Texas Regulatory Program and Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Plan, 64942-64946 [E7-22555]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
64942
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 222 / Monday, November 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Service will not apply the temporary
and proposed regulation to
contributions made to any section
403(b) plan prior to November 16, 2004,
for purposes of determining whether
such contributions were subject to FICA
tax. The final regulation will apply only
to contributions made to any section
403(b) plan on or after November 15,
2007.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this
Treasury decision is not a significant
regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a
regulatory assessment is not required. It
has also been determined that section
553(b) and (d) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) do
not apply to this regulation, and because
the regulation does not impose a
collection of information on small
entities, the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. chapter 6) does not apply.
Drafting Information
The principal author of this regulation
is Neil D. Shepherd, Office of Division
Counsel/Associate Chief Counsel (Tax
Exempt and Government Entities).
However, other personnel from the IRS
and Treasury Department participated
in its development.
(1) If the employee elects to reduce
his or her compensation pursuant to a
cash or deferred election as defined at
§ 1.401(k)–1(a)(3) of this chapter;
(2) If the employee elects to reduce
his or her compensation pursuant to a
one-time irrevocable election made at or
before the time of initial eligibility to
participate in such plan or arrangement
(or pursuant to a similar arrangement
involving a one-time irrevocable
election); or
(3) If the employee agrees as a
condition of employment (whether such
condition is set by statute, contract, or
otherwise) to make a contribution that
reduces his or her compensation.
(b) Effective/applicability date. This
section is applicable on November 15,
2007.
§ 31.3121(a)(5)–2T
[Removed]
Par. 3. Section 31.3121(a)(5)–2T is
removed.
I
Approved: November 13, 2007.
Linda E. Stiff,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
Eric Solomon,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax
Policy).
[FR Doc. 07–5730 Filed 11–14–07; 1:17 pm]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 31
Employment taxes, Income taxes,
Penalties, Pensions, Railroad retirement,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Social security,
Unemployment compensation.
Adoption of Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 31 is
amended as follows:
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of
amendments.
AGENCY:
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 31 continues to read in part as
follows:
I
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
Par. 2. Section 31.3121(a)(5)–2 is
added to read as follows:
I
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
§ 31.3121(a)(5)–2 Payments under or to an
annuity contract described in section
403(b).
(a) Salary reduction agreement
defined. For purposes of section
3121(a)(5)(D), the term salary reduction
agreement means a plan or arrangement
(whether evidenced by a written
instrument or otherwise) whereby
payment will be made by an employer,
on behalf of an employee or his or her
beneficiary, under or to an annuity
contract described in section 403(b)—
Jkt 214001
30 CFR Part 943
Texas Regulatory Program and
Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation
Plan
PART 31—EMPLOYMENT TAXES
15:24 Nov 16, 2007
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
[Docket No. TX–057–FOR]
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
(OSM), are approving amendments to
the Texas regulatory program (Texas
program) and the Texas abandoned
mine land reclamation plan (Texas plan)
under the Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the
Act). Texas proposed revisions to and
additions to regulations concerning post
mining land uses; terms and conditions
of the bond; topsoil redistribution;
standards for revegetation success;
public hearing; review of notice of
violation or cessation order;
determination of amount of penalty;
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
assessment of separate violation for each
day; request for hearing; and liens. Also,
Texas proposed revisions to its statute
concerning liens and administrative
penalty for violation of permit
conditions. Texas intends to revise its
program and plan to be consistent with
the corresponding Federal regulations
and/or SMCRA, to clarify ambiguities,
and to improve operational efficiency.
DATES: Effective Date: November 19,
2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alfred L. Clayborne, Director, Tulsa
Field Office. Telephone: (918) 581–
6430. E-mail: aclayborne@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Texas Program and
Texas Plan
II. Submission of the Amendments
III. OSM’s Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM’s Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Texas Program
and Texas Plan
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 State program
includes, among other things, ‘‘a State
law which provides for the regulation of
surface coal mining and reclamation
operations in accordance with the
requirements of this Act * * *; and
rules and regulations consistent with
regulations issued by the Secretary
pursuant to this Act.’’ See 30 U.S.C.
1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these
criteria, the Secretary of the Interior
(Secretary) conditionally approved the
Texas program effective February 16,
1980. You can find background
information on the Texas program,
including the Secretary’s findings, the
disposition of comments, and the
conditions of approval, in the February
27, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR
12998). You can find later actions on the
Texas program at 30 CFR 943.10,
943.15, and 943.16.
