95-15967. Arkansas Regulatory Program  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 126 (Friday, June 30, 1995)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 34138-34141]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-15967]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
    
    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
    
    30 CFR Part 904
    
    
    Arkansas Regulatory Program
    
    AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), 
    Interior.
    
    ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: OSM is approving, with additional requirements, a proposed 
    amendment to the Arkansas regulatory program (hereinafter referred to 
    as the ``Arkansas program'') under the Surface Mining Control and 
    Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). Arkansas proposed changes to its 
    statute by adding definitions of the terms ``unanticipated event or 
    condition'' and ``lands eligible for remining,'' deleting the authority 
    to either regulate or not regulate surface coal mining operations 
    affecting 2 acres or less, and revising provisions pertaining to 
    violations and revegetation performance standards for remining permits. 
    The amendment was intended to revise the Arkansas program to be 
    consistent with SMCRA.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: June 30, 1995.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Timothy Dieringer, Acting Director, 
    Tulsa Field Office, Telephone: (918) 581-6430.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Background on the Arkansas Program
    
        On November 21, 1980, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally 
    approved the Arkansas program. General background information on the 
    Arkansas program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition 
    of comments, and the conditions of approval of the Arkansas program can 
    be found in the November 21, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR 77003). 
    Subsequent actions concerning Arkansas's program and program amendments 
    can be found at 30 CFR 904.12 and 904.15.
    
    II. Proposed Amendment
    
        By letter dated August 26, 1994, Arkansas submitted a proposed 
    amendment to its program pursuant to SMCRA (administrative record No. 
    AR-522). Arkansas submitted the proposed amendment at its own 
    initiative with the intent of making its coal mining statutes 
    consistent with SMCRA. Arkansas proposed to revise the Arkansas Surface 
    Coal Mining and Reclamation Act of 1979 (ASCMRA) at (1) section 5, 
    jurisdiction and powers; rules and regulations, (2) section 13, surface 
    coal mining permits, and (3) section 15, environmental protection 
    performance standards.
        OSM published a notice in the September 29, 1994, Federal Register 
    (59 FR 49616) announcing receipt of the amendment and inviting public 
    comment on the adequacy of the proposed amendment (administrative 
    record No. AR-526). The public comment period ended October 31, 1994.
        During its review of the amendment, OSM identified concerns with 
    section 13(k) of ASCMRA, regarding remining permit violations, and 
    section 15(d)(1) of ASCMRA, regarding revegetation performance 
    standards on lands eligible for remining. OSM notified Arkansas of the 
    concerns by letter dated November 22, 1994 (administrative record No. 
    AR-539). Arkansas responded in a letter dated March 1, 1995, by 
    submitting a revised amendment (administrative record No. AR-540).
        In the revised amendment, Arkansas proposed to add definitions of 
    the terms ``unanticipated event or condition'' and ``lands eligible for 
    remining'' at sections 4(18) and 4(19) of ASCMRA.
        Based upon the revisions to the proposed program amendment 
    submitted by Arkansas, OSM reopened the public comment period in the 
    March 17, 1995, Federal Register (60 FR 14399, administrative record 
    No. AR-544). The 
    
    [[Page 34139]]
    public comment period ended on April 3, 1995.
        By letter dated April 4, 1995, Arkansas withdrew from this 
    amendment section 15(d)(1) of ASCMRA, which was a counterpart to 
    section 515(b)(20)(B) of SMCRA, and which set forth a variance from the 
    liability period performance standard for revegetation on lands 
    eligible for remining. In doing so, Arkansas indicated that it intends 
    to insert a counterpart provision to section 515(b)(20)(B) of SMCRA in 
    its regulations rather than in its statute at section 15(d)(1) of 
    ASCMRA as originally proposed (administrative record No. AR-548).
    
    III. Director's Findings
    
        As discussed below, the Director, in accordance with SMCRA and 30 
    CFR 732.15 and 732.17, finds, with additional requirements, that the 
    proposed program amendment submitted by Arkansas on August 26, 1994, 
    and as revised by it on March 1 and April 4, 1995, is no less stringent 
    than SMCRA. Accordingly, the Director approves the proposed amendment.
    
