West Virginia Regulatory Program, 77321-77325 [05-24643]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 250 / Friday, December 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
requirements have been approved under
OMB No. 2127–0600, through April 30,
2008.
F. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Public Law 104–4) requires
agencies to prepare a written assessment
of the costs, benefits and other effects of
proposed or final rules that include a
Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of more than $100
million annually. This action will not
result in additional expenditures by
state, local or tribal governments or by
any members of the private sector.
Therefore, the agency has not prepared
an economic assessment pursuant to the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
G. Civil Justice Reform
This final rule does not have any
retroactive effect. A petition for
reconsideration or other administrative
proceedings are not required before
parties may file suit in court.
H. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78), or you
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 1345
Grant programs—Transportation,
Highway safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
1. The authority citation continues to
read as follows:
I
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES
Authority: Pub. L. 105–78; Pub. L. 109–59;
23 U.S.C. 405, delegation of authority at 49
CFR 1.50.
2. Accordingly, the interim final rule
amending 23 CFR part 1345 which was
published at 70 FR 69078 on November
14, 2005, is adopted as a final rule
without change.
17:36 Dec 29, 2005
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 948
[WV–108–FOR]
West Virginia Regulatory Program
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of
amendment.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We are approving an
amendment to the West Virginia
regulatory program (the West Virginia
program) under the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977
(SMCRA or the Act). West Virginia
revised its Code of State Regulations
(CSR) concerning surety bonds. The
amendment is intended to provide the
State with an alternative source of
reliable financial information about the
surety, and to allow sureties that are
licensed and in good financial condition
but are not currently listed with the U.S.
Department of the Treasury as an
acceptable surety of Federal bonds to
provide surety bonds to the coal
industry in West Virginia. The
amendment was authorized by the West
Virginia Secretary of State as an
emergency rule under the State’s
Administrative Procedures Act.
DATES: Effective Date: December 30,
2005.
Mr.
Roger W. Calhoun, Director, Charleston
Field Office, 1027 Virginia Street East,
Charleston, West Virginia 25301.
Telephone: (304) 347–7158, Internet
address: chfo@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PART 1345—INCENTIVE GRANT
CRITERIA FOR OCCUPANT
PROTECTION PROGRAMS
VerDate Aug<31>2005
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
In consideration of the foregoing, 23
CFR Part 1345 is amended to read as
follows:
I
I
Issued on: December 23, 2005.
Gregory Walter,
Senior Associate Administrator for Policy and
Operations.
[FR Doc. 05–24653 Filed 12–29–05; 8:45 am]
I. Background on the West Virginia Program
II. Submission of the Amendment
III. OSM’s Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM’s Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the West Virginia
Program
Section 503(a) of the Act permits a
State to assume primacy for the
regulation of surface coal mining and
reclamation operations on non-Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
77321
and non-Indian lands within its borders
by demonstrating that its program
includes, among other things, ‘‘* * * a
State law which provides for the
regulation of surface coal mining and
reclamation operations in accordance
with the requirements of the Act * * *;
and rules and regulations consistent
with regulations issued by the Secretary
pursuant to the Act.’’ See 30 U.S.C.
1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these
criteria, the Secretary of the Interior
conditionally approved the West
Virginia program on January 21, 1981.
You can find background information
on the West Virginia program, including
the Secretary’s findings, the disposition
of comments, and conditions of
approval of the West Virginia program
in the January 21, 1981, Federal
Register (46 FR 5915). You can also find
later actions concerning West Virginia’s
program and program amendments at 30
CFR 948.10, 948.12, 948.13, 948.15, and
948.16.
II. Submission of the Amendment
By letter dated October 17, 2005
(Administrative Record Number WV–
1441), the West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection (WVDEP)
submitted an amendment to its program
under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.).
The amendment consists of a proposed
emergency rule revision to CSR 38–2–
11.3.a.3 concerning surety bonds, a
briefing document, an emergency rule
justification, which includes an affidavit
that was submitted in support of the
emergency rule package, and a decision
by the Secretary of State dated October
11, 2005, approving the emergency rule.
In its submittal of this amendment,
the WVDEP stated that its current rule
at CSR 38–2–11.3.a.3 requires that after
July 1, 2001, a surety must be
recognized by the Treasurer of the State
as holding a certificate of authority from
the United States Department of the
Treasury as an acceptable surety on
Federal bonds (otherwise referred to as
being ‘‘T-Listed’’). The WVDEP stated
that the original standard was adopted
to address concerns about the financial
solvency of sureties providing
reclamation bonds in West Virginia. The
WVDEP did not have the necessary
resources or expertise to regularly and
timely monitor the financial condition
of sureties doing business in West
Virginia. However, a surety that is TListed is required to provide, on a
regular basis, financial information to
the U.S. Department of the Treasury,
which reviews this information and
provides its findings to State regulatory
agencies. While this information
provided by the Department of the
Treasury has been helpful, WVDEP
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES
77322
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 250 / Friday, December 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
stated, this restriction has prevented
sureties that are not T-Listed, and that
are otherwise in good financial
condition, from providing reclamation
bonds in West Virginia. The WVDEP
stated that this, along with other
reasons, has adversely impacted the
market for reclamation bonds in West
Virginia. Further, the WVDEP stated,
since a surety must have at least two
years experience providing surety bonds
before it can be T-Listed, a new
insurance company or an existing
insurance company that has not
previously issued surety bonds cannot
offer surety bonds in West Virginia.
