Pennsylvania Regulatory Program, 12265-12267 [E9-6403]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the Internet through
FERC’s Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov)
and in FERC’s Public Reference Room
during normal business hours (8:30 a.m.
to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First
Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426.
79. From FERC’s Home Page on the
Internet, this information is available on
eLibrary. The full text of this document
is available on eLibrary in PDF and
Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access
this document in eLibrary, type the
docket number excluding the last three
digits of this document in the docket
number field.
80. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the FERC’s Web site during
normal business hours from FERC
Online Support at (202) 502–6652 (toll
free at 1–866–208–3676) or e-mail at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the
Public Reference Room at (202) 502–
8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. E-mail the
Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
VII. Effective Date and Congressional
Notification
81. The Supplemental Final Rule is
effective April 23, 2009. The
Commission has determined, with the
concurrence of the Administrator of the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs of OMB, that this rule is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined in section 351
of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 40
Electric power, Electric utilities,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
ISO/RTO Council
NRG
Southern
[FR Doc. E9–6416 Filed 3–23–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 938
[PA–152–FOR; Docket ID: OSM–2008–0019]
Pennsylvania Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; required amendment.
SUMMARY: We are reinstating a
requirement for the Pennsylvania
regulatory program (the ‘‘Pennsylvania
program’’) under the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977
(SMCRA or the Act). The requirement
deals with documentation for the
bonding provisions of the Pennsylvania
program.
DATES: Effective Date: March 24, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
George Rieger, Chief, Pittsburgh Field
Division, Telephone: (717) 782–4036,
e-mail: grieger@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Pennsylvania Program
II. The Modified Required Amendment
III. OSM’s Decision
IV. Procedural Determinations
Alcoa Inc. (Alcoa)*
Constellation Energy Commodities Group,
Inc. (Constellation)*
Independent Electricity System Operator of
Ontario (IESO)*
ISO/RTO Council*
ITCTransmission; Michigan Electric
Transmission Company, LLC; and ITC
Midwest LLC
Lafayette Utilities and the Louisiana Energy
and Power Authority (Lafayette and
LEPA)*
North American Electric Reliability Corp.
(NERC)*
NRG Companies (NRG)*
Southern Company Services, Inc. (Southern)
I. Background on the Pennsylvania
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 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 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
Pennsylvania program on July 30, 1982.
You can find background information
49 An asterisk (*) indicates that the commenter
addressed Reliability Standard IRO–006–4.
50 M–S–R Public Power Agency filed a motion to
intervene without comments.
By the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
Appendix A—NOPR Commenters 49
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Appendix B—Comments in Response to
NERC’s September 11, 2008 Filing 50
VerDate Nov<24>2008
01:02 Mar 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12265
on the Pennsylvania program, including
the Secretary’s findings, the disposition
of comments, and conditions of
approval in the July 30, 1982, Federal
Register notice (47 FR 33050). You can
also find later actions concerning
Pennsylvania’s program and program
amendments at 30 CFR 938.11, 938.12,
938.13, 938.15 and 938.16.
Pennsylvania’s Bonding Program
From 1982 until 2001, Pennsylvania’s
bonding program for surface coal mines,
coal refuse reprocessing operations and
coal preparation plants, was funded
under an Alternative Bonding System
(ABS), which included a central pool of
money (Surface Mining Conservation
and Reclamation Fund) used for
reclamation, to supplement site-specific
bonds posted by operators for each mine
site. This pool was funded by a per-acre
reclamation fee paid by operators of
permitted sites.
In 1991, our oversight activities
determined that Pennsylvania’s ABS
contained unfunded reclamation
liabilities for backfilling, grading, and
revegetation and we determined that the
ABS was financially incapable of
abating or treating pollutional
discharges from bond forfeiture sites
under its purview. As a result, on May
31, 1991, we imposed the required
amendment codified at 30 CFR
938.16(h), 56 FR 24687. That
amendment required Pennsylvania to
demonstrate that the revenues generated
by its collection of the reclamation fee
would assure that its Surface Mining
Conservation and Reclamation Fund
(Fund) could be operated in a manner
that would meet the ABS requirements
contained in 30 CFR 800.11(e). After a
decade of trying to address the problems
with the ABS, the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) terminated the ABS in 2001
and began converting active surface coal
mining permits to a Conventional
Bonding System (CBS) or ‘‘full-cost’’
bonding program. This CBS requires a
permittee to post a site specific bond in
an amount sufficient to cover the
estimated costs to complete reclamation
in the event of bond forfeiture.
