Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 66743

Drug labeler code Firm name and address

*******

Dated: November 30, 2001.

Claire M. Lathers,

Director, Office of New Animal Drug

Evaluation, Center for Veterinary Medicine.

[FR Doc. 01–31715 Filed 12–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–S

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 915

[IA–012–FOR]

Iowa Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of

amendment.

SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface

Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

(OSM), are approving an amendment to

the Iowa regulatory program (Iowa

program) under the Surface Mining

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977

(SMCRA or the Act). The Iowa

Department of Agriculture and Land

Stewardship, Division of Soil

Conservation, Mines and Minerals

Bureau (Division or Iowa) proposed

revisions to its April 1999 revegetation

success guidelines concerning normal

husbandry practices; minimum planting

arrangements and tree and shrub

stocking requirements for recreational,

wildlife, and forested lands; and criteria

for dry weight determinations for corn,

soybean, oat, and wheat crops. Iowa

intends to revise its program to be

consistent with the corresponding

Federal regulations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 27, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

W. Coleman, Office of Surface Mining,

Mid-Continent Regional Coordinating

Center, Alton Federal Building, 501

Belle Street, Alton, Illinois 62002.

Telephone: (618) 463–6460.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Iowa Program

II. Submission of the Amendment

III. OSM’s Findings

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

V. OSM’s Decision

VI. Procedural Determinations

I. Background on the Iowa Program

Section 503(a) of the Act permits a

State to assume primacy for the

regulation of surface coal mining and

reclamation operations on non-Federal

and non-Indian lands within its borders

by demonstrating that its program

includes, among other things, ‘‘ * * * a

State law which provides for the

regulation of surface coal mining and

reclamation operations in accordance

with the requirements of this Act * * *;

and rules and regulations consistent

with regulations issued by the Secretary

pursuant to this Act.’’ See 30 U.S.C.

1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these

criteria, the Secretary of the Interior

conditionally approved the Iowa

program on January 21, 1981. You can

find background information on the

Iowa program, including the Secretary’s

findings, the disposition of comments,

and the conditions of approval in the

January 21, 1981, Federal Register (46

FR 5885). You can find later actions on

the Iowa program at 30 CFR 915.10,

915.15, and 915.16.

II. Submission of the Amendment

By letter dated August 17, 2001

(Administrative Record No. IA–446),

Iowa sent us an amendment to its

program under SMCRA and the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(b). Iowa

sent the amendment in response to

required program amendments at 30

CFR 915.16(b), (d), and (e). Iowa

proposed changes to its April 1999

revegetation success guidelines entitled

‘‘Revegetation Success Standards and

Statistically Valid Sampling

Techniques.’’

We announced receipt of the

amendment in the September 24, 2001,

Federal Register (66 FR 48841). In the

same document, we opened the public

comment period and provided an

opportunity for a public hearing or

meeting on the adequacy of the

amendment. The public comment

period closed on October 24, 2001. We

did not receive any comments. Because

no one requested a public hearing or

meeting, we did not hold one.

During our review of the amendment,

we identified concerns about a

typographical error in a provision for

interseeding at Section III.H.4.(c)(ii); the

interpretation of the revegetation

success standards for recreational,

wildlife, and forested lands at Section

IV.E; and the interpretation of the dry

weight determination for grain samples

at Section V.A.2(l). We notified Iowa of

the error at Section III.H.4.(c)(ii) and

explained our interpretation of its

provisions at Sections IV.E and V.A.2(l)

in a letter dated September 12, 2001

(Administrative Record No. IA–446.3A).

By letter dated September 28, 2001

(Administrative Record No. IA–446.5),

Iowa agreed to correct the typographical

error and concurred with our

interpretation of its provisions at

Sections IV.E and V.A.2(l).

III. OSM’s Findings

This section contains our findings

concerning the amendment to the Iowa

program. We are making these findings

in accordance with the criteria and

procedural requirements of the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 732.15 and

732.17. Any revisions that we do not

discuss below are minor wording

changes or revised cross-references and

paragraph notations to reflect

organizational changes resulting from

this amendment.