The WVDEP stated that the
emergency rule amendment to CSR 38–
2–11.3.a.3 not only addresses the
concerns noted above by providing an
alternative source of reliable financial
information about the surety, but it also
allows sureties that are licensed and in
good financial condition but are not TListed to provide surety bonds in West
Virginia.
The WVDEP stated that an
‘‘emergency’’ exists under the State’s
Administrative Procedures Act because
there is presently a great demand for
reclamation bonds from the coal
industry in West Virginia that is not
being met by the limited number of
sureties currently offering surety bonds
in West Virginia. As a result, alternative,
more expensive means are being used
by coal companies to comply with the
State’s bonding requirements. Among
other things, this has greatly restricted
the availability of capital for the
development of new coal mines and the
creation of new jobs. The State
acknowledges that at a time when coal
is so important to West Virginia’s
economy, this dearth of surety bonds is
having a significant negative impact on
West Virginia’s coal industry. The
proposed amendment to 38 CSR 2 is
thus necessary ‘‘to prevent substantial
harm to the public interest.’’
By electronic mail dated November 4,
2005, WVDEP submitted revisions it
made to its emergency rule based upon
the State’s comment period which
ended on October 27, 2005
(Administrative Record Number WV–
1447). The revision package consists of
the amended emergency rule, Form #8
Notice of an Emergency Amendment to
an Emergency Rule, amended
Emergency Rule Questionnaire dated
October 28, 2005, and Form #3 Notice
of Agency Approval of a Proposed Rule
and Filing with the Legislative
Rulemaking Review Committee. These
documents were filed with the West
Virginia Secretary of State and the
Legislative Rulemaking Review
Committee on November 2, 2005.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:36 Dec 29, 2005
Jkt 208001
We announced receipt of the
proposed amendment in the November
8, 2005, Federal Register (70 FR 67654).
In the same document, we opened the
public comment period and provided an
opportunity for a public hearing or
meeting on the adequacy of the
proposed amendment (Administrative
Record Number WV–1448). We did not
hold a hearing or a meeting because no
one requested one. The public comment
period closed on December 8, 2005. We
received comments from one industry
organization and one Federal agency.
III. OSM’s Findings
Following are the findings that we
made concerning the amendment under
SMCRA and the Federal regulations at
30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. We are
approving the amendment in full, as
modified on November 4, 2005. Any
revisions that we do not specifically
discuss below concern nonsubstantive
wording or editorial changes and are
approved here without discussion.
CSR 38–2–11.3.a.3 Surety
The existing rule currently provides
that surety received after July 1, 2001,
must be recognized by the Treasurer of
the State as holding a current certificate
of authority from the U.S. Department of
the Treasury as an acceptable surety on
Federal bonds. In its October 17, 2005,
submittal, CSR 38–2–11.3.a.3 was
proposed to be amended by adding new
language at the end of the existing
requirement to provide as follows:
11.3.a.3. Surety received after July 1, 2001
must: (i) be recognized by the treasurer of
state as holding a current certificate of
authority from the United States Department
of the Treasury as an acceptable surety on
federal bonds; Or (ii) submit to the Secretary
proof that the surety holds a valid license
issued by the basis a certificate of good
standing or other evidence demonstrating
that the surety remains licensed or otherwise
in good standing with the West Virginia
Insurance Commissioner and the insurance
regulator of its domiciliary state and within
four (4) years take all steps necessary to
obtain a certificate of authority from the
United States Department of the Treasury as
an acceptable surety on federal bonds.
The WVDEP filed the emergency rule
with the West Virginia Secretary of State
on September 21, 2005. The Secretary of
State approved the rule on an
emergency basis pursuant to W. Va.
Code 29A–3–15a on October 11, 2005.
The WVDEP also filed a legislative
rule containing the same language with
the Secretary of State on September 21,
2005 (Administrative Record Number
WV–1442). At the same time, the State
announced a public comment period on
the legislative rule. The public comment
period commenced on September 21,
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2005, and closed on October 27, 2005.
A public hearing was held at the
WVDEP office in Kanawha City prior to
the close of the comment period.