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. A
reclamation fee on each ton of coal
supports the abandoned mine land
reclamation program. 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
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 222 / Monday, November 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
responsibility for reclamation activity
within the State or on Indian lands if
they develop and submit to the
Secretary for approval, a program (often
referred to as a plan) for the reclamation
of abandoned coal mines. On the basis
of these criteria, the Secretary approved
the Texas plan on June 23, 1980. You
can find background information on the
Texas plan, including the Secretary’s
findings, the disposition of comments,
and the approval of the plan in the June
23, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR
41937). You can find later actions
concerning the Texas plan and
amendments to the plan at 30 CFR
943.25.
II. Submission of the Amendments
By letter dated February 14, 2007
(Administrative Record No. TX–662),
Texas sent us amendments to the Texas
program and the Texas plan, at its own
initiative, under SMCRA (30 U.S.C.
1201 et seq.). We announced receipt of
the proposed amendments in the April
30, 2007, Federal Register (72 FR
21185). We did not receive any public
comments. We did receive comments
from two Federal agencies.
During our review of the amendment
to the Texas program, the Railroad
Commission of Texas notified us that
the Texas legislators capped the State’s
administrative penalty at $10,000
instead of the $13,000 as proposed in
the amendment to the Texas program
submitted to us on February 14, 2007
(Administrative Record No. TX–662).
On May 7, 2007, Texas sent us this
revision to its regulatory program
statutes regarding administrative
penalty for violations of permit
conditions along with corresponding
revisions to its regulations regarding
determination of amount of penalty
(Administrative Record No. TX–662.03).
Also, during our review of the Texas
program amendment, we identified
concerns about informal public hearings
and assessment of separate violations
for each day. By email dated June 5,
2007 (Administrative Record No. TX–
662.07) we notified Texas of these
concerns. Texas sent us revisions to this
amendment by e-mail dated June 7,
2007 (Administrative Record No. TX–
662.08).
Based on Texas’ revisions to its
amendment, we reopened the public
comment period in the June 11, 2007,
Federal Register at 72 FR 32049. The
public comment period ended on June
26, 2007. We did not receive any public
comments.
III. OSM’s Findings
Following are the findings we made
concerning the amendments under
SMCRA and the Federal regulations at
30 CFR 732.15, 732.17, 884.14, and
884.15. We are approving the
amendments as described below.
A. Revisions to Texas’ Statutes, Chapter
134 of the Texas Surface Coal Mining
and Reclamation Act (TSCMRA)
1. Section 134.150 Lien
Texas revised its requirements at
section 134.150(c) pertaining to who
may not be subject to liens as a result
of the reclamation of abandoned mine
lands. Currently, persons who owned
property before May 2, 1977, and who
did not consent to, or participate in, or
exercise control over the mining
operation that necessitated the
reclamation are exempt from liens.
64943
Texas removed the date requirement at
section 134.150(c)(1) so that persons
who did not consent to, or participate
in, or exercise control over the mining
operation (that necessitated the
reclamation) are exempt from liens
regardless of when they acquired the
property.
We are approving the change because
this date requirement of May 2, 1977,
was also removed from section 408(a) of
SMCRA effective December 20, 2006,
and because the change will not make
Texas’ plan less stringent than SMCRA.
2. Section 134.174 Administrative
Penalty for Violation of Permit
Condition of this Chapter
Texas proposed to revise subsection
(b) by increasing its penalty cap from
$5,000 to $10,000 for each violation at
surface coal mining operations.
Section 518(i) of SMCRA requires that
the civil penalty provisions of each
State program contain, at a minimum,
penalties which are ‘‘no less stringent
than’’ those set forth in SMCRA. Section
518(a) of SMCRA assesses a maximum
penalty of $5,000 for each violation.
Texas proposed a maximum penalty of
$10,000 for each violation. We are
approving Texas’ change at section
134.174(b) because it is no less stringent
than SMCRA.
B. Revisions to Texas’ Regulations That
Have the Same Meaning as the
Corresponding Provisions of the Federal
Regulations
Texas’ regulations listed in the table
below contain language that is the same
as or similar to the corresponding
sections of the Federal regulations or
statute.
