[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 227 (Friday, November 26, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66385-66391]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-30677]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 915
[SPATS No. IA-005-FOR]
Iowa Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM)
is approving, with certain exceptions and additional requirements, an
amendment to the Iowa regulatory program (Iowa program) under the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). Iowa added
revegetation success guidelines to its program. These guidelines
include revegetation success standards, statistically valid sampling
procedures and techniques for determining revegetation success on areas
being restored to various land uses, and normal husbandry practices.
Iowa intends to revise its program to be consistent with the
corresponding Federal regulations and to improve operational
efficiency.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 26, 1999.
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. Internet: jcoleman@mcrgw.osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Iowa Program
II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment
III. Director's Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
[[Page 66386]]
V. Director's Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Iowa Program
On January 21, 1981, the Secretary of Interior conditionally
approved the Iowa program, effective April 10, 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 Proposed Amendment
By letter dated September 28, 1998 (Administrative Record No. IA-
441), Iowa sent us an amendment to its program under SMCRA. Iowa sent
the amendment in response to our letter dated August 1, 1986
(Administrative Record No. IA-280), that we sent to Iowa under 30 CFR
732.17(c). The amendment concerns guidelines for revegetation success
and normal husbandry practices, entitled ``Revegetation Success
Standards and Statistically Valid Sampling Techniques.''
We announced receipt of the amendment in the October 14, 1998,
Federal Register (63 FR 55025) and invited public comment on its
adequacy. The public comment period closed November 13, 1998. Because
no one requested a public hearing or meeting, we did not hold one.
During our review of the amendment, we identified concerns relating
to Iowa's revegetation success guidelines concerning the definition for
``prime farmland''; plant species for recreational and wildlife areas;
reference areas; minimum planting arrangements for recreational,
wildlife, and forested lands; and control area adjustments of prime
farmland yields. We also identified concerns with Iowa's guidelines for
normal husbandry practices. We notified Iowa of these concerns by
electronic mail on November 19, 1998 (Administrative Record No. IA-
441.6). On August 3, 1999, Iowa sent us a revised amendment dated April
1999 (Administrative Record No. IA-441.7).
Based upon Iowa's revisions to its amendment, we reopened the
public comment period in the October 8, 1999, Federal Register (64 FR
54840). The public comment period closed on October 25, 1999.
III. Director's Findings
Following, under SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15
and 732.17, are our findings concerning the amendment.
A. Revegetation Success Standards and Statistically Valid Sampling
Techniques for Mined Lands in Iowa
Iowa submitted revegetation success guidelines that describe the
standards and procedures for determining revegetation success on
reclaimed mined lands in Iowa. The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
816.116(a)(1) and 817.116(a)(1) require that each regulatory authority
select revegetation success standards and statically valid sampling
techniques for measuring revegetation success and include them in its
approved regulatory program. Iowa developed its revegetation success
guidelines to satisfy this requirement. In some cases, Iowa's
revegetation success guidelines supplement and clarify the performance
standards for revegetation success contained in the Iowa program, but
they do not replace or change any of them.
The guidelines include revegetation success standards and
statically valid sampling techniques for measuring revegetation success
of reclaimed pastureland; cropland; industrial, commercial, or
residential lands; recreational, wildlife, or forested lands; and
remined lands in accordance with Iowa's counterparts to the Federal
regulations at 30 CFR 816.116 and 817.116. The guidelines also include
revegetation success standards and statically valid sampling techniques
for restoring soil productivity of prime farmland soils in accordance
with Iowa's counterparts to the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 823.15.
Iowa's standards, criteria, and parameters for revegetation success
reflect the extent of cover, species composition, and soil
stabilization required in the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.111 and
817.111. As required by the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(a)(2)
and (b), 817.116(a)(2) and (b), and 823.15, Iowa's revegetation success
standards include criteria representative of unmined lands in the area
being reclaimed to evaluate the appropriate vegetation parameters of
ground cover, production, or stocking suitable to the approved
postmining land uses. Iowa's guidelines specify the procedures and
techniques to be used for sampling, measuring, and analyzing vegetation
parameters.
Ground cover, production, and stocking suitable to the approved
postmining land uses, except prime farmland, are considered equal to
the approved success standard when they are not less than 90 percent of
the success standard. The average production of crops for prime
farmland soils must equal or exceed the average production of the same
crops for the same or similar unmined prime farmland soils. Sampling
techniques for measuring success use a 90-percent statistical
confidence interval for all land uses. We found that use of these
procedures and techniques will ensure consistent, objective collection
of vegetation data.
For the above reasons, we find that, except as discussed in the
following findings, the revegetation success standards and statically
valid sampling techniques for measuring revegetation success contained
in Iowa's revegetation success guidelines satisfy the requirements of
30 CFR 816.116(a)(1), 817.116(a)(1), and 823.15.
1. Reference Areas
Section III, part F of Iowa's revegetation success guidelines
contains requirements for the use of reference areas for establishing
revegetation success standards. Permittees can use data from reference
areas for direct comparison only when Iowa has approved the use of
reference areas in the permit. When reference areas are used, the
reference areas will serve as the data set for establishing the
revegetation success standard. The reclaimed areas will be directly
compared to the revegetation success standard developed from the
reference area production yields for the same growing season.
Management of all of the reference areas and the reclaimed areas must
be identical in all aspects. Part F contains examples of the criteria
that must be met on both the reclaimed and reference areas. Reference
areas must be within a five-mile radius of the permit site, unless the
Division approves a site outside of the five-mile radius that has
special features which cannot be found closer to the permit site. Part
F also contains additional prime farmland reference area requirements,
including examples of calculations for developing corn and soybean
productivity success standards.
The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2)
require that standards for success include criteria representative of
unmined lands in the area being reclaimed in order to evaluate the
appropriate vegetation parameters of ground cover, production, and
stocking. The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b) and 817.116(b)
allow the use of reference areas for determining revegetation success.
The Federal regulation at 30 CFR 823.15(b)(2) requires that permittees
measure soil productivity on a representative sample or on all of the
[[Page 66387]]
mined and reclaimed prime farmland areas using the reference crop
determined under 30 CFR 823.15(b)(6). It also requires that they use a
statistically valid sampling technique at a 90-percent or greater
statistical confidence level as approved by the regulatory authority in
consultation with the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS). The Federal regulation at 30 CFR 823.15(b)(4) requires that
permittees manage the reclaimed areas in the same manner as nonmined
prime farmland in the surrounding area. The Federal regulations at 30
CFR 823.15(b)(7) allow the use of reference crop yields of
representative local farms in the surrounding area for determining
revegetation success for prime farmland, with concurrence by the NRCS.
Iowa submitted a fax dated July 21, 1997, from the NRCS as evidence of
consultation when developing its revegetation success guidelines for
reference areas (Administrative Record No. IA-441.5). We find that
Iowa's requirements for reference areas are consistent with the Federal
requirements at 30 CFR 816.116(a)(2) and (b), 817.116(a)(2) and (b),
and 823.15(b)(2), (4), and (6). Therefore, we are approving the
requirements in section III, part F. However, the fax did not contain
specific concurrence by the NRCS for Iowa's use of the current yield
records of reference areas for measuring productivity on prime
farmland, as required by the Federal regulations at 30 CFR
823.15(b)(7). Because Iowa did not submit evidence of concurrence by
the NRCS, as required by the Federal regulations, we are not approving
the use of reference areas for determining success of productivity on
prime farmland areas. We are requiring Iowa to submit evidence of
concurrence by the NRCS before it allows permittees to use reference
area revegetation success standards for prime farmland. We are
approving Iowa's guidelines on reference areas for all other applicable
land uses.
2. Prime Farmland
Section IV, part A contains the revegetation success standards for
prime farmland. Section IV, part G contains a method for adjusting the
average prime farmland reference crop yield for adverse or beneficial
climatic conditions.
a. Section IV, part A, provides that in order to establish
revegetation success on prime farmland soils, the production of corn,
soybeans, or a combination of corn and soybeans must produce yields
equal to or greater than the yields of the same crops in similar
unmined prime farmland soils for three years of the five-year
responsibility period. Corn and soybeans are the most common deep-
rooted prime farmland crops in Iowa. The Division will consider
restoration of prime farmland soil productivity achieved each year that
the average yield during the measurement period exceeds or equals the
average yield for the same prime farmland soil map units as provided in
the County Soil Map Unit Yield Data tables for that county. These
tables were developed from a U. S. Department of Agriculture-Natural
Resources Conservation Service State Soil Survey Database. Part A.1
contains the method of determining the average yield of corn or soybean
productivity using the County Soil Map Unit Yield Data tables located
in Appendices 1 through 4. Part A.1 includes examples of how to
calculate the corn and soybean success standards for prime farmland
soils. At part A.2, Iowa also allows permittees to use prime farmland
reference area yield data instead of the County Soil Map Unit Yield
Data to prove productivity. Permittees would calculate corn or soybean
productivity revegetation success standards from the prime farmland
reference area yield data using the methods contained in part A.1.
The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 823.15(b)(7) allow permittees to
prove restoration of prime farmland soil productivity in two ways. At
30 CFR 823.15(b)(7)(i), the permittee can use the current yield records
of representative local farms in the surrounding area (reference areas)
to prove productivity, with concurrence by the NRCS. At 30 CFR
823.15(b)(7)(ii), the permittee can use the average county yields
recognized by the USDA, which have been adjusted by the NRCS for local
yield variation. Iowa submitted a fax dated July 21, 1997, from the
NRCS as evidence of consultation when developing its revegetation
success guidelines for prime farmland (Administrative Record No. IA-
441.5). We find that Iowa's requirements for revegetation and
restoration of prime farmland soil productivity are consistent with the
Federal requirements at 30 CFR 823.15(b)(7). Therefore, we are
approving the requirements in section IV, parts A and A.1. However, in
section IV, part A.2, Iowa proposed to use reference areas. The
evidence submitted by Iowa did not contain specific concurrence by the
NRCS for Iowa's use of the current yield records of reference areas for
measuring productivity on prime farmland, as required by 30 CFR
823.15(b)(7)(i). Because Iowa did not submit evidence of concurrence by
the NRCS, we are not approving Iowa's use of reference areas for
determining success of productivity on prime farmland areas. As
discussed in Finding A.1, we are requiring Iowa to submit evidence of
concurrence by the NRCS before allowing permittees to use reference
area revegetation success standards for measuring productivity on prime
farmland.
b. Section IV, parts A.1(a) and (b) allow permittees to adjust
average yield values for weather conditions by one of two methods. Part
A.1(a) allows the permittee to use control areas to adjust the County
Soil Map Unit Yield Data in accordance with the requirements of section
IV, part G. Part A.1(b) allows the permittee to get written concurrence
from the NRCS to adjust the calculated County Soil Map Unit Yield Data
to reflect a one year disease, pest, or weather induced variation
during a specific growing season. Section IV, part G contains the
requirements and methods for control area adjustments of prime farmland
revegetation success standards developed from the County Soil Map Unit
Yield Data. Control areas must contain one or more of the soil map
units which exist in the reclaimed tract. The control area data is used
to develop a climatic correction factor. The correction factor is used
to adjust the revegetation success standards developed for prime
farmlands for yield variations caused by adverse or beneficial climatic
conditions during the crop year. Permittees can use control areas to
develop a revegetation success standard adjusted for climatic condition
only when the Division approves its use in the permit for that site.
The control area must receive the same management as the reclaimed
area. If the Division approves the use of control areas, the permittee
must use the control area climatic correction factor in all production
years within the responsibility period, whether it increases or
decreases the revegetation success standards.
The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 823.15(b)(8) provide that the
permittee may adjust the average reference crop yield for disease,
pest, and weather-induced seasonal variations, with the concurrence of
the NRCS. Therefore, we are approving Iowa's provision at section IV,
part A.1(b) that requires the permittee to get written concurrence from
the NRCS to adjust the calculated County Soil Map Unit Yield Data corn
or soybean productivity revegetation success standards for disease,
pest, or weather-induced seasonal variations. However, Iowa did not
provide evidence that the NRCS concurred with Iowa's provisions at
section IV, part G
[[Page 66388]]
concerning the methods used to adjust the County Soil Map Unit Yield
Data for climatic conditions using control areas. Therefore, we are not
approving Iowa's provisions at section IV, part G that contain the
requirements and methods for adjusting prime farmland revegetation
success standards using control areas. Our decision also makes the
provision that allows the use of control areas at section IV, part
A.1(b) moot. We are requiring Iowa to either remove section IV, part G
from its revegetation success guidelines or submit evidence that the
NRCS concurs with this provision.