OSM published a final rule on
October 7, 2003, removing the required
amendment at 30 CFR 938.16(h) on the
basis that the conversion from an ABS
to a CBS rendered the requirement to
comply with 30 CFR 800.11(e) moot.
Subsequent to these OSM actions, a
lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Middle District Court of
Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Federation
of Sportsmen’s Clubs Inc. (PFSC) et. al.
v. Norton No. 1:03–CV–2220. The
Plaintiffs claimed, in relevant part, that
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
12266
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
reclamation obligations already incurred
under an ABS remain, even after the
ABS is prospectively converted to a
CBS. Thus, the Plaintiffs contended, the
requirement to comply with the Federal
ABS provision at 30 CFR 800.11(e) was
not mooted by the conversion to a CBS.
As noted above, the Defendants’
position was that the conversion to the
CBS eliminated the obligations imposed
by 30 CFR 800.11(e), and that, as a
result, the requirements contained in
the required amendment at 30 CFR
938.16(h) were no longer applicable.
The district court ruled in OSM’s (i.e.,
the Defendants’) favor, but was reversed
by the United States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit. Subsequently, on
November 1, 2007, the District court set
aside our October 7, 2003, termination
of the 1991 required amendment. The
appellate court’s decision is discussed
in the section below.
II. The Modified Required Amendment
On August 2, 2007, the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
decided PFSC v. Kempthorne, 497 F.3d
337 (3rd Cir. 2007). At issue, relevant to
this notice, was whether OSM properly
terminated the requirement that
Pennsylvania demonstrate that its
Surface Mining Conservation and
Reclamation Fund was in compliance
with 30 CFR 800.11(e).
The Third Circuit concluded: ‘‘while
it is true that the ‘ABS Fund’ continues
to exist in name, it no longer operates
as an ABS, that is, as a bond pool, to
provide liability coverage for new and
existing mining sites.’’ 497 F.3d at 349.
However, the Court went on to conclude
that ‘‘800.11(e) continues to apply to
sites forfeited prior to the CBS
conversion.’’ Id. at 353. In commenting
further on 30 CFR 800.11(e), the Court
stated ‘‘The plain language of this
provision requires that Pennsylvania
demonstrate adequate funding for mine
discharge abatement and treatment at all
ABS forfeiture sites.’’ Id. at 354.
Because the Third Circuit in PFSC v.
Kempthorne, Id., reversed the District
Court, which had upheld our
termination of the 1991 required
amendment at 30 CFR 938.16(h), we
decided to impose a modified version of
amendment (h), which we believed was
fully consistent with the rationale of the
Third Circuit’s decision while
accounting for circumstances which had
changed since 1991. Issuance of this
modified required amendment was
announced in the July 8, 2008, Federal
Register at 73 FR 38918. After we
published the modified version of 30
CFR 938.16(h), the Pennsylvania
Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, along
with the other plaintiffs, filed a Motion
VerDate Nov<24>2008
01:02 Mar 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
to Reopen, to Substitute Party, and for
Contempt in the matter of PFSC v.
Kempthorne, No. 1:03–CV–2220 (M.D.
Pa.). The plaintiffs alleged that the
Federal defendants were in contempt of
the district court’s November 1, 2007,
order on remand from the Third Circuit
decision in PFSC v. Kempthorne, 497
F.3d 337 (3rd Cir. 2007), because they
revised 30 CFR 938.16(h) from its 1991
form. The plaintiffs contend that the
Federal defendants disobeyed the
district court’s order, which the
plaintiffs claim did not authorize any
modification to the required
amendment. PFSC v. Kempthorne, No.