A. Normal Husbandry Practices

Section III, Part H of Iowa’s April

1999 revegetation success guidelines

describes normal husbandry practices

that a permittee can use in the repair of

rills and gullies without restarting the

responsibility period for successful

revegetation and bond liability. A

permittee may address rill and gully

erosion within the permit or partial

permit area without restarting the

responsibility period only if repairs are

completed using the normal husbandry

practice guidelines provided in this

section. If the repair work requires

augmented seeding, fertilization, or

irrigation, the period of responsibility

will restart. Normal husbandry practices

do not include any temporary erosion

control structures, such as silt fencing,

straw, or hay bale dikes. This section

includes requirements for terrace repair

and maintenance; riprap repair and

maintenance; land smoothing and

reseeding; and liming, fertilizing, and

interseeding.

The Federal regulations at 30 CFR

816.116(c)(4) for surface mining

operations and 30 CFR 817.116(c)(4) for

underground mining operations allow

the regulatory authority, under specified

conditions, to approve selective

husbandry practices (excluding

augmented seeding, fertilization, or

irrigation) without extending the period

of responsibility for revegetation success

and bond liability. The regulatory

authority must obtain prior approval

from OSM in accordance with 30 CFR

732.17 that the practices are normal

66744 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

husbandry practices that can either be

expected to continue as part of the

postmining land use or will not reduce

the probability of permanent

revegetation success if the practices are

discontinued after the responsibility

period expires. Approved practices

must be normal husbandry practices

within the region for unmined lands

having land uses similar to the

approved postmining land use of the

disturbed area. In the September 7,

1988, preamble for the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(c)(4) and

817.116(c)(4), we discussed the type of

documentation that the regulatory

authority must submit to support its

proposed normal husbandry practices

(53 FR 34641). The regulatory authority

must submit documentation that

demonstrates that the practice is the

usual or expected state, form, amount,

or degree of management performed

habitually or customarily to prevent

exploitation, destruction, or neglect of

the resource and to maintain a

prescribed level of use or productivity

on similar unmined lands. The

documentation may include either

conservation practice guidelines or

agronomy guidelines and fact sheets for

the management of unmined lands in

the applicable State. The guidelines and

fact sheets could be those distributed by

the Natural Resources Conservation

Service (NRCS) or other organizations

with similar expertise in management of

a State’s natural resources, including

agricultural lands.

In our final rule dated November 26,

1999, we did not approve Section III,

Part H because Iowa did not submit

documentation that demonstrated that

the proposed normal husbandry

practices were the usual or expected

state, form, amount, or degree of

management performed habitually or

customarily to prevent exploitation,

destruction, or neglect of the resources

on similar unmined lands in the State

(64 FR 66385). We required Iowa to

either remove its guidelines for normal

husbandry practices at Section III, Part

H or submit documentation that

supports the proposed normal

husbandry practices. We codified this

requirement at 30 CFR 915.16(b).

In response to the required program

amendment at 30 CFR 915.16(b), Iowa

made changes to Section III, Part H and

submitted documentation for support of

the proposed normal husbandry

practices. The documentation included

copies of five publications: (1) NRCS

Conservation Practice Standard 600,

Terrace; (2) NRCS Conservation Practice

Standard 468, Lined Waterway or

Outlet; (3) NRCS Conservation Practice

Standard 466, Land Smoothing; (4)

NRCS Conservation Practice Standard

590, Nutrient Management; and (5) Iowa

State University Extension Service

Publication Pm-1097, Interseeding and

No-till Pasture Renovation. Based on the

findings below, we are approving Iowa’s

normal husbandry practice guidelines at

Section III, Part H and removing the

required program amendment at 30 CFR

915.16(b).

1. Part H.1 provides that terrace repair

and maintenance required because of

specified occurrences will be

considered normal husbandry practices

and will not require restarting the

responsibility period. First, the

permittee may repair terraces damaged

because of rainfall events that exceed

their designed capacities. Second, the

permittee may clean out and reestablish

terrace flow lines during the first year or

two after the initial terrace construction

and seeding when sediment deposition

into a terrace flow line exceeds the

designed sediment storage capacity.

Third, the permittee may clean out and

reestablish terrace flow lines and repair

or replace tile lines that have been

plugged or crushed due to differential

settling. Part H.1 includes a listing of

the types of terrace repair and

maintenance options that the State will

consider as normal husbandry practices.

Iowa submitted NRCS Conservation

Practice Standard 600 (Terrace) to

support these practices.

Based on the supporting

documentation provided by Iowa, we

find that the proposed guidelines for

terrace repair and maintenance at Part

H.1 meet the requirements of the

Federal regulations at 30 CFR

816.116(c)(4) and 817.116(c)(4) for

normal husbandry practices.

