14398 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Pensacola Regional, FL, and Providence,

Theodore Francis Green State, RI,

Airports when the associated radar

approach control facility is not in

operation. Class C and Class E airspace

designations are published in

paragraphs 4000 and 6002, respectively,

of FAA Order 7400.9B dated July 18,

1994, and effective September 16, 1994,

which is incorporated by reference in 14

CFR 71.1. The Class C and Class E

airspace designations listed in this

document would be published

subsequently in the Order.

The FAA has determined that this

proposed regulation only involves an

established body of technical

regulations that need frequent and

routine amendments to keep them

operationally current. It, therefore - (1)

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)

does not warrant preparation of a

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated

impact is so minimal. Since this is a

routine matter that will only affect air

traffic procedures and air navigation, it

is certified that this rule, when

promulgated, will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities under the criteria of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference,

Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Federal Aviation Administration

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as

follows:

PART 71—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR

part 71 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. app. 1348(a), 1354(a),

1510; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 14 CFR

11.69.

§ 71.1 [Amended]

2. The incorporation by reference in

14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation

Administration Order 7400.9B, Airspace

Designations and Reporting Points,

dated July 18, 1994, and effective

September 16, 1994, is amended as

follows:

Paragraph 4000—Subpart C—Class C

Airspace

* * * * *

ASO FL C Pensacola Regional Airport, FL

(Revised)

Pensacola Regional Airport, FL

(lat. 30°28′24′′ N., long. 87°11′15′′ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the

surface to and including 4,200 feet MSL

within a 5-mile radius of the Pensacola

Regional Airport, and that airspace extending

upward from 1,400 feet MSL to and

including 4,200 feet MSL within a 10-mile

radius of the Pensacola Regional Airport,

excluding that airspace within the 5-mile

circle of the Pensacola NAS, FL, Class C

airspace area. This Class C airspace area is

effective during the specific dates and times

established in advance by a Notice to

Airmen. The effective date and time will

thereafter be continuously published in the

Airport/Facility Directory.

* * * * *

ASO KY C Lexington, Blue Grass Airport, KY

(Revised)

Lexington, Blue Grass Airport, KY

(lat. 38°02′13′′ N., long. 84°36′20′′ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the

surface to and including 5,000 feet MSL

within a 5-mile radius of the Blue Grass

Airport; and that airspace extending upward

from 2,200 feet MSL to and including 5,000

feet MSL within a 10-mile radius of the

airport.

* * * * *

ASO NC C Fayetteville Regional/Grannis

Field, NC, (Revised)

Fayetteville Regional/Grannis Field, NC

(lat. 34°59′30′′ N., long. 78°52′48′′ W.)

Gray’s Creek Airport

(lat. 34°53′04′′ N., long. 78°50′08′′ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the

surface to and including 4,200 feet MSL

within a 5-mile radius of the Fayetteville

Regional/Grannis Field excluding that

airspace below 1,400 feet MSL within a 1.5-

mile radius of Gray’s Creek Airport; and that

airspace within a 10-mile radius of the

airport extending upward from 1,400 feet

MSL to and including 4,200 feet MSL,

excluding that airspace contained within

Restricted Areas R–5311A, B and C when

they are active.

* * * * *

ASO NC C Pope AFB, NC (Revised)

Pope AFB, NC

(lat. 35°10′16′′ N., long. 79°00′52′′ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the

surface to and including 4,200 feet MSL

within a 5-mile radius of the Pope AFB,

excluding that airspace below 1,400 feet MSL

contained in the Simmons Army Air Field,

NC, Class D airspace area, and excluding that

airspace contained within Restricted Areas

R–5311A, B and C when they are active; and

that airspace within a 10-mile radius of Pope

AFB extending upward from 2,000 feet MSL

to and including 4,200 feet MSL, beginning

at the northern boundaries of R–5311A, B

and C clockwise to the 020° bearing from the

airport; and that airspace extending upward

from 1,400 feet MSL to and including 4,200

feet MSL within a 10-mile radius of the

airport beginning at the 020° bearing from the

airport clockwise to the northern boundaries

of R–5311A, B and C, excluding that airspace

contained in R–5311A, B and C when they

are active and excluding that airspace

contained in the Fayetteville Regional/

Grannis Field Airport, NC, Class C airspace

area.

* * * * *

ANE RI C Providence, Theodore Francis

Green State Airport, RI (Revised)

Providence, Theodore Francis Green State

Airport, RI

(lat. 41°43′30′′ N., long. 71°25′40′′ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the

surface to and including 4,100 feet MSL

within a 5-mile radius of the Theodore

Francis Green State Airport and that airspace

extending upward from 1,300 feet MSL to

and including 4,100 feet MSL within a 10-

mile radius of the airport from the 015°

bearing from the airport clockwise to the 195°

bearing from the airport, and that airspace

extending upward from 1,700 feet MSL to

and including 4,100 feet MSL within a 10-

mile radius of the airport from the 195°

bearing from the airport clockwise to the 015°

bearing from the airport. This Class C

airspace area is effective during the specific

dates and times established in advance by a

Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time

will thereafter be continuously published in

the Airport/Facility Directory.

