26454 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

RSMo 444.950.3—Self-bonding

requirements and adoption of an

alternative bonding system.

RSMo 444.950.4—Phase I reclamation

bond liability.

RSMo 444.960.1—Establishment of the

CMLR Fund.

RSMo 444.960.5—Allocation and use of

the A (40%) and B (60%) portions of

the CMLR Fund.

RSMo 444.965.1—CMLR initial

assessments.

RSMo 444.965.3—Deletion of buy-out

option.

RSMo 444.965.4—CMLR Fund

Adjustment.

RSMo 444.965.5—CMLR assessment

increase.

(2) Revisions to the Missouri Code of

Regulations (CSR) at 10 CSR 40–7.

10 CSR 40–7.011(1)—Deletion of the

definition of full-cost bond, revision

of the definition of Phase I bond, and

addition of definitions for Phase II

and Phase III bond.

10 CSR 40–7.011(2)—Revision of

requirements to file a bond.

10 CSR 40–7.011(3)—Filing of

incremental bond and identification

of increments for bonding.

10 CSR 40–7.011(4)—Minimum per acre

Phase I bond amounts, minimum

Phase I bond for a permit, and

deletion of full-cost bonding

provisions.

10 CSR 40–7.011(5)—Annual

adjustment of Phase I bond amounts.

10 CSR 40–7.021(2)—Concerning

criteria and schedule for release of

reclamation liability, qualification for

release of Phase I liability, release of

Phase I bond when Phase I

reclamation is completed, and release

of bond from undisturbed areas.

10 CSR 40–7.021(5)—Requirement to

file an affidavit at Phase III release of

underground mining acreage.

10 CSR 40–7.041(1)—Payment to the 40

percent pool, assessment rates,

continuation of monthly assessments,

and reinstatement rates.

10 CSR 40–7.041(4)—Expenditure of

reclamation fund moneys.

§ 925.16 [Amended]

3. Section 925.16 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraphs

(g)(1) through (g)(8) and (g)(20).

[FR Doc. 96–13261 Filed 5–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

30 CFR Part 925

[SPATS No. MO–025–FOR]

Missouri Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of

amendment.

SUMMARY: OSM is approving, with

certain exceptions, a proposed

amendment to the Missouri regulatory

program (hereinafter referred to as the

‘‘Missouri program’’) under the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1977 (SMCRA). The proposed

amendment consists of a proposed set of

revegetation success guidelines and a

rulemaking that eliminates the reference

to an earlier set of guidelines that was

never approved by OSM. The

amendment is intended to revise the

Missouri program to be consistent with

the corresponding Federal regulations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 28, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brent Wahlquist, Regional Director,

Mid-Continent Regional Coordinating

Center, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Alton

Federal Building, 501 Belle Street,

Alton, Illinois 62002, Telephone: (618)

463–6460.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Missouri Program

II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

III. Director’s Findings

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

V. Director’s Decision

VI. Procedural Determinations

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. Submission of the Proposed

Amendment

By letter dated December 14, 1995

(Administrative Record no. MO–633),

Missouri submitted a proposed

amendment to its program pursuant to

SMCRA. Missouri submitted the

proposed amendment in response to the

required program amendments at 30

CFR 925.16 (a) and (p)(6). The

provisions of the Code of State

Regulations (CSR) that Missouri

proposes to amend are: 10 CSR 40–

3.120/3.270(c)(B)2.A–H., Specific

revegetation success standards for

postmining land uses. Specifically,

Missouri proposes revisions to its

approved program for evaluating

revegetation success. Missouri revised

its regulations for the specific standards

for each of its approved land uses to

delete the reference to an earlier set of

guidelines that had not been approved

by OSM and reference the guidelines as

currently proposed in this amendment.

The proposed revegetation success

guidelines consist of eight separate

guidance documents that establish the

revegetation success standards by land

use. These documents are titled the: (1)

Phase II and Phase III revegetation

standards for prime farmland; (2) Phase

III revegetation standards for cropland;

(3) Phase III revegetation standards for

pasture and previously mined areas; (4)

Phase III revegetation standards for

wildlife habitat; (5) Phase III

revegetation standards for woodland; (6)

Phase III revegetation standards for

industrial/commercial revegetation; (7)

Phase III revegetation success standards

for residential land use; and (8) Phase III

revegetation success standards for

recreation land use. Each set of

guidelines elaborates by land use type

the revegetation success standards,

measurement frequency, sampling

procedures, data submission and

analysis, maps, and mitigation plan

requirements. The guidance documents

follow the approved Missouri program

regulations at 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270(6).

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the January 26,

1996, Federal Register (61 FR 2459),

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

February 26, 1996.

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.

Revisions not specifically discussed

below concern nonsubstantive wording

changes, or revised cross-references and

paragraph notations to reflect

organizational changes resulting from

this amendment.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 26455

1. 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270(6)(B)—

Specific Standards for Postmining Land

Uses

The required amendment at 30 CFR

925.16(p)(6) requires Missouri to amend

its program at 10 CSR 40–3.120/

3.270(6)(B) 2.A through H to remove the

reference to the Land Reclamation

Commission’s June 1990 Phase III

Liability Release Guidelines.