On October 3, 2005, the WVDEP
provided OSM a copy of the proposed
rule for informal review. Unlike the
State’s existing surety bond provisions
at CSR 38–2–11.3.a.1 and the Federal
surety bond requirements at 30 CFR
800.20(a), the proposed revision at CSR
38–2–11.3.a.3 did not appear to require
the surety to be licensed to do business
in the State. To resolve this concern and
to make additional clarifications
without altering the purpose or intent of
either the emergency or the legislative
rule, on October 14, 2005
(Administrative Record Number WV–
1443), OSM recommended that the
language in both rules be revised as
follows:
11.3.a.3. Any company that executes surety
bonds in the State after July 1, 2001, must:
(i) Be recognized by the treasurer of the state
as holding a current certificate of authority
from the United States Department of the
Treasury as an acceptable surety on federal
bonds by being included on the Treasury
Department’s listing of approved sureties
(Department Circular 570); or (ii) submit
proof to the Secretary that it holds a valid
license issued by the West Virginia Insurance
Commissioner, and agree to submit to the
Secretary on at least a quarterly basis a
certificate of good standing from the West
Virginia Insurance Commissioner and such
other evidence from the insurance regulator
of its domiciliary state, if other than West
Virginia, demonstrating that it is also in good
standing in that state. Companies not
included on the United States Treasury
Department’s listing of approved sureties
must diligently pursue application for listing,
submit evidence on a semi-annual basis
demonstrating that they are pursuing such
listing, and within four (4) years, obtain a
certificate of authority from the United States
Department of the Treasury as an acceptable
surety on federal bonds.
At the time, State officials agreed that
while the recommended technical
revisions offered by OSM appeared to
clarify that a surety must be licensed to
do business in the State and did not
change the intent of their initial rule,
they needed to wait until after the close
of their comment period before making
any changes to the rule. The WVDEP
stated that it would submit the revisions
and any additional changes to OSM
after the close of the State’s comment
period on October 27, 2005. The
WVDEP further stated that the revision
would be in the form of both an
emergency and a legislative rule. We
subsequently stated in our November 8,
2005, proposed rule notice that if the
WVDEP submits revised rules that
contain language identical to the
language recommended by OSM, and
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 250 / Friday, December 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES
quoted above, that revised language
would be acted upon by OSM in this
final rulemaking. If substantive changes
beyond or other than those
recommended by OSM were included in
the revised rules, we stated that we may
need to reopen the comment period.
The legislative rule was submitted to
the Legislative Rulemaking Review
Committee after the close of the
comment period, and it is to be acted
upon by the West Virginia Legislature
during the upcoming 2005–2006 regular
legislative session. If that rule is
adopted with the identical language
recommended by OSM as quoted above,
no further action will be required by
OSM, and it will become part of West
Virginia’s permanent regulatory
program upon submission by the State.
Given that an emergency situation
currently exists in West Virginia with
regard to surety bonds and to avoid any
unnecessary delays in approving the
proposed State rule, we requested
comments on both the proposed State
rule and our suggested revisions to that
rule as quoted above. We stated in the
proposed rule notice that any changes
adopted by the State after the close of
its public comment period would result
in the revision to both its emergency
and legislative rules. As mentioned
above, any substantive changes in the
proposed State rules that go beyond the
suggested language provided by OSM
and quoted above would also be subject
to further rulemaking.
In its November 4, 2005, submittal,
the WVDEP provided revisions to its
emergency rule at CSR 38–2–11.3.a.3
that were approved by the West Virginia
Secretary of State. The effective date of
the revision is September 21, 2005. As
proposed in the State’s November 4,
2005, submittal, the existing language
was deleted and CSR 38–2–11.3.a.3 now
provides as follows:
11.3.a.3. Any company that executes surety
bonds in the State after July 1, 2001, must:
(i) Be recognized by the treasurer to [of] the
state as holding a current certificate of
authority from the United States Department
of the Treasury as an acceptable surety on
federal bonds by being included on the
Treasury Department’s listing of approved
sureties (Department Circular 570); or (ii)
submit proof to the Secretary that it holds a
valid license issued by the West Virginia
Insurance Commissioner, and agree to submit
to the Secretary on at least a quarterly basis
a certificate of good standing from the West
Virginia Insurance Commissioner and such
other evidence from the insurance regulator
of its domiciliary state, if other than West
Virginia, demonstrating that it is also in good
standing in that state. Companies not
included on the United States Treasury
Department’s listing of approved sureties
must diligently pursue application for listing,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:36 Dec 29, 2005
Jkt 208001
submit evidence on a semi-annual basis
demonstrating that they are pursuing such
listing, and within four (4) years, obtain a
certificate of authority from the United States
Department of the Treasury as an acceptable
surety on federal bonds.
With the exception of the
typographical error which the State
intends to correct (‘‘to’’ should be
changed to ‘‘of’’), we find that the
revised emergency rule language
submitted by the State on November 4,
2005, is identical to the language that
OSM recommended it adopt, and that is
quoted above, to resolve our initial
concerns with the language that was
submitted on October 17, 2005.
Furthermore, we find that, as amended,
the emergency rule at CSR 38–2–
11.3.a.3 contains changes that have no
direct Federal counterparts, but is,
nevertheless, consistent with and no
less effective than the Federal
regulations at 30 CFR 800.20(a)
concerning surety bonds and can be
approved. As we stated above, the
legislative rule that will make
permanent the provisions of the
emergency rule was submitted to the
West Virginia Legislative Rulemaking
Review Committee on November 2,
2005. That provision will be acted upon
by the West Virginia Legislature during
the upcoming 2005–2006 regular
legislative session. If that legislative rule
is adopted with language identical to
that which we are approving here, and
quoted above, no further action will be
required by OSM, and it will become
part of West Virginia’s permanent
regulatory program upon submission by
the State. Any substantive changes to
that legislative rule that go beyond the
language that we are approving here and
quoted above will be subject to public
review and further rulemaking.
