27708 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Proposed Rules

and Health Administration, 200

Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room

N3649, Washington, D.C. 20210; (202)

219–8615.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On November 15, 1994, OSHA

published a notice of proposed

rulemaking on its respiratory protection

standard (59 FR 58884 et seq.). The

proposal is intended to update the

current respirator standard to reflect

changes in methodology, technology

and approach related to respirator

protection that have occurred since the

existing respiratory protection standard

was adopted in 1971.

The hearing on this proposal is

scheduled to begin on June 6, 1995, (60

FR 4132 et seq.), and will last until at

least until June 20, 1995. OSHA is in the

process of contacting parties who have

submitted notices of intention to appear

at the hearing, to confirm the scheduling

of their oral testimony.

Scheduling of Science-Policy Panel

OSHA has scheduled, on June 15,

1995, a panel discussion concerning

technical, scientific, and policy issues

surrounding the assignment of

protection factors (APFs). The panel

will be comprised of representatives of

6 parties invited by OSHA to participate

in the discussion, as well as an OSHA

representative. The panel discussion

will be chaired by an additional OSHA

official. Each invited party is already a

participant in the rulemaking by virtue

of having submitted a timely notice of

intention to appear to testify and is

already scheduled to provide testimony

on APFs. Each invited party may choose

its representative, who need not

necessarily be an individual named in

the notices of intention to appear at the

hearings which the parties previously

submitted. OSHA expects that the

representatives will possess technical

expertise and a willingness to exchange

views in a constructive manner. The

general agenda for the panel discussion

consists of the issues stated below, and

a more detailed agenda will be

distributed during the hearing no later

than June 9, 1995. Questions and brief

comments to the panel from hearing

participants and, to the extent time

permits, from the audience, will be

permitted until the Administrative Law

Judge adjourns the hearing for the day

on June 15, 1995.

The purpose of the panel discussion

is to provide a variety of perspectives on

the uncertainties surrounding the choice

of APFs, so that OSHA can rely upon

informed judgement if the Agency

decides to set an APF for each respirator

class as part of this rulemaking.

Conflicting information regarding APFs

is emerging in this rulemaking and

warrants focused discussion. OSHA

believes that additional information and

viewpoints on APFs would be useful in

resolving various open questions and in

arriving at sensible conclusions.

OSHA contemplates that discussion

topics will include: the validity of

results obtained from available

protection factor studies; the range of

statistical uncertainty and person-toperson variability surrounding the

results of these studies; correlations

between study results; identification/

specification of procedures and

protocols that should be used in

determining APFs; and science-policy

issues on the role of protection factors

in a required selection logic.

In choosing panel participants OSHA

will attempt to include, if possible,

those participants who have expressed

an interest in APFs, and a willingness

to exchange views on the record. It

should be emphasized that the panel is

a device to gather testimony; by opening

the discussion to a broad range of

parties and interests at once, OSHA

believes that information will be tested,

that views will be shared, and that the

areas of uncertainty intrinsic to these

issues will be crystallized. For these

reasons, OSHA finds that, pursuant to

29 CFR 1911.4, ‘‘good cause’’ exists for

scheduling this panel discussion.

The panel’s discussions will be

facilitated by an OSHA official who will

guide the discussion to ensure that the

Agency’s information needs are met.

Since the discussion is ‘‘on the record’’,

and is part of the hearing procedure, the

Administrative Law Judge will be the

overall presiding official, consistent

with 29 CFR part 1911.

Although as noted above, OSHA is

organizing and selecting the makeup of

the panel, all hearing participants will

have the opportunity, subject to the

direction and reasonable discretion of

the Administrative Law Judge, to

participate at appropriate intervals by

making their own comments and by

asking clarifying questions of

participants. During the panel

discussion, participants will discuss the

agenda issues and not repeat their

testimony provided elsewhere in the

hearing. To avoid unproductive,

irrelevant or repetitive questioning by

panel members, hearing participants, or

the public, the Administrative Law

Judge will exercise discretion in

disallowing such questioning.

The rest of the hearing procedures are

set out in 29 CFR 1911.15–18, in the

Federal Register notices of November

15, 1994 (59 FR 58884 et seq.) and also

repeated in the notice of January 20,

1995 (60 FR 4132 et seq.) or in the

Administrative Law Judge’s prehearing

guidelines which will be sent to all

persons who have filed notices of

intention to appear.

Authority and Signature

This document was prepared under

the direction of Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor for

Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20210.

It is issued pursuant to section 6(b) of

the Occupational Safety and Health Act

of 1970 (84 Stat. 1593, 29 U.S.C. 655).

Signed at Washington, D.C. this 19th day

of May, 1995.

Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor.

[FR Doc. 95–12876 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–25–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 925

Missouri Abandoned Mine Lands

Reclamation (AMLR) Plan

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and

extension of public comment period on

proposed amendment.

