West Virginia Regulatory Program, 53972-53979 [E9-25314]
Download as PDF
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
53972
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
(3) Time period and scope determined
by CBP; projection when sampling
employed. In conducting an audit under
paragraph (d)(1) of this section or
authorizing an audited person’s selftesting as described in paragraph (d)(2)
of this section, CBP will have the sole
authority to determine the time period
and scope of the audit. An audit
employing statistical sampling will be
limited to the transactions that the CBP
auditors actually examine (i.e., review)
during the audit. The results of the
sample examination, with respect to
properly identified overpayments and
over-declarations and properly
identified underpayments and underdeclarations, will be projected over the
universe of transactions to determine
the total overpayments and overdeclarations that are eligible for
offsetting and to determine the total loss
of duties, taxes, and fees.
(4) Same acts, statements, omissions,
or entries not required. Offsetting may
be permitted where the overpayments or
over-declarations were not made by the
same acts, statements, or omissions that
caused the underpayments or underdeclarations, and is not limited to the
same entries that evidence the
underpayments or under-declarations,
provided that they are within the time
period and scope of the audit as
established by CBP and as described in
paragraph (d)(4) of this section.
(5) Limitations. Offsetting will not be
allowed with respect to specific
overpayments or over-declarations made
for the purpose of violating any
provision of law, including laws other
than customs laws. Offsetting will not
be allowed with respect to
overpayments or over-declarations
resulting from a failure to timely claim
or establish a duty allowance or
preference. Offsetting will be disallowed
entirely where CBP determines that any
underpayments or under-declarations
identified for offsetting purposes were
made knowingly and intentionally.
(6) Audit report. Where overpayments
or over-declarations have been
identified in accordance with paragraph
(d)(1) of this section, the audit report
will state whether they have been made
within the time period and scope of the
audit.
(7) Disallowance determinations
referred to FP&F. Any determination
that offsets will be disallowed where
overpayments/over-declarations were
made for the purpose of violating any
law, or where underpayments or underdeclarations were made knowingly and
intentionally, will be made by the
appropriate Fines, Penalties, and
Forfeitures (FP&F) office to which the
issue was referred. CBP will notify the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Oct 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
audited person of a determination
whether to allow offsetting in whole or
in part. The FP&F office will issue a
notice of penalty and/or demand for lost
duties, taxes, and fees where it
determines that such action is
warranted. Where the FP&F office issues
a notice of penalty and/or demand, the
audited person may file a petition under
19 CFR part 171.
(8) Refunds limited. A net
overpayment of duties, taxes, and fees
will not be paid as a refund unless the
circumstances of the overpayments meet
the requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1520 or
the requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1514(a)
pertaining to clerical error, mistake of
fact, or other inadvertence in any entry,
liquidation, or reliquidation. In that
event, the audited person must file a
claim under the applicable statute and
regulations at the appropriate CBP port
office. Any such overpayment(s) will
not be included in the audit’s offsetting
calculation.
(e) Sampling not evidence of
reasonable care. The fact that entries
were previously within the time period
and scope of an audit conducted by CBP
in which sampling was employed, in
any circumstances described in this
section, is not evidence of reasonable
care by a violator in any subsequent
action involving such entries.
(f) Exception to procedures.
Paragraphs (a)(5), (a)(6), (b), (d)(7), and
(d)(8) of this section do not apply once
CBP and/or ICE commences an
investigation with respect to the issue(s)
involved.
Jayson P. Ahern,
Acting Commissioner, Customs and Border
Protection.
Approved: October 15, 2009.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. E9–25222 Filed 10–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 948
[WV–116–FOR; OSM–2009–0008]
West Virginia Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment
period and opportunity for public
hearing on proposed amendment.
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SUMMARY: We are announcing receipt of
a proposed amendment to the West
Virginia regulatory program (the West
Virginia program) under the Surface
Mining Control and Reclamation Act of
1977 (SMCRA or the Act) that includes
both statutory and regulatory revisions.
West Virginia submitted a proposed
amendment authorized by Committee
Substitute for Senate Bill 153 to revise
the West Virginia Code of State
Regulations (CSR) concerning the
continued oversight by the Secretary of
‘‘approved persons’’ who prepare, sign,
or certify mining permit applications
and related materials; regarding
incidental boundary revisions (IBR) to
existing permits, by clarifying that
certain types of collateral activities are
part of the primary mining operations
and therefore subject to the same
acreage limitations, while providing
more relevant and exacting criteria for
the Secretary to consider in evaluating
an application for revision; deleting the
bonding matrix forms; changing term
‘‘Bio-oil’’ to ‘‘Bio fuel’’; and clarifying
standards in subsection 9.3.f that
pertain to areas developed for hayland
or pasture use. West Virginia submitted
proposed changes as contained in
Senate Bill 436 which amends WV Code
22–3–8 by changing references
regarding ‘‘the commissioner of the
Bureau of Employment Programs’’ and
‘‘the executive director of the workers’
compensation commissioner’’ which are
considered non-substantive.
West Virginia also submitted
proposed changes as contained in
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill
600 regarding the Special Reclamation
Fund. This bill amends the State’s
alternative bonding requirements by
eliminating the 7 cents per ton
additional tax and increasing and
extending the special reclamation tax
from 7.4 to 14.4 cents per ton of clean
coal mined. It also requires the special
reclamation tax to be reviewed
biannually by the Legislature. This
amendment (WV–115–FOR) was
announced earlier in the July 22, 2009,
Federal Register (74 FR 36113–36116)
as an interim rule and approved on a
temporary basis.
West Virginia also submitted
proposed changes as contained in
Senate Bill 1011 which amends the WV
Code by requiring surface mine
reclamation plans to comport with
approved master land use plans and
authorizing surface mine reclamation
plans to contain alternative postmining
land uses. Senate Bill 1011 was passed
by the Legislature on June 2, 2009,
during the 1st extraordinary 2009
session, and approved by the Governor
on June 17, 2009.
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
DATES: We will accept written
comments on this amendment until 4
p.m. (local time), on November 20,
2009. If requested, we will hold a public
hearing on the amendment on
November 16, 2009. We will accept
requests to speak at a hearing until 4
p.m. (local time), on November 5, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following two methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. The proposed rule
has been assigned Docket ID OSM–
2009–0008. If you would like to submit
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal, go to https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Mail/Hand Delivery: Mr. Roger W.