2. Part H.2 provides guidelines for

riprap repair and maintenance on

ditches and structures due to storm

events that exceed the maximum design

standard. Part H.2 includes a listing of

the types of riprap repair and

maintenance practices that Iowa will

consider for normal husbandry

practices. Iowa submitted NRCS

Conservation Practice Standard 468

(Lined Waterway or Outlet) to support

these practices.

Based on the supporting

documentation provided by Iowa, we

find that the proposed guidelines for

riprap repair and maintenance on

ditches and structures at Part H.2 meet

the requirements of the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(c)(4) and

817.116(c)(4) for normal husbandry

practices.

3. Part H.3 provides that normal

husbandry practices can include limited

land smoothing and reseeding as long as

the individual areas are no larger than

one acre in size and the cumulative

acreage is no greater than 10 percent of

the entire permit area. Iowa submitted

NRCS Conservation Practice Standard

466 (Land Smoothing) to support these

practices.

Based on the supporting

documentation and the acreage

limitations provided by Iowa, we find

that Iowa’s proposed guidelines for land

smoothing and reseeding at Part H.3

meet the requirements of the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(c)(4) and

817.116(c)(4) for normal husbandry

practices.

4. Part H.4 provides normal

husbandry practices for applications of

lime and fertilizer at paragraphs (a) and

(b). It also provides normal husbandry

practices for interseeding at paragraph

(c).

Part H.4(a) and (b) provide,

respectively, that lime and fertilizer

applications may be made based on soil

test recommendations for the

appropriate crop or vegetation. Before

any lime and fertilizer applications, the

permittee must submit to the Division

the original copies of the soil test

recommendations and a map of the

permit areas indicating where each soil

sample was taken. Iowa requires the

permittee to follow the lime and

fertilizer maintenance application

guidelines of NRCS Conservation

Practice Standard 590 (Nutrient

Management). For lime and fertilizer

applications, the permittee must submit

the original weight tickets for the

applications to the Division at the times

specified in section III, part B.3. If

subsequent submittals of lime and

fertilizer weight tickets prove that actual

applications were in excess of the soil

test recommendations, Iowa will restart

the responsibility period. Iowa

submitted NRCS Conservation Practice

Standard 590 (Nutrient Management) to

support its normal husbandry practice

guidelines for liming and fertilizing.

Part H.4(c) requires the Division to

approve any species to be interseeded

before the seed is planted. The

permittee must submit the original seed

tickets to the Division at the times

specified in Section III, Part B.3. Iowa

will restart the responsibility period if

any interseeding completed on the

permit area fails to meet any of the

criteria listed below.

(i) Interseeding of a legume on the third

year of a grass/legume vegetative cover.

(ii) Interseeding of a single species in the

permit approved seeding mixture, or

interseeding of a replacement species, that

has been approved by the Division, to

improve the vegetative cover when

unfavorable weather conditions adversely

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 66745

affect the germination success of the original

revegetation effort.

(iii) Interseeding of a species due to

excessive winter kill.

Iowa submitted Iowa State University

Extension Service Publication Pm–1097

(Interseeding and No-till Pasture

Renovation) to support its normal

husbandry practice guidelines for

interseeding.

Based on the documentation

submitted by Iowa, we find that the

proposed guidelines for liming,

fertilizing, and interseeding at Part H.4

meet the requirements of the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(c)(4) and

817.116(c)(4) for normal husbandry

practices.

B. Recreational, Wildlife, and Forested

Lands

Section IV, Part E of Iowa’s April 1999

revegetation success guidelines contains

the revegetation success standards for

recreational areas, wildlife areas, and

forested lands. In our final rule dated

November 26, 1999, we approved

section IV, part E with two exceptions

(64 FR 66388). First, Iowa’s guidelines

did not contain any planting

arrangement provisions for these land

uses as required by 30 CFR

816.116(b)(3)(i) and 817.116(b)(3)(i).