    1. Substantive Arkansas Statute Provision That Is Substantively 
    Identical to the Corresponding SMCRA Provision
    
        Arkansas proposed a definition of the term ``unanticipated event or 
    condition'' at section 4(18) of ASCMRA (to be codified at Arkansas Code 
    Annotated (ACA) 15-58-104(17)) that is substantively identical to the 
    definition of the same term at section 701(33) of SMCRA.
        Because this proposed statutory provision is substantively 
    identical to the corresponding SMCRA provision, the Director finds that 
    it is no less stringent than SMCRA. The Director approves the proposed 
    definition of the term ``unanticipated event or condition.''
    
    2. ASCMRA 4(19), Definition of the Term ``Lands Eligible for Remining''
    
        Arkansas proposed at section 4(19) of ASCMRA (ACA 15-58-104(18)) to 
    define the term ``lands eligible for remining'' to mean those lands 
    that would otherwise be eligible for expenditures under section 6 of 
    ASCMRA (ACA 15-58-401).
        Section 701(34) of SMCRA defines the term ``lands eligible for 
    remining'' to mean those lands that would otherwise be eligible for 
    expenditures under section 404 or 402(g)(4) of SMCRA.
        Referenced section 6 of ASCMRA (ACA 15-58-401) in Arkansas' 
    proposed definition of the term ``lands eligible for remining'' is the 
    State counterpart provision to referenced sections 404 and 402(g)(4)(B) 
    of SMCRA in the Federal definition. However, unlike section 404 of 
    SMCRA, section 60 of ASCMRA (ACA 15-58-401) does not provide for an 
    exclusion of expenditures for those lands addressed by section 411 of 
    SMCRA. Accordingly, Arkansas' proposed definition of the term ``lands 
    eligible for remining'' at section 4(19) of ASCMRA (ACA 15-58-104(18) 
    is less stringent than section 404 of SMCRA.
        Therefore, the Director approves but requires Arkansas to revise 
    its definition, or otherwise modify its program, to exclude those lands 
    addressed by section 411 of SMCRA.
    
    3. ASCMRA 5(b)(1), Applicability of the 2-Acre Exemption
    
        Arkansas proposed to delete the language of section 5(b)(1) of 
    ASCMRA, which provided, in part, that ``the Commission may, by 
    regulation, include, modify or omit permit application requirements, 
    permit approval or denial procedures, bond requirements and 
    environmental performance standards as it deems appropriate for surface 
    mining operations affecting two acres or less.'' Under this authority, 
    Arkansas previously promulgated rules at Part 772 of the Arkansas 
    Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation Code (ASCMRC) that exempted from 
    regulation surface mining operations affecting 2 acres or less.
        As originally enacted, section 528(2) of SMCRA exempted from the 
    requirements of SMCRA coal operations affecting 2 acres or less. 
    However, on May 7, 1987, the President signed Pub. L. 100-34, which 
    repealed this exemption and preempted any corresponding acreage-based 
    exemptions included in State laws or regulations.
        In accordance with the repeal of section 528(2) of SMCRA, Arkansas 
    proposed and the Director approved the deletion of the 2-acre exemption 
    allowance at ASCMRC Part 772 and the references to that exemption at 
    ASCMRC 707.12, 770.6(b), 770.6(i) (a) and (c), 810.11, 815, 815.2 (b) 
    and (c), 815.11(c), 815.15 (a) through (d), and (f) through (k), and 
    1000(d)(7) (August 19, 1992; 57 FR 37423, 37426-37427). Arkansas' 
    proposed deletion of its statutory language at section 5(b)(1) of 
    ASCMRA is consistent with its previous OSM-approved rule revisions 
    deleting the 2-acre exemption allowance and is no less stringent that 
    SMCRA, as amended by Pub. L. 100-34. Accordingly, the Director approves 
    Arkansas' proposed deletion.
    