Calhoun, Director, Charleston Field
Office, Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, 1027
Virginia Street, East, Charleston, West
Virginia 25301. Please include the rule
identifier (WV–116–FOR) with your
written comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency Docket ID
(OSM–2009–0008) for this rulemaking.
For detailed instructions on
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the ‘‘Public Comment Procedures’’
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document. You may also
request to speak at a public hearing by
contacting the individual listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Docket: The proposed rule and any
comments that are submitted may be
viewed over the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov. Look for Docket
ID OSM–2009–0008. In addition, you
may review copies of the West Virginia
program, this amendment, a listing of
any scheduled public hearings, and all
written comments received in response
to this document at the addresses listed
below during normal business hours,
Monday through Friday, excluding
holidays. You may also receive one free
copy of this amendment by contacting
OSM’s Charleston Field Office listed
below:
Mr. Roger W. Calhoun, Director,
Charleston Field Office, Office of
Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement, 1027 Virginia Street,
East, Charleston, West Virginia 25301,
Telephone: (304) 347–7158. E-mail:
chfo@osmre.gov.
West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection, 601 57th
Street, SE., Charleston, WV 25304,
Telephone: (304) 926–0490.
In addition, you may review a copy of
the amendment during regular
business hours at the following
locations:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Oct 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement, Morgantown Area
Office, 604 Cheat Road, Suite 150,
Morgantown, West Virginia 26508,
Telephone: (304) 291–4004 (By
Appointment Only).
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement, Beckley Area
Office, 313 Harper Park Drive, Suite 3,
Beckley, West Virginia 25801,
Telephone: (304) 255–5265.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Roger W. Calhoun, Director, Charleston
Field Office, Telephone: (304) 347–
7158. E-mail: chfo@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the West Virginia Program
II. Description of the Proposed Amendment
III. Public Comment Procedures
IV. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the West Virginia
Program
Section 503(a) of the Act permits a
State to assume primacy for the
regulation of surface coal mining and
reclamation operations on non-Federal
and non-Indian lands within its borders
by demonstrating that its program
includes, among other things, ‘‘* * * a
State law which provides for the
regulation of surface coal mining and
reclamation operations in accordance
with the requirements of the Act * * *;
and rules and regulations consistent
with regulations issued by the Secretary
pursuant to the Act.’’ See 30 U.S.C.
1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these
criteria, the Secretary of the Interior
conditionally approved the West
Virginia program on January 21, 1981.
You can find background information
on the West Virginia program, including
the Secretary’s findings, the disposition
of comments, and conditions of
approval of the West Virginia program
in the January 21, 1981, Federal
Register (46 FR 5915). You can also find
later actions concerning West Virginia’s
program and program amendments at 30
CFR 948.10, 948.12, 948.13, 948.15, and
948.16.
II. Description of the Proposed
Amendment
By letter dated May 11, 2009
(Administrative Record Number WV–
1522), the West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection (WVDEP)
submitted an amendment to its
permanent regulatory program under
SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) and a
copy of Committee Substitute for Senate
Bill 153. Committee Substitute for
Senate Bill 153 modified the West
Virginia Code of State Regulations (CSR)
concerning the continued oversight of
‘‘approved-persons’’ who prepare, sign,
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53973
or certify mining permit applications
and related materials. This bill also
proposes to modify incidental boundary
revision (IBR) requirements for existing
permits by clarifying that certain types
of collateral activities are part of the
primary mining operations and
therefore subject to the same acreage
limitations, while providing more
relevant and exacting criteria for the
Secretary to consider in evaluating an
application for revision; deleting the
bonding matrix forms; changing the
term from ‘‘bio-oil’’ to ‘‘bio-fuel’’; and
clarifying standards for hayland and
pasture use. The changes regarding the
term ‘‘Bio-oil’’ to ‘‘Bio-fuel’’ in the
program amendments are nonsubstantive in nature.
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill
153 authorized revisions to the State’s
Surface Mining Reclamation
Regulations at 38 CSR 2. Committee
Substitute for Senate Bill 153 was
adopted by the Legislature on April 8,
2009, and signed into law by the
Governor on April 30, 2009. West
Virginia Code at paragraph 64–3–1 (e)
authorized WVDEP to promulgate the
revisions to its rules as legislative rules.
By letter date May 22, 2009
(Administrative Record Number WV–
1521), the WVDEP submitted copies of
Senate Bill 436 and Committee
Substitute for Senate Bill 600. Senate
Bill 436 was adopted by the West
Virginia Legislature on April 3, 2009,
and it was approved by the Governor on
April 11, 2009. Committee Substitute for
Senate Bill 600, which authorized
changes to the State’s alternative
bonding system, was passed by the
Legislature on April 10, 2009, and it was
approved by the Governor on May 4,
2009, with an effective date of July 1,
2009.
Senate Bill 436 amends WV Code 22–
3–8 by changing references to ‘‘the
commissioner of the Bureau of
Employment Programs’’ to ‘‘executive
director of the Workforce West Virginia’’
and ‘‘the executive director of the
workers’ compensation commissioner’’
to ‘‘Insurance Commissioner.’’ The
revisions authorized by Senate Bill 436
are considered non-substantive changes
by the State, and it requests that they
not be included in the amendment.
Given the nature of the changes, OSM
concurs with the State’s assessment and
finds them to be essentially nonsubstantive changes. Therefore, we are
not soliciting comments on these
revisions. However, though perhaps
non-substantive, the revisions proposed
would amend a statutory provision of
the State’s approved program.
Therefore, we will seek comments on
these revisions; if, after the comment
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
53974
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
period, we determine that the changes
are indeed non-substantive, we will
approve them without specific findings.