IV. Summary and Disposition of
Comments
Public Comments
We published a Federal Register
notice on November 8, 2005, and asked
for public comments on the proposed
State amendment (Administrative
Record Number WV–1448). One
organization responded on December 2,
2005 (Administrative Record Number
WV–1450). The West Virginia Coal
Association (WVCA) encouraged OSM’s
approval of the amendment. According
to the WVCA, there are currently a very
limited number of surety companies
offering surety bonds in West Virginia.
Because of market conditions, there is a
great demand for surety bonds. The
WVCA said that the proposed
amendment would not only have the
potential to increase the availability of
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
77323
bonds in West Virginia, but it would do
so without increasing any risk for the
State. It would only allow surety
companies that are licensed in West
Virginia and in good standing/good
financial condition, but are not T-listed,
to market surety bonds in West Virginia.
As noted above in the finding, we are
approving the amendment.
Federal Agency Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and
section 503(b) of SMCRA, we requested
comments on the amendment from
various Federal agencies with an actual
or potential interest in the West Virginia
program (Administrative Record
Number WV–1446). We only received
comments from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Its comments are
summarized below.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Concurrence and Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we
are required to obtain written
concurrence from 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
West Virginia proposed to make in this
amendment pertain to air or water
quality standards. Therefore, we did not
ask EPA to concur on the amendment.
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we
requested comments on the amendment
from EPA (Administrative Record
Number WV–1446). EPA responded by
letter dated December 5, 2005, and
stated that it did not identify any
apparent inconsistencies with the Clean
Water Act or other statutes and
regulations under EPA’s jurisdiction.
EPA went on to say, ‘‘Our primary
interests concerning reclamation bonds
are that they be sufficient to provide
restoration of land and water resources
in case of bankruptcy and that surety
companies which underwrite these
bonds remain solvent.’’ (Administrative
Record Number WV–1451). We note
that the amendment that we are
approving here does not alter the State’s
approved bonding requirements
concerning the amount of bond.
V. OSM’s Decision
Based on the above findings, we are
approving the program amendment
West Virginia sent us on October 17,
2005, and amended on November 4,
2005. To implement this decision, we
are amending the Federal regulations at
30 CFR part 948, which codify decisions
concerning the West Virginia program.
We find that good cause exists under 5
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
77324
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 250 / Friday, December 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make this final rule
effective immediately. Section 503(a) of
SMCRA requires that the State’s
program demonstrate that the State has
the capability of carrying out the
provisions of the Act and meeting its
purposes. Making this rule effective
immediately will expedite that process.
SMCRA requires consistency of State
and Federal standards.
VI. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12630—Takings
This rule does not have takings
implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the
Federal bonding regulations.
Executive Order 12866—Regulatory
Planning and Review
This rule is exempt from review by
the Office of Management and Budget
under Executive Order 12866.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES
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 this rule meets the
applicable standards of subsections (a)
and (b) of that section. However, these
standards are not applicable to the
actual language of State regulatory
programs and program amendments
because each program is drafted and
promulgated by a specific State, not by
OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of
SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR
730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),
decisions on proposed State regulatory
programs and program amendments
submitted by the States must be based
solely on a determination of whether the
submittal is consistent with SMCRA and
its implementing Federal regulations
and whether the other requirements of
30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have
been met.
Executive Order 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:36 Dec 29, 2005
Jkt 208001
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
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 basis for this determination is that
our decision is on a State regulatory
program and does not involve a Federal
regulation involving Indian lands.
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
This rule does not require an
environmental impact statement
because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30
U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency
decisions on proposed State regulatory
program provisions do not constitute
major Federal actions within the
meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain
information collection requirements that
require approval by OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3507 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior
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
consistent with and no less effective
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
than the Federal bonding 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 used in
the Federal bonding regulations.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
This rule: (a) Does not have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million;
(b) Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions; and (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
analysis performed under various laws
and executive orders for the Federal
bonding regulations.
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 analysis performed under various
laws and executive orders for the
Federal bonding regulations.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 948
Intergovernmental relations, Surface
mining, Underground mining.
Dated: December 15, 2005.
Michael K. Robinson,
Acting Regional Director, Appalachian
Region.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 30 CFR part 948 is amended
as set forth below:
I
PART 948—WEST VIRGINIA
1. The authority citation for part 948
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
2. Section 948.15 is amended by
adding a new entry to the table in
chronological order by ‘‘Date of
publication of final rule’’ to read as
follows:
I
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 250 / Friday, December 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
77325
§ 948.15 Approval of West Virginia
regulatory program amendments.
