Colorado Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Plan, 54490-54493 [05-18329]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
54490
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Related Investigative/Corrective Actions
(h) If any cracking is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (f) or (g) of
this AD: Before further flight, replace nose rib
7 with a new, reinforced rib and do all
related investigative actions in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–0242 or
A300–57–6097, both dated December 18,
2003, as applicable, except as provided by
paragraph (i) of this AD. Then, within 5,000
flight cycles after doing the replacement, do
the inspection in paragraph (f) of this AD,
and perform repetitive inspections or related
investigative/corrective actions as required
by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, as
applicable.
(i) If any cracking is found for which the
service bulletin specifies to contact Airbus:
Before further flight, repair per a method
approved by either the Manager,
International Branch, ANM–116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the Direction
´ ´
Generale de l’Aviation Civile (or its delegated
agent).
No Reporting Required
(j) Airbus Service Bulletins A300–57–0240
and A300–57–6095, both Revision 01, both
dated December 2, 2004, specify to submit
certain information to the manufacturer, but
this AD does not include that requirement.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(k) The Manager, International Branch,
ANM–116, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(l) French airworthiness directive F–2005–
022, dated February 2, 2005, also addresses
the subject of this AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
September 8, 2005.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–18312 Filed 9–14–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 906
[CO–031–FOR]
Colorado Abandoned Mine Land
Reclamation Plan
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and
extension of public comment period and
opportunity for public hearing on
proposed amendment.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<18>2005
14:58 Sep 14, 2005
Jkt 205001
SUMMARY: We are announcing receipt of
revisions pertaining to a previously
proposed amendment to the Colorado
abandoned mine land reclamation
(AMLR) plan (hereinafter, the ‘‘Colorado
plan’’) under the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977
(SMCRA or the Act). Colorado proposes
revisions about: Project selection
criteria; selection of project alternatives;
requirements for authorization to
proceed; evaluation of project benefits;
incorporation of the ‘‘Common Rule’’ in
the procedures for financial
management and accounting;
interaction with the Colorado State
Forest Service; and minor editorial
revisions. Colorado intends to revise its
plan to meet the requirements of the
corresponding Federal regulations, to
provide additional safeguards, and to
clarify ambiguities.
DATES: Comments on this amendment
must be received on or before 4 p.m.,
m.d.t., on October 17, 2005 to ensure
our consideration. If requested, we will
hold a public hearing on the
amendment on October 11, 2005. We
will accept requests to speak until 4
p.m., m.d.t., on September 30, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by ‘‘CO–031–FOR,’’ by any of
the following methods:
E-mail: rpair@osmre.gov. Include
‘‘CO–031–FOR’’ in the subject line of
the message.
Mail: James Fulton, Chief, Denver
Field Division, Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, P.O. Box
No. 46667, Denver, CO 80201–6667.
Hand Delivery/Courier: James Fulton,
Chief, Denver Field Division, Office of
Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement, 1999 Broadway, Suite
3320, Denver, CO 80202–5733, 303–
844–1400 x1424.
Fax: 303–844–1545.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and be
identified by ‘‘CO–031–FOR’’. For
detailed instructions on submitting
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Public Comment Procedures’’ heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: You may review the docket
(administrative record) for this plan
amendment at the addresses listed
below during normal business hours,
Monday through Friday, excluding
holidays. The docket will contain copies
of the Colorado plan, this amendment,
a listing of any scheduled public
hearings, and all written comments
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
received in response to this document.
You may receive one free copy of the
amendment by contacting Office of
Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement’s (OSM) Denver Field
Division. In addition, you may review a
copy of the amendment during regular
business hours at the following
locations:
James Fulton, Chief, Denver Field
Division, Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, 1999
Broadway, Suite 3320, Denver, CO
80202. 303–844–1400 x1424.