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill
600 amended Section 22–3–11 of the
West Virginia Surface Mining Control
and Reclamation Act (WVSCMRA). As
stated in the State’s May 22, 2009, letter
transmitting the amendment, Committee
Substitute for Senate Bill 600 ‘‘amends
Chapter 22–3–11 of the Code of West
Virginia to implement actuarial
recommendations relating to the
continuing fiscal viability of the Special
Reclamation Fund. The legislation
consolidates what has been known as
‘‘the 7-and-7.4 tax’’ (the 7.4 [cents]
portion of which is currently subject to
annual renewal) into a 14.4 cent[s] tax
per ton of clean coal mined, reviewable
every two years by the Legislature’’.
By letter dated July 6, 2009
(Administrative Record Number WV
1523), WVDEP submitted a copy of
Senate Bill 1011. Senate Bill 1011
amends the WV Code by requiring
surface mine reclamation plans to
comport with approved master land use
plans and authorizing surface mine
reclamation plans to contain alternative
postmining land uses. Senate Bill 1011
was passed by the Legislature on June
2, 2009, during the 1st extraordinary
2009 session, and approved by the
Governor on June 17, 2009.
The amendment is intended to
improve the effectiveness of the West
Virginia program and to render the West
Virginia program no less effective than
the Federal regulations. Throughout this
proposed amendment, nonsubstantive
changes from ‘‘Bio-oil’’ to ‘‘Bio-fuel’’ are
made but not listed in this Proposed
Rule Notice.
West Virginia proposes the following
amendments to its regulations as
authorized by Committee Substitute for
Senate Bill 153:
1. CSR 38–2–3.15. Permit Applications:
Approved Persons
This amendment proposes to add
language regarding persons approved to
prepare, sign, or certify permit
applications.
Subdivision a is amended by adding
(C) after 13(b)(10) to clarify when an
approved person has to be a registered
professional engineer or licensed land
surveyor.
Subdivision 3.15.b is amended by
adding ‘‘and subject to be renewed on
an annual basis.’’ after writing, ‘‘and’’ is
deleted and ‘‘Approvals and renewals’’
is added before ‘‘shall.’’
As amended, subdivision 3.15 reads
as follows:
3.15.a. Any person approved by the
Secretary, unless otherwise provided in the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Oct 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
Act and this rule, may prepare, sign, or
certify permit application, maps, plans, and
design specification or other similar
materials necessary to complete an
application; provided, however, that for
purposes of Sections 9(a)(13) and 13(b)(10)(C)
of the Act an approved person shall be a
registered professional engineer or licensed
land surveyor.
3.15.b. The Secretary’s approval shall be in
writing and subject to be renewed on an
annual basis. Approvals and renewals shall
be granted on the basis of the following:
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing approved
persons, these proposed revisions fall
under the provisions of 30 CFR 777.11,
777.13, and 780.14(c) and sections
507(b)(14) and 515(b)(10)(B)(ii) of
SMCRA.
2. CSR 38–2–3.15.b.3 Permit
Applications: Approved Persons
This amendment proposes to add a
new subparagraph, 3.15.b.3, regarding
obtaining a digital signature approved
by the Secretary for an approved person
to prepare, sign, or certify permit
applications.
As amended, 3.15.b.3 reads as
follows:
3.15.b.3. Any person seeking an approval
must obtain a digital signature approved by
the Secretary and maintain the capability of
submitting documents bearing digital
signatures to the Secretary. A digital
signature shall have the same effect when
affixed to documents submitted to the
Secretary as a signature affixed by other
means.
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing approved
persons, these proposed revisions fall
under the provisions of 30 CFR 777.11,
777.13, and 780.14(c) and sections
507(b)(14) and 515(b)(10)(B)(ii) of
SMCRA.
3. CSR 38–2–3.15.e Permit
Applications: Disciplinary Action and
Procedures
This amendment proposes to add a
new subdivision, 3.15.e, regarding
disciplinary action and procedures for
people approved to prepare, sign, or
certify permit applications.
As amended, 3.15.e reads as follows:
3.15.e. Disciplinary action and Procedures.
3.15.e.1. The Secretary may:
3.15.e.1.A. Revoke an approved person
authorization;
3.15.e.1.B. Suspend an approved person
authorization for a period of time, not
exceeding two years, subject to such
conditions as the Secretary may specify or
3.15.e.1.C. Make the continuation of a
person’s approved person status subject to
such conditions as the Secretary may specify.
3.15.e.2. The Secretary may suspend or
revoke a person’s approved person status, or
refuse to approve, restore, or renew any
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
continuation of a person’s approved person
status, or impose conditions upon approval,
restoration, or renewal, or may reprimand
any approved person who has:
3.15.e.2.A. Engaged or has caused others to
engage in fraud or deceit in obtaining or
renewing his or her approved person status;
3.15.e.2.B. Been negligent, incompetent or
committed an act of misconduct as an
approved person;
3.15.e.2.C. Failed to comply with any of
the provisions of Chapter 22 Article 3 of the
Code of West Virginia or any of the rules
promulgated thereunder;
3.15.e.2.D. Been disciplined by a
professional or occupational licensing body,
or by any State or Federal agency;
3.15.e.2.E. Made false statements or signed
false statements, certificates or affidavits; or
3.15.e.2.F. Aided or assisted another
person in violating any provision of Chapter
22 Article 3 of the Code of West Virginia or
any of the rules promulgated thereunder;
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing approved
persons, these proposed revisions fall
under the provisions of 30 CFR 777.11,
777.13, and 780.14(c) and sections
507(b)(14) and 515(b)(10)(B)(ii) of
SMCRA.
4. CSR 38–2–3.15.f Permit
Applications: Imposition of Conditions,
Suspension and Revocation
This amendment proposes to add a
new subdivision, 3.15.f, regarding the
imposition of conditions, suspension
and revocation of disciplinary action
and procedures for people approved to
prepare, sign, or certify permit
applications.
As amended, 3.15.f reads as follows:
3.15.f. Imposition of Conditions,
Suspension and Revocation.
3.15.f.1. If the Secretary takes one or more
of the actions specified in subsection 3.15.e.,
the person adversely affected shall be
notified.
3.15.f.2. Such notice shall inform the
person of the conditions or provisions
violated and his or her right to request a
hearing for the purpose of showing cause
why his or her approved person status
should not be revoked, suspended, made
subject to conditions, or otherwise abridged.
