposed amendment to its

plan (administrative record No. UT–

1071) pursuant to SMCRA (30 U.S.C.

1201 et seq.). Utah submitted the

proposed amendment at its own

initiative and in response to a

September 26, 1994, letter

(administrative record No. UT–1011)

that OSM sent to Utah in accordance

with 30 CFR 884.15(b). The provisions

of the Utah Administrative Rules (Utah

Admin. R.) that Utah proposed to revise

and add were: Utah Admin. R. 643–

870–500, definitions of ‘‘eligible lands

and water,’’ ‘‘left or abandoned in either

an unreclaimed or inadequately

reclaimed condition,’’ and ‘‘Secretary’’;

Utah Admin. R. 643–874–100, –110,
16508 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 66 / Monday, April 7, 1997 / Proposed Rules

–124 through –128, –130 through –132,

–140 through –144, –150, and –160,

general reclamation requirements for

coal lands and waters; Utah Admin. R.

643–875–120 and –122 through –125,

–130 through –133, –140 through –142,

–150 through –155, –160, –170, –180,

–190, and –200, noncoal reclamation;

Utah Admin. R. 643–877–141, rights of

entry; Utah Admin. R. 643–879–141,

–152.200, –153, and –154, acquisition,

management, and disposition of lands

and water; Utah Admin. R. 643–882–

132, reclamation on private land; Utah

Admin. R. 643–884–150, State

reclamation plan amendments; Utah

Admin. R. 643–886–130 through –190,

State reclamation grants; and Utah

Admin. R. 643–886–232.240, reports.

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the August 22,

1995, Federal Register (60 FR 43577),

provided an opportunity for a public

hearing or meeting on its substantive

adequacy, and invited public comment

on its adequacy (administrative record

No. UT–1071–3). Because no one

requested a public hearing or meeting,

none was held. The public comment

period ended on September 21, 1995.

During its review of the amendment,

OSM identified concerns relating to the

provisions of Utah Admin. R. 643–870–

500, definitions of ‘‘eligible lands and

water’’ and ‘‘left of abandoned in either

an unreclaimed or inadequately

reclaimed condition’’; Utah Admin. R.

643–874–120, –121, –123 through –125,

and –128, general reclamation

requirements; Utah Admin. R. 643–875–

132, certification of completion of

reclamation of coal sites; Utah Admin.

R. 643–877–120, rights of entry; Utah

Admin. R. 643–879–154, disposition of

reclaimed land; and Utah Admin. R.

643–882–121 and –122, appraisals.

OSM notified Utah of the concerns by

letter dated March 26, 1996

(administrative record No. UT–1071–8).

Utah responded in a letter dated March

12, 1997, by submitting a revised

amendment and additional explanatory

information (administrative record No.

UT–1071–9).

Utah proposes revisions to and

additional explanatory information for

Utah Admin. R., 643–870–500,

definitions of ‘‘eligible lands and water’’

and ‘‘left or abandoned in either an

unreclaimed or inadequately reclaimed

condition’’ and Utah Admin. R. 643–

874–120, –121, –124, and –125, eligible

lands and water.

Specifically, Utah proposes to revise

its definition of the term ‘‘eligible lands

and water’’ at Utah Admin. R. 643–870–

500 to read:

‘‘Eligible lands and water’’ means lands and

water eligible for reclamation or drainage

abatement expenditures and are those which

were mined for coal or which were affected

by such mining, wastebanks, coal processing,

or other coal mining processes, and

abandoned or left in an [inadequate

reclamation status prior to August 3, 1977,

and for which there is no continuing

reclamation responsibility under State or

Federal laws. Provided, however, that lands

and water damaged by coal mining

operations after that date may also be eligible

if they meet the requirements specified in

R643–874–124. For additional eligibility

requirements for water projects, see R643–

874–124. For additional eligibility

requirements for lands affected by remining

operations see R643–874–128. For eligibility

requirements for lands affected by mining for

minerals other than coal, see R643–875–120.