Missouri proposes to revise each land

use specific revegetation success

guidance document which it

incorporated by reference into its

regulations. Measurement, for

applicable land use specific levels of

ground cover, production, or stocking

shall be performed in accordance with

the criteria contained in the current

land use specific guidelines of the Land

Reclamation Commission.

Although there is not an exact

counterpart Federal regulation

concerning the incorporation by

reference of revegetation success

guidance documents, the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(1)

require a State to include its standards

for success and statistically valid

sampling techniques for measuring

revegetation success in its approved

regulatory program. Missouri is

proposing to accomplish this by

incorporating eight land use specific

guidance documents by reference in its

regulations at 10 CSR 40–3.120/

3.270(6)(B). The Director finds that

Missouri’s proposal to include these

documents by reference into its

approved program is not inconsistent

with the Federal regulation

requirements. Accordingly, the Director

is removing the required program

amendment from the Missouri program

as codified at 30 CFR 925.16(p)(6).

2. Revegetation Success Guidelines

The required amendment at 30 CFR

925.16(a) requires Missouri to amend its

program to include those technical

guidance procedures that the State

considers acceptable for use in

evaluating revegetation success.

a. Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for Woodland

Missouri proposes to adopt a

guidance document entitled ‘‘Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Woodland.’’ This document describes

the criteria and procedures for

determining Phase III success standards

for areas being restored as Woodland

pursuant to 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270(6)

and (7).

Missouri proposes that revegetation

success on woodland be determined on

the basis of: the general revegetation

requirements of the approved permit;

ground cover; and tree/shrub stocking

and survival. The permittee is

responsible for measuring the vegetation

and for submitting the data to the

director of Missouri Land Reclamation

Program (MLRP) for analysis.

Measurements of the vegetation must be

made in accordance with the procedures

outlined in the guidance document. The

director of MLRP must determine that

the general requirements for

revegetation success be satisfied as

stated in 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270(1). The

guidance document sets out specific

success standards and measurement

frequencies for ground cover and tree

and shrub stocking rate based on the

regulatory requirements of 10 CSR 40–

3.120/3.270. Sampling procedures are to

use statistically valid random sampling

methods using a 90 percent statistical

confidence limit. Ground cover is to be

measured by the line-point transect

method and tree/shrub stocking is to be

measured with sampling circles. Sample

adequacy is to be determined using a

prescribed formula. If the data indicates

that the vegetation is close to the

standard but less than the standard, the

data is to be submitted to the director of

MLRP for statistical analysis to

determine if the differences are

statistically significant within the limits

allowed by regulation. Maps must be

provided by the permittees for each

Phase III plan indicating the location of

each sampling transect and sample

frame point, the area covered by the

sampling and all permit boundaries. If

the permittees can not demonstrate

revegetation success in the fifth year

after completion of initial seeding, a

mitigation plan must be submitted to

the director of MLRP including a

statement of the problem, a discussion

of methods to correct the problem, and

a new phase III liability release plan. If

the plan involves augmented activities

then the 5 year responsibility period

will begin again. Appendices are

attached illustrating the selection of

random sampling sites; data forms for

line-point transect; data forms for

sample circle; T-table; example of

sample adequacy determination for

ground cover; example of sample

adequacy determination for tree/shrub

stocking; statistical analysis for ground

cover and tree/shrub stocking; accepted

plant species; and references.

The counterpart Federal regulations at

30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(1) require that

standards for success and statistically

valid sampling techniques for

measuring success shall be selected by

the regulatory authority and included in

an approved program. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(2)

require that standards for success shall

include criteria representative of

unmined lands in the area being

reclaimed to evaluate the appropriate

vegetation parameters of ground cover,

production, or stocking. Ground cover,

production, or stocking shall be

considered equal to the approved

success standard when they are not less

than 90 percent of the success standard.

The sampling techniques for measuring

success shall use a 90 percent statistical

confidence interval (i.e., one-sided test

with a 0.10 alpha error). Missouri is

proposing to accomplish this by

adoption of a detailed guidance

document illustrating the methods to be

used by the permittee to measure

revegetation success for woodland. The

Director finds that the guidance

document is not inconsistent with and

no less effective than the Federal

regulations.

b. Phase III Success Standards for

Industrial/Commercial Revegetation

Missouri proposes to adopt a

guidance document entitled ‘‘Phase III

Success Standards for Industrial/

Commercial Revegetation.’’ This

document describes the criteria and

procedures for determining Phase III

success standards for areas being

restored as industrial/commercial

pursuant to 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270 (6)

and (7).

Missouri proposes that revegetation

success on industrial/commercial be

determined on the basis of: the general

revegetation requirements of the

approved permit; and ground cover

density. The permittee is responsible for

measuring the vegetation and for

submitting the data to the director of

MLRP for analysis. Measurements of the

vegetation must be made in accordance

with the procedures outlined in the

guidance document. The director of

MLRP must determine that the general

requirements for revegetation success be

satisfied as stated in 10 CSR 40–3.120/

3.270(1). The guidance document sets

out specific success standards and

measurement frequencies for ground

cover based on the regulatory

requirements of 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270.

