[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 12 (Tuesday, January 20, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2919-2920]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1215]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 920

[MD-033-FOR]


Maryland Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), 
Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: OSM is reopening the public comment period on a proposed 
amendment to the Maryland permanent regulatory program (hereinafter 
referred to as the ``Maryland program'') under the Surface Mining 
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The proposed amendments 
consist of revisions to the Maryland regulations pertaining to excess 
spoil disposal, conditions of surety and collateral bonds, and 
procedures for release of general bonds. The amendments are intended to 
revise the Maryland program to be consistent with the corresponding 
Federal regulations.

DATES: Written comments must be received by 4:00 p.m., E.S.T., February 
4, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and requests to speak at the hearing should 
be mailed or hand delivered to George Rieger, Field Branch Chief, at 
the address listed below.
    Copies of the Maryland program, the proposed amendment, a listing 
of any scheduled public hearings, and all written comments received in 
response to this document 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 amendment by contacting OSM's Appalachian Regional 
Coordinating Center.

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
Maryland Bureau of Mines, 160 South Water Street, Frostburg, MD 21532, 
Telephone: (301) 689-4136

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
George Rieger, Field Branch Chief, Appalachian Regional Coordinating 
Center, Telephone: (412) 937-2153.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Maryland Program

    On February 18, 1982, the Secretary of the Interior approved the 
Maryland program. Background information on the Maryland program, 
including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and 
the conditions of approval can be found in the February 18, 1982, 
Federal Register (47 FR 7214). Subsequent actions concerning the 
conditions of approval and program amendments can be found at 30 CFR 
920.15 and 920.16.

II. Description of the Proposed Amendment

    Maryland provided an informal amendment to OSM regarding excess 
spoils on March 11, 1994. OSM completed its reviews of the informal 
amendment and requested a formal proposal from Maryland in a letter 
dated August 6, 1996. By letter dated January 7, 1997 (Administrative 
Record No. MD-576-00), Maryland submitted a proposed amendment to its 
program pursuant to SMCRA at OSM's request. Additionally, by letter 
dated January 14, 1997 (Administrative Record No. MD-552-13), Maryland 
submitted proposed amendments to its program pursuant to SMCRA. These 
amendments pertain to conditions of surety and collateral bonds, and 
procedures for release of general bonds and are intended to comply with 
required program amendments identified in 30 CFR 920.16 (k) and (m). 
The proposed amendments were announced in the January 30, 1997, Federal 
Register (62 FR 4502). (At the time of announcement, the proposed 
amendment was identified as [MD-041]. Please note that the amendment is 
now identified as [MD-033]). However, OSM's review determined that 
several items contained in the proposed amendments required 
clarification. As a result, a letter requesting clarification on four 
items was sent to Maryland dated June 13, 1997 (Administrative Record 
No. MD-576-05). Maryland responded in its letter dated June 27, 1997 
(Administrative Record No. MD-576-06), by requesting a meeting with OSM 
and stating that additional information would not be available until 
after that meeting. A meeting was held on August 14, 1997, and a 
response was received from Maryland in its letter dated December 8, 
1997 (Administrative Record No. MD-576-07). Therefore, OSM is reopening 
the public comment period regarding the following clarifications to 
Maryland's proposed amendments:

1. COMAR 25.20.26, Excess Spoil Disposal

    a. Maryland was asked to clarify how it would fund projects in 
cases where the operator defaults on the contract or otherwise fails to 
perform the necessary reclamation. This funding source would be in 
addition to the ``contractor incentive provisions proposed at COMAR 
25.20.26.05(D)(2). Maryland responded that the proposed amendment at 
COMAR 25.20.26.05(A)(1) provides that the abandoned mine land must be 
eligible for funding under Environment Article, Title 15, Subtitle 11, 
Annotated Code of Maryland. Any default by the operator on a contract 
or failure to perform reclamation could be funded by specially ear-
marking a portion of Maryland's AML grant funds to complete the 
reclamation. This would be in addition to the sanctions provided in the 
proposed amendment.
    b. Maryland was asked to clarify which requirements in the approved

[[Page 2920]]

program will apply to the placement of excess spoil on abandoned mine 
lands as referenced in proposed COMAR 25.20.26.05 (A)(3) and (B)(4). 
Maryland responded that since existing conditions on abandoned mine 
lands differ at each site, it would be extremely difficult to clarify 
exactly which requirements of Maryland's approved program would apply 
in every case for the placement of excess spoil. A field review during 
the application review process would verify conditions at the AML site 
and will determine which requirements are necessary to ensure that the 
excess spoil is placed in an environmentally sound manner.
    c. Maryland was asked to clarify how placement of excess spoil on 
abandoned mine lands would achieve compliance with its AML program. 
Maryland responded that it considers the environmental reviews, public 
notice requirements and inspection requirements of its federally 
approved regulatory program to be comparable to those required by the 
AML program. Each abandoned mine lands site proposed for placement of 
excess spoil will be reviewed in conjunction with the application for a 
surface mining permit and subjected to the same requirements.

2. COMAR 25.20.14.09, Procedures for Release of Bonds

    a. COMAR 25.20.14.09B(2)(e) is further modified by changing the 
word ``approximate'' to ``appropriate''.

III. Public Comment Procedures

    In accordance with the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), OSM is 
seeking comments on whether the proposed amendment satisfies the 
applicable program approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. Specifically, 
OSM is seeking comments on the clarifications to the State's 
regulations that were submitted on December 8, 1997 (Administrative 
Record No. MD-576-07). Comments should address whether the proposed 
amendment with these clarifications satisfies the applicable program 
approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If the amendment is deemed 
adequate. it will become part of the Maryland program.

Written Comments

    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 Appalachian Regional 
Coordinating Center will not necessarily be considered in the final 
rulemaking or included in the Administrative Record.

IV. 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 required 
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 
counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was 
prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a 
significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small 
entities. Accordingly, this rule will ensure that existing requirements 
previously promulgated by OSM will be implemented by the State. In 
making the determination as to whether this rule would have a 
significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and 
assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations.

Unfunded Mandates

    This rule will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any 
given year on any governmental entity or the private sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 920

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: January 9, 1998.
Allen D. Klein,
Regional Director, Appalachian Regional Coordinating Center.
[FR Doc. 98-1215 Filed 1-16-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-M