*
*
*
*
*
Original amendment submission date
Date of publication of
final rule
*
*
*
*
October 17, 2005, and amended November 4, 2005 ........................................................
*
*
December 30, 2005 .........
[FR Doc. 05–24643 Filed 12–29–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 80
[EPA–OAR–2005–0161; FRL–8017–1]
Regulation of Fuels and Fuel
Additives: Renewable Fuel Standard
Requirements for 2006
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action to interpret and clarify the 2006
default standard applicable under the
Renewable Fuel Program set forth in the
Energy Policy Act of 2005. The Act
requires that 2.78 volume percent of
gasoline sold or dispensed to consumers
in the U.S. in 2006 be renewable fuel if
EPA does not promulgate
comprehensive regulations to
implement the Renewable Fuel Program
by August 8, 2006. Given the short
timeframe available and the need to
provide certainty to the regulated
community, the Agency is finalizing a
limited set of regulations for the default
standard for 2006 that will provide for
collective compliance by refiners,
blenders, and importers to meet the 2.78
volume percent requirement, with
compliance determined by looking at
the national pool of gasoline sold in
2006. The Agency will develop and
NAICS 1
codes
Category
Industry .................................................
1 North
promulgate the comprehensive program
subsequent to this action.
DATES: This rule is effective on February
28, 2006 without further notice, unless
EPA receives adverse comment by
January 30, 2006. If we receive such
comment on one or more distinct
sections of this rule, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public of the
distinct provisions that will become
effective and which distinct provisions
of this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. OAR–2005–0161. All documents in
the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center,
EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. This Docket Facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
Docket telephone number is (202) 566–
1742. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia
MacAllister, U.S. EPA, National Vehicle
324110
SIC 2
codes
2911
Citation/description
*
CSR 38–2–11.3.a.3.
and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, 2000
Traverwood, Ann Arbor, MI 48105;
Telephone (734) 214–4131, FAX (734)
214–4816, E-mail
macallister.julia@epa.gov.
EPA is
publishing this rule without prior
proposal because we view this as a
noncontroversial action and anticipate
no adverse comment. However, in the
‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of today’s
Federal Register publication, we are
publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal if adverse
comments are filed. This rule is
effective on February 28, 2006 without
further notice, unless EPA receives
adverse comment by January 30, 2006.
If EPA receives adverse comment on one
or more distinct sections of this rule we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register indicating which
provisions of this rule will become
effective and which provisions are being
withdrawn due to adverse comment. We
will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. We will not institute a
second comment period on the
proposal. Any parties interested in
commenting must do so at this time.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
Entities potentially affected by this
final action include those involved with
the production, distribution and sale of
gasoline motor fuel or renewable fuels
such as ethanol and biodiesel. Regulated
categories and entities include:
Examples of potentially regulated entities
Petroleum Refiners, Importers.
American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES
2 Standard
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but provides a guide for
readers regarding entities likely to be
regulated by this action. This table lists
the types of entities that EPA is now
aware could potentially be affected by
this action. Other types of entities not
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:36 Dec 29, 2005
Jkt 208001
listed in the table could also be affected.
To decide whether your organization
might be affected by this action, you
should carefully examine today’s notice
and the existing regulations in 40 CFR
part 80. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
to a particular entity, consult the
persons listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Table of Contents
I. Overview
A. What Is Being Finalized for 2006?
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 250 (Friday, December 30, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 77321-77325]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-24643]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 948
[WV-108-FOR]
West Virginia Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are approving an amendment to the West Virginia regulatory
program (the West Virginia program) under the Surface Mining Control
and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). West Virginia revised
its Code of State Regulations (CSR) concerning surety bonds. The
amendment is intended to provide the State with an alternative source
of reliable financial information about the surety, and to allow
sureties that are licensed and in good financial condition but are not
currently listed with the U.S. Department of the Treasury as an
acceptable surety of Federal bonds to provide surety bonds to the coal
industry in West Virginia. The amendment was authorized by the West
Virginia Secretary of State as an emergency rule under the State's
Administrative Procedures Act.
DATES: Effective Date: December 30, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Roger W. Calhoun, Director,
Charleston Field Office, 1027 Virginia Street East, Charleston, West
Virginia 25301. Telephone: (304) 347-7158, Internet address:
chfo@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the West Virginia Program
II. Submission of the Amendment
III. OSM's Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM's Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the West Virginia Program
Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-
Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that
its program includes, among other things, ``* * * a State law which
provides for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation
operations in accordance with the requirements of the Act * * *; and
rules and regulations consistent with regulations issued by the
Secretary pursuant to the Act.'' See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On
the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior
conditionally approved the West Virginia program on January 21, 1981.
You can find background information on the West Virginia program,
including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and
conditions of approval of the West Virginia program in the January 21,
1981, Federal Register (46 FR 5915). You can also find later actions
concerning West Virginia's program and program amendments at 30 CFR
948.10, 948.12, 948.13, 948.15, and 948.16.