Ms. Loretta Pineda, Program
Supervisor, Colorado Inactive Mine
Reclamation Program, Division of
Minerals and Geology, Colorado
Department of Natural Resources, 1313
Sherman Street, Room 215, Denver, CO
80203. Telephone: 303–866–3567.
E-mail address:
loretta.pineda@state.co.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Fulton, Telephone: 303–844–1400
x1424, E-mail address:
jfulton@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Colorado Plan
II. Description of the Proposed Amendment
III. Public Comment Procedures
IV. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Colorado Plan
The Abandoned Mine Land
Reclamation Program was established
by Title IV of the Act, (30 U.S.C. 1201
et seq.) in response to concerns over
extensive environmental damage caused
by past coal mining activities. The
program is funded by a reclamation fee
collected on each ton of coal that is
produced. The money collected is used
to finance the reclamation of abandoned
coal mines and for other authorized
activities. Section 405 of the Act allows
States and Indian tribes to assume
exclusive responsibility for reclamation
activity within the State or on Indian
lands if they develop and submit to the
Secretary of the Interior for approval, a
program (often referred to as a plan) for
the reclamation of abandoned coal
mines. On June 11, 1982, the Secretary
of the Interior approved the Colorado
plan. You can find general background
information on the Colorado plan,
including the Secretary’s findings and
the disposition of comments, in the June
11, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR
25332). You can also find later actions
concerning Colorado’s plan and plan
amendments at 30 CFR 906.25.
II. Description of the Proposed
Amendment
By letter dated October 29, 1996,
Colorado sent to us a proposed
E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM
15SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / Proposed Rules
amendment to its plan (administrative
record number CO–AML–24) under
SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.).
Colorado sent the amendment in
response to a September 26, 1994, letter
(administrative record number CO–
AML–19) that we sent to Colorado in
accordance with 30 CFR 884.15(b), and
at its own initiative. The full text of the
Colorado plan amendment is available
for you to read at the locations listed
above under ADDRESSES above.
We announced receipt of the
proposed amendment in the November
19, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR
58800), provided an opportunity for a
public hearing or meeting on its
substantive adequacy, and invited
public comment on its adequacy
(administrative record number CO–
AML–26). Because no one requested a
public hearing or meeting, none was
held. The public comment period ended
on December 19, 1996. We received
comments from one industry group, four
Federal agencies and two citizen or
academic groups.
During our review of the amendment,
we identified a concern relating to the
provisions of Colorado’s plan provisions
at Section V.B.2. concerning the
determination of eligibility for proposed
sites. We notified Colorado of our
concern by letter dated June 7, 1999
(administrative record number CO–
AML–35). Colorado responded by a
memo dated June 15, 2005, by
submitting a revised amendment
(administrative record number CO–
AML–36). Colorado is also taking this
opportunity to submit additional
revisions at its own initiative.
The provisions of the plan that
Colorado now proposes to revise are:
II.B, Project selection criteria; II.C.,
Selection of project alternatives; V.B.,
Requirements for authorization to
proceed; V.B.5., Evaluation of project
benefits; VII.A.1.and 2., incorporation of
the ‘‘Common Rule’’ in the procedures
for financial management and
accounting; VIII., Interaction with the
Colorado State Forest Service; and
several editorial corrections.
Specifically, Colorado proposes the
following revisions.
II.B., Project selection criteria.
Colorado proposes 15 criteria to be used
in selecting projects for submission to
OSM in grant applications. These
include: (1) Public safety hazards (coal
hazards receive top priority; noncoal
projects must represent ‘‘extreme
hazards’’); (2) funding considerations
(consideration of total funds from all
sources and any constraints on the
funds); (3) technology available to
accomplish the required tasks; (4)
adverse impacts (consideration of
VerDate Aug<18>2005
14:58 Sep 14, 2005
Jkt 205001
impacts on people and the environment
during and after reclamation work,
including existing impacts); (5) value in
economy and efficiency of the proposed
project; (6) mineral recoverability
(consider loss of mineral recoverability
and possible disruption of the
reclamation effort by future mining); (7)
post-reclamation management
(compatibility with on-site and
surrounding land uses and applicable
land use controls); (8) minerals involved
in the inactive mining (coal receives top
priority; noncoal or hardrock problems
are of lower priority and must be
extreme hazards); (9) geographic
distribution (the plan tries to maintain
a presence in all areas of the State each
year for hardrock projects; geography is
not applicable for coal-related projects);
(10) accessibility (preference given to
sites that are accessible and show
significant visitation); (11) staffing
(number of projects is limited by staff
available); (12) community/landowner
support (special consideration given to
sites and projects where reclamation has
been requested by landowners or the
local community); (13) project size
(small projects encourage local
contractor participation); (14) project
review (representing the priorities of an
advisory committee); and (15) formal
public hearing (final approval of site
selection is given by the Mined Land
Reclamation Board).