* * * * *

Paragraph 6002–Class E Airspace Areas

Designated as a Surface Area for an Airport

* * * * *

ASO FL E2 Pensacola Regional Airport, FL

(New)

Pensacola Regional Airport, FL

(lat. 30°28′24′′ N., long. 87°11′15′′ W.)

Within a 5-mile radius of the Pensacola

Regional Airport. This Class E airspace area

is effective during the specific dates and

times established in advance by a Notice to

Airmen. The effective date and time will

thereafter be continuously published in the

Airport/Facility Directory.

* * * * *

ANE RI E2 Providence, Theodore Francis

Green State Airport, RI (New)

Providence, Theodore Francis Green State

Airport, RI

(lat. 41°43′30′′ N., long. 71°25′40′′ W.)

Within a 5-mile radius of the Theodore

Francis Green State Airport. This Class E

airspace area is effective during the specific

dates and times established in advance by a

Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time

will thereafter be continuously published in

the Airport/Facility Directory.

* * * * *

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 13,

1995.

Harold W. Becker,

Manager, Airspace-Rules and Aeronautical

Information Division.

[FR Doc. 95–6689 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14399

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 904

Arkansas Permanent Regulatory

Program

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 Arkansas

permanent regulatory program

(hereinafter, the ‘‘Arkansas program’’)

under the Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The

additional revisions pertain to statutory

revisions concerning the definitions of

‘‘unanticipated event or condition’’ and

‘‘lands eligible for remining.’’ The

amendment is intended to revise the

Arkansas program to be consistent with

SMCRA.

This notice sets forth the times and

locations that the Arkansas program and

proposed amendment to that program

are available for public inspection, and

the reopened comment period during

which interested persons may submit

written comments on the proposed

amendment.

DATES: Written comments must be

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

1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or hand delivered to James H.

Moncrief at the address listed below.

Copies of the Arkansas 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 Tulsa Field Office.

James H. Moncrief, Director, Tulsa Field

Office, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, 5100

East Skelly Drive, Suite 550, Tulsa,

OK 74135, Telephone: (918) 581–

7927.

Arkansas Department of Pollution

Control and Ecology, P.O. Box 8913,

8001 National Drive, Little Rock,

Arkansas 72219–8913, Telephone:

(501) 562–6533.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James H. Moncrief, Telephone: (918)

581–6430.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIOIN:

I. Background on the Arkansas

Program

On November 21, 1980, the Secretary

of the Interior conditionally approved

the Arkansas program. General

background information on the

Arkansas program, including the

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of

comments, and the conditions of

approval of the Arkansas program can

be found in the November 21, 1980,

Federal Register (45 FR 77003).

Subsequent actions concerning

Arkansas’s program and program

amendments can be found at 30 CFR

904.12 and 904.15.

II. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated August 26, 1994,

Arkansas submitted a proposed

amendment to its program pursuant to

SMCRA (administrative record No. AR–

522). Arkansas submitted the proposed

amendment at its own initiative with

the intent of making its coal mining

statutes consistent with SMCRA.

Arkansas proposed to revise the

Arkansas Surface Coal Mining and

Reclamation Act of 1979 at (1) section

5, jurisdiction and powers for rules and

regulations (2) section 13, surface coal

mining permits, and (3) section 15,

environmental protection performance

standards.

OSM published a notice in the

September 29, 1994, Federal Register

(59 FR 49616) announcing receipt of the

amendment and inviting public

comment on the adequacy of the

proposed amendment (administrative

record No. AR–526). The public

comment period ended October 31,

1994.

During its review of the amendment,

OSM identified concerns relating to

Arkansas Code Annotated (ACA)

sections 13(k), regarding remining

permit violations, and 15(d)(1),

regarding revegetation performance

standards on lands eligible for remining.

OSM notified Arkansas of the concerns

by letter dated November 22, 1994

(administrative record No. AR–539).

Arkansas responded in a letter dated

March 1, 1995, by submitting a revised

amendment package (administrative

record No. AR–540).

In the revised amendment, Arkansas

proposes to add the definition

‘‘unanticipated event or condition’’ at

section 4(18) to mean ‘‘an event or

condition encountered in a remining

operation that was not contemplated by

the applicable surface coal mining and

reclamation permit’’ and to add the

definition ‘‘lands eligible for remining’’

at section 4(19) to mean ‘‘those lands

that would otherwise be eligible for

expenditures under Section 6’’ of the

ACA regarding lands eligible under the

State abandoned mine reclamations

program.