3.15.f.3. Upon request made in writing
within fifteen days of service of the notice,
the person shall be granted a hearing before
the Secretary to show cause why his or her
approved person status should not be
suspended, revoked, made subject to
conditions, or otherwise abridged.
3.15.f.4. If the approved person requests a
hearing, a hearing shall be held within thirty
(30) days. Within sixty (60) days following
the hearing, the Secretary shall determine
whether cause exists, and furnish to the
approved person a written decision or order
setting forth the reasons therefor.
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing approved
persons, these proposed revisions fall
under the provisions of 30 CFR 777.11,
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
777.13, and 780.14(c) and sections
507(b)(14) and 515(b)(10)(B)(ii) of
SMCRA.
5. CSR 38–2–3.28.b.1
Permit Revision
This amendment proposes to add the
references ‘‘subdivisions 3.2.b., 3.2.c.,
and 3.2.d. of this rule:’’ for additional
clarification of the public notice
requirements for a significant permit
revision. As amended, subparagraph
3.28.b.1 reads as follows:
3.28.b.1. Where the permit revision
constitutes a significant departure from the
terms and conditions of the existing permit
which may result in a significant impact in
any of the following areas, it shall be deemed
to be a significant revision and be subject to
the public notice requirements of
subdivisions 3.2.a, 3.2.b., 3.2.c. and 3.2.d. of
this rule:
These proposed revisions fall under
the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13 and
section 511(a)(2) of SMCRA.
6. CSR 38–2–3.29.a Incidental
Boundary Revisions
This amendment proposes to delete
language regarding incidental boundary
revisions (IBRs) that involve the
abatement of a violation where
encroachment goes beyond the permit
boundary, unless an equal amount of
acreage covered under the IBR for
encroachment is deleted from the
permitted area and transferred to the
encroachment area. As amended,
subdivision 3.29.a reads as follows:
3.29.a. Incidental Boundary Revisions
(IBRs) shall be limited to minor shifts or
extensions of the permit boundary into noncoal areas or areas where any coal extraction
is incidental to or of only secondary
consideration to the intended purpose of the
IBR. IBRs shall also include the deletion of
bonded acreage which is overbonded by
another valid permit and for which full
liability is assumed in writing by the
successive permittee. Incidental Boundary
Revisions shall not be granted for any
prospecting operations.
These proposed revisions fall under
the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13 and
section 511(a)(3) of SMCRA.
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
7. CSR 38–2–3.29.b.2 Incidental
Boundary Revisions—Acreage
Limitation
This amendment proposes to add
language regarding the acreage
limitation for underground mining and
other related mining operations. Under
the proposed revision, the State
proposes to apply its underground
mining acreage limit and waiver
provisions to loadout operations, coal
refuse disposal operations, and coal
preparation operations. As amended,
subparagraph 3.29.b.2 reads as follows:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Oct 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
3.29.b.2. For purposes of surface mining
operations, the maximum total acreage to be
permitted under one or more IBR(s) shall not
exceed twenty (20) percent of the original
permitted acreage or a maximum of fifty (50)
acres, whichever is less, throughout the life
of the permit. Acreage limitation for IBR(s)
on underground mining operations and other
mining operations including but not limited
to loadout operations, coal refuse disposal
operations and coal preparation operations
shall be limited to one hundred fifty (150)
percent of the original permitted acreage or
a maximum of fifty (50) acres, whichever is
less, throughout the life of the permit;
Provided, That the Secretary may grant a
waiver specifying larger acre limits where the
applicant demonstrates that the nature and
complexity of the operation clearly requires
more than fifty (50) acres for additional
facilities to include but not be limited to site
development, air shafts, fan ways, vent holes,
roads, staging areas, etc.
These proposed revisions fall under
the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13 and
section 511(a)(3) of SMCRA.
8. CSR 38–2–3.29.d Incidental
Boundary Revisions
This amendment proposes to delete
language regarding the findings the
Secretary must make prior to approving
IBRs. Currently, the Secretary must
make six required findings prior to
approving an IBR. As proposed, the
State intends to delete language
requiring the Secretary to find that the
IBR does not constitute a change in
postmining land use; will only involve
lands for which the approved PHC is
applicable; does not constitute a change
in the mining method; and will not
result in adverse environmental impacts
of a larger scope or different nature from
those described in the approved permit.
Due to the proposed deletion of these
four IBR findings, the State proposes to
renumber 3.29.d.5 and 3.29.d.6 as
3.29.d.1 and 3.29.d.2, respectively. As
amended, subparagraph 3.29.d now
only has two required findings and
reads as follows:
3.29.d. The Secretary shall make the
following findings prior to approval of an
IBR:
3.29.d.1 The IBR will facilitate the
orderly and continuous conduct of mining
and reclamation operations.
3.29.d.2 Except for underground
operations, an area permitted under an IBR
must be contiguous to the original permitted
area.
These proposed revisions fall under
the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13 and
section 511(a)(3) of SMCRA.
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53975
9. CSR 38–2–3.29.e Incidental
Boundary Revisions—Hydrologic—
Consequences/Assessment—Significant
or Non-significant
This amendment proposes to delete
language which gives the Secretary the
authority to require IBR applications to
be advertised and to provide for a 10day public comment period. The
amendment also proposes to add new
language regarding the review of
applications for IBR’s to determine if an
updated probable hydrologic
consequences determination or
cumulative hydrologic impact
assessment is required. The State also
added language setting forth the basis by
which an IBR is determined to be
significant or non-significant. As
amended, subparagraph 3.29.e reads as
follows:
3.29.e. Each application for an IBR shall be
subject to review and approval by the
Secretary. Each application shall be reviewed
by the Secretary to determine if an updated
probable hydrologic consequences
determination or cumulative hydrologic
impact assessment is required. The Secretary
shall make a determination, on the basis of
information provided in the IBR application,
whether the IBR is of a significant or nonsignificant nature. The following criteria
shall provide guidance for making such a
determination.