II.C., Selection of project alternatives.
Colorado proposes that after a tentative
project selection, a suitable reclamation
design for each project be selected.
General alternatives are: (1) Hazard
abatement (eliminate the hazard without
necessarily addressing future land use);
(2) partial reclamation (corrective action
on hazards, but also make immediate
site compatible with adjacent land
uses); and (3) full reclamation (not only
correct hazardous conditions, but also
reclaim other effects of past mining,
possibly including restoration of
degraded land or water resources).
Colorado proposes that the objective is
to do as complete a reclamation job as
possible, including restoration and
abatement or control of adverse effects
of past mining; but in some cases, only
hazard abatement or partial reclamation
will be performed.
V.B. Colorado proposes to change the
title of this section from ‘‘Project
Feasibility Studies’’ to ‘‘Authorization to
Proceed Requirements.’’
V.B.5., Evaluation of project benefits.
Colorado proposes to limit the
requirement for a written finding of
project benefits to those projects which
would potentially produce a significant
increase in market value.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54491
VII.A.1. (financial management).
Colorado proposes to change the
reference regarding Federal financial
requirements to ‘‘OMB Circular A–102
and DOI’s Grants Management Common
Rule at 43 CFR 12’’. Colorado proposes
that fiscal management will comply
with the Common Rule.
VII.A.2., Audits. Colorado proposes to
change the reference regarding Federal
audit requirements from ‘‘OMB Circular
A–102’’ to ‘‘the Common Rule.’’
VIII.I., Colorado State Forest Service
(CSFS). Colorado proposes to add a new
section describing the role that the CSFS
plays in the plan implementation,
which describes the CSFS’s expertise in
natural resource protection.
We note that the document submitted
to OSM (administrative record number
CO–AML–36) is not limited to the
proposed revisions described here. It is
a full version of the Colorado plan
document, and indicates all changes
since the plan was originally approved
by OSM (see Section I. Background on
the Colorado Plan above). In this
document, text highlighted in magenta
indicates language that has been
approved by OSM (in 1985). Text
highlighted with yellow and blue is
language that was proposed in 1996,
and has already been opened to public
comment (see Section II. Description of
the Proposed Amendment above). The
text that is new with this current
submittal is highlighted in green. We
noted a couple of new changes that are
not highlighted in green, but they are
minor editorial changes. In this
proposed rule, we are specifically
requesting comments on the new
material highlighted in green, as
described above.
III. Public Comment Procedures
Written Comments
Send your written comments to us at
the address given above. Your written
comments should be specific, pertain
only to the issues proposed in this
rulemaking, and include explanations in
support of your recommendations. We
cannot ensure consideration of
comments received at locations other
than the Denver Field Division (see
ADDRESSES above).
Electronic Comments
Please submit Internet comments as
an ASCII or MS Word file, avoiding the
use of special characters and any form
of encryption. Please also include ‘‘Attn:
SATS No. CO–031–FOR’’ and your
name and return address in your
Internet message. If you do not receive
a confirmation that we have received
your Internet message, contact the
E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM
15SEP1
54492
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Denver Field Division at 303–844–1400
x1446.
meeting a part of the administrative
record.
Availability of Comments
IV. Procedural Determinations
We will make comments, including
names and addresses of respondents,
available for public review during
normal business hours. We will not
consider anonymous comments. If
individual respondents request
confidentiality, we will honor their
request to the extent allowable by law.
Individual respondents who wish to
withhold their name or address from
public review, except for the city or
town, must state this prominently at the
beginning of their comments. We will
make all submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from
individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, available
for public review in their entirety.
Executive Order 12630—Takings
This rule does not have takings
implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the
counterpart Federal regulation.
Public Hearing
If you wish to speak at the public
hearing, contact the person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4
p.m., m.d.t., on September 30, 2005. If
you are disabled and need special
accommodations to attend a public
hearing, please contact the individual
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. We will arrange the location
and time of the hearing with those
persons requesting the hearing. If no one
requests an opportunity to speak, we
will not hold the hearing.
To assist the transcriber and ensure an
accurate record, we request, if possible,
that each person who speaks at a public
hearing provide us with a written copy
of his or her comments. The public
hearing will continue on the specified
date until everyone scheduled to speak
has been heard. If you are in the
audience and have not been scheduled
to speak and wish to do so, you will be
allowed to speak after those who have
been scheduled. We will end the
hearing after everyone scheduled to
speak, and others present in the
audience who wish to speak, have been
heard.
Public Meeting
If only one person requests an
opportunity to speak, we may hold a
public meeting rather than a public
hearing. If you wish to meet with us to
discuss the amendment, please request
a meeting by contacting the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. All such meetings will be
open to the public and, if possible, we
will post notices of meetings at the
locations listed under ADDRESSES. We
will make a written summary of each
VerDate Aug<18>2005
14:58 Sep 14, 2005
Jkt 205001
Executive Order 12866—Regulatory
Planning and Review
This rule is exempted from review by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under Executive Order 12866
(Regulatory Planning and Review).
Executive Order 12988—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
allowable 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 Tribal or State AMLR
plans and revisions thereof because
each plan is drafted and promulgated by
a specific Tribe or State, not by OSM.
Decisions on proposed Tribal or State
AMLR plans and revisions thereof
submitted by a Tribe or State are based
on a determination of whether the
submittal meets the requirements of
Title IV of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1231–
1243) and the applicable Federal
regulations at 30 CFR part 884.
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
pursuant to SMCRA.
Executive Order 13175—Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
In accordance with Executive Order
13175, we have evaluated the potential
effects of this rule on Federallyrecognized Indian Tribes and have
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
determined that the rule does not have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
The rule does not involve or affect
Indian Tribes in any way.
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
No environmental impact statement is
required for this rule since agency
decisions on proposed Tribal or State
AMLR plans and revisions thereof are
categorically excluded from compliance
with the National Environmental Policy
Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) by the
Manual of the Department of the Interior
(516 DM 6, appendix 8, paragraph
8.4B(29)).
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.
3501 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior
certifies 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. 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.
E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM
15SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2) of 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
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 an
unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector
of $100 million or more in any given
year. This determination is based upon
the fact that the State submittal, which
is the subject of this rule, is based upon
counterpart Federal regulations for
which an analysis was prepared and a
determination made that the Federal
regulation did not impose an unfunded
mandate.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 906
Abandoned mine reclamation
programs, Intergovernmental relations,
Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: August 12, 2005.
Allen D. Klein,
Regional Director, Western Regional
Coordinating Center.
[FR Doc. 05–18329 Filed 9–14–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 20
International Mail: Proposed Changes
in Postal Rates and Fees
Postal Service.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Postal Service, under its
authority in Title 39 U.S.C. 407, is
proposing changes to international mail
postage rates and fees. As provided
under the Postal Reorganization Act, the
proposed changes will result in
VerDate Aug<18>2005
14:58 Sep 14, 2005
Jkt 205001
international postage rates that retain
the overall value of service to
customers, are fair and reasonable, and
are not unduly or unreasonably
discriminatory or preferential.