Topic
State regulation Texas Administrative Code
(TAC)
Federal counterpart regulation or statute
Reclamation Plan: Postmining Land Uses .........
Letters of Credit ..................................................
Topsoil: Redistribution ........................................
Revegetation: Standards for Success ................
12.147(a) through (a)(3) ..................................
12.309(g)(2) .....................................................
12.337(b) through (b)(3) ..................................
12.395(a)(1), (b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(3)(A) and (B),
and (c)(3) and (4).
12.681(a), (b) through (b)(3), (c), (e), (f), and
(h).
12.682(a) and (b) .............................................
30 CFR 780.23(b) through (b)(3).
30 CFR 800.21(b)(2).
30 CFR 816.22(d)(1) through (d)(1)(iii).
30 CFR 816.116(a)(1), (b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(3)(i)
and (ii), and (c)(3)(i) and (c)(4).
30 CFR 843.15(a), (b) through (b)(3), (c), (e),
and (h).
30 CFR 843.16(a) and (b).
12.689(b) through (b)(3) ..................................
30 CFR 845.15(b) through (b)(2).
12.693 ..............................................................
12.816(c) ..........................................................
30 CFR 845.19(a).
Section 408(a) of SMCRA, as amended in
December 2006.
Informal Public Hearing ......................................
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
Formal Review of Notice of Violation or Cessation Order.
Assessment of Separate Violations for Each
Day.
Request for Hearing ...........................................
Liens ...................................................................
Because the above State regulations
contain language that is the same as or
similar to or have the same meaning as
the corresponding Federal regulations or
statute, we find that they are no less
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Nov 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
stringent than SMCRA and/or no less
effective than the Federal regulations.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
B. TAC 12.337
Topsoil: Redistribution
In section 12.337(a), Texas added
topsoil substitutes to the list of materials
to be redistributed after final grading
during surface mining reclamation. The
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
64944
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 222 / Monday, November 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
counterpart Federal regulation at 30
CFR 816.22(d)(2) includes topsoil
substitutes as one of the materials being
redistributed after the land is regraded
during surface mining reclamation. We
are approving this addition because it is
no less affective than the above Federal
regulation.
C. TAC 12.681 Informal Public
Hearing
Texas added the word, informal, to
the section heading. Texas also revised
paragraph (g) by changing ‘‘public
hearing’’ to ‘‘informal public hearing’’
and by changing ‘‘review’’ to ‘‘formal
review.’’ The revised paragraph (g) reads
as follows:
(g) The granting or wavier of the above
informal public hearing shall not affect the
right of any person to formal review under
§§ 134.175 and 134.176 of the Act and
§§ 2001.141–2001.147 of the APA (relating to
Contested Cases: Final Decisions and Orders;
Motions for Rehearing). At such review
proceedings, no evidence as to statements
made or evidence produced at the informal
public hearing pursuant to this section shall
be introduced as evidence to impeach a
witness.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
The counterpart Federal regulation at
30 CFR 843.15(g) refers to ‘‘hearings’’
and ‘‘reviews’’ under enforcement
procedures as ‘‘informal hearings’’ and
‘‘formal reviews.’’ We are approving the
above revisions because they simply
clarify that under Texas’ enforcement
procedures, public hearings are
‘‘informal public hearings’’ and reviews
are ‘‘formal reviews’’ and because the
revisions are no less effective than the
Federal regulations at 30 CFR 843.15(g).
D. TAC 12.688 Determination of
Amount of Penalty
Texas’ current regulation regarding
administrative penalties was
promulgated in 1979. Texas proposed to
increase these penalties to reflect the
decreased value in the dollar since
1979. The current penalties begin with
$20 increments for each penalty
assessment point and increase to a
maximum penalty of $5,000. The
revised penalties begin with $550 and
increase to $10,000.
Section 518(i) of SMCRA requires that
the civil penalty provisions of each
State program contain penalties which
are ‘‘no less stringent than’’ those set
forth in SMCRA. Our regulations at 30
CFR 840.13(a) specify that each State
program shall contain penalties which
are no less stringent than those set forth
in section 518 of the Act and shall be
consistent with 30 CFR part 845.