Utah is also proposing to revise its

definition of ‘‘left or abandoned in

either an unreclaimed or inadequately

reclaimed condition’’ at Utah Admin. R.

643–870–500 to read:

‘‘Left or abandoned in either an unreclaimed

or inadequately reclaimed condition’’ means

lands and water:

Which were mined or which were affected by

such mining, wastebanks, processing or other

mining processes prior to August 3, 1977,

and all mining has ceased; and

Which continue, in their present condition,

to substantially degrade the quality of the

environment, prevent or damage the

beneficial use of land or water resources, or

endanger the health and safety of the public;

and

For which there is no continuing reclamation

responsibility under State or Federal laws,

except as provided in R643–874–124 and

R643–874–141.

Utah is not proposing to revise Utah

Admin. R. 643–874–120 and –121 by

adding the word ‘‘coal’’ to its

description of eligible lands and water.

Utah states that it considers omission of

the word ‘‘coal’’ to be an important

statement of policy and explains that its

approved plan lists aggressive pursuit of

noncoal reclamation as a purpose of the

State reclamation program. Utah further

offers that its rules at Utah Admin. R.

643–875 regarding noncoal eligibility

ensure that the more restrictive noncoal

eligibility requirements of SMCRA will

be met.

In addition, Utah proposes to add to

its rules at Utah Admin. R. 643–874–124

and –125 a reference to Utah Admin. R.

643–874–123, which provides for the

reclamation of sites where the forfeited

bond is insufficient to pay the total cost

of reclamation. Utah Admin. R. 643–

874–124 extends the use of AMLR funds

for reclamation of interim program and

bankrupt surety sites and Utah Admin.

R. 643–874–125 requires that those sites

determined to be eligible under the

criteria provided at Utah Admin. R.

643–874–124 also have the same or

more urgent priority as coal sites that

qualify as priority 1 or 2 sites under

Utah Code Annotated 40–10–25(2),

which is the State’s counterpart statute

to section 403(a) of SMCRA.

III. Public Comment Procedures

OSM is reopening the comment

period on the proposed Utah plan

amendment to provide the public an

opportunity to reconsider the adequacy

of the proposed amendment in light of

the additional materials submitted. In

accordance with the provisions of 30

CFR 884.15(a), OSM is seeking

comments on whether the proposed

amendment satisfies the applicable plan

approval criteria of 30 CFR 884.14. If the

amendment is deemed adequate, it will

become part of the Utah plan.

Written comments should be specific,

pertain only to the issues proposed in

this rulemaking, and include

explanations in support of the

commenter’s recommendations.

Comments received after the time

indicated under DATES or at locations

other than the Denver Field Division

will not necessarily be considered in the

final rulemaking or included in the

administrative record.

IV. Procedural Determinations

1. 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).

2. Executive Order 12778

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 2 of Executive Order 12778

(Civil Justice Reform) and has

determined that 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 AMLR plans

and revisions thereof since each such

plan is drafted and promulgated by a

specific State, not by OSM. Decisions on

proposed State AMLR plans and

revisions thereof submitted by a State

are based on a determination of whether

the submittal meets the requirements of

Title IV of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1231–

1243) and the applicable Federal

regulations at 30 CFR Parts 884 and 888.

3. National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is

required for this rule since agency

decisions on proposed State AMLR

plans and revisions thereof are

categorically excluded from compliance

with the National Environmental Policy

Act (42 U.S.C. 4332) by the Manual of
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 66 / Monday, April 7, 1997 / Proposed Rules 16509

the Department of the Interior (516 DM

6, appendix 8, paragraph 8.4B(29)).

4. 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.).

5. 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 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

established by SMCRA or 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 in the analyses for

the corresponding Federal regulations.

6. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

This rule will not impose a cost of

$100 million or more in any given year

on any governmental entity or private

sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 944

Abandoned mine reclamation

programs, Intergovernmental relations,

Surface mining, Underground mining.

Dated: April 26, 1997.