3.29.e.1. Where the IBR constitutes a
significant departure from the terms and
conditions of the existing permit which may
result in a significant impact in any of the
following areas, it shall be deemed to be
significant and be subject to the public notice
requirements of subdivisions 3.2.a., 3.2.b.,
3.2.c. and 3.2.d. of this rule:
3.29.e.1.A. The health, safety, or welfare of
the public;
3.29.e.1.B. The hydrologic balance in the
area of operation;
3.29.e.1.C. The postmining land use;
3.29.e.1.D. The method of mining;
3.29.e.1.E. Adverse environmental impacts
of a larger scope or different nature from
those described in the approved permit;
3.29.e.1.F. Areas prohibited from mining
pursuant to the provisions of subsection (d)
section 22 of the Act; and
3.29.e.1.G. An individual’s legal right to
receive notice, as prescribed by the
provisions of this rule.
3.29.e.2. Where the IBR constitutes only an
insignificant departure from the terms and
conditions of the approved existing permit, it
shall be deemed to be non-significant,
requiring no public notice.
These proposed revisions fall under
the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13 and
section 511(a)(2) of SMCRA.
10. CSR 38–2–9.3.f Revegetation
Success Standards
This amendment proposes to delete
‘‘Where the postmining land use
requires legumes and perennial
grasses,’’ and add ‘‘For areas to be
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
53976
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
developed for hayland or pasture use,’’
As amended, subparagraph 9.3.f reads
as follows:
9.3.f. For areas to be developed for hayland
or pasture use, the operator shall achieve at
least a ninety (90) percent ground cover and
a productivity level as set forth by the
Secretary during any two years of the
responsibility period except for the first year.
Substandard areas shall not exceed onefourth (1⁄4) acre in size nor total more than
ten (10) percent of the area seeded.
Exceptions to this standard may be
authorized by the Secretary based on the
following:
These proposed revisions fall under
the provisions of 30 CFR 816.116(b)(1)
and 817.116(b)(1).
11. Site Specific Bonding Tables
This amendment is proposing to
delete the Coal Bonding Calculations
Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 in subsection 11.5.
In addition, subdivisions 11.5.c, 11.5.d,
11.5.e, and 11.5.f propose to delete
language referring to the Bonding
Calculations Tables. The criterion for
calculating site specific bonds remains
the same in the existing regulations.
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing bonding
calculations, these proposed revisions
fall under the provisions of 30 CFR
800.14.
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
12. Section 5B–2A–3: Definitions
This amendment is proposing to add
the following definitions to the West
Virginia Code 5B–2A–3.
(2) ‘‘Master land use plan’’ means a
plan as defined in 145 CSR 8;
(3) Is renumbered (4) and the
following definition for ‘‘Operator’’ is
added: ‘‘Operator’’ means the definition
in section three, article three, chapter
twenty-two of this code;
(4) Is renumbered (5) and the
following definition for ‘‘Renewable and
alternative energy’’ is added:
‘‘Renewable and alternative energy’’
means energy produced or generated
from natural or replenishable resources
other than traditional fossil fuels or
nuclear resources and includes, without
limitation, solar energy, wind power,
hydropower, geothermal energy,
biomass energy, biologically derived
fuels, energy produced with advanced
coal technologies, coalbed methane, fuel
produced by a coal gasification or
liquefaction facility, synthetic gas, waste
coal, tire-derived fuel, pumped storage
hydroelectric power or similar energy
sources.
As amended, West Virginia Code 5B–
2A–3 reads as follows:
(a) For the purpose of this article, the
following terms have the meanings ascribed
to them:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Oct 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
(2) ‘‘Master land use plan’’ means a plan
as defined in 145 CSR 8;
(4) ‘‘Operator’’ means the definition in
section three, article three, chapter twentytwo of this code;
(5) ‘‘Renewable and alternative energy’’
means energy produced or generated from
natural or replenishable resources other than
traditional fossil fuels or nuclear resources
and includes, without limitation, solar
energy, wind power, hydropower, geothermal
energy, biomass energy, biologically derived
fuels, energy produced with advanced coal
technologies, coalbed methane, fuel
produced by a coal gasification or
liquefaction facility, synthetic gas, waste
coal, tire-derived fuel, pumped storage
hydroelectric power or similar energy
sources.
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing master land use
plans, these proposed revisions fall
under the provisions of SMCRA 507,
508, and 515(b), (c), (d) and (e) and 30
CFR 780.23, 784.15, 784.16, 816/
817.133 and 824.
13. Section 5B–2A–5: Powers and Duties
This amendment proposes to add
‘‘shall’’ after ‘‘assistance’’ in West
Virginia Code 5B–2A–5(8). As amended,
West Virginia Code 5B–2A–5(8) reads as
follows:
(8) On its own initiative or at the request
of a community in close proximity to a
mining operation, offer assistance to facilitate
the development of economic or community
assets. Such assistance shall include the
preparation of a master land use plan
pursuant to the provisions of section nine of
this article.
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing master land use
plans, these proposed revisions fall
under the provisions of SMCRA 508 and
30 CFR 780.23.
14. Section 5B–2A–6: Community
Impact Statement
This amendment proposes to replace
at West Virginia Code 5B–2A–6 (2)
‘‘division’s’’ with ‘‘department’s’’; add
‘‘county’’ after ‘‘local’’; delete
‘‘economic’’ after ‘‘regional’’ and add
‘‘or redevelopment’’ after
‘‘development’’. This amendment
proposes to add new language at (9)
regarding a master land use plan; and at
(9)(d) regarding receipt of a community
impact statement. The old (d) is
relettered to (e) and in (e)(1), ‘‘the
effective date of this article’’ is deleted
and ‘‘June 11, 1999’’ is added.
As amended, West Virginia Code 5B–
2A–6 reads as follows:
(a)(2) The operator shall provide copies of
the community impact statement to the
division’s department’s office of mining
reclamation and office of explosives and
blasting and to the county commissions,
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
county clerks’ offices and local, county or
regional economic development or
redevelopment authorities of the areas to be
affected by the surface mining operations.
(b) The community impact statement,
where practicable, shall not be a highly
technical or legalistic document, but shall be
written in a clear and concise manner
understandable to all citizens. The
community impact statement shall include
the following:
(9) An acknowledgment of the
recommendations of any approved master
land use plan that pertains to the land
proposed to be mined, including an
acknowledgment of the infrastructure
components needed to accomplish the
designated post-mine land use required by
the plan.