3. Recreational, Wildlife, and Forested Lands
Section IV, part E contains the revegetation success standards for
recreational areas, wildlife areas, and forested lands. The permittee
must first meet all of the general erosion control and ground cover
requirements of section III, part A and the general revegetation
requirements of section III, part C for these land uses. Once the
Permittee has documented that all of the criteria in these two sections
has been met, the reclaimed permit site must achieve 90 percent
vegetative cover density for a minimum of two years. Tree and shrub
survival must be measured by counting live and healthy trees and
shrubs. All trees and shrubs counted must have been in place for a
minimum of two years and must have at least one-third of their height
in live crown. At the time of counting trees or shrubs to determine if
their survival meets the revegetation success standard, 80 percent of
the original number of trees and shrubs planted per acre must be alive
and must have been in place for three years. There must be a minimum of
400 live trees or shrubs per acre of land under a forested land use,
including recreation or wildlife land use areas where woody plants are
used, for purposes of achieving revegetation success. The Division will
require the permittee to document the time of planting of all trees and
shrubs on the permit. The permittee must tag all trees and shrubs
planted with permanent markers which indicate the planting date. The
permittee is responsible for assuring that the markings are permanent
and will remain legible during the period of responsibility. Any tree
having tags which are illegible or appear to have been tampered with
will not count towards meeting the revegetation success standard for
forest lands. Iowa submitted two appendices that are referenced in its
guidelines for these land uses. Appendix 5 lists the recommended tree
planting species in Iowa. This appendix was developed by using lists of
tree planting species obtained from the Iowa Department of Natural
Resources and the Iowa State University Forestry Extension. Appendix 8
contains the recommended wildlife and recreation planting species in
Iowa. This appendix was also developed from information provided by the
Iowa Department of Natural Resources and the Iowa State University
Forestry Extension. Iowa submitted a letter dated October 21, 1996,
from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources as evidence of
consultation with the State agency responsible for the administration
of forestry and wildlife programs when developing it guidelines for
recreational, wildlife, and forested lands (Administrative Record No.
IA-441.5).
The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3) and 817.116(b)(3)
for fish and wildlife habitat, recreation, shelter belts, or forest
products require that permittees determine success of vegetation on the
basis of tree and shrub stocking and vegetative ground cover. They also
require that:
(i) Minimum stocking and planting arrangements shall be
specified by the regulatory authority on the basis of local and
regional conditions and after consultation with and approval by the
State agencies responsible for the administration of forestry and
wildlife programs. Consultation and approval may occur on either a
programwide or a permit-specific basis.
(ii) Trees and shrubs that will be used in determining the
success of stocking and the adequacy of the plant arrangement shall
have utility for the approved postmining land use. Trees and shrubs
counted in determining such success shall be healthy and have been
in place for not less than two growing seasons. At the time of bond
release, at least 80 percent of the trees and shrubs used to
determine such success shall have been in place for 60 percent of
the applicable minimum period of responsibility.
(iii) Vegetative ground cover shall not be less than that
required to achieve the approved postmining land use.
We find that Iowa's revegetation success standards for
recreational, wildlife, and forested lands at section IV, part E are no
less effective than the requirements of the Federal regulations at 30
CFR 816.116(b)(3) and 817.116(b)(3), with two exceptions. First, Iowa's
guidelines do 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). Therefore, we are requiring 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 are also requiring 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.
4. Sampling Procedures and Techniques
Section V of Iowa's revegetation success guidelines contain
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. With one exception, we find that Iowa's sampling procedures
and techniques are statistically valid at a 90 percent or greater
statistical confidence level as required by the Federal regulations at
30 CFR 816.116(a) (1) and (2), 817.116(a) (1) and (2), and
823.15(a)(2). Section V, part A.2, which contains the grain sampling
technique for test plot harvesting, does 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. Therefore, we are requiring Iowa to revise
its revegetation success guidelines at section V, part A.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.
B. Normal Husbandry Practices
Iowa also proposed guidelines relating to normal husbandry
practices that may be used without restarting the responsibility
period. Section III, part H contains requirements for rill and gully
repair; terrace repair and maintenance; riprap repair and maintenance;
land smoothing and reseeding; and liming, fertilizing, and
interseeding. Rill and gully erosion may be addressed within the permit
or partial permit area without restarting the responsibility period
only if repairs are completed using normal
[[Page 66389]]
husbandry practices. 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. Part H.1 specifies that the State will consider as normal
husbandry practices any terrace repairs and maintenance required due
to: (1) Rainfall events that exceed their designed capacities; (2)
sediment deposition into a terrace flow line during the first year or
two after the initial terrace construction and seeding that exceed the
designed sediment storage capacity of the terrace; and (3) differential
settling that impacts the flow line of the terrace. Part H.1 includes a
listing of the types of terrace repair and maintenance options that the
State will consider as normal husbandry practices. In part H.2, the
State considers riprap repair and maintenance on ditches and structures
due to storm events that exceed the maximum design standard as normal
husbandry practices. Part H.2 includes a listing of the types of riprap
repair and maintenance practices that will be considered normal
husbandry practices. Part H.3 provides that normal husbandry practices
can include limited land smoothing and reseeding as long as: (1) the
individual areas are no larger than one acre in size and (2) the
cumulative acreage is no greater than 10 percent of the entire permit
or partial area. At part H.4, Iowa will consider applications of lime
and fertilizer and interseeding to be normal husbandry practices when
they meet specified conditions. For lime and fertilizer applications,
the permittee must submit the original weight tickets for the
applications at the times specified in section III, part B.3. For
interseeding, the permittee must submit the original seed tickets at
the times specified in section III, part B.3. Part H.4(a) and (b)
provide, respectively, that lime and fertilizer applications must 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. If subsequent submittals of lime and fertilizer
weight tickets prove that actual applications were in excess of the
soil test recommendations, the Division will restart the responsibility
period. Interseeding will be considered a normal husbandry practice
based on the criteria listed in part H.4(c). This criteria includes:
(1) interseeding of a legume on the third year of a grass/legume
vegetative cover; (2) interseeding of a single species that failed to
germinate due to unfavorable climate conditions on half or more of the
permit area; and (3) interseeding of a species due to excessive winter
kill.
The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(c)(4) for surface mining
operations and 817.116(c)(4) for underground mining operations allow
the regulatory authority to approve selective husbandry practices,
excluding augmented seeding, fertilization, or irrigation, without
extending the period of responsibility for revegetation success and
bond liability, under specified conditions. The regulatory authority
must obtain prior approval from OSM in accordance with 30 CFR 732.17
that the practices are normal husbandry practices that can be expected
to continue as part of the postmining land use or that discontinuance
of the practices after the responsibility period expires will not
reduce the probability of permanent revegetation success. 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
maintain a prescribed level of use or productivity of similar unmined
lands. We will consider, on a practice-by-practice basis, the
documentation supporting each practice proposed by a regulatory
authority as a normal husbandry practice. The documentation must
include 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
NRCS or other organizations with similar expertise in management of a
State's natural resources, including agricultural lands.
Iowa submitted a fax dated July 21, 1997, from the NRCS as evidence
that Iowa consulted with the NRCS when developing its normal husbandry
practice guidelines (Administrative Record No. IA-441.5. Iowa also
submitted a letter dated December 16, 1996, from the Iowa State
University, Department of Agronomy, as additional evidence of
consultation when developing its normal husbandry practices. However,
Iowa did not submit actual NRCS conservation practice guidelines or
Iowa State University agronomy guidelines or fact sheets to support its
proposed normal husbandry practices. Therefore, we find that Iowa has
not adequately demonstrated that its proposals for rill and gully
repair; terrace repair and maintenance; riprap repair and maintenance;
land smoothing and reseeding; and liming, fertilizing, and interseeding
of areas disturbed by mining in Iowa are normal husbandry practices
within the region for unmined lands having land uses similar to the
approved postmining land uses of the disturbed areas. We are requiring
Iowa to either remove its guidelines for normal husbandry practices at
section III, part H or submit documentation that support the proposed
normal husbandry practices.
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
Public Comments
We asked for public comments on the amendment, but did not receive
any.
Federal Agency Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments on the
amendment from various Federal agencies with an actual or potential
interest in the Iowa program (Administrative Record Nos. IA-441.1 and
IA-441.9). On October 5, 1999, the Mine Safety and Health
Administration sent us a letter stating that it had no comments on the
amendment (Administrative Record No. IA-441.10).
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to get a written
agreement from 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 to agree on the amendment.
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments on the
amendment from the EPA (Administrative Record Nos. IA-441.1 and IA-
441.9). The EPA did not respond to our requests.
[[Page 66390]]
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 October 5, 1998, and September 28, 1999, we requested
comments on Iowa's amendment (Administrative Record Nos. IA-441.1 and
IA-441.9), but neither responded to our request.