The total international rate increase is
5.9 percent. To the extent possible, the
targeted increase is 5.4 percent acrossthe-board, consistent with our domestic
rate filing with the Postal Rate
Commission. We are proposing to
implement this international pricing
change at the same time as the domestic
pricing change.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
October 17, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Mail or deliver comments to
the Manager, Mailing Standards, Attn:
Obataiye Akinwole, U.S. Postal Service,
475 L’Enfant Plaza SW., RM 3436,
Washington, DC 20260–3436. You may
also fax written comments to 202–268–
4955. You may inspect and photocopy
all written comments between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, at
USPS Headquarters Library, 11th Floor
North, 475 L’Enfant Plaza SW.,
Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Obataiye B. Akinwole at 202–268–7262,
or Thomas P. Philson at 202–268–7355.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal
Service is proposing to change
international postage rates and fees
concurrent with the implementation of
new domestic postage rates and fees. We
also plan to realign certain Express Mail
and Air Parcel Post rate groups based on
operational changes that have taken
place since the last rate change in 2001.
This realignment will enhance service
to some European and Asian countries.
The total international rate increase is
5.9 percent. To the extent possible, we
targeted the same 5.4 percent across-theboard increase we requested in our
domestic rate filing with the Postal Rate
Commission. However, for some
services and country groups, our
proposed increase is more than 5.4
percent. There are two reasons for this
difference. First, unlike domestic rates,
international rates have not changed
since January 2001. During that time,
costs have increased. To cover those
increases, we need to raise some rates
more than 5.4 percent. Second, rates
were rounded, in some cases to the
nearest $0.05. This rounding resulted in
increases for services such as postcards
and aerogrammes of more than 5.4
percent. Postcards and aerogrammes are
predominantly retail services, and we
rounded those rates for customer
convenience.
There are five principal categories of
international mail service, primarily
differentiated by speed of service. They
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54493
are Global Express Guaranteed (GXG),
Global Express Mail (EMS), Global
Priority Mail (GPM), Airmail, and
Economy Mail. Following is a summary
of our proposed changes.
Global Express Guaranteed (GXGTM)
Global Express Guaranteed (GXG) is
an international expedited delivery
service providing high-speed,
guaranteed, and time-definite service
from selected post offices to many
international destinations. GXG is
available for documents
(correspondence) and merchandise. Our
proposal would increase rates
approximately 5.3 percent.
Global Express MailTM (EMS)
Global Express Mail (EMS) is an
international expedited delivery service
provided to approximately 180
countries. Our proposal would increase
rates 5.7 percent. For most country
groups, the increase is an across-theboard 5.4 percent, rounded to the
nearest $0.05. However, with enhanced
service and operational changes, rates to
certain Asian destinations increased
more than 5.4 percent to cover costs.
Global Priority Mail (GPM)
Global Priority Mail (GPM) is an
expedited airmail letter service for
documents, printed matter, and
uninsured merchandise up to 4 pounds
to approximately 50 countries. Our
proposal would increase rates 5.6
percent. The proposed change
represents an across-the-board 5.4
percent increase, rounded to the nearest
$0.25. Because of this rounding, the rate
increase is more than 5.4 percent.
Air Letters
Air letters includes personal
correspondence, statements of account,
printed matter, and uninsured
merchandise weighing up to 4 pounds.
Our proposal would increase rates 5.2
percent.
Postcards and Postal Cards
Postcards and postal cards are
unsealed personal and business
correspondence similar to First-Class
Mail domestic postcards. Our proposal
would increase rates 7.8 percent. The
proposed change represents a 5.4
percent increase rounded to the nearest
$0.05. Because of this rounding, the rate
increase is more than 5.4 percent.
Postcards are predominantly a retail
service, and we rounded rates for
customer convenience.
Aerogrammes
Aerogrammes are designed for
personal correspondence and consist of
E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM
15SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 178 (Thursday, September 15, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54490-54493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18329]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 906
[CO-031-FOR]
Colorado Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Plan
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and extension of public comment period
and opportunity for public hearing on proposed amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are announcing receipt of revisions pertaining to a
previously proposed amendment to the Colorado abandoned mine land
reclamation (AMLR) plan (hereinafter, the ``Colorado plan'') under the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act).
