8562 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

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 New

Mexico proposed to make in its

amendment pertain to air or water

quality standards. Therefore, OSM did

not request EPA’s concurrence.

Pursuant to 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM

solicited comments on the proposed

amendment from EPA (administrative

record No. NM–717). It responded on

November 29, 1994, that it had no

objections to OSM’s approval of the

proposed regulations (administrative

record No. NM–720).

4. State Historic Preservation Officer

(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on

Historic Preservation (ACHP)

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), OSM

solicited comments on the proposed

amendment from the SHPO and the

ACHP (administrative record No. NM–

717). Neither the SHPO nor the ACHP

responded to OSM’s request.

V. Director’s Decision

Based on the above finding, the

Director approves New Mexico’s

proposed amendment as submitted on

October 26, 1994, and as revised on

December 20, 1994.

The Director approves, as discussed

above, CSMC Rule 80–1–34–1,

concerning scope; CSMC Rule 80–1–34–

2, concerning definitions; CSMC Rule

80–1–34–3, concerning application

requirements and procedures; CSMC

Rule 80–1–34–4, concerning contents of

application for exemption; CSMC Rule

80–1–34–5, concerning public

availability of information; CSMC Rule

80–1–34–6, concerning requirements for

exemption; CSMC Rule 80–1–34–7,

concerning conditions of exemption and

right of inspection and entry; CSMC

Rule 80–1–34–8, concerning stockpiling

of minerals; CSMC Rule 80–1–34–9,

concerning revocation and enforcement;

and CSMC Rule 80–1–34–10,

concerning reporting requirements.

The Director approves the rules as

proposed by New Mexico with the

provision that they be fully promulgated

in identical form to the rules submitted

to and reviewed by OSM and the public.

The Federal regulations at 30 CFR

part 931, codifying decisions concerning

the New Mexico 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

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 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

the Federal regulations at 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.

3. 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)).

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

that 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.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR 931

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: February 7, 1995.

Russell F. Price,

Acting Assistant Director, Western Support

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 931—NEW MEXICO

1. The authority citation for Part 931

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.

2. Section 931.15 is amended by

adding paragraph(s) to read as follows:

§ 931.15 Approval of amendments to State

regulatory program.

* * * * *

(s) The following New Mexico Coal

Surface Mining Commission (CSMC)

rules, as submitted to OSM on October

26, 1994, and as revised on December

20, 1994, are approved effective

February 15, 1995.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–1, scope.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–2, definitions.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–3, application

requirements and procedures.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–4, contents of

application for exemption.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–5, public

availability of information.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–6, requirements

for exemption.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–7, conditions of

exemption and right of inspection and

entry.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–8, stockpiling of

minerals.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–9, revocation and

enforcement.

CSMC Rule 80–1–34–10, reporting

requirements.

[FR Doc. 95–3744 Filed 2–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 8563

1The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act

made significant changes to the Act. See Pub. L. No.

101–549, 104 Stat. 2399. References herein are to

the Clean Air Act, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). The

Clean Air Act is codified, as amended, in the U.S.

Code at 42 U.S.C. sections 7401, et seq.

2Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable to

nonattainment areas generally and subpart 4

contains provisions specifically applicable to PM–

10 nonattainment areas. At times, subpart 1 and

subpart 4 overlap or conflict. EPA has attempted to

clarify the relationship among these provisions in

the ‘‘General Preamble’’ and, as appropriate, in

today’s notice and supporting information.

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Part 99

Family Educational Rights and Privacy

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Final regulations; correction.

SUMMARY: On January 17, 1995 (60 FR

3464), the Secretary of Education

published in the Federal Register final

regulations implementing the Family

Educational Rights and Privacy Act.

This document corrects an error that

was made in the effective date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ellen Campbell, Family Policy

Compliance Office, Office of

Management, U.S. Department of

Education, 600 Independence Avenue,

SW., Washington, DC 20202–4605.

Telephone (202) 260–3887. Individuals

who use a telecommunications device

for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–

800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8

p.m., Eastern time, Monday through

Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The final

regulations published on January 17

stated that the effective date was 45

days from the date of publication in the

Federal Register subject to certain

conditions. This document corrects the

effective date to read ‘‘These regulations

take effect on February 16, 1995.’’