However, in a 1980 decision on OSM’s
regulations governing civil monetary
penalties (CMPs), the U.S. District Court
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Nov 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
for the District of Columbia held that
because section 518 of SMCRA fails to
enumerate a point system for assessing
civil penalties, the imposition of this
requirement upon the States is
inconsistent with SMCRA. In response
to the Secretary’s request for
clarification, the Court further stated
that it could not uphold requiring the
States to impose penalties as stringent
as those appearing in 30 CFR 845.15.
Instead, section 518(i) of the Act
requires only the incorporation of
penalties and procedures explained in
section 518. The system proposed by the
State must incorporate the four criteria
of section 518(a) of SMCRA: (1) History
of previous violations, (2) seriousness of
the violation, (3) negligence of the
permittee, and (4) good faith of the
permittee in attempting to achieve
compliance. As a result of the litigation,
30 CFR 840.13(a) was suspended in part
on August 4, 1980 (45 FR 51548) by
suspending the requirement that
penalties shall be consistent with 30
CFR part 845. Consequently, we cannot
require that the CMP provisions
contained in a State’s regulatory
program mirror the point system and
resulting dollar amounts specified in
our regulations.
We are approving Texas’ revised
penalties because the penalties are no
less stringent than those specified in
SMCRA and the procedural
requirements are the same or similar to
the procedures specified in SMCRA and
the Federal regulations.
IV. Summary and Disposition of
Comments
Public Comments
We asked for public comments on the
Texas program and Texas plan
amendments, but did not receive any.
Federal Agency Comments
On March 16, 2007 (Administrative
Record No. TX–662.01) and May 31,
2007 (Administrative Record No. TX–
662.06), under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i),
884.14(a)(2), and 884.15(a), and section
503(b) of SMCRA, we requested
comments on the amendments from
various Federal agencies with an actual
or potential interest in the Texas
program and Texas plan. On March 22,
2007, the Natural Resources
Conservation Service stated that it had
no comments pertaining to the proposed
changes (Administrative Record No.
TX–662.02). The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers responded on April 20, 2007
(Administrative Record No. TX–662.04),
that both its Southwestern Division
representatives and its Regulatory
Branch in its Headquarters office had no
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
additional comments at this time to the
proposed changes to the Texas
abandoned mine land reclamation plan.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Concurrence and Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we
are required to get a written concurrence
from EPA for those provisions of the
Texas 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 Texas proposed to
make in this amendment pertain to air
or water quality standards. Therefore,
we did not ask EPA to concur on the
amendment.
On March 16, 2007 (Administrative
Record No. TX–662.01) and July 10,
2007 (Administrative Record No. TX–
662.06), under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i),
884.14(a)(2), and 884.15(a), we
requested comments on the Texas
program and Texas plan amendments
from the EPA. The EPA did not respond
to our request.
State Historical Preservation Officer
(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation (ACHP)
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are
required to request comments from the
SHPO and ACHP on State regulatory
program amendments that may have an
effect on historic properties. On March
16, 2007 (Administrative Record No.
TX–662.01) and May 31, 2007
(Administrative Record No. TX–662.06),
we requested comments on the Texas
program amendment, but neither
responded to our request.
V. OSM’s Decision
Based on the above findings, we
approve the amendments to the Texas
program and the Texas plan that Texas
sent us on February 14, 2007, and as
revised on May 7, 2007, and June 7,
2007.
To implement this decision, we are
amending the Federal regulations at 30
CFR part 943, which codify decisions
concerning the Texas program and
Texas plan. We find that good cause
exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make
this final rule effective immediately.
Section 503(a) of SMCRA requires that
the State’s program demonstrate that the
State has the capability of carrying out
the provisions of the Act and meeting its
purposes. Making this rule effective
immediately will expedite that process.
SMCRA requires consistency of State
and Federal standards.
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 222 / Monday, November 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
VI. 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.
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.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
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-
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Nov 16, 2007
Jkt 214001
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.
This determination is based on the fact
that the Texas program does not regulate
coal exploration and surface coal
mining and reclamation operations on
Indian lands. Therefore, the Texas
program has no effect on federallyrecognized Indian tribes.
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 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
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
64945
economic impact, the Department relied
upon the data and assumptions for the
counterpart Federal regulations.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
This rule: (a) Does not have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million;
(b) Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions; 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 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 943
Intergovernmental relations, Surface
mining, Underground mining.
Dated: October 19, 2007.