Colorado proposes revisions about: Project selection criteria;
selection of project alternatives; requirements for authorization to
proceed; evaluation of project benefits; incorporation of the ``Common
Rule'' in the procedures for financial management and accounting;
interaction with the Colorado State Forest Service; and minor editorial
revisions. Colorado intends to revise its plan to meet the requirements
of the corresponding Federal regulations, to provide additional
safeguards, and to clarify ambiguities.
DATES: Comments on this amendment must be received on or before 4 p.m.,
m.d.t., on October 17, 2005 to ensure our consideration. If requested,
we will hold a public hearing on the amendment on October 11, 2005. We
will accept requests to speak until 4 p.m., m.d.t., on September 30,
2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by ``CO-031-FOR,'' by
any of the following methods:
E-mail: rpair@osmre.gov. Include ``CO-031-FOR'' in the subject line
of the message.
Mail: James Fulton, Chief, Denver Field Division, Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, P.O. Box No. 46667, Denver, CO
80201-6667.
Hand Delivery/Courier: James Fulton, Chief, Denver Field Division,
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1999 Broadway,
Suite 3320, Denver, CO 80202-5733, 303-844-1400 x1424.
Fax: 303-844-1545.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and be identified by ``CO-031-FOR''. For detailed instructions on
submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking
process, see the ``Public Comment Procedures'' heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: You may review the docket (administrative record) for this
plan amendment at the addresses listed below during normal business
hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. The docket will
contain copies of the Colorado plan, this amendment, a listing of any
scheduled public hearings, and all written comments received in
response to this document. You may receive one free copy of the
amendment by contacting Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement's (OSM) Denver Field Division. In addition, you may review
a copy of the amendment during regular business hours at the following
locations:
James Fulton, Chief, Denver Field Division, Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1999 Broadway, Suite 3320, Denver,
CO 80202. 303-844-1400 x1424.
Ms. Loretta Pineda, Program Supervisor, Colorado Inactive Mine
Reclamation Program, Division of Minerals and Geology, Colorado
Department of Natural Resources, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215, Denver,
CO 80203. Telephone: 303-866-3567. E-mail address:
loretta.pineda@state.co.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Fulton, Telephone: 303-844-1400
x1424, E-mail address: jfulton@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Colorado Plan
II. Description of the Proposed Amendment
III. Public Comment Procedures
IV. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Colorado Plan
The Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Program was established by
Title IV of the Act, (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) in response to concerns
over extensive environmental damage caused by past coal mining
activities. The program is funded by a reclamation fee collected on
each ton of coal that is produced. The money collected is used to
finance the reclamation of abandoned coal mines and for other
authorized activities. Section 405 of the Act allows States and Indian
tribes to assume exclusive responsibility for reclamation activity
within the State or on Indian lands if they develop and submit to the
Secretary of the Interior for approval, a program (often referred to as
a plan) for the reclamation of abandoned coal mines. On June 11, 1982,
the Secretary of the Interior approved the Colorado plan. You can find
general background information on the Colorado plan, including the
Secretary's findings and the disposition of comments, in the June 11,
1982, Federal Register (47 FR 25332). You can also find later actions
concerning Colorado's plan and plan amendments at 30 CFR 906.25.
II. Description of the Proposed Amendment
By letter dated October 29, 1996, Colorado sent to us a proposed
[[Page 54491]]
amendment to its plan (administrative record number CO-AML-24) under
SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). Colorado sent the amendment in response
to a September 26, 1994, letter (administrative record number CO-AML-
19) that we sent to Colorado in accordance with 30 CFR 884.15(b), and
at its own initiative. The full text of the Colorado plan amendment is
available for you to read at the locations listed above under ADDRESSES
above.
We announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the November 19,
1996, Federal Register (61 FR 58800), provided an opportunity for a
public hearing or meeting on its substantive adequacy, and invited
public comment on its adequacy (administrative record number CO-AML-
26). Because no one requested a public hearing or meeting, none was
held. The public comment period ended on December 19, 1996. We received
comments from one industry group, four Federal agencies and two citizen
or academic groups.