II. Submission of the Amendment
By letter dated October 17, 2005 (Administrative Record Number WV-
1441), the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP)
submitted an amendment to its program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et
seq.). The amendment consists of a proposed emergency rule revision to
CSR 38-2-11.3.a.3 concerning surety bonds, a briefing document, an
emergency rule justification, which includes an affidavit that was
submitted in support of the emergency rule package, and a decision by
the Secretary of State dated October 11, 2005, approving the emergency
rule.
In its submittal of this amendment, the WVDEP stated that its
current rule at CSR 38-2-11.3.a.3 requires that after July 1, 2001, a
surety must be recognized by the Treasurer of the State as holding a
certificate of authority from the United States Department of the
Treasury as an acceptable surety on Federal bonds (otherwise referred
to as being ``T-Listed''). The WVDEP stated that the original standard
was adopted to address concerns about the financial solvency of
sureties providing reclamation bonds in West Virginia. The WVDEP did
not have the necessary resources or expertise to regularly and timely
monitor the financial condition of sureties doing business in West
Virginia. However, a surety that is T-Listed is required to provide, on
a regular basis, financial information to the U.S. Department of the
Treasury, which reviews this information and provides its findings to
State regulatory agencies. While this information provided by the
Department of the Treasury has been helpful, WVDEP
[[Page 77322]]
stated, this restriction has prevented sureties that are not T-Listed,
and that are otherwise in good financial condition, from providing
reclamation bonds in West Virginia. The WVDEP stated that this, along
with other reasons, has adversely impacted the market for reclamation
bonds in West Virginia. Further, the WVDEP stated, since a surety must
have at least two years experience providing surety bonds before it can
be T-Listed, a new insurance company or an existing insurance company
that has not previously issued surety bonds cannot offer surety bonds
in West Virginia.
The WVDEP stated that the emergency rule amendment to CSR 38-2-
11.3.a.3 not only addresses the concerns noted above by providing an
alternative source of reliable financial information about the surety,
but it also allows sureties that are licensed and in good financial
condition but are not T-Listed to provide surety bonds in West
Virginia.
The WVDEP stated that an ``emergency'' exists under the State's
Administrative Procedures Act because there is presently a great demand
for reclamation bonds from the coal industry in West Virginia that is
not being met by the limited number of sureties currently offering
surety bonds in West Virginia. As a result, alternative, more expensive
means are being used by coal companies to comply with the State's
bonding requirements. Among other things, this has greatly restricted
the availability of capital for the development of new coal mines and
the creation of new jobs. The State acknowledges that at a time when
coal is so important to West Virginia's economy, this dearth of surety
bonds is having a significant negative impact on West Virginia's coal
industry. The proposed amendment to 38 CSR 2 is thus necessary ``to
prevent substantial harm to the public interest.''
By electronic mail dated November 4, 2005, WVDEP submitted
revisions it made to its emergency rule based upon the State's comment
period which ended on October 27, 2005 (Administrative Record Number
WV-1447). The revision package consists of the amended emergency rule,
Form 8 Notice of an Emergency Amendment to an Emergency Rule,
amended Emergency Rule Questionnaire dated October 28, 2005, and Form
3 Notice of Agency Approval of a Proposed Rule and Filing with
the Legislative Rulemaking Review Committee. These documents were filed
with the West Virginia Secretary of State and the Legislative
Rulemaking Review Committee on November 2, 2005.
We announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the November 8,
2005, Federal Register (70 FR 67654). In the same document, we opened
the public comment period and provided an opportunity for a public
hearing or meeting on the adequacy of the proposed amendment
(Administrative Record Number WV-1448). We did not hold a hearing or a
meeting because no one requested one. The public comment period closed
on December 8, 2005. We received comments from one industry
organization and one Federal agency.
III. OSM's Findings
Following are the findings that we made concerning the amendment
under SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. We
are approving the amendment in full, as modified on November 4, 2005.
Any revisions that we do not specifically discuss below concern
nonsubstantive wording or editorial changes and are approved here
without discussion.
CSR 38-2-11.3.a.3 Surety
The existing rule currently provides that surety received after
July 1, 2001, must be recognized by the Treasurer of the State as
holding a current certificate of authority from the U.S. Department of
the Treasury as an acceptable surety on Federal bonds. In its October
17, 2005, submittal, CSR 38-2-11.3.a.3 was proposed to be amended by
adding new language at the end of the existing requirement to provide
as follows:
11.3.a.3. Surety received after July 1, 2001 must: (i) be
recognized by the treasurer of state as holding a current
certificate of authority from the United States Department of the
Treasury as an acceptable surety on federal bonds; Or (ii) submit to
the Secretary proof that the surety holds a valid license issued by
the basis a certificate of good standing or other evidence
demonstrating that the surety remains licensed or otherwise in good
standing with the West Virginia Insurance Commissioner and the
insurance regulator of its domiciliary state and within four (4)
years take all steps necessary to obtain a certificate of authority
from the United States Department of the Treasury as an acceptable
surety on federal bonds.
