Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 97 / Friday, May 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 26855

(PS–013–88) contains errors which may

prove to be misleading and are in need

of clarification.

Correction of Publication

Accordingly, the publication of the

notice of proposed rulemaking and

notice of public hearing (PS–013–88),

which was the subject of FR Doc. 95–

10765, is corrected as follows:

1. On page 21476, column 1, under

the caption DATES:, last line, the

language ‘‘July 31, 1995’’ is corrected to

read ‘‘July 10, 1995’’.

2. On page 21478, column 3, in the

preamble under the paragraph heading

‘‘Comments and Public Hearing’’,

paragraph 4, lines 3 through 5, the

language ‘‘written comments and an

outline of the topics to be discussed (a

signed original and eight (8) copies) by

July 31, 1995.’’ is corrected to read

‘‘written comments (a signed original

and eight (8) copies) by July 31, 1995.

The outline of topics to be discussed at

the hearing must be received by July 10,

1995.’’.

Cynthia E. Grigsby,

Chief, Regulations Unit, Assistant Chief

Counsel (Corporate).

[FR Doc. 95–12363 Filed 5–18–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 948

West Virginia Program Amendment

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability and

opportunity for public comment.

SUMMARY: OSM is making available for

public review and comment its draft

decision document on a proposed

amendment to the West Virginia

permanent regulatory program

(hereinafter referred to as the West

Virginia program). The amendment

concerns revisions to State law and

regulations governing the Special

Reclamation Fund and bonding

requirements for surface coal mining

operations. OSM has evaluated the

proposed changes and made tentative

findings on whether they can be

approved as part of the West Virginia

program. Where necessary, OSM

proposed required amendments to bring

the program into compliance with the

Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA).

OSM is inviting public comment on the

proposed amendment and the tentative

findings contained in the draft decision

document. A public meeting is also

scheduled.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before 4 p.m., E.D.T. on

June 5, 1995. A public meeting will be

held at 1 p.m., E.D.T. on May 30, 1995,

at the Holiday Inn, Heart-Of-Town,

Washington and Broad Streets,

Charleston, West Virginia.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or hand delivered to James C.

Blankenship, Jr., Director, Charleston

Field Office at the address listed below.

Copies of the proposed amendment

and draft decision document, the West

Virginia program, and the

administrative record on the West

Virginia program are available for public

review and copying at the address

below during normal business hours,

Monday through Friday, excluding

holidays. Each requester may receive

one free copy of the proposed

amendment and draft decision

document by contacting OSM’s

Charleston Field Office.

James C. Blankenship, Jr., Director,

Charleston Field Office, Office of

Surface Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement, 1027 Virginia Street

East, Charleston, West Virginia 25301,

Telephone: (304) 347–7158

West Virginia Division of

Environmental Protection, 10

McJunkin Road, Nitro, West Virginia

25143, Telephone: (304) 759–0515.

In addition, copies of the proposed

amendment and draft decision

document are available for inspection

during regular business hours at the

following locations:

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement, Morgantown Area

Office, 75 High Street, Room 229, P.O.

Box 886, Morgantown, West Virginia

26507, Telephone: (304) 291–4004

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement, Beckley Area

Office, 323 Harper Park Drive, Suite 3,

Beckley, West Virginia 25801,

Telephone: (304) 255–5265

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement, Logan Area Office,

313 Hudgins Street, 2nd Floor, P.O.

Box 506, Logan, West Virginia 25601,

Telephone: (304) 752–2851.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. James C. Blankenship, Jr., Director,

Charleston Field Office; Telephone:

(304) 347–7158.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the West Virginia

Program

SMCRA was passed in 1977 to

address the growing environmental and

safety problems associated with coal

mining. Under SMCRA, OSM works

with States to ensure that coal mines are

operated in a manner that protects

citizens and the environment during

mining, that the land is restored to

beneficial use following mining, and

that the effects of past mining at

abandoned coal mines are mitigated.

Many coal-producing States,

including West Virginia, have sought

and obtained approval from the

Secretary of the Interior to carry out

SMCRA’s requirements within their

borders. In becoming the primary

enforcers of SMCRA, these ‘‘primacy’’

states accept a shared responsibility

with OSM to achieve the goals of the

Act. Such States join with OSM in a

shared commitment to the protection of

citizens—our primary customers—from

abusive mining practices, to be

responsive to their concerns, and to

allow them full access to information

needed to evaluate the effects of mining

on their health, safety, general welfare,

and property. This commitment also

recognizes the need for clear, fair, and

consistently applied policies that are

not unnecessarily burdensome to the

coal industry—producers of an

important source of our Nation’s energy.

Under SMCRA, OSM sets minimum

regulatory and reclamation standards.

Each primacy State ensures that coal

mines are operated and reclaimed in

accordance with the standards in its

approved State program. The States

serve as the front-line authorities for

implementation and enforcement of

SMCRA, while OSM maintains a State

performance evaluation role and

provides funding and technical

assistance to States to carry out their

approved programs. OSM also is

responsible for taking direct

enforcement action in a primacy State,

if needed, to protect the public in cases

of imminent harm or, following

appropriate notice to the State, when a

State acts in an arbitrary and capricious

manner in not taking needed

enforcement actions required under tits

approved regulatory program.