During our review of the amendment, we identified a concern
relating to the provisions of Colorado's plan provisions at Section
V.B.2. concerning the determination of eligibility for proposed sites.
We notified Colorado of our concern by letter dated June 7, 1999
(administrative record number CO-AML-35). Colorado responded by a memo
dated June 15, 2005, by submitting a revised amendment (administrative
record number CO-AML-36). Colorado is also taking this opportunity to
submit additional revisions at its own initiative.
The provisions of the plan that Colorado now proposes to revise
are: II.B, Project selection criteria; II.C., Selection of project
alternatives; V.B., Requirements for authorization to proceed; V.B.5.,
Evaluation of project benefits; VII.A.1.and 2., incorporation of the
``Common Rule'' in the procedures for financial management and
accounting; VIII., Interaction with the Colorado State Forest Service;
and several editorial corrections.
Specifically, Colorado proposes the following revisions.
II.B., Project selection criteria. Colorado proposes 15 criteria to
be used in selecting projects for submission to OSM in grant
applications. These include: (1) Public safety hazards (coal hazards
receive top priority; noncoal projects must represent ``extreme
hazards''); (2) funding considerations (consideration of total funds
from all sources and any constraints on the funds); (3) technology
available to accomplish the required tasks; (4) adverse impacts
(consideration of impacts on people and the environment during and
after reclamation work, including existing impacts); (5) value in
economy and efficiency of the proposed project; (6) mineral
recoverability (consider loss of mineral recoverability and possible
disruption of the reclamation effort by future mining); (7) post-
reclamation management (compatibility with on-site and surrounding land
uses and applicable land use controls); (8) minerals involved in the
inactive mining (coal receives top priority; noncoal or hardrock
problems are of lower priority and must be extreme hazards); (9)
geographic distribution (the plan tries to maintain a presence in all
areas of the State each year for hardrock projects; geography is not
applicable for coal-related projects); (10) accessibility (preference
given to sites that are accessible and show significant visitation);
(11) staffing (number of projects is limited by staff available); (12)
community/landowner support (special consideration given to sites and
projects where reclamation has been requested by landowners or the
local community); (13) project size (small projects encourage local
contractor participation); (14) project review (representing the
priorities of an advisory committee); and (15) formal public hearing
(final approval of site selection is given by the Mined Land
Reclamation Board).
II.C., Selection of project alternatives. Colorado proposes that
after a tentative project selection, a suitable reclamation design for
each project be selected. General alternatives are: (1) Hazard
abatement (eliminate the hazard without necessarily addressing future
land use); (2) partial reclamation (corrective action on hazards, but
also make immediate site compatible with adjacent land uses); and (3)
full reclamation (not only correct hazardous conditions, but also
reclaim other effects of past mining, possibly including restoration of
degraded land or water resources). Colorado proposes that the objective
is to do as complete a reclamation job as possible, including
restoration and abatement or control of adverse effects of past mining;
but in some cases, only hazard abatement or partial reclamation will be
performed.
V.B. Colorado proposes to change the title of this section from
``Project Feasibility Studies'' to ``Authorization to Proceed
Requirements.''
V.B.5., Evaluation of project benefits. Colorado proposes to limit
the requirement for a written finding of project benefits to those
projects which would potentially produce a significant increase in
market value.
VII.A.1. (financial management). Colorado proposes to change the
reference regarding Federal financial requirements to ``OMB Circular A-
102 and DOI's Grants Management Common Rule at 43 CFR 12''. Colorado
proposes that fiscal management will comply with the Common Rule.
VII.A.2., Audits. Colorado proposes to change the reference
regarding Federal audit requirements from ``OMB Circular A-102'' to
``the Common Rule.''
VIII.I., Colorado State Forest Service (CSFS). Colorado proposes to
add a new section describing the role that the CSFS plays in the plan
implementation, which describes the CSFS's expertise in natural
resource protection.