Sampling procedures are to use

statistically valid random sampling

methods using a 90 percent confidence

interval. Ground cover is to be measured

by the line-point transect method.

Sample adequacy is to be determined

using a prescribed formula. If the data

indicates that the vegetation is close to

the standard but less than the standard,

the data is to be submitted to the

director of MLRP for statistical analysis

to determine if the differences are
26456 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

statistically significant within the limits

allowed by regulation. Maps must be

provided by the permittee for each

Phase III plan indicating the location of

each sampling transect and sample

frame point, the area covered by the

sampling, and all permit boundaries. If

the permittee can not demonstrate

revegetation success in the fifth year

after completion of initial seeding, a

mitigation plan must be submitted to

the director of MLRP including a

statement of the problem, a discussion

of methods to correct the problem, and

a new phase III liability release plan. If

the plan involves augmented activities

then the 5 year responsibility period

will begin again. Appendices are

attached illustrating the selection of

random sampling sites; data forms for

line-point transect; data forms for

sample circle; T-table; example of

sample adequacy determination for

ground cover; statistical analysis for

ground cover; accepted plant species;

and references.

The counterpart Federal regulations at

30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(1) require that

standards for success and statistically

valid sampling techniques for

measuring success shall be selected by

the regulatory authority and included in

an approved program. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(2)

require that standards for success shall

include criteria representative of

unmined lands in the area being

reclaimed to evaluate the appropriate

vegetation parameters of ground cover,

production, or stocking. Ground cover,

production, or stocking shall be

considered equal to the approved

success standard when they are not less

than 90 percent of the success standard.

The sampling techniques for measuring

success shall use a 90 percent statistical

confidence interval (i.e., one-sided test

with a 0.10 alpha error). Missouri is

proposing to accomplish this by

adoption of a detailed guidance

document illustrating the methods to be

used by the permittee to measure

revegetation success for industrial/

commercial land uses. The Director

finds that the guidance document is not

inconsistent with and is no less effective

than the Federal regulations.

c. Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for Cropland

Missouri proposes to adopt a

guidance document entitled ‘‘Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Cropland.’’ This document describes the

criteria and procedures for determining

Phase III success standards for areas

being restored as cropland pursuant to

10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270 (6) and (7).

Missouri proposes that revegetation

success on cropland be determined on

the basis of ground cover and crop

production. The permittee is

responsible for measuring the vegetation

and for submitting the data to the

director of MLRP for analysis.

Measurements of the vegetation must be

made in accordance with the procedures

outlined in the guidance document. The

guidance document sets out specific

success standards and measurement

frequencies for ground cover and crop

production based on the regulatory

requirements of 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270.

The crop production standard is to be

determined with a reference area or the

use of a technical standard. Approved

technical standards include the county

average or target yield established by the

U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural

Resources Conservation Service (USDA

NRCS). Target yields must be adjusted

annually and be representative of yields

expected when using high management

practices common to the area. Sampling

procedures are to use statistically valid

random sampling methods. Ground

cover is to be measured by the linepoint transect method. Crop production

is to be measured utilizing sampling

frames for forage production or whole

area harvest for forage or row crop

production. Manual sampling of row

crops is only allowed when weather or

other factors prevent mechanical harvest

and must have prior approval by the

director of MLRP. The guidance

document also establishes a method for

establishing representative test plots for

use with row crop production. Sample

adequacy is to be determined using a

prescribed formula. If the data indicates

that the vegetation is close to the

standard but less than the standard, the

data is to be submitted to the director of

MLRP for statistical analysis to

determine if the differences are

statistically significant within the limits

allowed by regulation. Maps must be

provided by the permittee for each

Phase III plan indicating the location of

each sampling transect and sample

frame point, the area covered by the

sampling, and all permit boundaries. If

the permittee can not demonstrate

revegetation success in the fifth year

after completion of initial seeding, a

mitigation plan must be submitted to

the director of MLRP including a

statement of the problem, a discussion

of methods to correct the problem, and

a new phase III liability release plan. If

the plan involves augmented activities

then the 5 year responsibility period

will begin again. Appendices are

attached illustrating the selection of

random sampling sites; summary data

forms for sampling frames; data forms

for crop production data; T-table;

example of sample adequacy

determination for hay production

measurements; statistical analysis for

sampling frame data; data form for

forage crop production data harvested as

baled hay; statistical analysis of whole

release area harvesting; yield

adjustments for release areas due to

differing soil series; yield adjustments

for moisture; crop surveyor’s affidavit of

qualifications and crop production

yields; grasses of acceptable plant

species for permanent ground cover on

agricultural areas; procedure for

manually sampling row crops; and

references.

The counterpart Federal regulations at

30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(1) require that

standards for success and statistically

valid sampling techniques for

measuring success shall be selected by

the regulatory authority and included in

an approved program. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(2)

require that standards for success shall

include criteria representative of

unmined lands in the area being

reclaimed to evaluate the appropriate

vegetation parameters of ground cover,

production, or stocking. Ground cover,

production, or stocking shall be

considered equal to the approved

success standard when they are not less

than 90 percent of the success standard.

The sampling techniques for measuring

success shall use a 90 percent statistical

confidence interval (i.e., one-sided test

with a 0.10 alpha error). Missouri is

proposing to accomplish this by

adoption of a detailed guidance

document illustrating the methods to be

used by the permittee to measure

revegetation success for cropland. The

Director finds that the guidance

document is not inconsistent with and

no less effective than the Federal

regulations.

d. Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for Wildlife Habitat

Missouri proposes to adopt a

guidance document entitled ‘‘Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Wildlife Habitat.’’ This document

describes the criteria and procedures for

determining Phase III success standards

for areas being restored as wildlife

habitat pursuant to 10 CSR 40–3.120/

3.270 (6) and (7).

Missouri proposes that revegetation

success on wildlife habitat be

determined on the basis of: the general

revegetation requirements of the

approved permit; ground cover; and

tree/shrub stocking and survival. The

permittee is responsible for measuring

the vegetation and for submitting the
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 26457

data to the director of MLRP for

analysis. Measurements of the

vegetation must be made in accordance

with the procedures outlined in the

guidance document. The director of

MLRP must determine that the general

requirements for revegetation success be

satisfied as stated in 10 CSR 40–3.120/

3.270(1). The guidance document sets

out specific success standards and

measurement frequencies for ground

cover and tree and shrub stocking rate

based on the regulatory requirements of

10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270. Sampling

procedures are to use statistically valid

random sampling methods. Ground

cover is to be measured by the linepoint transect method and tree/shrub

stocking is to be measured with

sampling circles. Sample adequacy is to

be determined using a prescribed

formula. If the data indicates that the

vegetation is close to the standard but

less than the standard, the data is to be

submitted to the director of MLRP for

statistical analysis to determine if the

differences are statistically significant

within the limits allowed by regulation.

Maps must be provided by the permittee

for each Phase III plan indicating the

location of each sampling transect and

sample frame point, the area covered by

the sampling, and all permit boundaries.

If the permittee can not demonstrate

revegetation success in the fifth year

after completion of initial seeding, a

mitigation plan must be submitted to

the director of MLRP including a

statement of the problem, a discussion

of methods to correct the problem, and

a new phase III liability release plan. If

the plan involves augmented activities

then the 5 year responsibility period

will begin again. Appendices are

attached illustrating the selection of

random sampling sites; data forms for

line-point transect; data forms for

sample circle; T—table; example of

sample adequacy determination for

ground cover; example of sample

adequacy determination for tree/shrub

stocking; statistical analysis for ground

cover and tree/shrub stocking; accepted

plant species; and references.

The counterpart Federal regulations at

30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(1) require that

standards for success and statistically

valid sampling techniques for

measuring success shall be selected by

the regulatory authority and included in

an approved program. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(2)

require that standards for success shall

include criteria representative of

unmined lands in the area being

reclaimed to evaluate the appropriate

vegetation parameters of ground cover,

production, or stocking. Ground cover,

production, or stocking shall be

considered equal to the approved

success standard when they are not less

than 90 percent of the success standard.

The sampling techniques for measuring

success shall use a 90 percent statistical

confidence interval (i.e., one-sided test

with a 0.10 alpha error). Missouri is

proposing to accomplish this by

adoption of a detailed guidance

document illustrating the methods to be

used by the permittee to measure

revegetation success for wildlife habitat.

The Director finds that the guidance

document is not inconsistent with and

no less effective than the Federal

regulations.

e. Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for Pasture and Previously

Mined areas

Missouri proposes to adopt a

guidance document entitled ‘‘Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Pasture and Previously Mined Areas.’’

This document describes the criteria

and procedures for determining Phase

III success standards for areas being

restored as pasture and previously

mined land pursuant to 10 CSR 40–

3.120/3.270 (6) and (7).

Missouri proposes that revegetation

success on pasture and previously

mined land be determined on the basis

of: the general revegetation

requirements of the approved permit;

ground cover; and production. The

permittee is responsible for measuring

the vegetation and for submitting the

data to the director of MLRP for

analysis. Any previously mined land

that was remined or redistributed and

reclaimed to a land use of pasture, must

achieve the same success standard for

cover as land that was not previously

disturbed by mining. However if the

area is not reclaimed to the

requirements of 10 CSR 40–3.120(6)(B),

the vegetation cover shall not be less

than the ground cover existing before

redisturbance and shall be adequate to

control erosion. This ground cover

standard must have been determined

and incorporated into the permit prior

to disturbance. There is no productivity

standard for previously mined land. The

director of MLRP must determine that

the general requirements for

revegetation success be satisfied as

stated in 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270(1).

Measurements of the vegetation must be

made in accordance with the procedures

outlined in the guidance document. The

guidance document sets out specific

success standards and measurement

frequencies for ground cover and

production based on the regulatory

requirements of 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270.

The forage production standard is to be

determined with a reference area or a

current USDA/NRCS high management

target yield. Sampling procedures are to

use statistically valid random sampling

methods at a 90 percent statistical

confidence interval. Ground cover is to

be measured by the line-point transect

method. Forage production is to be

measured utilizing sampling frames or

whole area harvest. The guidance

document also establishes a method for

establishing representative test plots.