Ervin J. Barchenger,
Acting Regional Director, Mid-Continent
Region.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 30 CFR part 943 is amended
as set forth below:
I
PART 943—TEXAS
1. The authority citation for part 943
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
2. Section 943.15 is amended in the
table by adding a new entry in
chronological order by ‘‘Date of final
publication’’ to read as follows:
I
§ 943.15 Approval of Texas regulatory
program amendments.
*
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
*
*
19NOR1
*
*
64946
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 222 / Monday, November 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Original amendment submission
date
*
*
February 14, 2007 .........................
Date of final publication
Citation/description
*
*
*
*
*
November 19, 2007 ....................... TSCMRA 134.174(b); TAC 12.147(a) through (a)(3); 12.309(g)(2);
12.337(a) and (b) through (b)(3); 12.395(a)(1), (b)(1), (b)(3),
(b)(3)(A) and (B), and (c)(3) and (4); 12.681(a), (b) through (b)(3),
(c), (e), (f), (g), and (h); 12.682(a) and (b); 12.688; 12.689(b)
through (b)(3); and 12.693.
3. Section 943.25 is amended in the
table by adding a new entry in
chronological order by ‘‘Date of final
publication’’ to read as follows:
I
§ 943.25 Approval of Texas abandoned
mine land reclamation plan amendments.
*
Original amendment submission
date
*
*
February 14, 2007 .........................
Date of final publication
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2007–1013; FRL–8496–7]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley
Air Quality Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the
Antelope Valley Air Quality
Management District portion of the
California State Implementation Plan
(SIP). Under authority of the Clean Air
Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the
Act), we are approving the rescission
from the California SIP of local rules
that address Storage, Handling and
Transport of Petroleum Coke and PM–
10 Emissions from Paved and Unpaved
Roads, and Livestock Operations, and
the accompanying negative declaration.
DATES: This rule is effective on January
18, 2008 without further notice, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by
December 19, 2007. If we receive such
comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to
notify the public that this direct final
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
15:24 Nov 16, 2007
*
*
*
Citation/description
*
*
*
*
November 19, 2007 ....................... TSCMRA 134.150(c) and TAC 12.816(c),
[FR Doc. E7–22555 Filed 11–16–07; 8:45 am]
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
Jkt 214001
OAR–2007–1013, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
https://www.regulations.gov is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA
will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov and in hard
copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
Street, San Francisco, California. While
all documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may be
publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
some may not be publicly available in
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Cynthia G. Allen, EPA Region IX, (415)
947–4120, allen.cynthia@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule rescissions did the State
submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule rescissions?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule
rescissions?
B. Do the rule rescissions meet the
evaluation criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule rescissions did the State
submit?
Table 1 lists the rule rescissions we
are approving with the dates that they
were adopted by the Antelope Valley
Air Quality Management District
(AVAQMD) and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 222 (Monday, November 19, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64942-64946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-22555]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 943
[Docket No. TX-057-FOR]
Texas Regulatory Program and Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Plan
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
(OSM), are approving amendments to the Texas regulatory program (Texas
program) and the Texas abandoned mine land reclamation plan (Texas
plan) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977
(SMCRA or the Act). Texas proposed revisions to and additions to
regulations concerning post mining land uses; terms and conditions of
the bond; topsoil redistribution; standards for revegetation success;
public hearing; review of notice of violation or cessation order;
determination of amount of penalty; assessment of separate violation
for each day; request for hearing; and liens. Also, Texas proposed
revisions to its statute concerning liens and administrative penalty
for violation of permit conditions. Texas intends to revise its program
and plan to be consistent with the corresponding Federal regulations
and/or SMCRA, to clarify ambiguities, and to improve operational
efficiency.
DATES: Effective Date: November 19, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alfred L. Clayborne, Director, Tulsa
Field Office. Telephone: (918) 581-6430. E-mail: aclayborne@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Texas Program and Texas Plan
II. Submission of the Amendments
III. OSM's Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM's Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Texas Program and Texas Plan
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 State program includes, among other things, ``a State law which
provides for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation
operations in accordance with the requirements of this Act * * *; and
rules and regulations consistent with regulations issued by the
Secretary pursuant to this Act.'' See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On
the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary)
conditionally approved the Texas program effective February 16, 1980.
You can find background information on the Texas program, including the
Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and the conditions
of approval, in the February 27, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR 12998).