Dated: February 8, 1995.

Rodney McCowan,

Assistant Secretary, Office of Management.

[FR Doc. 95–3699 Filed 2–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OR11–2–6854; FRL–5145–3]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to

approve a revision to the state

implementation plan (SIP) submitted by

the State of Oregon for the purpose of

bringing about the attainment of the

national ambient air quality standards

(NAAQS) for particulate matter with an

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal

to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM–10).

The implementation plan was submitted

by the State to satisfy certain Federal

requirements for an approvable

moderate nonattainment area PM–10

SIP for La Grande, Oregon.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be

effective on March 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State’s request

and information supporting today’s

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations: EPA,

1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101,

and the State of Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth

Avenue, Portland, OR 97204–1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Montel Livingston, Air and Radiation

Branch (AT–082), EPA, 1200 Sixth

Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 553–

0180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Union County, La Grande,

Oregon, Urban Growth Boundary (UGB),

was designated nonattainment for PM–

10 and classified as moderate under

sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the

Clean Air Act (CAA), upon enactment of

the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA)

of 1990 1 (see 56 FR 56694 (November 6,

1991) and 40 CFR § 81.338). The air

quality planning requirements for

moderate PM–10 nonattainment areas

are set out in subparts 1 and 4 of Title

I of the Act.2 EPA has issued a ‘‘General

Preamble’’ describing EPA’s preliminary

views on how EPA intends to review

SIP’s and SIP revisions submitted under

Title I of the Act, including those State

submittals containing moderate PM–10

nonattainment area SIP requirements

(see generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16,

1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28,

1992)).

The State of Oregon was required to

submit for the La Grande PM–10

nonattainment area, among other things,

the following provisions by November

15, 1991:

1. Provisions to assure that reasonably

available control measures (RACM)

(including such reductions in emissions

from existing sources in the area as may

be obtained through the adoption, at a

minimum, of reasonably available

control technology (RACT)) shall be

implemented no later than December

10, 1993;

2. Either a demonstration (including

air quality modeling) that the plan will

provide for attainment as expeditiously

as practicable but no later than

December 31, 1994, or a demonstration

that attainment by that date is

impracticable;

3. Quantitative milestones which are

to be achieved every three years and

which demonstrate reasonable further

progress (RFP) toward attainment by

December 31, 1994; and

4. Provisions to assure that the control

requirements applicable to major

stationary sources of PM–10 also apply

to major stationary sources of PM–10

precursors except where the

Administrator determines that such

sources do not contribute significantly

to PM–10 levels which exceed the

NAAQS in the area. (see sections 172(c),

188, and 189 of the Act).

Additional provisions are due at a

later date. States with initial moderate

PM–10 nonattainment areas were

required to submit a permit program for

the construction and operation of new

and modified major stationary sources

of PM–10 by June 30, 1992 (see section

189(a)). Such States also were required

to submit contingency measures by

November 15, 1993, which become

effective without further action by the

State or EPA, upon a determination by

EPA that the area has failed to achieve

RFP or to attain the PM–10 NAAQS by

the applicable statutory deadline (see

section 172(c)(9) and 57 FR 13543–

13544).

To address the CAAA of 1990, Oregon

submitted a PM–10 nonattainment area

SIP for La Grande, Oregon, on

November 15, 1991. EPA reviewed the

November 15, 1991, SIP revision

according to its interpretation of subpart

1 and 4 of Part D of Title I of the Act.

EPA concluded from its review that the

SIP met the applicable requirements of

the Act and EPA, therefore, indicated

that it was approving the plan to be

effective on August 30, 1994, unless

adverse or critical comments were

received by August 1, 1994, (see 59 FR

33914, July 1, 1994).

On July 1, 1994, EPA also published

an accompanying proposed rule (see 59

FR 33941) explaining that if adverse

comments were received on the

prospective final rule approval of the La

Grande PM–10 SIP, then the final rule

would be withdrawn and all comments

would be responded to in relation to the

proposal. The notice also indicated that

anyone wishing to comment should do

so by August 1, 1994.