Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 76 / Thursday, April 20, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 19669

without undue delay. Consistency of

State and Federal standards is required

by SMCRA.

VI. 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

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 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 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 Part 914

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: April 13, 1995.

Richard J. Seibel,

Acting Assistant Director, Eastern 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 914—INDIANA

1. The authority citation for Part 914

continues to read as follows:

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

2. In § 914.15, paragraph (jjj) is added

to read as follows:

§ 914.15 Approval of regulatory program

amendments.

* * * * *

(jjj) Amendment #94–2 to the Indiana

program concerning miscellaneous

revisions to the Indiana rules as

submitted to OSM on August 25, 1994,

supplemented on August 30, 1994, and

amended on March 20, 1995, is

approved effective April 20, 1995.

[FR Doc. 95–9774 Filed 4–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

30 CFR Part 914

[IN–112–FOR; Amendment 92–7C]

Indiana Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of

amendment.

SUMMARY: OSM is approving, with

exceptions, a proposed amendment to

the Indiana permanent regulatory

program (hereinafter referred to as the

Indiana program) under the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1977 (SMCRA). The amendment is a

continuation of an earlier program

amendment and consists of revisions to

Indiana’s Surface Coal Mining and

Reclamation Rules concerning the

control of subsidence caused by

underground mining operations. The

amendment is intended to revise the

Indiana program to be consistent with

SMCRA and to incorporate State

initiatives.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 20, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Roger W. Calhoun, Director,

Indianapolis Field Office, Office of

Surface Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement, Minton-Capehart Federal

Building, 575 North Pennsylvania

Street, Room 301, Indianapolis, IN

46204, Telephone (317) 226–6166.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Indiana Program.

II. Submission of the Amendment.

III. Director’s Findings.

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments.

V. Director’s Decision.

VI. Procedural Determinations.

I. Background on the Indiana Program

On July 29, 1982, the Indiana program

was made effective by the conditional

approval of the Secretary of the Interior.

Information pertinent to the general

background on the Indiana program,

including the Secretary’s findings, the

disposition of comments, and a detailed

explanation of the conditions of

approval of the Indiana program can be

found in the July 26, 1982 Federal

Register (47 FR 32107). Subsequent

actions concerning the conditions of

approval and program amendments are

identified at 30 CFR 914.10, 914.15, and

914.16.

II. Submission of the Amendment

By letter dated December 2, 1992

(Administrative Record No. IND–1175),

the Indiana Department of Natural

Resources (IDNR) submitted a proposed

amendment (#92–7) to the Indiana

program. Amendment #92–7 proposed

changes to the Indiana surface mining

rules concerning subsidence liability.

On May 17, 1993, OSM approved,

with two exceptions, amendment #92–7

(58 FR 28775). By letter dated March 18,

1994 (Administrative Record Number

IND–1340), Indiana submitted to OSM a

notice of the final adoption of

amendment #92–7 as published in the

Indiana Register, Volume 17, Number 6,

pages 1086–1089 (March 1, 1994).

The final adopted language of

amendment #92–7 differs in some ways

from the language approved by OSM on

May 17, 1993. Therefore, OSM reopened

the public comment period and invited

comment on the substantive differences.

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the April 22,

1994, Federal Register (59 FR 19155),
19670 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 76 / Thursday, April 20, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

and, in the same notice, opened the

public comment period and provided

opportunity for a public hearing on the

adequacy of the proposed amendment.

The comment period closed on May 23,

1994.

III. Director’s Findings

Set forth below, pursuant to SMCRA

and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

732.15 and 732.17, are the Director’s

findings concerning the proposed

amendment to the Indiana program.

Nonsubstantive word changes and

paragraph notation changes also appear

in the final adopted version of

amendment #92–7. However, only the

substantive changes are discussed

below.

1. 310 IAC 12–3–87.1 Subsidence

Control Plan

a. 310 IAC 12–3–87.1(c)(2). In the May

17, 1993, Federal Register notice which

approved most of Indiana amendment

#92–7 concerning subsidence, the

Director did not fully approve the

proposed language at subsection

87.1(c)(2). The language at subsection

87.1(c)(2) was approved except to the

extent the provision defers to State law

to correct subsidence related material

damage.

