11640 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules

be $.10 per copy per page. The charge

for reproducing records on magnetic

tapes or computer diskettes is the full

cost of the operator’s time plus the full

cost of the machine time and the

materials used.

(iii) Use of electronic data processing

equipment to obtain records. Full cost

for the service, including computer

search time and computer runs and

printouts, and the time of computer

programmers and operators and of other

employees.

(iv) Certification or authentication.

Full cost of certification and

authentication.

(v) Providing other special services.

Full cost of the time of the employee

who performs the service, management

and supervisory costs, plus the full costs

of any machine time and materials the

employee uses. Consulting and other

indirect costs will be assessed as

appropriate.

(vi) Special forwarding arrangements.

Full cost of special arrangements for

forwarding material requested.

(vii) Statutory supersession. Where a

Federal statute prohibits the assessment

of a charge for a service or addresses an

aspect of that charge, the statute shall

take precedence over this regulation.

(p) Assessment of a Fee with Respect

to the Provision of Custom Tailored

Information Where the Identification of

the Beneficiary Is Obscure and Where

Provision of the Information Can be

Seen as Benefiting the Public Generally.

When the identification of a specific

beneficiary with respect to the provision

of custom tailored information is

obscure, the service can be considered

primarily as benefiting broadly the

general public, and the estimated cost of

providing the information is less than

$1,000.00, the Director of

Administration shall determine whether

or not a fee is to be charged. In any such

case where the cost is $1,000.00 or

more, the request shall be referred by

the Director of Administration to the

three-member Board for a determination

whether or not a fee is to be assessed.

* * * * *

Dated: February 23, 1995.

By Authority of the Board.

Beatrice Ezerski,

Secretary to the Board.

[FR Doc. 95–5132 Filed 3–1 –95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7905–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 925

Missouri Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment

period and opportunity for public

hearing on proposed amendment.

SUMMARY: OSM is announcing the

receipt of a proposed amendment to the

Missouri regulatory program

(hereinafter, the ‘‘Missouri program’’)

under the Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201

et seq., SMCRA). The proposed

amendment consists of changes to

provisions of the Missouri regulations

pertaining to definitions, topsoil

redistribution, impoundment design,

disposal of coal processing and noncoal

waste, backfilling and grading, coal

exploration, fish and wildlife plan,

permit approval findings, notice of

violations, and eligibility for small

operators assistance. The amendment is

intended to revise the State program to

be consistent with the corresponding

Federal standards, clarify ambiguities,

and improve operational efficiency.

This notice sets forth the times and

locations that the Missouri program and

proposed amendment to that program

are available for public inspection, the

comment period during which

interested persons may submit written

comments on the proposed amendment,

and procedures that will be followed

regarding the public hearing, if one is

requested.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by 4:00 p.m., c.s.t. April 3,

1995. If requested, a public hearing on

the proposed amendment will be held

on March 27, 1995. Requests to present

oral testimony at the hearing must be

received by 4:00 p.m., c.s.t. on March

17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or hand delivered to Michael

C. Wolfrom at the address listed below.

Copies of the Missouri program, the

proposed amendment, and all written

comments received in response to this

notice 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, MO 64105,

Telephone: (816) 374–6405

Land Reclamation Program, Missouri

Department of Natural Resources, 205

Jefferson Street, P.O. Box 176,

Jefferson City, MO 65102, Telephone:

(314) 751–4041.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael C. Wolfrom, telephone: (816)

374–6405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Missouri Program

On November 21, 1980, the Secretary

of Interior conditionally approved the

Missouri program. General background

information on the Missouri program,

including the Secretary’s findings, the

disposition of comments, and the

conditions of approval of the Missouri

program can be found in the November

21, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR

77017). Subsequent actions concerning

Missouri’s program and program

amendments can be found at 30 CFR

925.12, 925.15, and 925.16.

II. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated February 10, 1995

(administrative record No. MO–612),

Missouri submitted a proposed

amendment to its program pursuant to

SMCRA. Missouri submitted the

proposed amendment with the intent of

satisfying the required program

amendments at 30 CFR 925.16 (b)(4),

(p)(9), and (q)(1) through (q)(5), and at

its own initiative to improve its

program. The amendment also contains

nonsubstantive revisions to eliminate

editorial and typographical errors and to

accomplish necessary recodification

required by the addition or deletion of

provisions.

Specifically, Missouri proposes to

revise (1) 10 Code of State Regulations

(CSR) 40–3.030(4) to require that

contamination of topsoil be prevented

during redistribution; (2) 10 CSR 40–

3.040(10)(B)5 to reference the January

1991, U.S. Natural Resources

Conservation Service (formerly the Soil

Conservation Service) technical

document, Practice Standards 378,

concerning impoundment design; (3) 10

CSR 40–3.110(3)(A)1 to clarify that the

requirements of this section apply to

coal seams, combustible materials, and

acid- and toxic-forming materials, to

require that coal processing waste and

noncoal waste be covered in accordance

with the regulations for disposal of coal

processing waste at 10 CSR 40–3.080,

and to delete the existing requirement
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules 11641

that exposed coal seams and

combustible materials, including coal

processing waste, be covered with a

minimum of 4 feet of nontoxic- and

nonacid-producing materials unless

otherwise demonstrated; (4) 10 CSR 40–

3.110(6)(B) to provide that the

regulations for repair of rills and gullies

at 10 CSR 40–3.110(6)(A) apply, on

areas that have been previously mined,

only after final grading of the area when

topsoil or a topsoil substitute is not

available; (5) 10 CSR 40–6.010(2)(H) to

add a definition of ‘‘Secretary;’’ (6) 10

CSR 40–6.020 (2)(A) and (3)(A) to clarify

that these regulations concern

exploration activities outside of a permit

area; (7) 10 CSR 40–6.120 (7)(C) and (D)

and (12)(C) and (D) to specify the

information that must be included in a

fish and wildlife plan and that, when

the plan does not include enhancement

measures, it must include an

explanation of why enhancement is not

practicable; (8) 10 CSR 40–6.070(8)(M)

to require that the Director of the

Missouri program must find, prior to

permit approval for a proposed

remaining operation where the

applicant intends to reclaim in

accordance with the requirements of 10

CSR 40–4.080, that the site of the

operation is a previously mined area; (9)

at 10 CSR 40–8.010(1)(A)72 the

definition of ‘‘previously mined area;’’

(10) at 10 CSR 40–8.010(1)(A)84 the

definition of ‘‘road;’’ (11) 10 CSR 40–

8.030(7)(A) to delete the requirement

that modification, termination, or

vacating of notice of violations must be

in accordance with the regulation at 10

CSR 40–8.040; (12) 10 CSR 40–8.040(9)

to delete the definition of ‘‘habitual

violator;’’ and (13) 10 CSR 40–

8.050(2)(B) to change the eligibility

requirement of coal production of

100,000 tons per year to 300,000 tons

per year for a small operator assistance

applicant.

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. If the amendment is deemed

adequate, it will become part of the

Missouri program.

Written Comments

Wrriten comments should be specific,

pertain only to the issue 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.

Public Hearing

Persons wishing to testify at the

public hearing should contact the

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., c.s.t.

[March 17, 1995]. The location and time

of the hearing will be arranged with

those persons requesting the hearing. If

no one requests an opportunity to testify

at the public hearing, the hearing will

not be held.

Filing of a written statement at the

time of the hearing is requested as it

will greatly assist the transcriber.

Submission of written statements in

advance of the hearing will allow OSM

officials to prepare adequate responses

and appropriate questions.

The public hearing will continue on

the specified date until all persons

scheduled to comment having been

heard. Persons in the audience who

have not been scheduled to testify, and

who wish to do so, will be heard

following those who have been

scheduled. The hearing will end after all

persons scheduled to testify and persons

present in the audience who wish to

testify have been heard.

Any disabled individual who has

need for a special accommodation to

attend a public hearing should contact

the individual listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

Public Meeting

If only one person requests an

opportunity to testify at a hearing, a

public meeting, rather than a public

hearing, may be held. Persons wishing

to meet with OSM representatives to

discuss the proposed amendment may

request a meeting at the OSM office

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. All such meetings will be

open to the public and, if possible,

notices of meetings will be posted at the

locations listed under ADDRESSES. A

written summary of each meeting will

be made a part of the administrative

record.

IV. Procedural Determinations

Compliance With the 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 of 1969, 42

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C).

Compliance With Executive Order No.

12866

On July 12, 1984, the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) granted

OSM an exemption from sections 3, 4,

7, and 8 of Executive Order 12291 for

actions related to approval or

conditional approval of State regulatory

programs, actions, and program

amendments. Therefore, preparation of

a Regulatory Impact Analysis is not

necessary and OMB regulatory review is

not required.

Compliance With the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

The Department of the Interior has

determined that this rule will not have

a significant economic effect 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.

Hence, 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.

Compliance With 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 subsection (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 requirements of 30 CFR

parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met.
11642 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Compliance With the Paperwork

Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by the Office of

Management and Budget under the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 925

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: February 23, 1995.

Russell F. Price,

Acting Assistant Director, Western Support

Center.

[FR Doc. 95–5151 Filed 3–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

32 CFR Part 209

University Research Initiative Support

Program (URISP)

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This proposed rule is to

comply with section 802 of the National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal

Year 1994 (Pub. L. 103–160), which

requires the Department of Defense to

establish URISP, and prescribe a

regulation for carrying out the program.

URISP is required to be a competitive

university research program for research

and development that is relevant to the

requirements of the Department of

Defense, that is set aside for Colleges

and Universities that have received less

than $2 million dollars from the

Department of Defense over the two

previous fiscal years. URISP is oriented

toward assisting institutions build

university research infrastructure in the

fields of science, engineering, and

mathematics, so they may become more

competitive.

DATES: Written comments on this

proposed rule must be received by May

1, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Forward comments to the

Office of Director of Defense Research

and Engineering, Pentagon—3E1045,

Washington, DC 20301–3080.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Art McGregor (703) 614–0205.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory

Planning and Review’’

It has been determined that 32 CFR

part 209 is not a significant regulation

action. The rule does not:

(1) Have an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more or

adversely affect in a material way the

economy; a sector of the economy;

productivity; competition; jobs; the

environment; public health or safety;

State, local, or tribal governments or

communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfere with an action taken

or planned by another Agency; (3)

Materially alter the budgetary impact of

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan

programs, or rights and obligations of

recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel

legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President’s priorities, or

the principles set forth in this Executive

Order.

Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory

Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 601)

It has been certified that this rule is

not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (5 U.S.C. 601) because it would not,

if promulgated, have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The proposed

rule does not place any economic

burdens on small entities. The primary

effect on grantees administering this

rule will be a reduction in

administrative cost and other burdens

resulting from the simplification and

clarification of certain policies and the

elimination of policy differences among

the Federal Agencies promulgating this

proposed rule.

Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork

Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 44)

It has been certified that 32 CFR part

209 does not impose any reporting or

record keeping requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44

U.S.C. 3501–3520).

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 209

Education, Grants, Institutions, and

Universities.

Accordingly, title 32, chapter I,

subchapter M is proposed to be

amended to add part 209 to read as

follows:

PART 209—UNIVERSITY RESEARCH

INITIATIVE SUPPORT PROGRAM

(URISP)

Sec.

209.1 Purpose.

209.2 Applicability.

209.3 Definitions.

209.4 Policy.

209.5 Responsibilities.

Authority: Sec. 802 of Pub. L. 103–160 (see

10 U.S.C. 2358 note)

§ 209.1 Purpose.

This part establishes policy and

assigns responsibilities under section

802 of Public Law 103–160 (see 10

U.S.C. 2358 note).

§ 209.2 Applicability.

This part applies to the Office of the

Secretary of Defense, the Military

Departments, and Defense Agencies

responsible for the majority of the

university basic research grants in the

Department of Defense.

§ 209.3 Definitions.

(a) American Association of State

Colleges and Universities (AASCU).

Institutions that are members of AASCU

during the period that peers are

selected.

(b) Eligible Institutions. Institutions

that may compete for URISP funding are

those that have received a total of less

than $2 million in obligations from the

Department of Defense, over the two

previous fiscal years (FYs). A list of

ineligible institutions will be attached

as an appendix to the URISP

announcement, and institutions not on

the list are eligible to participate.

(c) Institutions. Institutions of Higher

Education that have accredited, degreegranting programs in science,

engineering or mathematics.

(d) Merit-based selection process. A

university-based review using peers

who are members of the faculty or staff

of an institution of higher education that

is a member of NASULGC or AASCU

(section 802 of Pub. L. 103–160).

(e) National Association of State

Universities and Land Grant Colleges

(NASULGC). Institutions that are

members of NASULGC during the

period that peers are selected.

(f) Research Offices. The research

office under the Military Services and

Defense Agencies that are responsible

for the majority of the university basic

research grants in the Department of

Defense. These are:

(1) Advanced Research Projects

Agency.

(2) Air Force Office of Scientific

Research.

(3) Army Research Office.

(4) Ballistic Missile Defense

Organization.

(5) Office of Naval Research.

§ 209.4 Policy.

It is DoD policy that:

(a) The purpose of URISP is to help

build the infrastructure in the fields of

science, engineering, and mathematics