SUMMARY: OSM is announcing receipt of

revisions pertaining to a previously

proposed amendment to the Missouri

AMLR plan (hereinafter referred to as

the ‘‘Missouri plan’’) under the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1977 (SMCRA). The revisions for

Missouri’s proposed statutes, regulation,

and State reclamation plan provisions of

the Missouri Abandoned Mine Lands

program pertain to powers of the Land

Reclamation Commission, expenditures

of the abandoned mine reclamation

fund, eligible coal lands and water, and

a future set-aside program. The

amendment is intended to revise the

Missouri AMLR plan to be consistent

with the corresponding Federal

standards, to clarify ambiguities, and to

improve operational efficiency.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by 4:00 p.m., c.d.t., June 9,

1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or hand delivered to Michael

C. Wolfrom at the address listed below.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Proposed Rules 27709

Copies of the Missouri 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 normal business hours, Monday

through Friday, excluding holidays.

Each requester may receive one free

copy of the proposed amendment by

contacting OSM’s Kansas City Field

Office.

Michael C. Wolfrom, Acting Director,

Kansas City Field Office, Office of

Surface Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement, 934 Wyandotte, Room

500, Kansas City, Missouri 64105.

Missouri Department of Natural

Resources, Land Reclamation

Program, 205 Jefferson Street, P.O.

Box 176, Jefferson City, Missouri

65102, Telephone: (314) 751–4041.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael C. Wolfrom, telephone: (816)

374–6405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on Title IV of SMCRA

Title IV of SMCRA established an

abandoned mine land (AML) program

for the purposes of reclaiming and

restoring lands and waters adversely

affected by past mining. The program is

funded by a reclamation fee levied on

the production of coal. Lands and

waters eligible for reclamation under

Title IV are those that are mined or

affected by mining and abandoned or

inadequately reclaimed prior to August

3, 1977, and for which there is no

continuing reclamation responsibility

under State or Federal laws. The

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of

1990 (Pub. L. 101–508, Title VI, Subtitle

A, Nov. 5, 1990, effective Oct. 1, 1991)

amended SMCRA, to provide changes in

the eligibility of project sites for AML

expenditures. The Secretary adopted

AML regulations (59 FR 28136, May 31,

1994) at 30 CFR Chapter VII, Subchapter

R, Parts 795, 870, 872, 873, 874, 875,

876, and 886 to implement this act. Title

IV of SMCRA now provides for

reclamation of certain mine sites where

the mining occurred after August 3,

1977. These include interim program

sites where bond forfeiture proceeds

were insufficient for adequate

reclamation and sites affected any time

between August 4, 1977, and November

5, 1990, for which there were

insufficient funds for adequate

reclamation due to the insolvency of the

bond surety.

Title IV provides for State submittal to

OSM of an AMLR plan. The Secretary

of the Interior adopted regulations at 30

CFR 870 through 888 that implement

Title IV of SMCRA. Under these

regulations, the Secretary reviewed the

plans submitted by States and solicited

and considered comments of State and

Federal agencies and the public. Based

upon the comments received, the

Secretary determined whether a State

had the ability and necessary legislation

to implement the provisions of Title IV.

After making such determination, the

Secretary decided whether to approve

the State AMLR program. Approval

granted the State exclusive authority to

administer its plan.

Upon approval of a State’s plan by the

Secretary, the State may submit to OSM,

on an annual basis, an application for

funds to be expended by that State on

specific projects that are necessary to

implement the approved plan. Such

annual requests are reviewed and

approved by OSM in accordance with

the requirements of 30 CFR Part 886.

II. Background on the Missouri Plan

On January 29, 1982, the Secretary of

the Interior approved the Missouri plan.

General background information on the

Missouri plan, including the Secretary’s

findings, the disposition of comments,

and the approval of the Missouri plan

can be found in the January 29, 1982,

Federal Register (47 FR 4253).

Subsequent actions concerning the

Missouri plan and plan amendments

can be found at 30 CFR 925.20 and

925.25.

III. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated November 29, 1994,

Missouri submitted a proposed

amendment to its AMLR plan pursuant

to SMCRA (administrative record No.

AML–MO–89). Missouri submitted the

proposed amendment in response to a

September 26, 1994, letter

(administrative record No. AML–MO–

88) that OSM sent to Missouri in

accordance with 30 CFR 884.15(b)

concerning revisions to the AML

regulations at 30 CFR Chapter VII,

Subchapter R (59 FR 28136, May 31,

1994).

Missouri proposed to amend its

statutes at (1) Revised Statutes of

Missouri (RSMo) Section 444.810.2,

pertaining to powers of the Land

Reclamation Commission (Commission)

to require that any rules promulgated

under the authority of the Commission

shall not become effective until they are

approved by the joint committee on

administrative rules and to provide the

procedures necessary for this review

and approval process, (2) RSMo Section

444.915.2, pertaining to priorities for

expenditures of monies deposited to the

abandoned mine reclamation fund, and

(3) RSMo 444.915.3, pertaining to

reclamation of interim program and

insolvent surety coal sites. Missouri also

proposed to amend its rules at 10 Code

of State Regulations (CSR) 40–9.020

(1)(D) and (E) for general requirements

related to the reclamation of coal lands

and water abandoned after August 3,

1977, and at 10 CSR 40–9.020(3),

concerning the definition of the term

‘‘left or abandoned in either an

unreclaimed or inadequately reclaimed

condition.’’