Second, Iowa did not submit any

documentation to prove that the State

agencies responsible for the

administration of forestry and wildlife

programs approved its minimum

stocking provisions as required by 30

CFR 816.116(b)(3)(i) and

817.116(b)(3)(i). We required Iowa to

either add planting arrangement

provisions for recreational, wildlife, and

forested land to its guidelines and

obtain program-wide concurrence from

the State agencies responsible for the

administration of forestry and wildlife

programs or add a provision to its

guidelines that requires permit-specific

concurrence for planting arrangements

from the State agencies responsible for

the administration of forestry and

wildlife programs. We also required

Iowa to either obtain program-wide

concurrence for its minimum stocking

provisions or add a provision to its

guidelines that requires permit-specific

concurrence for minimum stocking from

the State agencies responsible for the

administration of forestry and wildlife

programs. We codified these

requirements at 30 CFR 915.16(d)(1) and

(2).

Iowa made the following changes to

section IV, part E to address these

requirements.

1. Iowa added the following new

provision to the beginning of the second

paragraph of section IV, part E:

The wildlife and recreational lands have

site specific vegetation. Each permit with

these types of post-mining land use have

been approved by the Division in

concurrence with the Iowa Department of

Natural Resources.

We are interpreting the language of

this provision to mean that Iowa

requires permit specific concurrence

from the Iowa Department of Natural

Resources for both planting

arrangements and stocking rates for

recreational, wildlife, and forested land

uses. In its letter dated September 28,

2001, Iowa agreed with our

interpretation (Administrative Record

No. IA–446.5). Based on this

interpretation, we find that section IV,

part E is no less effective than the

Federal regulations at 30 CFR

816.116(b)(3)(i) and 817.116(b)(3)(i). We

are also removing the required program

amendments at 30 CFR 915.16(d)(1) and

(2).

2. Iowa added the following new

provision for tree and shrub stocking

requirements at Section IV, Part E, Step

2:

The tree and shrub planting shall be

spaced such that there are a minimum of five

hundred (500) seedlings per acre. Acceptable

tree and shrub spacing, which will meet or

exceed the minimum number of seedlings

per acre, are listed below. Narrower spacing

is used for timber production. Wider spacing

and planting in groups or clumps is used for

wildlife and recreational tree and shrub

plantings. These group or clump plantings

should consist of a minimum of five (5) or

more trees, and fifteen (15) or more shrubs

per group.

TREE AND SHRUB SPACING FOR

PLANTING

Spacing in feet

Number of

seedlings

per acre

5 x 5 .......................................... 1,742

5 x 10 ........................................ 871

6 x 6 .......................................... 1,210

6 x 10 ........................................ 726

7 x 7 .......................................... 889

7 x 10 ........................................ 622

8 x 8 .......................................... 681

8 × 10 ....................................... 545

We find that this provision provides

additional guidance to permittees for

addressing planting arrangements and

stocking rates for recreational, wildlife,

and forested land uses in their permits.

As discussed above, Iowa requires

permit specific concurrence from the

Iowa Department of Natural Resources

for both planting arrangements and

stocking rates for these land uses.

Therefore, we find that Section IV.E.2 is

no less effective than the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3)(i)

and 817.116(b)(3)(i).

C. Corn, Soybean, Oat, and Wheat Crops

Section V of Iowa’s April 1999

revegetation success guidelines contains

sampling procedures and techniques to

determine productivity for corn,

soybeans, oats, wheat, and forage crops;

to determine ground cover percentage;

and to determine if trees and shrubs

meet minimum density standards. In

our final rule dated November 26, 1999,

we approved Section V of Iowa’s April

1999 revegetation success guidelines

with one exception (64 FR 66388). We

did not fully approve Section V, Part A,

Step 2, which contains the grain

sampling techniques for test plot

harvesting, because it did not specify

how the permittee is to obtain the dry

weight of the test plot grain samples.

The dry weight is used in a calculation

to determine the moisture percentage for

each test plot sample. We required Iowa

to revise its April 1999 revegetation

success guidelines at Section V, Part A,

Step 2 by adding a provision that

specifies the standard method that

permittees are to use for obtaining the

dry weight of test plot grain samples.

We codified this requirement at 30 CFR

915.16(e).

In response to the required

amendment at 30 CFR 915.16(e), Iowa

added the following new provision to

the beginning of Step 2(l):

(l) The grain samples collected and labeled

in Step 2.g. above must be oven dried until

a constant dry weight is obtained. Weighing

will be performed immediately after oven

drying to avoid absorption of water from

humid air. This dry weight will equal zero

percent (0%) moisture. All samples will be

adjusted to the appropriate percent moisture

for that grain.