Richard J. Seibel,

Regional Director, Western Regional

Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 97–8790 Filed 4–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 946

[VA–106–FOR]

Virginia Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: OSM is reopening the

comment period on information

submitted by Virginia concerning parts

of a proposed amendment to the

Virginia regulatory program (hereinafter

referred to as the Virginia program)

under the Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The

information submitted by Virginia for

which the comment period is being

reopened includes Virginia’s technical

justification for the proposed use of a

28-degree angle of draw with the

rebuttable presumption of causation by

subsidence provision. Virginia’s

proposed amendment is intended to

revise the State program to be consistent

with the Federal regulations as amended

on March 31, 1995 (60 FR 16772).

DATES: Comments must be received by

4:00 p.m., on April 22, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or hand delivered to Mr.

Robert A. Penn, Director, Big Stone Gap

Field Office at the first address listed

below.

Copies of the Virginia program, the

proposed amendment, the technical

justification for the 28-degree angle of

draw, other information submitted by

Virginia, and all written comments

received in response to this amendment

will be available for public review at the

addresses listed below during normal

business hours, Monday through Friday,

excluding holidays. Each requestor may

receive one free copy of the proposed

amendment by contacting OSM’s Big

Stone Gap Field Office.

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement, Big Stone Gap Field

Office, 1941 Neeley Road, Suite 201,

Compartment 116, Big Stone Gap,

Virginia 24219, Telephone: (703) 523–

4303

Virginia Division of Mined Land

Reclamation, P.O. Drawer 900, Big

Stone Gap, Virginia 24219,

Telephone: (703) 523–8100

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Robert A. Penn, Director, Big Stone Gap

Field Office, Telephone: (703) 523–

4303.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Virginia Program

On December 15, 1981, the Secretary

of the Interior conditionally approved

the Virginia program. Background

information on the Virginia program,

including the Secretary’s findings, the

disposition of comments, and the

conditions of approval can be found in

the December 15, 1981, Federal Register

(46 FR 61085–61115). Subsequent

actions concerning the conditions of

approval and program amendments can

be found at 30 CFR 946.12, 946.13,

946.15, and 946.16.

II. Discussion of the Proposed

Amendment

By letter dated May 21, 1996

(Administrative Record No. VA–882),

Virginia submitted amendments to the

Virginia program concerning subsidence

damage. The amendments are intended

to make the Virginia program consistent

with the Federal regulations as amended

on March 31, 1995 (60 FR 16722).

Virginia stated that the proposed

amendments implement the standards

of the Federal Energy Policy Act of

1992, and sections 45.1–243 and 45.1–

258 of the Code of Virginia.

The proposed amendment was

published in the June 11, 1996, Federal

Register (61 FR 29506), and in the same

notice, OSM opened the public

comment period and provided

opportunity for a public hearing on the

adequacy of the proposed amendment.

The comment period closed on July 11,

1996. The public comment period was

reopened on July 24, 1996 (61 FR

38422), to accept additional comments

on the proposed use of a 28-degree angle

of draw with the rebuttable presumption

of causation by subsidence provision.

That comment period ended on August

8, 1996. On September 12, 1996 (61 FR

48110), OSM announced a scheduled

public hearing on the proposed

amendments. The hearing was held on

September 18, 1996 (Administrative

Record Number VA–896).

By letter dated July 11, 1996

(Administrative Record Number VA–

894), OSM requested that Virginia

provide additional information on the

proposed amendments, including

technical justification for the use of the

28-degree angle of draw. Virginia

responded to that request for additional

information by letter dated January 3,

1997 (Administrative Record Number

VA–902). OSM is reopening the public

comment period on the additional

information submitted by Virginia,

including the technical justification of

the use of a 28-degree angle of draw.

III. Public Comment Procedures

In accordance with the provisions of

30 CFR 732.17(h), OSM is seeking

comment on whether the additional

information submitted by Virginia

satisfies the applicable program

approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If the

amendments are deemed adequate, they

will become part of the Virginia

program.

Written Comments

Written comments should be specific,

pertain only to the issues proposed in