1:03–CV–2220 (M.D. Pa.) (Motion to
Reopen, to Substitute Party, and for
Contempt filed July 16, 2008)
In order to resolve the matter of the
contempt proceeding, and without
admitting any liability with respect to
the plaintiffs’ allegations put forth in
said proceeding, we announced the
rescission of the revised version of the
required amendment at 30 CFR
938.16(h) in an October 15, 2008,
Federal Register notice 73 FR 60944.
Nevertheless, the plaintiffs subsequently
raised a concern that the October 15,
2008 rescission notice did not clearly
provide for reinsertion of the original
1991 version of 30 CFR 938.16(h).
Therefore, again in order to resolve
plaintiffs’ latest concerns, but without
admitting any liability with respect to
the plaintiffs’ latest allegations, we have
decided to take the action set forth in
Section III, below.
III. OSM’s Decision
Based on the above discussion we
hereby reinstate, with one exception,
the required amendment at 30 CFR
938.16(h), as it was published in the
May 31, 1991 Federal Register, at 56 FR
24687. The last sentence of the May 31,
1991 required amendment is not being
reinstated because the plaintiffs did not
contest our 2003 decision to remove this
portion of the required amendment
before the United States Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit in PFSC v.
Kempthorne, supra. The sentence that
will not be reinstated provided as
follows: In addition, Pennsylvania shall
clarify the procedures to be used for
bonding the surface impacts of
underground mines and the procedures
to reclaim underground mining permits
where the operator has defaulted on the
obligation to reclaim.
IV. Procedural Determinations
Administrative Procedure Act
This rule is being issued without prior
public notice or opportunity for public
comment. The Administrative
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553)
provides an exception to the notice and
comment procedures when an agency
finds there is good cause for dispensing
with such procedures on the basis that
they are impracticable, unnecessary or
contrary to the public interest. In view
of the litigation and court order, we
have determined that under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), good cause exists for
dispensing with the notice of proposed
rulemaking and public comment
procedures for this rule. For the same
reason, we believe there is good cause
under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) of the APA to
have the rule become effective on a date
that is less than 30 days after the date
of publication in the Federal Register.
Also, the final rule is being made
effective immediately in order to
encourage Pennsylvania to bring its
program into conformity with the
Federal standards without undue delay.
Consistency of State and Federal
standards is required by SMCRA.
Executive Order 12630—Takings
This rule does not have takings
implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the
counterpart Federal regulations.
Executive Order 12866—Regulatory
Planning and Review
This rule is exempted 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, to the extent
possible, this rule meets the applicable
standards of Subsections (a) and (b) of
that Section.
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. Section 503(a)(7) requires that
State programs contain rules and
regulations ‘‘consistent with’’
regulations issued by the Secretary
pursuant to SMCRA.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Executive Order 13175—Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Government
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 the
fact that our decision affects the
Pennsylvania regulatory program and
will have no effect on 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
Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C.
1292(d)) provides that a decision on a
proposed State regulatory program
provision does not constitute a major
Federal action within the meaning of
Section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42
U.S.C. 4332(2)(c). A determination has
been made that such decisions are
categorically excluded from the NEPA
process (516 DM 13.5A(2)).
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
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.). This certification is
based on the fact that the required
amendment simply requires the State of
Pennsylvania to submit information
sufficient to demonstrate that the
revenues generated by the collection of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
01:02 Mar 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
the reclamation fee will assure that the
Surface Mining Conservation and
Reclamation Fund can be operated in a
manner that will meet the requirements
of 30 CFR 800.11(e).
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, geographic
regions, or Federal, State, or local
government agencies; 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 on the fact that
the required amendment simply
requires the State of Pennsylvania to
submit information sufficient to
demonstrate that the revenues generated
by the collection of the reclamation fee
will assure that the Surface Mining
Conservation and Reclamation Fund can
be operated in a manner that will meet
the requirements of 30 CFR 800.11(e).
Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose a cost of
$100 million or more in any given year
on any governmental entity or the
private sector.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 938
Intergovernmental relations, Surface
mining, Underground mining.