We note that the document submitted to OSM (administrative record
number CO-AML-36) is not limited to the proposed revisions described
here. It is a full version of the Colorado plan document, and indicates
all changes since the plan was originally approved by OSM (see Section
I. Background on the Colorado Plan above). In this document, text
highlighted in magenta indicates language that has been approved by OSM
(in 1985). Text highlighted with yellow and blue is language that was
proposed in 1996, and has already been opened to public comment (see
Section II. Description of the Proposed Amendment above). The text that
is new with this current submittal is highlighted in green. We noted a
couple of new changes that are not highlighted in green, but they are
minor editorial changes. In this proposed rule, we are specifically
requesting comments on the new material highlighted in green, as
described above.
III. Public Comment Procedures
Written Comments
Send your written comments to us at the address given above. Your
written comments should be specific, pertain only to the issues
proposed in this rulemaking, and include explanations in support of
your recommendations. We cannot ensure consideration of comments
received at locations other than the Denver Field Division (see
ADDRESSES above).
Electronic Comments
Please submit Internet comments as an ASCII or MS Word file,
avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption.
Please also include ``Attn: SATS No. CO-031-FOR'' and your name and
return address in your Internet message. If you do not receive a
confirmation that we have received your Internet message, contact the
[[Page 54492]]
Denver Field Division at 303-844-1400 x1446.
Availability of Comments
We will make comments, including names and addresses of
respondents, available for public review during normal business hours.
We will not consider anonymous comments. If individual respondents
request confidentiality, we will honor their request to the extent
allowable by law. Individual respondents who wish to withhold their
name or address from public review, except for the city or town, must
state this prominently at the beginning of their comments. We will make
all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals
identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations
or businesses, available for public review in their entirety.
Public Hearing
If you wish to speak at the public hearing, contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4 p.m., m.d.t., on
September 30, 2005. If you are disabled and need special accommodations
to attend a public hearing, please contact the individual listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will arrange the location and time
of the hearing with those persons requesting the hearing. If no one
requests an opportunity to speak, we will not hold the hearing.
To assist the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we
request, if possible, that each person who speaks at a public hearing
provide us with a written copy of his or her comments. The public
hearing will continue on the specified date until everyone scheduled to
speak has been heard. If you are in the audience and have not been
scheduled to speak and wish to do so, you will be allowed to speak
after those who have been scheduled. We will end the hearing after
everyone scheduled to speak, and others present in the audience who
wish to speak, have been heard.
Public Meeting
If only one person requests an opportunity to speak, we may hold a
public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with
us to discuss the amendment, please request a meeting by contacting the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings
will be open to the public and, if possible, we will post notices of
meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES. We will make a
written summary of each meeting a part of the administrative record.
IV. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12630--Takings
This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.
Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review).
Executive Order 12988--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 allowable 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 Tribal or State AMLR plans and
revisions thereof because each plan is drafted and promulgated by a
specific Tribe or State, not by OSM. Decisions on proposed Tribal or
State AMLR plans and revisions thereof submitted by a Tribe or State
are based on a determination of whether the submittal meets the
requirements of Title IV of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1231-1243) and the
applicable Federal regulations at 30 CFR part 884.
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 pursuant to SMCRA.
Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the
potential effects of this rule on Federally-recognized Indian Tribes
and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
The rule does not involve or affect Indian Tribes in any way.
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
No environmental impact statement is required for this rule since
agency decisions on proposed Tribal or State AMLR plans and revisions
thereof are categorically excluded from compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) by the Manual of the
Department of the Interior (516 DM 6, appendix 8, paragraph 8.4B(29)).
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.
3501 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior certifies 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. 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.
[[Page 54493]]
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2) of 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 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 an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any
given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State
submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart
Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a
determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an
unfunded mandate.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 906
Abandoned mine reclamation programs, Intergovernmental relations,
Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: August 12, 2005.
Allen D. Klein,
Regional Director, Western Regional Coordinating Center.
[FR Doc. 05-18329 Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