In addition, Missouri proposed to

amend its AML State Reclamation Plan

at (1) Section 884.13(c)(2), concerning

project ranking and selection

procedures to require the submittal of

the Abandoned Mine Land Problem

Area Description Form (OSM 76), to

provide that interim program and

insolvent surety coal sites mined after

August 3, 1977, may be eligible for AML

funding, and to exclude certain types of

sites from AML funding, (2) Section

884.13(d)(3), concerning purchasing and

procurement procedures that restrict the

eligibility of bidders and their

subcontractors on AML contracts, and

(3) Section 884.13(d)(4), concerning

accounting procedures and the use of

AML State-share funds annually for a

future reclamation set-aside program in

Missouri.

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the December

13, 1994, Federal Register (59 FR

64176), provided an opportunity for a

public hearing or meeting on its

substantive adequacy, and invited

public comment on its adequacy

(administrative record No. AML–MO–

91). The public comment period ended

on January 12, 1995. At the request of

the Missouri Department of Natural

Resources, OSM held a public meeting

in Jefferson, Missouri on March 1, 1995.

OSM entered a summary of the public

meeting into the administrative record

(administrative record No. AML–MO–

96).

During its review of the proposed

amendment, OSM identified concerns

relating to the provisions of (1) RSMo

444.915.3(3), concerning the

reclamation of sites where mining

occurred between certain dates and the

surety company became insolvent, (2)

10 CSR 40–9.020(1)(D) and (E),

concerning eligible coal lands and

waters, and (3) Section 884.13(d)(4),

concerning the creation of a future

reclamation set-aside program. OSM

notified Missouri of the concerns in a

letter dated February 16, 1995

(administrative record No. AML–MO–

93).

Missouri responded in a letter dated

May 16, 1995, by submitting a revised

amendment and additional explanatory

information (administrative record No.
27710 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Proposed Rules

AML–MO–100). Missouri proposes

revisions to and additional explanatory

information for (1) RSMo 444.915.3(3),

pertaining to the reclamation of

insolvent surety coal sites, (2) 10 CSR

40–9.020(1)(D) and (E), pertaining to

priorities of eligible coal lands and

waters for reclamation and

reimbursement for the cost of

reclamation, and (3) Section

884.13(D)(4) of the AML State

Reclamation Plan, pertaining to the use

of AML State-share funds to establish a

future set-aside program in Missouri.

IV. Public Comment Procedures

OSM is reopening the comment

period on the proposed Missouri 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 884.14 AND 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 Missouri 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 Kansas City

Field Office will not necessarily be

considered in the final rulemaking or

included in the administrative record.

V. 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

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 as significant economic

impact, the Department relied upon the

data and assumptions in the analyses for

the corresponding Federal regulations.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 925

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: May 19, 1995.

Nancy L. Shaw,

Acting Regional Director, Mid-Continent

Regional Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 95–12881 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05M

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND

SPACE ADMINISTRATION

48 CFR Parts 1803, 1815, and 1852

Addition of Coverage to NASA FAR

Supplement on NASA Ombudsman

Program

AGENCY: Office of Procurement, National

Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: To improve communications

with interested parties, NASA plans to

establish an Ombudsman Program. This

rule sets forth a clause for identification

of the NASA and installation

ombudsmen to be included in

solicitations and contracts. The clause is

also to serve as the basis for a statement

to be included in ‘‘Commerce Business

Daily’’ announcements. In addition, the

rule amends NASA’s coverage on

procurement integrity to include the

NASA and installation ombudsmen as

individuals authorized access to

proprietary and source selection

information.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 24, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to Mr.

Joseph Le Cren, Analysis Division (Code

HC), Office of Procurement, NASA

Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Joseph Le Cren, (202) 358–0444.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

In order to improve communications

with interested parties (offerors,

potential offerors, contractors), and to

facilitate the resolution of concerns in

an informal manner, NASA plans to

establish an Ombudsman Program. In

addition, section 1004(a) of the Federal

Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994,

Public Law 103–355, enacted October

13, 1994, requires NASA, under 10

U.S.C. 2304c(e), to appoint a task and

delivery order ombudsman where

multiple task or delivery order contracts

are made. In order to accomplish these

things, a NASA Management Instruction

has been developed to establish the

NASA Ombudsman Program. It is also

necessary to amend the NASA FAR

Supplement to include a clause to notify

offerors, potential offerors, contractors,

and industry representatives of the

purpose of the NASA Ombudsman

Program and to provide the names and

telephone numbers of the agency and

applicable installation ombudsmen. The

rule also proposes to amend the current

NASA FAR Supplement coverage on

procurement integrity to include the

NASA and installation ombudsmen as

individuals authorized access to

proprietary and source selection

information, as needed, to carry out

their duties.

Impact

NASA certifies that this regulation

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.) This rule does

not impose any reporting or