Dated: February 3, 2009.
Michael K. Robinson,
Acting Regional Director, Appalachian
Region.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 30 CFR part 938 is amended
as set forth below:
■
PART 938—PENNSYLVANIA
1. The authority citation for part 938
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
§ 938.16
[Amended]
2. In § 938.16, add paragraph (h) to
read as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
(h) By November 1, 1991,
Pennsylvania shall submit information,
sufficient to demonstrate that the
revenues generated by the collection of
the reclamation fee, as amended in
§ 86.17(e), will assure that the Surface
Mining Conservation and Reclamation
■
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12267
Fund can be operated in a manner that
will meet the requirements of 30 CFR
800.11(e). Pennsylvania could provide
such a demonstration through an
actuarial study showing the Fund’s
soundness or financial solvency.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–6403 Filed 3–23–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1986–0005; FRL–8784–7]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance
Pollution Contingency Plan; National
Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Direct final Notice of Partial
Deletion of the Mouat Industries
Superfund Site from the National
Priorities List.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 8 is publishing a
direct final Notice of Partial Deletion of
the surface and subsurface soil
components of the Mouat Industries
Superfund Site (Site), located in the
Town of Columbus, Stillwater County,
Montana, from the National Priorities
List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated
pursuant to section 105 of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is
an appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct
final partial deletion is being published
by EPA with the concurrence of the
State of Montana (State), through the
Montana Department of Environmental
Quality (MDEQ) because EPA has
determined that all appropriate
response actions at these identified
parcels under CERCLA, other than five
year reviews and operation and
maintenance, have been completed.
However, this partial deletion does not
preclude future actions under
Superfund.
This partial deletion pertains to the
surface and subsurface soils component
of the Mouat Industries Superfund Site.
The groundwater component will
remain on the NPL and is not being
considered for deletion as part of this
action.
DATES: This direct final partial deletion
will be effective May 26, 2009 unless
EPA receives adverse comments by
April 23, 2009. If adverse comments are
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 24, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12265-12267]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6403]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 938
[PA-152-FOR; Docket ID: OSM-2008-0019]
Pennsylvania Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; required amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are reinstating a requirement for the Pennsylvania
regulatory program (the ``Pennsylvania program'') under the Surface
Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). The
requirement deals with documentation for the bonding provisions of the
Pennsylvania program.
DATES: Effective Date: March 24, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Rieger, Chief, Pittsburgh Field
Division, Telephone: (717) 782-4036, e-mail: grieger@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Pennsylvania Program
II. The Modified Required Amendment
III. OSM's Decision
IV. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Pennsylvania 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 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 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 Pennsylvania program on July 30, 1982. You
can find background information on the Pennsylvania program, including
the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and conditions
of approval in the July 30, 1982, Federal Register notice (47 FR
33050). You can also find later actions concerning Pennsylvania's
program and program amendments at 30 CFR 938.11, 938.12, 938.13, 938.15
and 938.16.
Pennsylvania's Bonding Program
From 1982 until 2001, Pennsylvania's bonding program for surface
coal mines, coal refuse reprocessing operations and coal preparation
plants, was funded under an Alternative Bonding System (ABS), which
included a central pool of money (Surface Mining Conservation and
Reclamation Fund) used for reclamation, to supplement site-specific
bonds posted by operators for each mine site. This pool was funded by a
per-acre reclamation fee paid by operators of permitted sites.
In 1991, our oversight activities determined that Pennsylvania's
ABS contained unfunded reclamation liabilities for backfilling,
grading, and revegetation and we determined that the ABS was
financially incapable of abating or treating pollutional discharges
from bond forfeiture sites under its purview. As a result, on May 31,
1991, we imposed the required amendment codified at 30 CFR 938.16(h),
56 FR 24687. That amendment required Pennsylvania to demonstrate that
the revenues generated by its collection of the reclamation fee would
assure that its Surface Mining Conservation and Reclamation Fund (Fund)
could be operated in a manner that would meet the ABS requirements
contained in 30 CFR 800.11(e). After a decade of trying to address the
problems with the ABS, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection (PADEP) terminated the ABS in 2001 and began converting
active surface coal mining permits to a Conventional Bonding System
(CBS) or ``full-cost'' bonding program. This CBS requires a permittee
to post a site specific bond in an amount sufficient to cover the
estimated costs to complete reclamation in the event of bond
forfeiture.