(d) Within thirty days of receipt of a
community impact statement pursuant to
subdivision (2), subsection (a) of this section
or a revised community impact statement
pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, the
local, county or regional development or
redevelopment authorities of the areas to be
affected by the surface mining operations
shall provide a written acknowledgment of
the receipt of this community impact
statement or revised community impact
statement to the department’s Division of
Mining Reclamation, to the county
commission or county commissions and to
the office.
(e) The provisions of this section shall
apply as follows:
(1) To all surface mining permits granted
after June 11, 1999; and
(2) At the first renewal date of all
previously issued permits: Provided, That the
permittee shall be afforded ninety days from
said date to comply with the provisions of
this section.
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing master land use
plans, these proposed revisions fall
under the provisions of SMCRA 507,
508, and 515(b), (c), (d) and (e) and 30
CFR 780.23, 784.15, 784.16, 816/
817.133 and 824.
15. Section 5B–2A–9: Securing
Developable Land and Infrastructure
This amendment proposes to delete
from (f) ‘‘Participation in a master land
use plan is voluntary.’’ At (f)(1) delete
‘‘State, local, county or regional
development or redevelopment
authorities may’’ and add ‘‘The county
commission or other governing body for
each county in which there are surface
mining operations that are subject to
this article shall’’ after ‘‘may’’; delete
‘‘that include’’ after ‘‘needs’’ and add ‘‘,
including, but not limited to, renewable
and alternative energy uses, residential
uses, highway uses,’’; add new language
at the end of (f)(1) regarding designation
of development or redevelopment
authority and adoption of a master land
use plan. (f)(2) is deleted and new
language is added to (f)(2), (3)(A), (3)(B),
(3)(C), and (3)(D) regarding master land
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
plan use; (3) is renumbered to (4) and
‘‘subdivision (1) of this subsection’’ is
deleted and ‘‘a master land use plan’’ is
added; ‘‘relevant State, local,’’ is deleted
after ‘‘the’’; ‘‘regional’’ is deleted after
‘‘or’’; and ‘‘its designated’’ is added after
‘‘or’’; ‘‘State, local,’’ is deleted after
‘‘respective’’ and ‘‘regional’’ is deleted
after ‘‘or’’; ‘‘State, local,’’ is added after
‘‘relevant’’ in (4)(ii); ‘‘or other county
governing body’’ is added after
‘‘commissions’’; and (4) is renumbered
to (5).
As amended, West Virginia Code 5B–
2A–9(f) reads as follows:
(f) The office may secure developable land
and infrastructure for a development office or
county through the preparation of a master
land use plan for inclusion into a reclamation
plan prepared pursuant to the provisions of
section ten, article three, chapter twenty-two
of this code. No provision of this section may
be construed to modify requirements of
article three of said chapter.
(1) The county commission or other
governing body for each county in which
there are surface mining operations that are
subject to this article shall determine land
and infrastructure needs within their
jurisdictions through the development of a
master land use plan which incorporates
post-mining land use needs, including, but
not limited to, renewable and alternative
energy uses, residential uses, highway uses,
industrial uses, commercial uses, agricultural
uses, public facility uses or recreational
facility uses. A county commission or other
governing body of a county may designate a
local, county, or regional development or
redevelopment authority to assist in the
preparation of a master land use plan. A
county commission or other governing body
of a county may adopt a master land use plan
developed after July 1, 2009, only after a
reasonable public comment period;
(2) Upon the request of a county or
designated development or redevelopment
authority, the office shall assist the county or
development or redevelopment authority
with the development of a master land use
plan;
(3)(A) The Department of Environmental
Protection and the Office of Coalfield
Community Development shall review
master land use plans existing as of July 1,
2009. If the office determines that a master
land use plan complies with the
requirements of this article and the rules
promulgated pursuant to this article, the
office shall approve the plan on or before July
1, 2010;
(B) Master land use plans developed after
July 1, 2009, shall be submitted to the
department and the office for review. The
office shall determine whether to approve a
master land use plan submitted pursuant to
this subdivision within three months of
submission. The office shall approve the plan
if it complies with the requirements of this
article and the rules promulgated pursuant to
this article;
(C) The office shall review a master land
use plan approved under this section every
three years. No later than six months before
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Oct 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
the review of a master land use plan, the
county or designated development or
redevelopment authority shall submit an
updated master land use plan to the
department and the office for review. The
county may submit its updated master land
use plan only after a reasonable public
comment period. The office shall approve the
master land use plan if the updated plan
complies with the requirements of this article
and the rules promulgated pursuant to this
article;
(D) If the office does not approve a master
land use plan, the county or designated
development or redevelopment authority
shall submit a supplemental master land use
plan to the office for approval;
(4) The required infrastructure component
standards needed to accomplish the
designated post-mining land uses identified
in a master land use plan shall be developed
by the county or its designated development
or redevelopment authority. These standards
must be in place before the respective county
or development or redevelopment authority
can accept ownership of property donated
pursuant to a master land use plan.
Acceptance of ownership of such property by
a county or development or redevelopment
authority may not occur unless it is
determined that: (i) The property use is
compatible with adjacent land uses; (ii) the
use satisfies the relevant county or
development or redevelopment authority’s
anticipated need and market use; (iii) the
property has in place necessary infrastructure
components needed to achieve the
anticipated use; (iv) the use is supported by
all other appropriate public agencies; (v) the
property is eligible for bond release in
accordance with section twenty-three, article
three, chapter twenty-two of this code; and
(vi) the use is feasible. Required
infrastructure component standards require
approval of the relevant county commission,
commissions or other county governing body
before such standards are accepted. County
commission or other county governing body
approval may be rendered only after a
reasonable public comment period;
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing master land use
plans, these proposed revisions fall
under the provisions of SMCRA 507,
508, and 515(b), (c), (d) and (e) and 30
CFR 780.23, 784.15, 784.16, 816/
817.133 and 824.
16. Section 22–3–10: Reclamation Plan
Requirements
This amendment proposes to add new
language to West Virginia Code 22–3–
10(a)(3) regarding a variety of alternative
uses; delete language regarding master
plan for postmining land use; add new
language regarding postmining land use;
delete language regarding surface permit
application and add language regarding
master land use plan. This amendment
also proposes to add new language at
the end regarding the effective date of
these amendments.