Currently there are 24 primacy states

that administer and enforce regulatory

programs under SMCRA. These states

may amend their programs, with OSM

approval, at any time so long as they

remain no less effective than Federal

regulatory requirements. In addition,

whenever SMCRA or implementing

Federal regulations are revised, OSM is
26856 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 97 / Friday, May 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules

required to notify the States of the

changes so that they can revise their

programs accordingly to remain no less

effective than the Federal requirements.

A major goal of SMCRA is to ensure

adequate reclamation of all areas

disturbed by surface coal mining

operations. To accomplish this, mining

is allowed to proceed only after an

operator has filed a performance bond of

sufficient amount to ensure completion

or reclamation. In the event of bond

forfeiture, the regulator authority uses

the performance bond money to contract

for the necessary reclamation work.

SMCRA also allows for the adoption of

an alternative bonding system (ABS) so

long as it achieves the purposes and

objectives of the conventional bonding

system described above. Under an ABS,

rather than posting full-cost reclamation

bonds, an operator is allowed to

participate in a bond pool which is to

provide sufficient revenue at any time to

complete reclamation in the event of

bond forfeiture.

As part of their approved programs,

primacy States have adopted procedures

consistent with Federal bonding

requirements. The Secretary

conditionally approved West Virginia’s

ABS on January 21, 1981 (46 FR 5326).

After receipt of a required actuarial

study, the Secretary fully approved the

State’s ABS on March 1, 1983 (48 FR

8448), by finding it consistent with

section 509(c) of SMCRA.

Background information on the West

Virginia program, including the

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of

comments, and the conditions of

approval can be found in the January 21,

1981, Federal Register (46 FR 5915).

Subsequent actions concerning the

conditions of approval and program

amendments can be found at 30 CFR

948.10, 948.12, 948.13, 948.15, and

948.16.

II. Discussion of the Proposed

Amendment

On October 1, 1991, OSM notified

West Virginia that it needed to amend

its ABS to be in compliance with

sections 509(c) , 519(b) and 519(c) of

SMCRA (Administrative Record No.

878). OSM’s annual reviews of the West

Virginia program had found that the

State’s ABS no longer met the

requirements for such systems because,

as of June 30, 1990, liabilities exceeded

assets by $6.2 million dollars. OSM also

informed the State that its ABS must

provide for the abatement or treatment

of polluted water flowing from

permanent program bond forfeiture sites

unless its approved program included

some other form of financial guarantee

to provide for water treatment. The

proposed amendment now under

consideration was submitted to OSM in

response to this letter and concurrent

State initiatives to address bonding and

water quality problems.

In a series of three letters dated June

28, 1993, and July 30, 1993

(Administrative Record Nos. WV–888,

WV–889 and WV–893), the West

Virginia Division of Environmental

Protection (WVDEP) submitted an

amendment to its approved permanent

regulatory program that included

numerous revisions to the West Virginia

Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation

Act (WVSCMRA § 22A–3–1 et seq.) and

the West Virginia Surface Mining

Reclamation Regulations (CSR § 38–2–1

et seq.). OSM grouped the proposed

revisions that concern bonding into one

amendment which is the subject of this

notice. The proposed amendment will:

• Allow for the selection and

prioritization of bond forfeiture sites to

be reclaimed;

• Limit administrative expenditures

from the Special Reclamation Fund to

an amount not to exceed 10 percent of

the total annual assets in the Fund;

• Raise the special reclamation tax

from one cent to three cents per ton and

provide for the collection of the tax

whenever liabilities exceed assets;

• Limit the amount of money that can

be used for water treatment to 25

percent of the annual amount of the fees

collected;

• Require site-specific bonds that

reflect the potential cost of reclamation

but do not exceed $5,000 per acre;

• Require penal bonds instead of

performance bonds; and

• Require bond forfeiture sites to be

reclaimed in accordance with the

approved reclamation plan or

modifications thereof.

By letter dated April 1, 1994, OSM

informed the WVDEP of probable

deficiencies in the proposed

amendment (Administrative Record No.

WV–916). The WVDEP and OSM met on

April 25, May 5, June 20, and August 5,

1994, to resolve these issues. During this

time, WVDEP and OSM exchanged

technical studies, policy statements,

legal opinions, and explanations to

clarify positions and where possible

reach agreement. On August 30, 1994,

OSM sent WVDEP a letter stating the

tentative resolutions of the issues listed

in the April 1, 1994, letter. These

documents and a summary of the

meetings are in Administrative Record

Nos. WV–916 through 933.

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the August 12,

1993, Federal Register (58 FR 42903)

and invited public comment on its

adequacy. Following this initial

comment period, WVDEP revised the

amendment on March 12, 1994, and

September 1, 1994 (Administrative

Record Nos. WV–933 and WV–937).