On October 24, 1992, SMCRA was

amended by the addition of new section

720 concerning subsidence. New section

720 provides that underground coal

mining operations shall promptly

repair, or compensate for, material

damage resulting from subsidence

caused to any occupied residential

dwelling and structures related thereto,

or noncommercial building due to

underground coal mining operations.

The new SMCRA provision does not

provide for deference to State law

regarding the repair or compensation for

material damage resulting from

subsidence due to underground coal

mining operations. Therefore, in the

May 17, 1993, Federal Register notice,

the Director found the proposed

language at 310 IAC 12–3–87.1(c)(2) less

effective than the counterpart Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 784.20(b) to the

extent that the language affords a lesser

degree of protection to occupied

residential dwellings, related structures,

and noncommercial buildings than

SMCRA as revised.

The currently proposed 310 IAC 12–

3–87.1(c)(2) provides that the

subsidence control plan must contain a

map of underground workings which

includes all areas where the measures

described in subdivisions (4) and (5)

will be taken ‘‘where appropriate under

state law’’ to correct subsidence related

material damage. The quoted language,

‘‘where appropriate under state law’’ is

identical to the language which OSM

did not approve in the May 17, 1993,

Federal Register notice.

In its submittal of this final adopted

language, Indiana provided two reasons

for its retention of the language quoted

above. First, Indiana asserts that the

language quoted above is substantially

identical to the counterpart Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 784.20(b). Second,

Indiana asserts that a newly enacted

statute, IC 13–4.1–9–2.5, which was

included in Senate Enrolled Act No. 408

and signed into Indiana law on March

11, 1994, codifies the October 24, 1992,

changes made to Federal SMCRA at

section 720. Specifically, Indiana asserts

that because Indiana law (IC 13–4.1–9–

2.5) requires the correction of material

subsidence damage to the same degree

as amended SMCRA at section 720, the

current regulation’s (310 IAC 12–3–

87.1(c)(2)(B)(ii)) reference to Indiana

law is no longer less effective than the

requirements of the Federal program.

In response to Indiana’s assertions,

the Director notes the following. On

March 31, 1995 (60 FR 16722–16751),

OSM amended the Federal subsidence

regulations at 30 CFR 784 to bring those

regulations into conformance with

SMCRA at new section 720. Currently,

neither SMCRA at section 720 nor 30

CFR 784.20(b) provide for deference to

State law regarding the repair or

compensation for material damage

resulting from subsidence due to

underground coal mining operations.

However, Indiana State law at IC 13–

4.1–9–2.5 provides a counterpart to

SMCRA section 720 from June 30, 1994,

on.

On April 4, 1995 (60 FR 16985), the

Director published an approval of IC

13–4.1–9–2.5, Indiana’s new law

concerning subsidence control. In that

notice, the Director determined that IC

13–4.1–9–2.5 is substantively identical

to and no less stringent than SMCRA at

new section 720 with one exception.

The Indiana law applies only to damage

that occurs after June 30, 1994. SMCRA

at section 729(a) provides that

underground coal mining operations

conducted after the date of enactment of

section 720 (October 24, 1992) shall

comply with each of the requirements of

section 720. Therefore, the Director

approved IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 to the extent

that the Indiana law meets the

requirements of SMCRA section 720(a)

from June 30, 1994.

In addition, the Director deferred

decision on the enforcement of the

provisions of SMCRA section 720(a)

during the period from the effective date

of SMCRA section 720 (October 24,

1992) to the effective date of IC 13–4.1–

9–2.5 (June 30, 1994). Pursuant to newly

promulgated 30 CFR 843.25, OSM

intends to publish by July 31, 1995, for

each State with a regulatory program,

including Indiana, final rule notices

concerning the enforcement of the

provisions of the Energy Policy Act in

those States.

Since, by letter dated March 18, 1994

(Administrative Record IND–1340),

Indiana interpreted ‘‘state law’’ as used

in 310 IACV 12–3–87.1 to mean the

provisions found at IC 13–4.1–9–2.5, the

Director finds that this provision is no

less effective than 30 CFR 784.20(b) and

no less stringent than SMCRA section

720, to the extent that IC 13–4.1–9–2.5

meets the requirements of SMCRA

section 720 from June 30, 1994. The

Director is deferring decision until July

31, 1995, on the enforcement of the

provisions of SMCRA section 720 and

30 CFR 784.20 during the period from

the effective date of SMCRA section 720

(October 24, 1992) to the effective date

of IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 (June 30, 1994).

b. 310 IAC 12–3–87.1(c)(7). In the

second sentence of this subdivision,

Indiana is deleting the word ‘‘operator’’

and adding in its place the word

‘‘permittee.’’ With this change, the

permittee is required to include

required information in the permit

application. The word ‘‘permittee’’ is

the appropriate word to use in this

section on permit application

requirements. The Director finds the

change to be consistent with and no less

effective than the Federal regulations at

30 CFR 784.20 concerning subsidence

control plan.

2. 310 IAC 12–5–130.1 Subsidence

Control; General Requirements

In the final adopted language at

subsection 130.1(c)(2), language appears

which is identical to language which

OSM did not approve in the May 17,

1993, Federal Register notice.

Specifically, the language at subsection

130.1(c)(2) provides for the repair or

compensation of damage caused by

subsidence ‘‘[t]o the extent required

under Indiana law.’’ In the May 17, 1993

notice at Finding 2, OSM did not

approve the language which reads ‘‘[t]o

the extent required under Indiana law.’’

OSM did not approve the Indiana

deference to State law because it

afforded a lesser degree of protection to

occupied residential dwellings, related

structures, and noncommercial

buildings than section 720 of SMCRA.

See Finding 1, above, for a discussion of

section 720 of SMCRA.

In its submittal of this final adopted

language, Indiana provided an

explanation why the language which

defers to State law was retained. Indiana
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 76 / Thursday, April 20, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 19671

stated (also see Finding 1, above) that

new Indiana law IC 13–4.1–9–2.5

requires the correction of material

subsidence damage to the same degree

as SMCRA at section 720. Therefore,

Indiana asserts, the language at 310 IAC

12–5–130.1(c)(2) which defers to State

law is no longer less effective than the

requirements of the Federal program.

As discussed in Finding 1 above, the

new Indiana law at IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 is

substantially identical to and no less

stringent than SMCRA at section 720

except to the extent that the Indiana law

applies only to damage that occurs after

June 30, 1994. SMCRA at section 720(a)

provides for such repair or

compensation by underground coal

mining operations conducted after the

date of enactment of section 720

(October 24, 1992). Since, by letter

dated March 18, 1994 (Administrative

Record No. IND–1340), Indiana

interpreted ‘‘state law’’ as used in 310

IAC 12–5–130.1(c)(2), to mean the

provisions found at IC 13–4.1–9–2.5, the

Director finds that this provision is no

less effective than 30 CFR 817.121(a)(2)

and no less stringent than SMCRA

section 720, to the extent that IC 13–

4.1–9–2.5 meets the requirements of

SMCRA section 720 from June 30, 1994.

The Director is deferring decision on the

enforcement of the provisions of

SMCRA section 720 and 30 CFR 817.121

during the period from the effective date

of SMCRA section 720 (October 24,

1992) to the effective date of IC 13–4.1–

9–2.5 (June 30, 1994).

3. 310 IAC 12–5–130.1(g) Suspension

of Underground Mining

Indiana added language to this

provision after the provision was

approved by OSM on May 17, 1993. At

subdivision 130.1(g)(2) the words

‘‘under or’’ are added. With the added

language, the provision provides that

the director of INDR shall suspend

underground mining activities under or

adjacent to industrial or commercial

buildings, pipelines, major

impoundments, or perennial streams.

In addition, the words ‘‘under any

other location’’ are added in new

subdivision 130.1(g)(3). With this new

language, the director of INDR shall

suspend underground mining activities

under any other location if imminent

danger is found to inhabitants of

urbanized areas, cities, towns, or

communities ‘‘or whenever required or

authorized by IC 13–4.1–11–5.’’

The quoted language immediately

above identifies the third revision to

subsection 130.1(g). With this new

language, the director of INDR shall also

suspend underground mining activities

whenever required or authorized by IC

13–4.1–11–5 concerning cessation

orders. The Director finds that these

changes are consistent with and no less

effective than the Federal regulations at

30 CFR 817.121(f).

4. 310 IAC 12–5–130.1(h) Detailed

Report of Underground Workings

The changes in this subsection are

related to the preparation and

certification of the required map of

underground workings. Specifically,

Indiana has deleted the word

‘‘registered’’ immediately preceding the

words ‘‘professional engineer.’’ Also,

the words ‘‘or registered land surveyor’’

are added following the words

‘‘professional engineer.’’ With these

changes, the required map of

underground workings shall be

prepared by, or under the direction of,

and certified by a qualified professional

engineer or registered land surveyor

with assistance from experts in related

fields such as land surveying. The

Director finds that the amendments are

not inconsistent with and are no less

effective than the counterpart Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 817.121(g) which

provide that the operator shall submit a

detailed plan of the underground

workings.

5. Repealed Provisions

Indiana proposes to repeal 310 IAC

12–3–87, 310 IAC 12–5–130, 310 IAC

12–5–131, and IAC 12–5–132. The

provisions are proposed for repeal

because they are replaced by 310 IAC

12–3–87.1, 310 IAC 12–5–130.1, and 10

IAC 12–5–131.1.

The Director is approving the repeal

of 310 IAC 12–3–87, 310 IAC 12–5–130,

and 310 IAC 12–5–131 because such

repeal does not render the Indiana

program less effective than the Federal

regulations. The director is deferring

decision on the repeal of 310 IAC 12–

5–132 until July 31, 1995, when OSM

will address the enforcement of the

provisions of SMCRA section 720 and

30 CFR 784.20 during the period from

the effective date of SMCRA section 720

(October 24, 1992) to the effective date

of IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 (June 30, 1994).

IV. Summary and Disposition of

Comments

Federal Agency Comments

Pursuant to section 503(b) of SMCRA

and 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), comments

were solicited from various interested

Federal agencies. The U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Soil Conservation

Service (SCS) commented on the

amendment (Administrative Record

Number IND–1345). The SCS stated that

the SCS determined that the changes

will not impact SCS programs

differently from the existing rules.

Public Comments

The public comment period and

opportunity to request a public hearing

was announced in the April 22, 1994,

Federal Register (59 FR 19155). The

comment period closed on May 23,

1994. No one requested an opportunity

to testify at the scheduled public

hearing so no hearing was held.

Ms. Freida K. Harris commented that

OSM should not approve the proposed

amendments because the amendments

contain language which OSM has

previously not approved. Specifically,

the commenter is referring to Indiana’s

deference to State law at 310 IAC 12–

3–87.1(c)(2)(B)(ii) and 310 IAC 12–5–

130.1(c)(2).

As discussed above in Findings 1 and

2, the Director did not fully approve the

previously-proposed language at 310

IAC 12–3–87.1(c)(2) and 310 IAC 12–5–

130.1(c)(2) to the extent that the

proposed language deferred to State law

to correct subsidence related material

damage. Since the time of that final rule

notice, however, Indiana amended its

statutes by adding IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 as a

counterpart to the new SMCRA

provision at section 720 concerning

subsidence liability. Upon review of

Indiana’s new subsidence statute, the

Director determined that the subsidence

statute is no less stringent than SMCRA

at section 720 to the extent that

Indiana’s statue meets the requirements

of SMCRA section 720 from June 30,

1994. As discussed in Findings 1 and 2

above, the Director is deferring, until

July 31, 1995, decision concerning the

enforcement of the provisions of the

Energy Policy Act in Indiana during the

period from the effective date of SMCRA

section 720 (October 24, 1992) to the

effective date of IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 (June

30, 1994). In the March 31, 1995,

approval of the Federal subsidence

regulations (60 FR 16722–16751) OSM

stated that it will publish proposed

notices and open public comment

periods to seek comment on information

submitted by States with approved

regulatory programs, including Indiana,

concerning enforcement of the Energy

Policy Act provisions in those States.

The public comment period for Indiana

closes on May 8, 1995.

Mr. R. Gehres commented on the

proposed changes at 310 IAC 12–5–

130.1(h). Specifically, the commenter

objected to the removal of the term

‘‘registered’’ as it appeared before the

words ‘‘professional engineer,’’ and to

the addition of a ‘‘registered land

surveyor’’ to the language describing

who must prepare the required maps of
19672 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 76 / Thursday, April 20, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

underground workings. In response, the

Director notes that the counterpart

Federal regulations at 30 CFR

817.121(g), while requiring the

submittal of a detailed plan of the

underground workings do not specify

the credentials of individuals who may

prepare those plans. Therefore,

Indiana’s amendments at 310 IAC 12–5–

130.1(h) do not render the Indiana

language less effective than 30 CFR

817.121(g).

Amoco Pipeline Company and

Tennico Gas, Inc., pipeline operators,

commented that the proposed

amendments provide inadequate

protection to pipelines from unplanned

subsidence. The proposed wording is

unnecessarily restrictive without

justification the commenter stated.

In response, the Director notes that

the proposed Indiana language is

patterned after the Federal regulations at

30 CFR 817.121 concerning subsidence

control, and SMCRA at section 720

concerning repair or compensation of

subsidence damage. On March 31, 1995

(60 FR 16722–16751), OSM published

subsidence regulations that are intended

to implement the new provisions at

SMCRA section 720. In that notice,

OSM noted that Congress directed OSM

to review existing Federal, State, and

local laws, as well as common law

related to underground coal mine

subsidence and natural gas and

petroleum pipeline safety. Since that

mandated review and report are not

finished, OSM believes that it would be

premature to revise existing law at this

time.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), the

director is required to obtain the written

concurrence of the Administrator of the

EPA with respect to any provisions of a

State 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.). The Director has determined that

this amendment contains no provisions

in these categories and that EPA’s

concurrence is not required.

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

solicited comments on the proposed

amendment from EPA (Administrative

Record No. IND–1221). EPA responded

by letter dated June 21, 1994

(Administrative Record Number IND–

1373). In that letter, the EPA concurred

without comment.

V. Director’s Decision

Based on the findings above, the

Director is approving, except as noted

below, Indiana’s program amendment

concerning subsidence as submitted by

Indiana on March 18, 1994. As

discussed above in Finding 1

concerning 310 IAC 12–3–87.1(c)(2) and

Finding 2 Concerning 310 IAC 12–5–

130.1(c)(2), the Director is approving the

propose deference to State law to the

extent that IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 meets the

requirements of SMCRA section 720

from June 30, 1994. The Director is

deferring decision on the enforcement of

the provisions of SMCRA section 720

during the period from the effective date

of SMCRA section 720 (October 24,

1992) to the effective date of IC 13–4.1–

9–2.5 (June 30, 1994). As discussed in

Finding 5, the Director is deferring

decision on the repeal of 310 IAC 12–

5–132.

The Federal regulations at 30 CFR

Part 914 codifying decisions concerning

the Indiana 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.

Effect of Director’s Decision

Section 503 of SMCRA provides that

a State may not exercise jurisdiction

under SMCRA unless the State program

is approved by the Secretary. Similarly,

30 CFR 732.17(a) requires that any

alteration of an approved State program

be submitted to OSM for review as a

program amendment. Thus, any changes

to the State program are not enforceable

until approved by OSM. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(g) prohibit

any unilateral changes to approved State

programs. In his oversight of the Indiana

program, the Director will recognize

only the statutes, regulations and other

materials approved by him, together

with any consistent implementing

policies, directives and other materials,

and will require the enforcement by

Indiana of only such provisions.

VI. 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

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 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 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 Part 914

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 76 / Thursday, April 20, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 19673

Dated: April 14, 1995.

Tim L. Dieringer,

Acting Assistant Director, Eastern 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 914—INDIANA

1. The authority citation for Part 914

continues to read as follows:

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

2. In § 914.15, paragraph (iii) is added

to read as follows:

§ 914.15 Approval of regulatory program

amendments.

* * * * *

(iii) The following amendment to the

Indiana program concerning

underground mine subsidence as

submitted to OSM on March 18, 1994,

is approved, except as noted herein,

effective April 20, 1995: 310 IAC 12–3–

87.1(c)(2) concerning subsidence control

plan, to the extent that IC 13–4.1–9–2.5

meets the requirements of SMCRA

section 720 from June 30, 1994. The

Director is deferring decision on the

enforcement of the provisions of

SMCRA section 720 during the period

from the effective date of SMCRA

section 720 (October 24, 1992) to the

effective date of IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 (June

30, 1994); 310 IAC 12–3–87.1(c)(7)

concerning subsidence control plan; 310

IAC 12–5–130.1(c)(2) concerning

subsidence control plan, general

requirements, to the extent that IC 13–

4.1–9–2.5 meets the requirements of

SMCRA section 720 from June 30, 1994.