You can find later actions on the Texas program at 30 CFR 943.10,
943.15, and 943.16.
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. A reclamation fee on each ton of coal supports the
abandoned mine land reclamation program. 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
[[Page 64943]]
responsibility for reclamation activity within the State or on Indian
lands if they develop and submit to the Secretary for approval, a
program (often referred to as a plan) for the reclamation of abandoned
coal mines. On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary approved the
Texas plan on June 23, 1980. You can find background information on the
Texas plan, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of
comments, and the approval of the plan in the June 23, 1980, Federal
Register (45 FR 41937). You can find later actions concerning the Texas
plan and amendments to the plan at 30 CFR 943.25.
II. Submission of the Amendments
By letter dated February 14, 2007 (Administrative Record No. TX-
662), Texas sent us amendments to the Texas program and the Texas plan,
at its own initiative, under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). We
announced receipt of the proposed amendments in the April 30, 2007,
Federal Register (72 FR 21185). We did not receive any public comments.
We did receive comments from two Federal agencies.
During our review of the amendment to the Texas program, the
Railroad Commission of Texas notified us that the Texas legislators
capped the State's administrative penalty at $10,000 instead of the
$13,000 as proposed in the amendment to the Texas program submitted to
us on February 14, 2007 (Administrative Record No. TX-662). On May 7,
2007, Texas sent us this revision to its regulatory program statutes
regarding administrative penalty for violations of permit conditions
along with corresponding revisions to its regulations regarding
determination of amount of penalty (Administrative Record No. TX-
662.03).
Also, during our review of the Texas program amendment, we
identified concerns about informal public hearings and assessment of
separate violations for each day. By email dated June 5, 2007
(Administrative Record No. TX-662.07) we notified Texas of these
concerns. Texas sent us revisions to this amendment by e-mail dated
June 7, 2007 (Administrative Record No. TX-662.08).
Based on Texas' revisions to its amendment, we reopened the public
comment period in the June 11, 2007, Federal Register at 72 FR 32049.
The public comment period ended on June 26, 2007. We did not receive
any public comments.
III. OSM's Findings
Following are the findings we made concerning the amendments under
SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15, 732.17, 884.14, and
884.15. We are approving the amendments as described below.
A. Revisions to Texas' Statutes, Chapter 134 of the Texas Surface Coal
Mining and Reclamation Act (TSCMRA)
1. Section 134.150 Lien
Texas revised its requirements at section 134.150(c) pertaining to
who may not be subject to liens as a result of the reclamation of
abandoned mine lands. Currently, persons who owned property before May
2, 1977, and who did not consent to, or participate in, or exercise
control over the mining operation that necessitated the reclamation are
exempt from liens. Texas removed the date requirement at section
134.150(c)(1) so that persons who did not consent to, or participate
in, or exercise control over the mining operation (that necessitated
the reclamation) are exempt from liens regardless of when they acquired
the property.
We are approving the change because this date requirement of May 2,
1977, was also removed from section 408(a) of SMCRA effective December
20, 2006, and because the change will not make Texas' plan less
stringent than SMCRA.
2. Section 134.174 Administrative Penalty for Violation of Permit
Condition of this Chapter
Texas proposed to revise subsection (b) by increasing its penalty
cap from $5,000 to $10,000 for each violation at surface coal mining
operations.
Section 518(i) of SMCRA requires that the civil penalty provisions
of each State program contain, at a minimum, penalties which are ``no
less stringent than'' those set forth in SMCRA. Section 518(a) of SMCRA
assesses a maximum penalty of $5,000 for each violation. Texas proposed
a maximum penalty of $10,000 for each violation. We are approving
Texas' change at section 134.174(b) because it is no less stringent
than SMCRA.
B. Revisions to Texas' Regulations That Have the Same Meaning as the
Corresponding Provisions of the Federal Regulations
Texas' regulations listed in the table below contain language that
is the same as or similar to the corresponding sections of the Federal
regulations or statute.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State regulation Federal counterpart
Topic Texas Administrative regulation or
Code (TAC) statute
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reclamation Plan: Postmining 12.147(a) through 30 CFR 780.23(b)
Land Uses. (a)(3). through (b)(3).
Letters of Credit........... 12.309(g)(2)........ 30 CFR 800.21(b)(2).