III. Public Comment Procedures

OSM is reopening the comment

period on the proposed Arkansas

program amendment to provide the

public an opportunity to reconsider the

adequacy of the amendment in light of

the additional materials submitted. 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

Arkansas program.

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 Tulsa Field Office will

not necessarily be considered in the

final rulemaking or included in the

administrative record.

IV. 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.
14400 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules

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

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.

V. List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 904

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: March 9, 1995.

Charles E. Sandberg,

Acting Assistant Director, Western Support

Center.

[FR Doc. 95–6590 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

30 CFR Part 935

[OH–231; Amendment Number 68R]

Ohio Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and

extension of public comment period and

opportunity for public hearing on

proposed amendment.

SUMMARY: OSM is reopening the public

comment period for a revised

amendment to the Ohio permanent

regulatory program (hereinafter referred

to as the Ohio program) under the

Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977. This revised

amendment was initiated by Ohio and

is intended to make the Ohio program

as effective as the corresponding Federal

regulations concerning

contemporaneous reclamation.

Specifically, the amendment proposes

to revise Ohio’s definition of ‘‘auger

mining’’ and to further revise Ohio’s

proposed time and distance schedules

for backfilling and grading in

conjunction with various mining

methods.

This document sets forth the times

and locations that the Ohio programs

and the proposed amendments to those

programs will be available for public

inspection, the comment period during

which interested persons may submit

written comments on the proposed

amendments, and the procedures that

will be followed regarding the public

hearing, if one is requested.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by 4 p.m. [e.s.t.], on April 3,

1995. If requested, a public hearing on

the proposed amendments will be held

at 1 p.m. [e.s.t.], on March 27, 1995.

Requests to present oral testimony at the

hearing must be received on or before 4

p.m. [e.s.t.], on March 24, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and

requests to testify at the hearing should

be mailed or hand-delivered to Mr.

Robert H. Mooney, Acting Director,

Columbus Field Office, at the address

listed below. Copies of the Ohio

programs, the proposed amendments,

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, free of charge, one copy of the

proposed amendments by contacting

OSM’s Columbus Field Office.

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement, Columbus Field

Office, 4480 Refugee Road, Suite 201,

Columbus, Ohio 43232, Telephone:

(614) 866–0578

Ohio Department of Natural Resources,

Division of Reclamation, 1855

Fountain Square Court, Building H–3,

Columbus, Ohio 43224, Telephone:

(614) 265–6675.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Robert H. Mooney, Acting Director,

Columbus Field Office, (614) 866–0578.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Ohio Program

On August 16, 1982, the Secretary of

the Interior conditionally approved the

Ohio programs. Information on the

general background of the Ohio program

submissions, including the Secretary’s

findings, the disposition of comments,

and a detailed explanation of the

conditions of approval of the Ohio

programs, can be found in the August

10, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR

34688). Subsequent actions concerning

the conditions of approval and program

amendments are identified at 30 CFR

935.11, 935.12, 935.15, and 935.16.

II. Proposed Amendment

The Ohio Department of Natural

Resources, Division of Reclamation

(Ohio) submitted proposed Program

Amendment Number 68 (PA 68) by

letter dated May 17, 1994

(Administrative Record No. OH–2018).

In this amendment, Ohio proposed to

revise three rules in the Ohio

Administrative Code (OAC) to make the

Ohio program as effective as the

corresponding Federal regulations

concerning contemporaneous

reclamation. As part of and in support

of proposed PA 68, Ohio also submitted

a draft Policy/Procedure Directive (PPD)

which provided additional clarification

and guidance on the proposed Ohio rule

requirements for contemporaneous

reclamation.

OSM announced receipt of PA 68 in

the May 26, 1994, Federal Register (59

FR 27253), and, in the same document,

opened the public comment period and

provided an opportunity for a public

hearing on the adequacy of the proposed

amendment. The public comment

period closed on June 27, 1994.

OSM and Ohio staff met on August

22, 1994, to discuss OSM’s questions

and concerns about PA 68

(Administrative Record No. OH–2093).

In response to OSM’s August 22, 1994,

questions and comments, Ohio provided

Revised Program Amendment Number

68 (PA 68R) by letter dated March 1,

1995 (Administrative Record No. OH–

2094).

In PA 68R, Ohio is proposing a

number of editorial changes to improve

the clarity and readability of the rule

changes and the PPD previously

proposed by Ohio in PA 68. These

additional changes do not affect the

content of the previously proposed

revisions and are not individually

discussed in this proposed rule

document.

The substantive changes proposed by

Ohio in PA 68R are described briefly

below: