Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 1996 / Proposed Rules 25425

under the non-arm’s-length contract on

a monthly basis. MMS requests

comments on whether the volume

transferred under a non-arm’s-length

arrangement should be evaluated on the

basis of all gas under the contract or by

the size of each individual delivery

package. Second Benchmark: First bonafide arm’s-length sale by the affiliate,

except to retail customers. Third

Benchmark: Other relevant matters.

2. Adopt the Committee’s

recommendation for entitlements-based

reporting for mixed agreements, but

with no exception for small producers.

Under limited circumstances, allow

MMS-approved exceptions to

entitlements-based reporting if all

lessees agree.

3. Adopt industry’s comments to

include in this rule the explicit

provision for takes-based reporting for

100 percent Federal agreements and

stand alone leases.

4. In response to the State’s comments

and in order to provide more certainty

and consistency, modify the ‘‘bright

line’’ (distinction) between

transportation and gathering to be at the

FMP, consistent with the ‘‘bright line’’

test for the allowability of compression.

We may approve exceptions on a caseby-case basis. Add a provision to

prevent manipulation in the location of

compressors.

IV. Request for Public Comments

It is our intent to publish regulations

that are: (1) Clear and understandable

(2) responsive to the changing needs of

royalty payors, (3) equitable to all

affected parties, and (3) practical for us

to administer. Such regulations should

reduce administrative costs to both

payors and MMS, while not generating

a significant loss of royalty revenues.

Based on the comments received, we are

concerned that the proposed rule may

not satisfy these goals. Therefore, we

request input on how to improve the gas

valuation regulations so that all affected

parties benefit.

We specifically request comments on

the five options outlined above for

finalizing the proposed regulations in

light of the public comments we

received. We recognize that, for each

affected party, each option holds

benefits in certain areas while

containing drawbacks in other areas. We

emphasize that the five listed options

are not exhaustive but merely

suggestions for an improved, simplified,

and streamlined valuation process. We

welcome any new options or any

modifications to the proposed options

for consideration.

We are not requesting comments on

the summary of comments outlined in

this notice, only on the five options

described above or other options

suggested for valuing gas from Federal

leases.

The policy of the Department is,

whenever practicable, to give the public

an opportunity to participate in the

rulemaking process. Accordingly, you

should submit written comments,

suggestions, or objections regarding this

notice to the location identified in the

ADDRESSES section of this notice. You

should submit comments on or before

the date identified in the DATES section

of this notice.

Dated: May 15, 1996.

Michael A. Miller,

Acting Associate Director for Royalty

Management.

[FR Doc. 96–12723 Filed 5–20–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 934

[ND–033–FOR]

North Dakota Abandoned Mine Land

Reclamation Plan

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and

extension of public comment period on

proposed amendment.

SUMMARY: The Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is

announcing receipt of additional

explanatory information pertaining to a

previously proposed amendment to the

North Dakota abandoned mine land

reclamation (AMLR) plan (hereinafter,

the ‘‘North Dakota plan’’) under the

Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The

additional explanatory information for

North Dakota’s proposed statute and

plan provisions pertain to contractor

eligibility and sole-source procurement

procedures and policies. The

amendment is intended to revise the

North Dakota plan to meet the

requirements of the corresponding

Federal regulations and to improve

operational efficiency.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by 4:00 p.m., m.d.t., June 20,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or hand delivered to Guy

Padgett at the address listed below.

Copies of the North Dakota plan, the

proposed amendment, 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 one free

copy of the proposed amendment by

contacting OSM’s Casper Field Office.

Guy Padgett, Director, Casper Field

Office, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, 100

East B Street, Room 2128, Casper,

Wyoming 82601–1918

Louis A. Ogaard, Director, AML

Division, Public Service Commission,

Capitol Building, Bismarck, ND

58505–0165

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Guy Padgett, Telephone: (307) 261–

6555, Internet address:

GPADGETT@CWYGW.OSMRE.GOV.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the North Dakota

Plan

On December 23, 1981, the Secretary

of the Interior approved the North

Dakota plan. General background

information on the North Dakota plan,

including the Secretary’s findings and

the disposition of comments, can be

found in the December 23, 1981,

Federal Register (46 FR 62253).

Subsequent actions concerning North

Dakota’s plan and plan amendments can

be found at 934.25.

II. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated September 20, 1995,

North Dakota submitted a proposed

amendment to its plan (administrative

record No. ND–X–02) pursuant to

SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). North

Dakota submitted the proposed

amendment in response to a September

26, 1994, letter (administrative record

No. ND–X–01) that OSM sent to North

Dakota in accordance with 30 CFR

884.15(b), and at its own initiative. The

provisions of the North Dakota plan that

North Dakota proposed to add or revise

were: North Dakota Century Code

(NDCC) 38–14.2–03(14), powers and

duties of the Commission; procurement

procedures; contract procedures; policy

2–01–81(5), procurement policy and

contract policy; and State agency

organizational chart.

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the October 16,

1995, Federal Register (60 FR 53564),

provided an opportunity for a public

hearing or meeting on its substantive

adequacy, and invited public comment

on its adequacy (administrative record

No. ND–X–05). Because no one

requested a public hearing or meeting,

none was held. The public comment

period ended on November 15, 1995.

During its review of the amendment,

OSM identified concerns relating to (1)
25426 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 21, 1996 / Proposed Rules

the powers and duties of the

Commission at NDCC 38–14.2–03(14),

concerning the eligibility of successful

bidders to receive AMLR contracts and

(2) procurement procedures at section

IV. C. 5 of the North Dakota plan

provisions, concerning noncompetitive

negotiation (sole-source procurement)

when emergency or severe time

constraints preclude issuing a formal

request for proposals. OSM notified

North Dakota of the concerns by letter

dated December 7, 1995 (administrative

record No. ND–X–04). North Dakota

responded in a letter dated April 30,

1996, be submitting additional

explanatory information (administrative

record No. ND–X–09).

North Dakota proposes additional

explanatory information for NDCC 38–

14.2–03(14), contractor responsibility,

in the form of a policy that provides

guidelines to govern the selection of

successful bidders for AMLR contracts,

and section IV. C. 5 of its plan

provisions, procurement procedures, in

the form of a statement concerning solesource procurement.

Specifically, North Dakota proposes to

add a policy statement that requires a

background search of successful bidders

for AMLR contracts, provides the

criteria to be used in determining the

eligibility of the successful bidder under

30 CFR 773.15(b)(1) at the time of

contract award, limits the award of the

AMLR contract to a successful bidder

who meets the criteria used to

determine eligibility, and provides that

the eligibility determination will be

made through OSM’s Applicant/

Violator System for each AMLR contract

to be awarded. North Dakota also

proposes that the Federal regulation at

43 CFR 12.76(d)(4)(i)(B), which is cited

in OSM’s December 7, 1995, issue letter,

and implements one part of the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB)

Circular A–102 (commonly known as

the ‘‘Common Rule’’), does not apply to

States and that States are required to

abide by 43 CFR 12–76(a) only.

III. Public Comment Procedures

OSM is reopening the comment

period on the proposed North Dakota

plan amendment to provide the public

an opportunity to reconsider the

adequacy of the proposed amendment

in light of the additional materials

submitted. In accordance with the

provisions of 30 CFR 884.15(a), OSM is

seeking comments on whether the

proposed amendment satisfies the

applicable plan approval criteria of 30

CFR 884.14. If the amendment is

deemed adequate, it will become part of

the North Dakota plan.

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 Casper 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 12988

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988

(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 Tribe or State AMLR

plans and revisions thereof since each

such plan is drafted and promulgated by

a specific Tribe or State, not by OSM.

Decisions on proposed Tribe or State

AMLR plans and revisions thereof

submitted by a Tribe or State are based

on a determination of whether the

submittal meets the requirements of

Title IV of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1231–

1243) and the applicable Federal

regulations at 30 CFR Parts 884 and 888.

3. National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is

required for this rule since agency

decisions on proposed Tribe or State

AMLR plans and revisions thereof are

categorically excluded from compliance

with the National Environmental Policy

Act (42 U.S.C. 4332) by the Manual of

the Department of the Interior (516 DM

6, appendix 8, paragraph 8.4B(29)).

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 Tribe or State

submittal which is the subject of this

rule is based upon 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 established by

SMCRA or previously promulgated by

OSM will be implemented by the Tribe

or State. In making the determination as

to whether this rule would have a

significant economic impact, the

Department relied upon the data and

assumptions in the analyses for the

corresponding Federal regulations.

6. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

This rule will not impose a cost of

$100 million or more in any given year

on any governmental entity or the

private sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 934

Abandoned mine reclamation

programs, Intergovernmental relations,

Surface mining, Underground mining.

Dated: May 9, 1996.

Richard J. Seibel,

Regional Director, Western Regional

Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 96–12726 Filed 5–20–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

30 CFR Part 936

[OK–018–FOR]

Oklahoma 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 receipt of

a propose amendment to the Oklahoma

regulatory program (hereinafter, the

‘‘Oklahoma program’’) under the

Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The

proposed amendment consists of

revisions to Oklahoma’s Coal Program

Rules and Regulations. Oklahoma

proposes to recodify and reinstate rules

pertaining to an exemption for coal

extraction incidental to governmentfinanced or other construction. The

amendment is intended to revise the

Oklahoma program to be consistent with

the corresponding Federal regulations.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by 4:00 p.m., c.d.t., June 20,

1996. If requested, a public hearing on

the proposed amendment will be held

on June 17, 1996. Requests to present

oral testimony at the hearing must be

received by 4:00 p.m., c.d.t., on June 5,

1996.