Sample adequacy is to be determined

using a prescribed formula. If the data

indicates that the vegetation is close to

the standard but less than the standard,

the data is to be submitted to the

director of MLRP for statistical analysis

to determine if the differences are

statistically significant within the limits

allowed by regulation. Maps must be

provided by the permittee for each

Phase III plan indicating the location of

each sampling transect and sample

frame point, the area covered by the

sampling and all permit boundaries. If

the permittee can not demonstrate

revegetation success in the fourth year

after completion of last augmented

seeding, a mitigation plan must be

submitted to the director of MLRP

including a statement of the problem, a

discussion of methods to correct the

problem, and a new phase III liability

release plan. If the plan involves

augmented activities then the 5 year

responsibility period will begin again.

Appendices are attached illustrating the

selection of random sampling sites; data

forms for line point transects; summary

data forms for sampling frames; T-table;

data form for forage crop production

data harvested as baled hay; example

use of sample adequacy formula for

ground cover measurements and hay

production measurements; statistical

analysis on sampling frame data and

whole release area harvesting; yield

adjustments for release areas due to

differing soil series; grasses of

acceptable plant species for permanent

ground cover on agricultural areas; and

references.

The counterpart Federal regulations at

30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(1) require that

standards for success and statistically

valid sampling techniques for

measuring success shall be selected by

the regulatory authority and included in

an approved program. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(2)

require that standards for success shall

include criteria representative of

unmined lands in the area being

reclaimed to evaluate the appropriate

vegetation parameters of ground cover,

production, or stocking. Ground cover,

production, or stocking shall be
26458 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

considered equal to the approved

success standard then they are not less

than 90 percent of the success standard.

The sampling techniques for measuring

success shall use a 90 percent statistical

confidence interval (i.e., one-sided test

with a 0.10 alpha error). Missouri is

proposing to accomplish this by

adoption of a detailed guidance

document illustrating the methods to be

used by the permittee to measure

revegetation success for pasture and

previously mined land. The Director

finds that the guidance document is not

inconsistent with and no less effective

than the Federal regulations.

f. Phase II/III Revegetation Success

Standards for Prime Farmland

Missouri proposes to adopt a

guidance document entitled ‘‘Phase II/

III Revegetation Success Standards for

Prime Farmland.’’ This document

describes the criteria and procedures for

determining Phase II and III success

standards for areas being restored as

prime farmland pursuant to 10 CSR 40–

3.120/3.270 (6) and (7) and 10 CSR 40–

4.030.

Missouri proposes that revegetation

success on prime farmland be

determined on the basis of crop

production. The permittee is

responsible for measuring the vegetation

and for submitting the data to the

director of MLRP for analysis.

Measurements of the vegetation must be

made in accordance with the procedures

outlined in the guidance document.

Ground cover must be established

following soil replacement with

approved species to effectively control

erosion. The guidance document sets

out specific success standards and

measurement frequencies for crop

production based on the regulatory

requirements of 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270

and 10 CSR 40–4.030. The crop

production standard is to be determined

with a reference area or the use of a

technical standard. Approved technical

standards include the county average or

target yield established by the USDA

NRCS. Target yields must be adjusted

annually and be representative of yields

expected when using high management

practices common to the area.

Sampling procedures are to use

statistically valid random sampling

methods. Crop production is to be

measured utilizing sampling frames for

forage production or whole area harvest

for forage or row crop production.

Manual sampling of row crops is only

allowed when weather or other factors

prevent mechanical harvest and must

have prior approval by the director of

MLRP. The guidance document also

establishes a method for establishing

representative test plots for use with

row crop production. Sample adequacy

is to be determined using a prescribed

formula. If the data indicates that the

vegetation is close to the standard but

less than the standard, the data is to be

submitted to the director of MLRP for

statistical analysis to determine if the

differences are statistically significant

within the limits allowed by regulation.

Maps must be provided by the permittee

for each Phase III plan indicating the

location of each sampling transect and

sample frame point, the area covered by

the sampling, and all permit boundaries.

If the permittee cannot demonstrate

revegetation success in the fifth year

after completion of initial seeding, a

mitigation plan must be submitted to

the director of MLRP including a

statement of the problem, a discussion

of methods to correct the problem, and

a new phase III liability release plan. If

the plan involves augmented activities,

then the 5-year responsibility period

will begin again. Appendices are

attached illustrating the selection of

random sampling sites; summary data

forms for sampling frames; data forms

for crop production data; T—table;

example of sample adequacy

determination for hay production

measurements; statistical analysis for

sampling frame data; data form for

forage crop production data harvested as

baled hay; statistical analysis of whole

release area harvesting; yield

adjustments for release areas due to

differing soil series; yield adjustments

for moisture; crop surveyor’s affidavit of

qualifications and crop production

yields; grasses of acceptable plant

species for permanent ground cover on

agricultural areas; procedure for

manually sampling row crops; and

references.

The counterpart Federal regulations at

30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(1) require that

standards for success and statistically

valid sampling techniques for

measuring success shall be selected by

the regulatory authority and included in

an approved program. The Federal

regulation at 30 CFR 823.15 establishes

the revegetation and restoration

requirements for soil productivity on

prime farmland.