Topsoil: Redistribution..... 12.337(b) through 30 CFR 816.22(d)(1)
(b)(3). through
(d)(1)(iii).
Revegetation: Standards for 12.395(a)(1), 30 CFR
Success. (b)(1), (b)(3), 816.116(a)(1),
(b)(3)(A) and (B), (b)(1), (b)(3),
and (c)(3) and (4). (b)(3)(i) and (ii),
and (c)(3)(i) and
(c)(4).
Informal Public Hearing..... 12.681(a), (b) 30 CFR 843.15(a),
through (b)(3), (b) through (b)(3),
(c), (e), (f), and (c), (e), and (h).
(h).
Formal Review of Notice of 12.682(a) and (b)... 30 CFR 843.16(a) and
Violation or Cessation (b).
Order.
Assessment of Separate 12.689(b) through 30 CFR 845.15(b)
Violations for Each Day. (b)(3). through (b)(2).
Request for Hearing......... 12.693.............. 30 CFR 845.19(a).
Liens....................... 12.816(c)........... Section 408(a) of
SMCRA, as amended
in December 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the above State regulations contain language that is the
same as or similar to or have the same meaning as the corresponding
Federal regulations or statute, we find that they are no less stringent
than SMCRA and/or no less effective than the Federal regulations.
B. TAC 12.337 Topsoil: Redistribution
In section 12.337(a), Texas added topsoil substitutes to the list
of materials to be redistributed after final grading during surface
mining reclamation. The
[[Page 64944]]
counterpart Federal regulation at 30 CFR 816.22(d)(2) includes topsoil
substitutes as one of the materials being redistributed after the land
is regraded during surface mining reclamation. We are approving this
addition because it is no less affective than the above Federal
regulation.
C. TAC 12.681 Informal Public Hearing
Texas added the word, informal, to the section heading. Texas also
revised paragraph (g) by changing ``public hearing'' to ``informal
public hearing'' and by changing ``review'' to ``formal review.'' The
revised paragraph (g) reads as follows:
(g) The granting or wavier of the above informal public hearing
shall not affect the right of any person to formal review under
Sec. Sec. 134.175 and 134.176 of the Act and Sec. Sec. 2001.141-
2001.147 of the APA (relating to Contested Cases: Final Decisions
and Orders; Motions for Rehearing). At such review proceedings, no
evidence as to statements made or evidence produced at the informal
public hearing pursuant to this section shall be introduced as
evidence to impeach a witness.
The counterpart Federal regulation at 30 CFR 843.15(g) refers to
``hearings'' and ``reviews'' under enforcement procedures as ``informal
hearings'' and ``formal reviews.'' We are approving the above revisions
because they simply clarify that under Texas' enforcement procedures,
public hearings are ``informal public hearings'' and reviews are
``formal reviews'' and because the revisions are no less effective than
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 843.15(g).
D. TAC 12.688 Determination of Amount of Penalty
Texas' current regulation regarding administrative penalties was
promulgated in 1979. Texas proposed to increase these penalties to
reflect the decreased value in the dollar since 1979. The current
penalties begin with $20 increments for each penalty assessment point
and increase to a maximum penalty of $5,000. The revised penalties
begin with $550 and increase to $10,000.
Section 518(i) of SMCRA requires that the civil penalty provisions
of each State program contain penalties which are ``no less stringent
than'' those set forth in SMCRA. Our regulations at 30 CFR 840.13(a)
specify that each State program shall contain penalties which are no
less stringent than those set forth in section 518 of the Act and shall
be consistent with 30 CFR part 845. However, in a 1980 decision on
OSM's regulations governing civil monetary penalties (CMPs), the U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia held that because section
518 of SMCRA fails to enumerate a point system for assessing civil
penalties, the imposition of this requirement upon the States is
inconsistent with SMCRA. In response to the Secretary's request for
clarification, the Court further stated that it could not uphold
requiring the States to impose penalties as stringent as those
appearing in 30 CFR 845.15. Instead, section 518(i) of the Act requires
only the incorporation of penalties and procedures explained in section
518. The system proposed by the State must incorporate the four
criteria of section 518(a) of SMCRA: (1) History of previous
violations, (2) seriousness of the violation, (3) negligence of the
permittee, and (4) good faith of the permittee in attempting to achieve
compliance. As a result of the litigation, 30 CFR 840.13(a) was
suspended in part on August 4, 1980 (45 FR 51548) by suspending the
requirement that penalties shall be consistent with 30 CFR part 845.