OSM reopened the comment period on

August 31, 1994, and September 29,

1994, and held public meetings in

Charleston, West Virginia on September

7, 1993, and October 27, 1994

(Administrative Record No. WV–958).

III. Public Comment Procedures

OSM is reopening the comment

period on the West Virginia program

amendment to provide the public an

opportunity to review OSM’s draft

decision document and to comment

prior to making a final decision. OSM is

seeking comments on whether the

proposed amendment satisfies the

applicable program criteria of 30 CFR

732.15. Additional public comment is

requested on how OSM and WVDEP

should address the following:

1. State records show that as of June

30, 1994, there was a backlog of 243

bond forfeiture sites totalling 10,996

acres that had not been completely

reclaimed. Total liabilities of the Special

Reclamation Fund exceeded total assets

by 22.2 million dollars. This estimate

does not include the cost of treating

water at bond forfeiture sites. How can

this backlog in reclamation work be

completed in a timely manner and how

should the Special Reclamation Fund be

made financially sound?

2. The WVDEP identified 89 bond

forfeiture sites that were producing

approximately 10 percent of the acid

mine drainage in the State. WVDEP

estimated that it would cost two to four

million dollars annually to treat this

water to meet Federal and State effluent

limitations and water quality standards.

What is the best approach to dealing

with acid mine drainage from these and

future bond forfeiture sites?

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 OSM Charleston Field

Office will not necessarily be

considered in the final rulemaking or

included in the Administrative Record.

Public Meeting

Persons requesting to speak at the

meeting should contact the individual

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. Submission of written

statements in advance of the meeting
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 97 / Friday, May 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 26857

will allow OSM to study the remarks

and ask questions of the speakers.

The meeting will continue on the

specified date until all persons

scheduled to speak have been heard.

Persons in the audience who have not

been scheduled to speak, and who wish

to do so, will be heard following those

who have been scheduled. The meeting

will end after all persons who wish to

speak have spoken.

Any disabled individual who has

need for a special accommodation to

attend the public meeting should

contact the individual listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

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 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, 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

programs and program amendments

since each such program is drafted and

promulgated by a specific State, not by

OSM. Under sections 502 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.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 948

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: May 12, 1995.

Richard J. Seibel,

Acting Regional Director, Appalachian

Regional Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 95–12362 Filed 5–18–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

National Park Service

36 CFR Part 7

Cape Cod National Seashore Off-Road

Vehicle Use Negotiated Rulemaking

Committee

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Establish a

Negotiated Rulemaking Committee.

SUMMARY: As required by section 3 of

the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990,

5 U.S.C. section 564, the National Park

Service (NPS) is giving notice of its

intent to establish a Negotiated

Rulemaking Committee to negotiate and

develop a proposed rule revising offroad vehicle use regulations at Cape Cod

National Seashore. NPS has determined

that the establishment of this Committee

is in the public interest and supports the

NPS in performing its duties and

responsibilities under the National Park

Service Organic Act, 16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.,

and the Endangered Species Act, 16

U.S.C. 1531 et seq. Copies of the

Committee’s charter will be filed with

the appropriate committees of Congress

and with the Library of Congress in

accordance with section 9(c) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act

(FACA), 5 U.S.C. Appx.

DATES: NPS invites any interested

person to comment on the proposal to

create this Committee. In addition, NPS

invites persons who believe that they

will be significantly affected by the

proposed rule and who believe their

interests will not be adequately

represented by the persons identified in

this Notice, to apply for, or nominate

another person for membership on the

Committee. Each application must

contain the information described in the

‘‘Application for Membership’’ section

below. Applications or nominations for

membership on the Committee should

be submitted on or before June 19, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments and applications

should be submitted to: Andrew T.

Ringgold, Superintendent, Cape Cod

National Seashore, South Wellfleet, MA

02663. Comments and applications

received will be available for inspection

at the address listed above from 8:00

a.m. to 4:30 p.m. EST, Monday through

Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew T. Ringgold, Superintendent,

Cape Cod National Seashore, at the

address listed above, or by telephone at

(508) 349–3785, ext. 202.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Committee’s function will be to

negotiate and develop a proposed rule

to revise regulations that govern off-road

vehicle use at Cape Cod National

Seashore. It will attempt, via face-to-face

negotiations, to reach consensus on

concepts and language to use as the

basis for a proposed rule to be published

by the NPS in the Federal Register that

would revise existing regulations

codified at 36 CFR 7.67(a). The existing

regulations have not been effective in

resolving longstanding and

controversial resource management and

public use conflicts at the Seashore.

With the participation of

knowledgeable, affected parties, NPS

expects to develop a practical approach

to addressing these management and

public use issues involving the

protection of beach environments, their

associated floral and faunal

communities, and the public’s desire for

access to beach areas by motorized

vehicle for fishing and other

recreational activities.

Scope of the Proposed Rule: Within

the constraints of NPS statutory

responsibilities to preserve natural and

cultural resources and to provide for

their enjoyment, the Committee will

evaluate and address key issues

including, but not limited to, the

designation of specific off-road vehicle

routes and areas, the periods of the year

and times of day during which off-road

vehicles may be operated, and other