The Director is deferring decision on the

enforcement of the provisions of

SMCRA section 720 during the period

from the effective date of SMCRA

section 720 (October 24, 1992) to the

effective date of IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 (June

30, 1994); 310 IAC 12–5–130.1(g)

concerning suspension of underground

mining; 310 IAC 12–5–130.1(h)

concerning detailed report of

underground workings; the repeal of

310 IAC 12–3–87, 310 IAC 12–5–130,

and 310 IAC 12–5–131; decision on the

repeal of 310 IAC 12–5–132 is deferred.

[FR Doc. 95–9775 Filed 4–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 144–3–6972b; FRL–5194–2]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; California State

Implementation Plan Revision; Interim

Final Determination That State has

Corrected Deficiencies

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final determination.

SUMMARY: Elsewhere in today’s Federal

Register EPA has published a proposed

rulemaking fully approving revisions to

the California State Implementation

Plan. The revisions concern South Coast

Air Quality Management District Rule

1164—Semiconductor Manufacturing.

The proposed rulemaking provides the

public with an opportunity to comment

on EPA’s action approving Rule 1164.

Based on the proposed approval, EPA is

making an interim final determination

by this action that the State has

corrected the deficiencies for which a

sanctions clock was activated on

September 29, 1993. This action will

defer the application of the offset

sanction and defer the application of the

highway sanction. Although this action

is effective upon publication, EPA will

take comment. If comments are received

on EPA’s proposed approval and this

interim final action, EPA will publish a

final notice taking into consideration

any comments received.

DATES: This interim final determination

is effective on April 20, 1995.

Comments must be received by May

22, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent

to: Daniel A. Meer, Rulemaking Section

(A–5–3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105.

The state submittal and EPA’s

analysis for that submittal, which are

the basis for this action, are available for

public review at the above address and

at the following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket 6102, 401 ‘‘M’’ Street, S.W.,

Washington 20460.

California Air Resources Board,

Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ‘‘L’’ Street,

Sacramento, CA 95814.

South Coast Air Quality Management

District, 21865 E. Copley Drive,

Diamond Bar, CA 91765–4182.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Helen Liu, Rulemaking Section (A–5–3),

Air and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105. Telephone: (415)

744–1199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On May 13, 1991, the State submitted

South Coast Air Quality Management

(SCAQMD) Rule 1164—Semiconductor

Manufacturing, for which EPA

published a limited disapproval in the

Federal Register on September 29, 1993

[58 FR 50850]. EPA’s limited

disapproval action started an 18-month

clock for the application of one sanction

(followed by a second sanction 6

months later) under section 179 of the

Clean Air Act (CAA) and a 24-month

clock for promulgation of a Federal

Implementation Plan (FIP) under

section 110(c) of the CAA. The State

subsequently submitted a revised rule

on February 24, 1995. The revised rule

was adopted by the SCAQMD on

January 13, 1995. In the Proposed Rules

section of today’s Federal Register, EPA

has proposed full approval of the State’s

submittal of SCAQMD Rule 1164—

Semiconductor Manufacturing.

Based on the proposed approval set

forth in today’s Federal Register, EPA

believes that it is more likely than not

that the State has corrected the original

disapproval deficiencies. Therefore,

EPA is taking this final rulemaking

action, effective on publication, finding

that the State has corrected the

deficiency. However, EPA is also

providing the public with an

opportunity to comment on this final

action. If, based on any comments on

this action and any comments on EPA’s

proposed approval of the State’s

submittal, EPA determines that the

State’s submittal is not fully approvable

and this final action was inappropriate,

EPA will either propose or take final

action finding that the State has not

corrected the original disapproval

deficiency. As appropriate, EPA will

also issue an interim final determination

or a final determination that the

deficiency has not been corrected. Until

EPA takes such an action, the

application of sanctions will continue to

be deferred.

This action does not stop the

sanctions clock that started for this area

on September 29, 1993. However, this

action will defer the application of the

offsets sanction and will defer the

application of the highway sanction. See

59 FR 39832 (Aug. 4, 1994). If EPA’s

proposal fully approving the State’s

submittal becomes final, such action

will permanently stop the sanctions