OSM published a final rule on October 7, 2003, removing the
required amendment at 30 CFR 938.16(h) on the basis that the conversion
from an ABS to a CBS rendered the requirement to comply with 30 CFR
800.11(e) moot. Subsequent to these OSM actions, a lawsuit was filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Middle District Court of Pennsylvania,
Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs Inc. (PFSC) et. al. v.
Norton No. 1:03-CV-2220. The Plaintiffs claimed, in relevant part, that
[[Page 12266]]
reclamation obligations already incurred under an ABS remain, even
after the ABS is prospectively converted to a CBS. Thus, the Plaintiffs
contended, the requirement to comply with the Federal ABS provision at
30 CFR 800.11(e) was not mooted by the conversion to a CBS. As noted
above, the Defendants' position was that the conversion to the CBS
eliminated the obligations imposed by 30 CFR 800.11(e), and that, as a
result, the requirements contained in the required amendment at 30 CFR
938.16(h) were no longer applicable. The district court ruled in OSM's
(i.e., the Defendants') favor, but was reversed by the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Subsequently, on November 1,
2007, the District court set aside our October 7, 2003, termination of
the 1991 required amendment. The appellate court's decision is
discussed in the section below.
II. The Modified Required Amendment
On August 2, 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third
Circuit decided PFSC v. Kempthorne, 497 F.3d 337 (3rd Cir. 2007). At
issue, relevant to this notice, was whether OSM properly terminated the
requirement that Pennsylvania demonstrate that its Surface Mining
Conservation and Reclamation Fund was in compliance with 30 CFR
800.11(e).
The Third Circuit concluded: ``while it is true that the `ABS Fund'
continues to exist in name, it no longer operates as an ABS, that is,
as a bond pool, to provide liability coverage for new and existing
mining sites.'' 497 F.3d at 349. However, the Court went on to conclude
that ``800.11(e) continues to apply to sites forfeited prior to the CBS
conversion.'' Id. at 353. In commenting further on 30 CFR 800.11(e),
the Court stated ``The plain language of this provision requires that
Pennsylvania demonstrate adequate funding for mine discharge abatement
and treatment at all ABS forfeiture sites.'' Id. at 354.
Because the Third Circuit in PFSC v. Kempthorne, Id., reversed the
District Court, which had upheld our termination of the 1991 required
amendment at 30 CFR 938.16(h), we decided to impose a modified version
of amendment (h), which we believed was fully consistent with the
rationale of the Third Circuit's decision while accounting for
circumstances which had changed since 1991. Issuance of this modified
required amendment was announced in the July 8, 2008, Federal Register
at 73 FR 38918. After we published the modified version of 30 CFR
938.16(h), the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, along with
the other plaintiffs, filed a Motion to Reopen, to Substitute Party,
and for Contempt in the matter of PFSC v. Kempthorne, No. 1:03-CV-2220
(M.D. Pa.). The plaintiffs alleged that the Federal defendants were in
contempt of the district court's November 1, 2007, order on remand from
the Third Circuit decision in PFSC v. Kempthorne, 497 F.3d 337 (3rd
Cir. 2007), because they revised 30 CFR 938.16(h) from its 1991 form.
The plaintiffs contend that the Federal defendants disobeyed the
district court's order, which the plaintiffs claim did not authorize
any modification to the required amendment. PFSC v. Kempthorne, No.