Missouri is proposing to accomplish

this by adoption of a detailed guidance

document illustrating the methods to be

used by the permittee to measure

revegetation success for prime farmland.

The Director finds that portion of the

prime farmland guidance document that

establishes the revegetation standards

and sampling techniques is not

inconsistent with and no less effective

than the Federal regulations and is

approving it with the following

exception.

As previously discussed, Missouri

proposes in its prime farmland guidance

document one option for establishing a

success standard by utilizing approved

technical standards including the

county average or target yield

established by the USDA NRCS. Target

yields must be adjusted annually and be

representative of yields expected when

using high management practices

common to the area. The Federal

regulation at 30 CFR 823.15(b)(7)

requires that reference crop yields for a

given crop season are to be determined

from * * * (ii) the average county

yields recognized by the USDA, which

have been adjusted by the U.S. Soil

Conservation Service for local yield

variation within the county that is

associated with differences between

nonmined prime farmland soil and all

other soils that produce the reference

crop. The Director finds that Missouri’s

proposal to utilize county averages of

production is less effective than the

Federal regulations because county

averages would not have been adjusted

by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service to

remove the influence of other nonprime

soils that produce the reference crop.

The Director finds that portion of the

prime farmland guidance document

concerning Missouri’s option for

establishing a revegetation success

standard for prime farmland soils with

county averages that do not distinguish

between nonprime and prime soil is less

effective than the Federal regulations

and is not approving its use.

g. Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for a Recreation Land Use

Missouri proposes to adopt a

guidance document entitled ‘‘Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for a

Recreation land use.’’ This document

describes the criteria and procedures for

determining Phase III success standards

for areas being restored for a recreation

land use pursuant to 10 CSR 40–3.120/

3.270 (6) and (7).

Missouri proposes that revegetation

success for a recreation land use be

determined on the basis of: the general

revegetation requirements of the

approved permit; ground cover; and

tree/shrub stocking and survival. The

permittee is responsible for measuring

the vegetation and for submitting the

data to the director of MLRP for

analysis. Measurements of the

vegetation must be made in accordance

with the procedures outlined in the

guidance document. The director of

MLRP must determine that the general

requirements for revegetation success be

satisfied as stated in 10 CSR 40–3.120/
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 26459

3.270(1). The guidance document sets

out specific success standards and

measurement frequencies for ground

cover and tree and shrub stocking rate

based on the regulatory requirements of

10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270. Sampling

procedures are to use statistically valid

random sampling methods. Ground

cover is to be measured by the linepoint transect method and tree/shrub

stocking is to be measured with

sampling circles. Sample adequacy is to

be determined using a prescribed

formula. If the data indicates that the

vegetation is close to the standard but

less than the standard, the data is to be

submitted to the director of MLRP for

statistical analysis to determine if the

differences are statistically significant

within the limits allowed by regulation.

Maps must be provided by the permittee

for each Phase III plan indicating the

location of each sampling transect and

sample frame point, the area covered by

the sampling and all permit boundaries.

If the permittee can not demonstrate

revegetation success in the fifth year

after completion of initial seeding, a

mitigation plan must be submitted to

the director of MLRP including a

statement of the problem, a discussion

of methods to correct the problem, and

a new phase III liability release plan. If

the plan involved augmented activities

then the 5 year responsibility period

will begin again. Appendices are

attached illustrating the selection of

random sampling sites; data forms for

line-point transect; T—table; example of

sample adequacy determination for

ground cover; statistical analysis for

ground cover; accepted plant species;

and references.

The counterpart Federal regulations at

30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(1) require that

standards for success and statistically

valid sampling techniques for

measuring success shall be selected by

the regulatory authority and included in

an approved program. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(2)

require that standards for success shall

include criteria representative of

unmined lands in the area being

reclaimed to evaluate the appropriate

vegetation parameters of ground cover,

production, or stocking. Ground cover,

production, or stocking shall be

considered equal to the approved

success standard when they are not less

than 90 percent of the success standard.

The sampling techniques for measuring

success shall use a 90 percent statistical

confidence interval (i.e., one-sided test

with a 0.10 alpha error). Missouri is

proposing to accomplish this by

adoption of a detailed guidance

document illustrating the methods to be

used by the permittee to measure

revegetation success for a recreation

land use. The Director finds that the

guidance document is not inconsistent

with and no less effective than the

Federal regulations.

h. Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for Residential Land Use

Missouri proposes to adopt a

guidance document entitled ‘‘Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Residential land use.’’ This document

describes the criteria and procedures for

determining Phase III success standards

for areas being restored as industrial/

commercial pursuant to 10 CSR 40–

3.120/3.270 (6) and (7).

Missouri proposes that revegetation

success for a residential land use be

determined on the basis of: the general

revegetation requirements of the

approved permit; ground cover density;

and if approved in the permit, tree and

shrub stocking. The permittee is

responsible for measuring the vegetation

and for submitting the data to the

director of MLRP for analysis.