We interpret the first sentence of

Iowa’s new provision to mean that the

permittees must use the standard airoven method to obtain dry weights. The

air-oven method is recognized by the

United States Department of Agriculture

as a means of determining the moisture

content of grain. In its letter dated

September 28, 2001, Iowa agreed with

our interpretation (Administrative

Record No. IA–446.5). Based on Iowa’s

concurrence with our interpretation, we

are approving Section V, Part A, Step

2(l) and removing the required

amendment at 30 CFR 915.16(e).

IV. Summary and Disposition of

Comments

Federal Agency Comments

On August 30, 2001, under section

503(b) of SMCRA and 30 CFR

732.17(h)(11)(i) of the Federal

66746 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

regulations, we requested comments on

the amendment from various Federal

agencies with an actual or potential

interest in the Iowa program

(Administrative Record No. IA–446.1A).

We did not receive any comments.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

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

are required to obtain the written

concurrence of the EPA for those

provisions of the program amendment

that relate to air or water quality

standards issued 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

Iowa proposed to make in this

amendment pertain to air or water

quality standards. Therefore, we did not

ask the EPA for its concurrence.

Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we

requested comments on the amendment

from the EPA (Administrative Record

No. IA–446.1A). The EPA did not

respond to our request.

State Historical Preservation Officer

(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on

Historic Preservation (ACHP)

Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are

required to request comments from the

SHPO and ACHP on amendments that

may have an effect on historic

properties. On August 31, 2001, we

requested comments on Iowa’s

amendment (Administrative Record No.

IA–446.2A), but we received no

response to our request.

Public Comments

We requested public comments on the

proposed amendment, but we did not

receive any.

V. OSM’s Decision

Based on the above findings, we

approve the amendment as sent to us by

Iowa on August 17, 2001.

To implement this decision, we are

amending the Federal regulations at 30

CFR Part 915, which codify decisions

concerning the Iowa program. We find

that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C.

553(d)(3) to make this final rule

effective immediately. Section 503(a) of

SMCRA requires that the State’s

program demonstrate that the State has

the capability of carrying out the

provisions of the Act and meeting its

purposes. Making this rule effective

immediately will expedite that process.

VI. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12866—Regulatory

Planning and Review

This rule is exempt from review by

the Office of Management and Budget

under Executive Order 12866.

Executive Order 12630—Takings

This rule does not have takings

implications. This determination is

based on the analysis performed for the

counterpart Federal regulations.

Executive Order 13132—Federalism

This rule does not have federalism

implications. SMCRA delineates the

roles of the Federal and State

governments with regard to the

regulation of surface coal mining and

reclamation operations. One of the

purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a

nationwide program to protect society

and the environment from the adverse

effects of surface coal mining

operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of

SMCRA requires that State laws

regulating surface coal mining and

reclamation operations be ‘‘in

accordance with’’ the requirements of

SMCRA, and section 503(a)(7) requires

that State programs contain rules and

regulations ‘‘consistent with’’

regulations issued by the Secretary

under SMCRA.

Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice

Reform

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 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

because each 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.

Executive Order 13211—Regulations

That Significantly Affect the Supply,

Distribution, or Use of Energy

On May 18, 2001, the President issued

Executive Order 13211 which requires

agencies to prepare a Statement of

Energy Effects for a rule that is (1)

considered significant under Executive

Order 12866 and (2) likely to have a

significant adverse effect on the supply,

distribution, or use of energy. Because

this rule is exempt from review under

Executive Order 12866 and is not

expected to have a significant adverse

effect on the supply, distribution, or use

of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects

is not required.

National Environmental Policy Act

Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C.

1292(d)) provides that a decision on a

proposed State regulatory program

provision does not constitute a major

Federal action within the meaning of

section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). A determination has

been made that such decisions are

categorically excluded from the NEPA

process (516 DM 8.4.A).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by the Office of

Management and Budget under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

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.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act

This rule is not a major rule under 5

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.

This rule:

a. Does not have an annual effect on

the economy of $100 million.

b. Will not cause a major increase in

costs or prices for consumers,

individual industries, federal, state, or

local government agencies, or

geographic regions.

c. Does not have significant adverse

effects on competition, employment,

investment, productivity, innovation, or

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to

compete with foreign-based enterprises.

This determination is based upon the

fact that the State submittal which is the

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 66747

subject of this rule is based upon

counterpart Federal regulations for

which an analysis was prepared and a

determination made that the Federal

regulation was not considered a major

rule.

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.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 915

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: December 4, 2001.