As amended, West Virginia Code 22–
3–10(a)(3) will read as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53977
Each reclamation plan * * * shall include
* * * a statement of:
(3) The use which is proposed to be made
of the land following reclamation, including
a discussion of the utility and capacity of the
reclaimed land to support a variety of
alternative uses, including, but not limited
to, renewable and alternative energy uses,
residential uses, highway uses, industrial
uses, commercial uses, agricultural uses,
public facility uses or recreational facility
uses, and the relationship of the use to
existing land use policies and plans and the
comments of any owner of the surface, other
State agencies and local governments which
would have to initiate, implement, approve
or authorize the proposed use of the land
following reclamation;
(A) The post-mining land use proposed in
any reclamation plan for lands proposed to
be mined by surface mining methods shall
comport with the land use that is specified
in the approved master land use plan for the
area as provided in section nine, article twoa, chapter five-b of this code: Provided, That
the secretary may approve an alternative
post-mining land use where the applicant
demonstrates that:
(i) The proposed post-mining land use is a
higher and better use than the land use
specified in the approved master land use
plan;
(ii) Site-specific conditions make
attainment of a post-mining land use which
comports with the land use that is specified
in the approved master land use plan for the
area impractical; or
(iii) The post-mining land use specified in
the approved master land use plan would
substantially interfere with the future
extraction of mineable coal, as that term is
defined in 110 CSR 1 or a successor rule,
from the land to be mined.
(B) Existing permits with approved
reclamation plans may be modified by the
operator through an appropriate permit
revision to include a post-mining land use
which comports with the land use that is
specified in the approved master land use
plan for the area as provided in section nine,
article two-a, chapter five-b of this code;
(C) By complying with a master land use
plan that has been approved in accordance
with article two-a, chapter five-b of this code,
a post-mining land use satisfies the
requirements for an alternative post-mining
land use and satisfies the variance
requirements set forth in subsection (c),
section thirteen, article three, chapter twentytwo of this code if applicable to the proposed
use;
(b) A reclamation plan pending approval as
of the effective date of this section may be
amended by the operator to provide for a
post-mining land use that comports with a
master land use plan that has been approved
in accordance with article two-a, chapter
five-b of this code.
(d) The amendments to this section by the
first extraordinary session of the Legislature
in 2009 are effective upon the approval of the
corresponding amendments to West
Virginia’s State program, as that term is
defined in the Federal Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, 30
U.S.C. 1291, by the Federal Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
53978
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Although there are no specific Federal
requirements governing master land use
plans, these proposed revisions fall
under the provisions of SMCRA 507,
508, and 515(b), (c), (d) and (e) and 30
CFR 780.23, 784.15, 784.16, 816/
817.133 and 824.
should be continued: Provided That the tax
may not be reduced until the Special
Reclamation Fund and Special Reclamation
Water Trust Fund have sufficient moneys to
meet the reclamation responsibilities of the
State established in this section.
This proposed amendment was
announced earlier in the July 22, 2009,
Federal Register (74 FR 36113–36226)
as an interim rule (WV–115–FOR) and
approved on a temporary basis.
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
17. Section 22–3–11 Bonds
Subsection 22–3–11(h)(1) of the
WVSCMRA is amended by deleting the
year 2008, and adding language to
provide that, ‘‘For tax periods
commencing on and after July 1, 2009,
every person conducting coal surface
mining shall remit a special reclamation
tax * * *’’ Former subparagraph (A) is
revised by deleting language which
provides that the special reclamation tax
be remitted for the initial period of
twelve months, ending June 30, 2009,
and the word ‘‘seven’’ is deleted. As
modified, the special reclamation tax is
increased from seven and four-tenths to
fourteen and four-tenths cents per ton of
clean coal mined.
Former subparagraph (B) is amended
by deleting language which provides
that ‘‘[A]n additional seven cents per
ton of clean coal mined, the proceeds of
which shall be deposited in the Special
Reclamation Fund.’’ This revision
eliminates the additional seven cents
tax which previously funded the Special
Reclamation Fund.
Furthermore, language is deleted
which provides that the additional
seven cents tax shall be reviewed and,
if necessary, adjusted annually by the
Legislature upon the recommendation of
the council pursuant to the provisions
of section seventeen, article one of this
chapter. This provision is modified to
provide that, ‘‘Beginning with the tax
period commencing on July 1, 2009, and
every two years thereafter, the special
reclamation tax shall be reviewed by the
Legislature to determine whether the tax
should be continued:’’
As amended, West Virginia Code 22–
3–11(h)(1) reads as follows:
Send your written comments to OSM
at one of the addresses given above.
Your comments should be specific,
pertain only to the issues proposed in
this rulemaking, and include
explanations in support of your
recommendations. We may not consider
or respond to your comments when
developing the final rule if they are
received after the close of the comment
period (see DATES) or sent to an address
other than those listed above (see
ADDRESSES).
(h)(1) For tax periods commencing on and
after July 1, 2009, every person conducting
coal surface mining shall remit a special
reclamation tax of fourteen and four-tenths
cents per ton of clean coal mined, the
proceeds of which shall be allocated by the
secretary for deposit in the Special
Reclamation Fund and the Special
Reclamation Water Trust Fund. The tax shall
be levied upon each ton of clean coal severed
or clean coal obtained from refuse pile and
slurry pond recovery, or clean coal from
other mining methods extracting a
combination of coal and waste material as
part of a fuel supply. Beginning with the tax
period commencing on July 1, 2009, and
every two years thereafter, the special
reclamation tax shall be reviewed by the
Legislature to determine whether the tax
If you wish to speak at the public
hearing, contact the person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT until
4 p.m. (local time), on November 5,
2009. If you are disabled and need
reasonable accommodations to attend a
public hearing, contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. We will arrange the location
and time of the hearing with those
persons requesting the hearing. If no one
requests an opportunity to speak, we
will not hold a hearing. To assist the
transcriber and ensure an accurate
record, we request, if possible, that each
person who speaks at the public hearing
provide us with a written copy of his or
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Oct 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
III. Public Comment Procedures
Under the provisions of 30 CFR
732.17(h), we are seeking your
comments on whether these
amendments satisfy the applicable
program approval criteria of 30 CFR
732.15. If we approve these revisions,
they will become part of the West
Virginia program.