1:03-CV-2220 (M.D. Pa.) (Motion to Reopen, to Substitute Party, and for
Contempt filed July 16, 2008)
In order to resolve the matter of the contempt proceeding, and
without admitting any liability with respect to the plaintiffs'
allegations put forth in said proceeding, we announced the rescission
of the revised version of the required amendment at 30 CFR 938.16(h) in
an October 15, 2008, Federal Register notice 73 FR 60944. Nevertheless,
the plaintiffs subsequently raised a concern that the October 15, 2008
rescission notice did not clearly provide for reinsertion of the
original 1991 version of 30 CFR 938.16(h). Therefore, again in order to
resolve plaintiffs' latest concerns, but without admitting any
liability with respect to the plaintiffs' latest allegations, we have
decided to take the action set forth in Section III, below.
III. OSM's Decision
Based on the above discussion we hereby reinstate, with one
exception, the required amendment at 30 CFR 938.16(h), as it was
published in the May 31, 1991 Federal Register, at 56 FR 24687. The
last sentence of the May 31, 1991 required amendment is not being
reinstated because the plaintiffs did not contest our 2003 decision to
remove this portion of the required amendment before the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in PFSC v. Kempthorne, supra.
The sentence that will not be reinstated provided as follows: In
addition, Pennsylvania shall clarify the procedures to be used for
bonding the surface impacts of underground mines and the procedures to
reclaim underground mining permits where the operator has defaulted on
the obligation to reclaim.
IV. Procedural Determinations
Administrative Procedure Act
This rule is being issued without prior public notice or
opportunity for public comment. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
(5 U.S.C. 553) provides an exception to the notice and comment
procedures when an agency finds there is good cause for dispensing with
such procedures on the basis that they are impracticable, unnecessary
or contrary to the public interest. In view of the litigation and court
order, we have determined that under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), good cause
exists for dispensing with the notice of proposed rulemaking and public
comment procedures for this rule. For the same reason, we believe there
is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) of the APA to have the rule
become effective on a date that is less than 30 days after the date of
publication in the Federal Register. Also, the final rule is being made
effective immediately in order to encourage Pennsylvania to bring its
program into conformity with the Federal standards without undue delay.
Consistency of State and Federal standards is required by SMCRA.
Executive Order 12630--Takings
This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal
regulations.
Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is exempted 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, to the
extent possible, this rule meets the applicable standards of
Subsections (a) and (b) of that Section.
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. Section 503(a)(7) requires
that State programs contain rules and regulations ``consistent with''
regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.
[[Page 12267]]
Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Government
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 the fact that our decision affects
the Pennsylvania regulatory program and will have no effect on 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
Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that a
decision on a proposed State regulatory program provision does not
constitute a major Federal action within the meaning of Section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(c). A determination has been made that such decisions are
categorically excluded from the NEPA process (516 DM 13.5A(2)).
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.).
This certification is based on the fact that the required amendment
simply requires the State of Pennsylvania to submit information
sufficient to demonstrate that the revenues generated by the collection
of the reclamation fee will assure that the Surface Mining Conservation
and Reclamation Fund can be operated in a manner that will meet the
requirements of 30 CFR 800.11(e).
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, geographic regions, or Federal, State, or local government
agencies; 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 on the fact that the required
amendment simply requires the State of Pennsylvania to submit
information sufficient to demonstrate that the revenues generated by
the collection of the reclamation fee will assure that the Surface
Mining Conservation and Reclamation Fund can be operated in a manner
that will meet the requirements of 30 CFR 800.11(e).
Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any
given year on any governmental entity or the private sector.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 938
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: February 3, 2009.
Michael K. Robinson,
Acting Regional Director, Appalachian Region.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 938 is amended as
set forth below:
PART 938--PENNSYLVANIA
0
1. The authority citation for part 938 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
Sec. 938.16 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 938.16, add paragraph (h) to read as follows:
* * * * *
(h) By November 1, 1991, Pennsylvania shall submit information,
sufficient to demonstrate that the revenues generated by the collection
of the reclamation fee, as amended in Sec. 86.17(e), will assure that
the Surface Mining Conservation and Reclamation Fund can be operated in
a manner that will meet the requirements of 30 CFR 800.11(e).
Pennsylvania could provide such a demonstration through an actuarial
study showing the Fund's soundness or financial solvency.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-6403 Filed 3-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P