Richard J. Seibel,

Regional Director, Mid-Continent Regional

Coordinating Center.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 30 CFR Part 915 is amended

as set forth below:

PART 915—IOWA

1. The authority citation for Part 915

continues to read as follows:

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

2. Section 915.15 is amended in the

table by adding a new entry in

chronological order by ‘‘Date of final

publication’’ to read as follows:

§ 915.15 Approval of Iowa regulatory

program amendments.

* * * * *

Original amendment submission

date Date of final publication Citation/description

*******

August 17, 2001 ............................. December 27, 2001 ....................... Sections III.H, IV.E, and V.A.2(l) of Iowa’s April 1999 Revegetation

Success Standards and Statistically Valid Sampling Techniques.

3. Section 915.16 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraphs (b),

(d), and (e).

[FR Doc. 01–31683 Filed 12–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 110 and 165

[CGD09–01–153]

RIN 2115–AA97 and 2115–AA98

Safety Zone and Anchorage

Regulations; Chicago Harbor, Chicago,

Illinois

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

establishing a temporary safety zone and

suspending a portion of an anchorage

area encompassed by the safety zone for

the City of Chicago’s New Year

Celebration. This rulemaking is

necessary for the protection and safety

of passengers and vessels during the

fireworks display. This rulemaking is

intended to restrict vessel traffic from a

portion of Lake Michigan in the area of

the Chicago Harbor, in particular, the

Monroe Street Harbor. During this

event, vessels will be unable to enter or

exit the Monroe Harbor.

DATES: This temporary final rule is

effective from 11 p.m. (local) December

31, 2001 until 12:45 a.m. (local) January

1, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material

received from the public, as well as

documents indicated in this preamble as

being available in the docket, are part of

docket [CGD09–01–153] and are

available for inspection or copying at:

U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office

Chicago, 215 W. 83rd Street, Suite D,

Burr Ridge, Illinois 60521, between 7:30

a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday,

except Federal Holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

MST3 Mike E. Esquivel, U.S. Coast

Guard Marine Safety Office Chicago,

215 W. 83rd Street, Burr Ridge, Illinois

60521. The telephone number is (630)

986–2155.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

We did not publish a notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this

regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the

Coast Guard finds that good cause exists

for not publishing an NPRM. Under 5

U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds

that good cause exists for making this

rule effective less than 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register. The

permit application was not received in

time to publish an NPRM followed by

a final rule before the effective date.

Delaying this rule would be contrary to

the public interest of ensuring the safety

of spectators and vessels during this

event and immediate action is necessary

to prevent possible loss of life or

property. The Coast Guard has not

received any complaints or negative

comments previously with regard to this

event.

Background and Purpose

A temporary safety zone is necessary

to ensure the safety of vessels and

spectators from the hazards associated

with fireworks displays. Based on recent

accidents that have occurred in other

Captain of the Port zones, and the

explosive hazard of fireworks, the

Captain of the Port Chicago has

determined firework launches in close

proximity to watercraft pose significant

risks to public safety and property. The

likely combination of large numbers of

recreational vessels, congested

waterways, darkness punctuated by

bright flashes of light, alcohol use, and

debris falling in the water could easily

result in serious injuries or fatalities.

Establishing a safety zone to control

vessel movement around the location of

the launch platforms will help ensure

the safety of person and property at this

event and help minimize the associated

risk.

The safety zone encompasses the

waters of the Chicago Harbor bounded

by the following positions: 41° 52.43 N,

087° 36.43 W, thence east to 41° 52.43

N, 087° 36.16 W, thence south to 41°

52.28 N, 087° 36.16 W, thence west to

41° 52.28 N, 087° 36.43 W, thence north

back to the point of origin. These

coordinates are based upon North

American Datum 1983 (NAD 83). This

area includes a portion of the Monroe

Street Harbor including the Grant Park

anchorage areas (33 CFR 110.83), the

entrance to the Monroe Street Harbor, as

well as a portion outside the breakwall

for the Monroe Street Harbor. Only that

portion of the anchorage area

encompasses by the safety zone will be

suspended.

All persons and vessels shall comply

with the instructions of the Coast Guard

Captain of the Port or the designated on

scene patrol personnel. Entry into,

transiting, or anchoring within the

safety zone is prohibited unless

authorized by the Captain of the Port

Chicago or his designated on scene

representative. The Captain of the Port

or his designated on scene