Measurements of the vegetation must be

made in accordance with the procedures

outlined in the guidance document. The

director of MLRP must determine that

the general requirements for

revegetation success be satisfied as

stated in 10 CSR 40–3.120/3.270(1). The

guidance document sets out specific

success standards and measurement

frequencies for ground cover based on

the regulatory requirements of 10 CSR

40–3.120/3.270. Sampling procedures

are to use statistically valid random

sampling methods. Ground cover is to

be measured by the line-point transect

method and tree/shrub stocking is to be

measured with sampling circles. Sample

adequacy is to be determined using a

prescribed formula. If the data indicates

that the vegetation is close to the

standard but less than the standard, the

data is to be submitted to the director of

MLRP for statistical analysis to

determine if the differences are

statistically significant within the limits

allowed by regulation. Maps must be

provided by the permittee for each

Phase III plan indicating the location of

each sampling transect and sample

frame point, the area covered by the

sampling and all permit boundaries. If

the permittee can not demonstrate

revegetation success in the fifth year

after completion of initial seeding, a

mitigation plan must be submitted to

the director of MLRP including a

statement of the problem, a discussion

of methods to correct the problem, and

a new phase III liability release plan. If

the plan involves augmented activities

then the 5 year responsibility period

will begin again. Appendices are

attached illustrating the selection of

random sampling sites; data forms for

line-point transect; data forms for

sample circle; T-table; example of

sample adequacy determination for

ground cover measurements and tree/

shrub counts; statistical analysis for

ground cover and tree/shrub data;

accepted plan species; and references.

The counterpart Federal regulations at

30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(1) require that

standards for success and statistically

valid sampling techniques for

measuring success shall be selected by

the regulatory authority and included in

an approved program. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816/817.116(a)(2)

require that standards for success shall

include criteria representative of

unmined lands in the area being

reclaimed to evaluate the appropriate

vegetation parameters of ground cover,

production, or stocking. Ground cover,

production, or stocking shall be

considered equal to the approved

success standard when they are not less

than 90 percent of the success standard.

The sampling techniques for measuring

success shall use a 90 percent statistical

confidence interval (i.e., one-sided test

with a 0.10 alpha error). Missouri is

proposing to accomplish this by

adoption of a detailed guidance

document illustrating the methods to be

used by the permittee to measure

revegetation success for a residential

land use. The Director finds that the

guidance document is not inconsistent

with and no less effective than the

Federal regulations.

Based on the above findings, the

Director is removing the required

program amendment from the Missouri

program as codified at 30 CFR 925.16(a).

IV. Summary and Disposition of

Comments

Public Comments

The Director solicited public

comments and provided an opportunity

for a public hearing on the proposed

amendment. No public comments were

received, and because no one requested

an opportunity to speak at a public

hearing, no hearing was held.

Federal Agency Comments

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(I),

the Director solicited comments on the

proposed amendment from various

Federal agencies with an actual or

potential interest in the Missouri

program. No comments were received.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii),

OSM is required to obtain the written
26460 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

concurrence of the EPA with respect to

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 Missouri proposed

to make in this 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. MO–634). EPA did not

respond to OSM’s request.

State Historical Preservation Officer

(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on

Historic Preservation (ACHP)

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

is required to solicit comments on

proposed amendments which may have

an effect on historic properties from the

SHPO and ACHP. Since the proposed

amendment would not have any effect

on historic properties, OSM did not

solicit comment from the SHPO or

ACHP.

V. Director’s Decision

Based on the above findings, the

Director approves, with certain

exceptions, the proposed amendment as

submitted by Missouri on December 14,

1995.

The Director does not approve, as

discussed in: finding No. 2.f, Phase II/

III Revegetation Success Standards for

Prime Farmland, Missouri’s proposal to

utilize county averages of production as

one method of establishing a target yield

for prime farmland. This is less effective

than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

823.15(b)(7) because the county

averages would not have been adjusted

by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service to

remove the influence of other nonprime

soils that produce the reference crop.

Missouri must not use the option for

utilizing a county average as a success

standard for prime farmland soils unless

and until it is revised consistent with

the Federal regulations and approved by

OSM.

The Director approves, as discussed

in: finding No. 1, 10 CSR 40–3.120/

3.270(6)(B) concerning Specific

standards for postmining land uses;

finding No. 2.a, concerning its Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Woodland; finding No. 2.b, concerning

its Phase III Success Standards for

Industrial/Commercial Revegetation;

finding No. 2.c, concerning its Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Cropland; finding No. 2.d, concerning

its Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for Wildlife Habitat; finding

No. 2.e, concerning its Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Pasture and Previously Mined Areas;

finding No. 2.f, concerning its Phase II/

III Revegetation Success standards for

Prime Farmland, with the exception

noted above; finding No. 2.g, concerning

its Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for a Recreation land use;

finding No. 2.h, concerning its Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Residential land use.

The Director approves the rules and

guidance documents as proposed by

Missouri 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 925, codifying decisions concerning

the Missouri 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. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(g) prohibit

any unilateral changes to approved State

programs. In the oversight of the

Missouri program, the Director will

recognize only the statutes, regulations

and other materials approved by OSM,

together with any consistent

implementing policies, directives and

other materials, and will require the

enforcement by Missouri 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 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, 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 731.17(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 corresponding 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

corresponding Federal regulations.

Unfunded Mandates

This rule will not impose a cost of

$100 million or more in any given year

on any governmental entity or the

private sector.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 26461

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 925

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: May 8, 1996.