V. Director's Decision
Based on the above findings, we approve, with certain exceptions
and additional requirements, the amendment as sent to us by Iowa on
September 28, 1998, and as revised and sent to us by Iowa on August 3,
1999.
With the requirement that Iowa further revise its revegetation
success guidelines, we do not approve, as discussed in: findings No.
A.1 and A.2.a, the use of reference areas for determining success of
productivity on prime farmland areas; finding No. A.2.b., section IV,
part G, concerning the requirements and methods for use of control
areas to adjust the County Soil Map Unit Yield Data for climatic
conditions; and finding No. B, section III, part H, concerning normal
husbandry practices.
With the requirement that Iowa further revise its revegetation
success guidelines, we approve, as discussed in finding No. A.3,
section IV, part E, concerning revegetation success standards for
recreational, wildlife, and forested lands; finding No. A.4, section V,
concerning sampling procedures and techniques for ground cover,
stocking, and production.
To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal regulations
at 30 CFR Part 915, which codify decisions concerning the Iowa program.
We are making this final rule effective immediately to expedite the
State program amendment process and to encourage Iowa to bring its
program into conformity with the Federal standards. SMCRA requires
consistency of State and Federal standards.
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 change to 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
changes to State programs that are not approved by OSM. In the
oversight of the Iowa program, we will recognize only the statutes,
regulations and other materials approved by the Secretary or by us,
together with any consistent implementing policies, directives and
other materials. We will require the enforcement by Iowa of only such
provisions.
VI. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) exempts this rule from
review 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 732.17(h)(10), decisions on State regulatory
programs and program amendments 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
This rule does not require an environmental impact statement since
section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency
decisions on 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. Therefore, this rule will ensure that existing requirements
previously published 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
OSM has determined and certifies under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq.) that this rule will not impose a cost of
$100 million or more in any given year on local, state, or tribal
governments or private entities.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 915
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: November 10, 1999.
Richard J. Seibel,
Acting 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:
Sec. 915.15 Approval of Iowa regulatory program amendments.
* * * * *
[[Page 66391]]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original amendment submission Date of final
date publication Citation/description
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
September 28, 1998............... November 26, 1999.. Revegetation Success Guidelines dated April 1999 (partial approval).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Section 915.16 is amended by adding paragraphs (a) through (e)
to read as follows:
Sec. 915.16 Required program amendments.
* * * * *
(a) Before Iowa allows the use of reference areas for determining
success of productivity on prime farmland as proposed at section III,
part F and section IV, part A.2 of its revegetation success guidelines,
Iowa must submit for OSM approval evidence that the U.S. Natural
Resources Conservation Service concurs with these provisions.
(b) By May 25, 2000, Iowa must either remove the guidelines for
normal husbandry practices from section III, part H of its April 1999
revegetation success guidelines or submit for OSM approval
documentation that demonstrates each practice is a normal husbandry
practice within the region for unmined lands having land uses similar
to the approved postmining land uses of areas disturbed by mining in
Iowa.
(c) By May 25, 2000, Iowa must either remove section IV, part G,
which contains the requirements and methods for control area climatic
adjustments to the prime farmland average yields provided in the County
Soil Map Unit Yield Data tables, from its April 1999 revegetation
success guidelines or submit for OSM approval evidence that the U.S.
Natural Resources Conservation Service concurs with this provision.
(d) By May 25, 2000, Iowa must amend its revegetation success
guidelines at:
(1) Section IV, part E by either adding planting arrangement
provisions for recreational, wildlife, and forested lands and obtaining
program-wide concurrence for the provisions from the State agencies
responsible for the administration of forestry and wildlife programs or
adding a provision that requires permit-specific concurrence for
minimum planting arrangements from the State agencies responsible for
the administration of forestry and wildlife programs.
(2) Section IV, part E by either obtaining program-wide concurrence
for its minimum stocking provisions or adding a provision that requires
permit-specific concurrence for minimum stocking from the State
agencies responsible for the administration of forestry and wildlife
programs.
(e) By May 25, 2000, Iowa must add a provision to section V, Part
A.2 of its revegetation success guidelines that specifies the standard
method that permittees are to use for obtaining the dry weight of test
plot grain samples.
[FR Doc. 99-30677 Filed 11-24-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