The WVDEP filed the emergency rule with the West Virginia Secretary
of State on September 21, 2005. The Secretary of State approved the
rule on an emergency basis pursuant to W. Va. Code 29A-3-15a on October
11, 2005.
The WVDEP also filed a legislative rule containing the same
language with the Secretary of State on September 21, 2005
(Administrative Record Number WV-1442). At the same time, the State
announced a public comment period on the legislative rule. The public
comment period commenced on September 21, 2005, and closed on October
27, 2005. A public hearing was held at the WVDEP office in Kanawha City
prior to the close of the comment period.
On October 3, 2005, the WVDEP provided OSM a copy of the proposed
rule for informal review. Unlike the State's existing surety bond
provisions at CSR 38-2-11.3.a.1 and the Federal surety bond
requirements at 30 CFR 800.20(a), the proposed revision at CSR 38-2-
11.3.a.3 did not appear to require the surety to be licensed to do
business in the State. To resolve this concern and to make additional
clarifications without altering the purpose or intent of either the
emergency or the legislative rule, on October 14, 2005 (Administrative
Record Number WV-1443), OSM recommended that the language in both rules
be revised as follows:
11.3.a.3. Any company that executes surety bonds in the State
after July 1, 2001, must: (i) Be recognized by the treasurer of the
state as holding a current certificate of authority from the United
States Department of the Treasury as an acceptable surety on federal
bonds by being included on the Treasury Department's listing of
approved sureties (Department Circular 570); or (ii) submit proof to
the Secretary that it holds a valid license issued by the West
Virginia Insurance Commissioner, and agree to submit to the
Secretary on at least a quarterly basis a certificate of good
standing from the West Virginia Insurance Commissioner and such
other evidence from the insurance regulator of its domiciliary
state, if other than West Virginia, demonstrating that it is also in
good standing in that state. Companies not included on the United
States Treasury Department's listing of approved sureties must
diligently pursue application for listing, submit evidence on a
semi-annual basis demonstrating that they are pursuing such listing,
and within four (4) years, obtain a certificate of authority from
the United States Department of the Treasury as an acceptable surety
on federal bonds.
At the time, State officials agreed that while the recommended
technical revisions offered by OSM appeared to clarify that a surety
must be licensed to do business in the State and did not change the
intent of their initial rule, they needed to wait until after the close
of their comment period before making any changes to the rule. The
WVDEP stated that it would submit the revisions and any additional
changes to OSM after the close of the State's comment period on October
27, 2005. The WVDEP further stated that the revision would be in the
form of both an emergency and a legislative rule. We subsequently
stated in our November 8, 2005, proposed rule notice that if the WVDEP
submits revised rules that contain language identical to the language
recommended by OSM, and
[[Page 77323]]
quoted above, that revised language would be acted upon by OSM in this
final rulemaking. If substantive changes beyond or other than those
recommended by OSM were included in the revised rules, we stated that
we may need to reopen the comment period.
The legislative rule was submitted to the Legislative Rulemaking
Review Committee after the close of the comment period, and it is to be
acted upon by the West Virginia Legislature during the upcoming 2005-
2006 regular legislative session. If that rule is adopted with the
identical language recommended by OSM as quoted above, no further
action will be required by OSM, and it will become part of West
Virginia's permanent regulatory program upon submission by the State.
Given that an emergency situation currently exists in West Virginia
with regard to surety bonds and to avoid any unnecessary delays in
approving the proposed State rule, we requested comments on both the
proposed State rule and our suggested revisions to that rule as quoted
above. We stated in the proposed rule notice that any changes adopted
by the State after the close of its public comment period would result
in the revision to both its emergency and legislative rules. As
mentioned above, any substantive changes in the proposed State rules
that go beyond the suggested language provided by OSM and quoted above
would also be subject to further rulemaking.
In its November 4, 2005, submittal, the WVDEP provided revisions to
its emergency rule at CSR 38-2-11.3.a.3 that were approved by the West
Virginia Secretary of State. The effective date of the revision is
September 21, 2005. As proposed in the State's November 4, 2005,
submittal, the existing language was deleted and CSR 38-2-11.3.a.3 now
provides as follows:
11.3.a.3. Any company that executes surety bonds in the State
after July 1, 2001, must: (i) Be recognized by the treasurer to [of]
the state as holding a current certificate of authority from the
United States Department of the Treasury as an acceptable surety on
federal bonds by being included on the Treasury Department's listing
of approved sureties (Department Circular 570); or (ii) submit proof
to the Secretary that it holds a valid license issued by the West
Virginia Insurance Commissioner, and agree to submit to the
Secretary on at least a quarterly basis a certificate of good
standing from the West Virginia Insurance Commissioner and such
other evidence from the insurance regulator of its domiciliary
state, if other than West Virginia, demonstrating that it is also in
good standing in that state. Companies not included on the United
States Treasury Department's listing of approved sureties must
diligently pursue application for listing, submit evidence on a
semi-annual basis demonstrating that they are pursuing such listing,
and within four (4) years, obtain a certificate of authority from
the United States Department of the Treasury as an acceptable surety
on federal bonds.