    4. ASCMRA 13(k), Remining Permit Violations
    
        Arkansas proposed to create new section 13(k) of ASCMRA (ACA 15-58-
    503(a)(3)(G)) to provide that certain violations incurred under a 
    remining permit shall not disqualify the holder of that permit from 
    obtaining subsequent surface coal mining permits. Specifically, 
    proposed section 13(k) of ASCMRA requires that
    
        After the date of enactment of this subsection, the prohibition 
    of subsection (c)(3)(E) shall not apply to a permit application due 
    to any violation resulting from an unanticipated event or condition 
    at a surface coal mining operation on lands eligible for remining 
    under a permit held by the person making such application. As used 
    in this subsection, the term ``violation'' has the same meaning as 
    such term has under subsection (c)(3)(E). The authority of this 
    subsection and Section 15(d)(1) shall terminate on September 30, 
    2004.
    
        The only difference in wording between this proposed statutory 
    provision and the counterpart provision at section 510(e) of SMCRA is 
    that it references section 13(c)(3)(E) of ASCMRA instead of section 
    510(c) of SMCRA and references section 15(d)(1) of ASCMRA instead of 
    section 515(b)(20)(B) of SMCRA.
        Referenced section 13(c)(3)(E) of ASCMRA is a counterpart to 
    section 510(c) of SMCRA that Arkansas previously proposed and OSM 
    approved. Arkansas withdrew from this amendment referenced section 
    15(d)(1) of ASCMRA, which was a counterpart to section 515(b)(20)(B) of 
    SMCRA.
        With the exception of the reference to section 15(d)(1) of ASCMRA, 
    which does not exist, proposed section 13(k) of ASCMRA is substantively 
    identical to and no less stringent than section 510(e) of SMCRA. 
    Accordingly, the Director approves proposed section 13(k) of ASCMRA but 
    requires Arkansas to delete the phrase ``and section 15(d)(1).''
    
    IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
    
        Following are summaries of all substantive written comments on the 
    proposed amendment that were received by OSM, and OSM's responses to 
    them.
    
    1. Public Comments
    
        OSM invited public comments on the proposed amendment, but none 
    were received.
    2. Federal Agency Comments
    
        Pursuant to 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM solicited comments on the 
    proposed amendment from various Federal 
    