Consequently, we cannot require that the CMP provisions contained in a
State's regulatory program mirror the point system and resulting dollar
amounts specified in our regulations.
We are approving Texas' revised penalties because the penalties are
no less stringent than those specified in SMCRA and the procedural
requirements are the same or similar to the procedures specified in
SMCRA and the Federal regulations.
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
Public Comments
We asked for public comments on the Texas program and Texas plan
amendments, but did not receive any.
Federal Agency Comments
On March 16, 2007 (Administrative Record No. TX-662.01) and May 31,
2007 (Administrative Record No. TX-662.06), under 30 CFR
732.17(h)(11)(i), 884.14(a)(2), and 884.15(a), and section 503(b) of
SMCRA, we requested comments on the amendments from various Federal
agencies with an actual or potential interest in the Texas program and
Texas plan. On March 22, 2007, the Natural Resources Conservation
Service stated that it had no comments pertaining to the proposed
changes (Administrative Record No. TX-662.02). The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers responded on April 20, 2007 (Administrative Record No. TX-
662.04), that both its Southwestern Division representatives and its
Regulatory Branch in its Headquarters office had no additional comments
at this time to the proposed changes to the Texas abandoned mine land
reclamation plan.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to get a written
concurrence from EPA for those provisions of the Texas 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
Texas proposed to make in this amendment pertain to air or water
quality standards. Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the
amendment.
On March 16, 2007 (Administrative Record No. TX-662.01) and July
10, 2007 (Administrative Record No. TX-662.06), under 30 CFR
732.17(h)(11)(i), 884.14(a)(2), and 884.15(a), we requested comments on
the Texas program and Texas plan amendments from the EPA. The EPA did
not respond to our request.
State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation (ACHP)
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are required to request comments from
the SHPO and ACHP on State regulatory program amendments that may have
an effect on historic properties. On March 16, 2007 (Administrative
Record No. TX-662.01) and May 31, 2007 (Administrative Record No. TX-
662.06), we requested comments on the Texas program amendment, but
neither responded to our request.
V. OSM's Decision
Based on the above findings, we approve the amendments to the Texas
program and the Texas plan that Texas sent us on February 14, 2007, and
as revised on May 7, 2007, and June 7, 2007.
To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal regulations
at 30 CFR part 943, which codify decisions concerning the Texas program
and Texas plan. We find that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)
to make this final rule effective immediately. Section 503(a) of SMCRA
requires that the State's program demonstrate that the State has the
capability of carrying out the provisions of the Act and meeting its
purposes. Making this rule effective immediately will expedite that
process. SMCRA requires consistency of State and Federal standards.
[[Page 64945]]
VI. 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.
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.
This determination is based on the fact that the Texas program does not
regulate coal exploration and surface coal mining and reclamation
operations on Indian lands. Therefore, the Texas program has no effect
on federally-recognized Indian tribes.
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 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.
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 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 943
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: October 19, 2007.
Ervin J. Barchenger,
Acting Regional Director, Mid-Continent Region.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 943 is amended as
set forth below:
PART 943--TEXAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 943 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
0
2. Section 943.15 is amended in the table by adding a new entry in
chronological order by ``Date of final publication'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 943.15 Approval of Texas regulatory program amendments.
* * * * *
[[Page 64946]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original amendment submission Date of final
date publication Citation/description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
February 14, 2007............. November 19, 2007 TSCMRA 134.174(b);
TAC 12.147(a)
through (a)(3);
12.309(g)(2);
12.337(a) and (b)
through (b)(3);
12.395(a)(1),
(b)(1), (b)(3),
(b)(3)(A) and (B),
and (c)(3) and (4);
12.681(a), (b)
through (b)(3), (c),
(e), (f), (g), and
(h); 12.682(a) and
(b); 12.688;
12.689(b) through
(b)(3); and 12.693.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Section 943.25 is amended in the table by adding a new entry in
chronological order by ``Date of final publication'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 943.25 Approval of Texas abandoned mine land reclamation plan
amendments.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original amendment submission Date of final
date publication Citation/description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
February 14, 2007............. November 19, 2007 TSCMRA 134.150(c) and
TAC 12.816(c),
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E7-22555 Filed 11-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