With the exception of the typographical error which the State
intends to correct (``to'' should be changed to ``of''), we find that
the revised emergency rule language submitted by the State on November
4, 2005, is identical to the language that OSM recommended it adopt,
and that is quoted above, to resolve our initial concerns with the
language that was submitted on October 17, 2005. Furthermore, we find
that, as amended, the emergency rule at CSR 38-2-11.3.a.3 contains
changes that have no direct Federal counterparts, but is, nevertheless,
consistent with and no less effective than the Federal regulations at
30 CFR 800.20(a) concerning surety bonds and can be approved. As we
stated above, the legislative rule that will make permanent the
provisions of the emergency rule was submitted to the West Virginia
Legislative Rulemaking Review Committee on November 2, 2005. That
provision will be acted upon by the West Virginia Legislature during
the upcoming 2005-2006 regular legislative session. If that legislative
rule is adopted with language identical to that which we are approving
here, and quoted above, no further action will be required by OSM, and
it will become part of West Virginia's permanent regulatory program
upon submission by the State. Any substantive changes to that
legislative rule that go beyond the language that we are approving here
and quoted above will be subject to public review and further
rulemaking.
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
Public Comments
We published a Federal Register notice on November 8, 2005, and
asked for public comments on the proposed State amendment
(Administrative Record Number WV-1448). One organization responded on
December 2, 2005 (Administrative Record Number WV-1450). The West
Virginia Coal Association (WVCA) encouraged OSM's approval of the
amendment. According to the WVCA, there are currently a very limited
number of surety companies offering surety bonds in West Virginia.
Because of market conditions, there is a great demand for surety bonds.
The WVCA said that the proposed amendment would not only have the
potential to increase the availability of bonds in West Virginia, but
it would do so without increasing any risk for the State. It would only
allow surety companies that are licensed in West Virginia and in good
standing/good financial condition, but are not T-listed, to market
surety bonds in West Virginia. As noted above in the finding, we are
approving the amendment.
Federal Agency Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and section 503(b) of SMCRA, we
requested comments on the amendment from various Federal agencies with
an actual or potential interest in the West Virginia program
(Administrative Record Number WV-1446). We only received comments from
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Its comments are summarized
below.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to obtain written
concurrence from 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 West Virginia proposed
to make in this amendment pertain to air or water quality standards.
Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the amendment.
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments on the
amendment from EPA (Administrative Record Number WV-1446). EPA
responded by letter dated December 5, 2005, and stated that it did not
identify any apparent inconsistencies with the Clean Water Act or other
statutes and regulations under EPA's jurisdiction. EPA went on to say,
``Our primary interests concerning reclamation bonds are that they be
sufficient to provide restoration of land and water resources in case
of bankruptcy and that surety companies which underwrite these bonds
remain solvent.'' (Administrative Record Number WV-1451). We note that
the amendment that we are approving here does not alter the State's
approved bonding requirements concerning the amount of bond.
V. OSM's Decision
Based on the above findings, we are approving the program amendment
West Virginia sent us on October 17, 2005, and amended on November 4,
2005. To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal
regulations at 30 CFR part 948, which codify decisions concerning the
West Virginia program. We find that good cause exists under 5
[[Page 77324]]
U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make this final rule effective immediately. Section
503(a) of SMCRA requires that the State's program demonstrate that the
State has the capability of carrying out the provisions of the Act and
meeting its purposes. Making this rule effective immediately will
expedite that process. SMCRA requires consistency of State and Federal
standards.
VI. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12630--Takings
This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the Federal bonding regulations.
Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is exempt from review by the Office of Management and
Budget under Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 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 this rule
meets the applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that
section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual
language of State regulatory programs and program amendments because
each program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by
OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),
decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments
submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of
whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing
Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR parts
730, 731, and 732 have been met.
Executive Order 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 basis for this determination is that our decision is on a State
regulatory program and does not involve a Federal regulation involving
Indian lands.
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
This rule does not require an environmental impact statement
because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that
agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not
constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)).
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain information collection requirements that
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3507 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior 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 consistent
with and no less effective than the Federal bonding 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 used in the Federal
bonding regulations.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) Does not
have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) Will not
cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual
industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic
regions; and (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 analysis performed
under various laws and executive orders for the Federal bonding
regulations.
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 analysis performed
under various laws and executive orders for the Federal bonding
regulations.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 948
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: December 15, 2005.
Michael K. Robinson,
Acting Regional Director, Appalachian Region.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 948 is amended as
set forth below:
PART 948--WEST VIRGINIA
0
1. The authority citation for part 948 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
0
2. Section 948.15 is amended by adding a new entry to the table in
chronological order by ``Date of publication of final rule'' to read as
follows:
[[Page 77325]]
Sec. 948.15 Approval of West Virginia regulatory program amendments.
* * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original amendment submission date Date of publication of final rule Citation/description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
October 17, 2005, and amended December 30, 2005.................... CSR 38-2-11.3.a.3.
November 4, 2005.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 05-24643 Filed 12-29-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