    [[Page 34140]]
    agencies with an actual or potential interest in the Arkansas program.
        Soil Conservation Service (SCS). SCS responded on October 24, 1994, 
    that it had no comments to make concerning the proposed amendment. SCS 
    further stated that since the proposal deals with remining it expects 
    no impact on Rural Abandoned Mine Program projects in Arkansas, which 
    are administered by SCS under the abandoned mine reclamation provisions 
    of title IV of SMCRA (administrative record No. AR-532).
        The Bureau of Land Management (BLM). BLM responded on October 19, 
    1994 (administrative record No. AR-533). It commented that Arkansas' 
    amendment to section 13(k) of ASCMRA tends to follow the intent of 
    SMCRA. As discussed in finding No. 4, the Director finds, with an 
    additional requirement, that proposed section 13(k) of ASCMRA is no 
    less stringent than section 510(e) of SMCRA.
        BLM further commented that while the exception concerning rainfall 
    was left out of section 15(d) of ASCMRA, which serves as the statutory 
    authority for Arkansas' environmental protection performance standards 
    and regulations, a review of the SCS Handbook for Logan County, 
    Arkansas indicates an annual precipitation of 46 inches and, as such, 
    the probability of 26 inches or less of annual precipitation in the 
    State is probably remote. In its November 22, 1994, issue letter, OSM 
    notified Arkansas that it did not include in its proposed revision at 
    section 15(d)(1) of ASCMRA a counterpart to the last part of section 
    515(b)(20)(b), which states that ``in those areas or regions of the 
    country where the annual average precipitation is twenty-six inches or 
    less, then the operator's assumption of responsibility and liability 
    will be extended for a period of five full years after the last year of 
    augmented seeded, fertilizing, irrigation, or other work in order to 
    assure compliance with the applicable standards.'' OSM further notified 
    Arkansas that it requires in section 816.116(c)(3) of its rules a 10-
    year liability period for areas receiving 26 inches or less of 
    precipitation. As a result, OSM requested that Arkansas clarify whether 
    or not the provision at section 816.116(c)(3), regarding the liability 
    period for areas receiving 26 inches or less of annual average 
    precipitation, is applicable to Arkansas on the basis of Arkansas' 
    climate. In its March 1, 1995, revised amendment, Arkansas responded 
    that because Arkansas' climate incurs 50 or more inches of annual 
    precipitation, section 816.116(c)(3) of its regulations is inapplicable 
    and, as such, shall be deleted in a subsequent amendment.
        BLM also commented that the amendment to section 5(b)(1) of ASCMRA 
    striking the 2-acre or less exemption appears to follow the intent of 
    SMCRA. As discussed in finding No. 3, Arkansas' proposed deletion of 
    the statutory exemption for operations affecting 2 acres or less is (1) 
    consistent with Arkansas' deletion of the counterpart regulation 
    exemption that OSM previously approved and (2) is no less stringent 
    than SMCRA.
        Lastly, BLM commented that the portion of the State law referring 
    to the extraction of coal as an incidental part of the Federal, State, 
    or local government-financed highway or other construction under 
    regulations and the extraction of coal by a landowner for noncommercial 
    use should be in the regulation elsewhere. In response to BLM's last 
    comment, the Arkansas provisions concerning the exemption for coal 
    incident to government-financed highways or other construction can be 
    found at ACA 15-58-106(3) and at Part 707 of Arkansas' rules.
        U.S. Forest Service. The U.S. Forest Service responded on October 
    20, 1994, that it had no additions or corrections to offer on the 
    proposed amendment (administrative record No. AR-534).
        U.S. Bureau of Mines. The U.S. Bureau of Mines responded on October 
    31, 1994, and March 30, 1995, that its Division of Environmental 
    Technology reviewed Arkansas' proposed amendment and had no comment 
    (administrative record Nos. AR-535 and AR-546).
        U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). USFWS responded on November 
    14, 1994, that it had no objections to Arkansas' proposed amendments to 
    sections 5 and 15 of ASCMRA. However, it did express a concern that the 
    amendment to section 13 of ASCMRA, which would provide that certain 
    violations incurred under a remining permit shall not disqualify the 
    holder from obtaining subsequent coal mining permits, should not be 
    adopted (administrative record No. AR-537). USFWS further stated that 
    outstanding violations on existing permits should be corrected or 
    resolved prior to the permit holder being issued additional permits.
        In response to USFWS's concern, section 510(e) of SMCRA, as 
    discussed in finding No. 4, provides, as does proposed section 13(k) of 
    ASCMRA, that violations resulting from an unanticipated event or 
    condition at a surface coal mining operation on lands eligible for 
    remining under a permit held by the person making such application 
    shall not disqualify the holder from obtaining subsequent coal mining 
    permits.
        Therefore, this provision of proposed section 13(k) of ASCMRA is in 
    accordance with and no less stringent than section 510(e) of SMCRA. 
    Because the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.5(b) only require that a 
    State's laws and regulations be ``consistent with'' and ``in accordance 
    with'' SMCRA and the Federal regulations, the Director does not have 
    the authority to require standards in excess of SMCRA or the Federal 
    regulations. On this basis, the Director does not require Arkansas to 
    revise its program in response to USFWS's comment.
        U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
    responded on March 28, 1995, that it found the changes submitted by 
    Arkansas to be satisfactory (administrative record No. AR-545).
        The National Park Service. The National Park Service responded by 
    telephone conversation on April 10, 1995, that it had no comments on 
    the proposed amendment (administrative record No. AR-547).
    
    3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments
        Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), OSM is required to solicit 
    the written concurrence of 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 Arkansas proposed to make in its 
    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 Nos. AR-524 and AR-
    541). By letter dated April 11, 1995, EPA responded that it had no 
    comments on the proposed amendment (administrative record No. AR-549).
    
    4. State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council 
    on Historic Preservation (ACHP)
    
        Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), OSM solicited comments on the 
    proposed amendment from the SHPO and ACHP (administrative record Nos. 
    AR-524 and AR-541). Neither SHPO nor ACHP responded to OSM's request.
    
    V. Director's Decision
    
        Based on the above findings, the Director approves, with additional 
    requirements, Arkansas' proposed 
    
    [[Page 34141]]
    amendment as submitted on August 26, 1994, and as revised on March 1 
    and April 4, 1995.
        The Director approves, as discussed in: finding No. 1, section 
    4(18) of ASCMRA, concerning the definition of the term ``unanticipated 
    event or condition;'' and finding No. 3, section 5(b)(1) of ASCMRA, 
    concerning the applicability of the 2-acre exemption.
        With the requirement that Arkansas further revise its statutes, the 
    Director approves, as discussed in: finding No. 2, section 4(19) of 
    ASCMRA, concerning the definition of the term ``lands eligible for 
    remining;'' and finding No. 4, section 13(k) of ASCMRA, concerning 
    remining permit violations.
        The Director approves the statute revisions as proposed by Arkansas 
    with the provision that they be fully promulgated in identical form to 
    the statute revisions submitted to and reviewed by OSM and the public.
        The Federal regulations at 30 CFR Part 904, codifying decisions 
    concerning the Arkansas 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.
    
    IV. Procedural Determinations
    
    1. Executive Order 12866
    
        This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and 
    Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and 
    Review).
    
    2. Executive Order 12778
    
        The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required 
    by section 2 of Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform) and has 
    determined that 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 the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 
    732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed State regulatory 
    programs and program amendment 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.
    
    3. 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)).
    
    4. Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        This rule does not contain information collection requirements that 
    require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
    3507 et seq.).
    
    5. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        The Department of the Interior has determined that this rule will 
    not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
    entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 
    The State submittal that is the subject of this rule is based upon 
    counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was 
    prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a 
    significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small 
    entities. Accordingly, this rule will ensure that existing requirements 
    previously promulgated by OSM will be implemented by the State. In 
    making the determination as to whether this rule would have a 
    significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and 
    assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations.
    
    List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 904
    
        Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
    
        Dated: June 22, 1995.
    Peter A. Rutledge,
    Acting Regional Director, Western 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 904--ARKANSAS
    
        1. The authority citation for Part 904 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
    
        2. Section 904.15 is amended by adding paragraph (m) to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 904.15  Approval of amendments to State regulatory program.
    
    * * * * *
        (m) The following sections of the Arkansas Surface Coal Mining and 
    Reclamation Act of 1979 (ASCMRA), as submitted to OSM on August 26, 
    1994, and as revised on March 1 and April 4, 1995, are approved 
    effective on June 30, 1995:
    
    section 4(18), definition of the term ``unanticipated event or 
    condition;''
    4(19), definition of the term ``lands eligible for remining;''
    5(b)(1), applicability of the 2-acre exemption; and
    13(k), remining permit violations.
    
        3. Section 904.16 is added to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 904.16  Required program amendments.
    
        Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(f)(1), Arkansas is required to submit to 
    OSM by the specified date the following written, proposed program 
    amendment, or a description of an amendment to be proposed that meets 
    the requirements of SMCRA or 30 CFR Chapter VII and a timetable for 
    enactment that is consistent with Arkansas' established administrative 
    or legislative procedures.
        (a) By August 29, 1995, Arkansas shall revise section 4(19) of the 
    Arkansas Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation Act of 1979 (ASCMRA), 
    concerning the definition of the term ``lands eligible for remining,'' 
    or otherwise modify its program, to exclude those lands addressed by 
    section 411 of SMCRA.
        (b) By August 29, 1995, Arkansas shall revise section 13(k) of 
    ASCMRA, concerning remining permit violations, by deleting the phrase 
    ``and section 15(d)(1).''
    
    [FR Doc. 95-15967 Filed 6-29-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4310-05-M
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
6/30/1995
Published:
06/30/1995
Department:
Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule; approval of amendment.
Document Number:
95-15967
Dates:
June 30, 1995.
Pages:
34138-34141 (4 pages)
PDF File:
95-15967.pdf
CFR: (2)
30 CFR 904.15
30 CFR 904.16