Brent Wahlquist,

Regional Director, Mid-Continent Regional

Coordinating 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 925—MISSOURI

1. The authority citation for Part 925

continues to read as follows:

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

2. Section 925.15 is amended by

adding paragraph (u) to read as follows:

§ 925.15 Approval of regulatory program

amendments.

* * * * *

(u) With the exception of that portion

of the Phase II/III Revegetation Success

Standards for Prime Farmland,

concerning the option to utilize county

averages of production as one method of

establishing a target yield for prime

farmland, the addition of the following

revegetation success guidelines: Phase

III Revegetation Success Standards for

Woodland; Phase III Success Standards

for Industrial/Commercial Revegetation;

Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for Cropland; Phase III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Wildlife Habitat; Phase III Revegetation

Success Standards for Pasture and

Previously Mined Areas; Phase II/III

Revegetation Success Standards for

Prime Farmland; Phase III Revegetation

Success Standards for a Recreation land

use; Phase III Revegetation Success

Standards for Residential land use; and

the revision of the rules at 10 CSR 40–

3.120/3.270(6)(B) concerning specific

standards for postmining land uses, as

submitted to OSM on December 14,

1995, are approved effective May 28,

1996.

§ 925.16 [Amended]

3. Section 925.16 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraphs (a)

and (p)(6).

[FR Doc. 96–13263 Filed 5–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

30 CFR Part 936

[SPATS No. OK–015–FOR]

Oklahoma Abandoned Mine Land

Reclamation Plan

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of

amendment.

SUMMARY: OSM is approving a proposed

amendment to the Oklahoma abandoned

mine land reclamation plan (hereinafter

referred to as the ‘‘Oklahoma plan’’)

under the Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA).

Oklahoma proposed revisions and

additions to its rules and to sections of

the Oklahoma plan pertaining to

definitions, contractor responsibility,

eligible lands and waters, reclamation

project objectives and priorities, project

ranking, public participation,

organizational structure, and

coordination of reclamation with other

agencies. The amendment is intended to

revise the Oklahoma plan to be

consistent with the corresponding

Federal regulations and SMCRA, to

incorporate the additional flexibility

afforded by the revised Federal

regulations, and to improve operational

efficiency.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 28, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jack R. Carson, Acting Director, Tulsa

Field Office, Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, 5100

East Skelly Drive, Suite 470, Tulsa,

Oklahoma 74135–6547, Telephone: 918

581–6430.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Oklahoma Plan

II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

III. Director’s Findings

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

V. Director’s Decision

VI. Procedural Determinations

I. Background on the Oklahoma Plan

On January 21, 1982, the Secretary of

the Interior approved the Oklahoma

plan. Background information on the

Oklahoma plan, including the

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of

comments, and the approval of the plan

can be found in the January 21, 1982,

Federal Register (47 FR 2989).

Subsequent actions concerning

Oklahoma’s plan and amendments to

the plan can be found at 30 CFR 936.25.

II. Submission of the Proposed

Amendment

By letter dated November 13, 1995

(Administrative Record No. OAML–63),

Oklahoma submitted a proposed

amendment to its plan pursuant to

SMCRA. Oklahoma submitted the

proposed amendment in response to a

September 26, 1994, letter from OSM in

accordance with 30 CFR 884.15

(Administrative Record No. OAML–65)

and at its own initiative. Oklahoma

proposed to amend its administrative

rules at OAC 155:15, Oklahoma

Abandoned Mine Land Program, and its

reclamation plan at section 884.13(c)1,

Goals and Objectives; 884.13(c)2, Project

Ranking and Selection: 884.13(c)3,

Interagency Coordination; 884.13(c)5,

Eligible Lands and Waters; 884.13(c)7,

Public Participation; and 884.13(d)1,

Administrative and Management

Structure.

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the December

21, 1995, Federal Register (60 FR

66244), 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 January 22, 1996.

During its review of the amendment,

OSM identified concerns relating to

Oklahoma’s proposal to revise the

administrative regulations at OAC

155.15–1–5, Eligible Lands and Water,

and the Oklahoma plan at section

884.13(c)5, Eligible Lands and Water.

These revisions were intended to allow

expenditure of funds for reclamation of

certain lands and water affected by

mining after August 3, 1977, the

effective date of SMCRA. OSM notified

Oklahoma of the concerns by telephone

on March 15, 1996, and by telefax on

March 19, 1996 (Administrative Record

Nos. OAML–71 and OAML–72).

Oklahoma responded in a letter dated

March 21, 1996, by submitting revisions

to its amendment (Administrative

Record No. OAML–69).

Based upon the revisions to the

proposed plan amendment submitted by

Oklahoma, OSM reopened the public

comment period in the April 8, 1996,

Federal Register (61 FR 15435) and

provided opportunity for public

comment on the adequacy of the revised

amendment. The public comment

period closed on April 23, 1996.

III. Director’s Findings

Set forth below, pursuant to SMCRA

and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

884.14 and 884.15, are the Director’s

findings concerning the proposed

amendment.

Revisions not specifically discussed

below concern nonsubstantive editorial

changes, punctuation, grammatical, or

revised cross-references and paragraph