Written Comments
Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Public Hearing
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
her comments. The public hearing will
continue on the specified date until
everyone scheduled to speak has been
given an opportunity to be heard. If you
are in the audience and have not been
scheduled to speak and wish to do so,
you will be allowed to speak after those
who have been scheduled. We will end
the hearing after everyone scheduled to
speak and others present in the
audience who wish to speak, have been
heard.
Public Meeting
If only one person requests an
opportunity to speak, we may hold a
public meeting rather than a public
hearing. If you wish to meet with us to
discuss the amendment, please request
a meeting by contacting the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. All such meetings will be
open to the public and, if possible, we
will post notices of meetings at the
locations listed under ADDRESSES. We
will make a written summary of each
meeting a part of the Administrative
Record.
IV. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12630—Takings
This rule does not have takings
implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the
counterpart Federal regulation.
Executive Order 12866—Regulatory
Planning and Review
This rule is exempt from review by
the Office of Management and Budget
under Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice
Reform
The Department of the Interior has
conducted the reviews required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and
has determined that this rule meets the
applicable standards of subsections (a)
and (b) of that section. However, these
standards are not applicable to the
actual language of State regulatory
programs and program amendments
because each program is drafted and
promulgated by a specific State, not by
OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of
SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR
730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),
decisions on proposed State regulatory
programs and program amendments
submitted by the States must be based
solely on a determination of whether the
submittal is consistent with SMCRA and
its implementing Federal regulations
and whether the other requirements of
30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have
been met.
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 21, 2009 / Proposed 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 Federallyrecognized Indian Tribes and have
determined that the rule does not have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
The basis for this determination is that
our decision is on a State regulatory
program and does not involve a Federal
regulation involving Indian lands.
Executive Order 13211—Regulations
that Significantly Affect the Supply,
Distribution, or Use of Energy
On May 18, 2001, the President issued
Executive Order 13211 which requires
agencies to prepare a Statement of
Energy Effects for a rule that is (1)
considered significant under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Because
this rule is exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866 and is not
expected to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects
is not required.
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Oct 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
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
analysis performed under various laws
and executive orders for the counterpart
Federal regulations.
Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose an
unfunded mandate on State, local, or
Tribal governments or the private sector
of $100 million or more in any given
year. This determination is based upon
the analysis performed under various
laws and executive orders for the
counterpart Federal regulations.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 948
Intergovernmental relations, Surface
mining, Underground mining.
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53979
Dated: August 8, 2009.
Michael K. Robinson,
Acting Regional Director, Appalachian
Region.
[FR Doc. E9–25314 Filed 10–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Parts 300–70 and 302–1
[FTR Case 2009–306; Docket 2009–0011,
Sequence 1]
RIN 3090–AI94
Federal Travel Regulation (FTR); FTR
Case 2009–306; Relocation Allowances
AGENCY: Office of Governmentwide
Policy (OGP), General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: This proposed rule defines a
process for collecting transaction-level
data regarding relocation of Federal
civilian employees. Specifically, this
proposed rule would require that
agencies that spend more than $5
million per year on travel and relocation
send transaction-level data on relocation
to GSA at least quarterly. GSA will store
this data in a data warehouse that the
agencies will be able to query to answer
operational, managerial, and policy
questions. In addition to the transactionlevel reporting process, this proposed
rule also would establish an annual
reporting requirement for data regarding
employee relocation and would modify
the existing requirement for large
agencies to collect and report data on
temporary duty travel on an annual
basis, instead of biennially.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 21, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by FTR case 2009–306 by any
of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Search for any
document by typing in the FTR case
number (for example, FTR case 2009–
306) and clicking on the ‘‘Go’’ button.
• Fax: 202–501–4067.
• Mail: General Services
Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
(MVPR), 1800 F Street, NW., Room
4041, ATTN: Hada Flowers,
Washington, DC 20405.
Instructions: Please submit comments
only and cite FTR case 2009–306 in all
correspondence related to this case. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 21, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53972-53979]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25314]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 948
[WV-116-FOR; OSM-2009-0008]
West Virginia Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment period and opportunity for public
hearing on proposed amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are announcing receipt of a proposed amendment to the West
Virginia regulatory program (the West Virginia program) under the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act)
that includes both statutory and regulatory revisions.
West Virginia submitted a proposed amendment authorized by
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 153 to revise the West Virginia
Code of State Regulations (CSR) concerning the continued oversight by
the Secretary of ``approved persons'' who prepare, sign, or certify
mining permit applications and related materials; regarding incidental
boundary revisions (IBR) to existing permits, by clarifying that
certain types of collateral activities are part of the primary mining
operations and therefore subject to the same acreage limitations, while
providing more relevant and exacting criteria for the Secretary to
consider in evaluating an application for revision; deleting the
bonding matrix forms; changing term ``Bio-oil'' to ``Bio fuel''; and
clarifying standards in subsection 9.3.f that pertain to areas
developed for hayland or pasture use. West Virginia submitted proposed
changes as contained in Senate Bill 436 which amends WV Code 22-3-8 by
changing references regarding ``the commissioner of the Bureau of
Employment Programs'' and ``the executive director of the workers'
compensation commissioner'' which are considered non-substantive.
West Virginia also submitted proposed changes as contained in
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 600 regarding the Special
Reclamation Fund. This bill amends the State's alternative bonding
requirements by eliminating the 7 cents per ton additional tax and
increasing and extending the special reclamation tax from 7.4 to 14.4
cents per ton of clean coal mined. It also requires the special
reclamation tax to be reviewed biannually by the Legislature. This
amendment (WV-115-FOR) was announced earlier in the July 22, 2009,
Federal Register (74 FR 36113-36116) as an interim rule and approved on
a temporary basis.
West Virginia also submitted proposed changes as contained in
Senate Bill 1011 which amends the WV Code by requiring surface mine
reclamation plans to comport with approved master land use plans and
authorizing surface mine reclamation plans to contain alternative
postmining land uses. Senate Bill 1011 was passed by the Legislature on
June 2, 2009, during the 1st extraordinary 2009 session, and approved
by the Governor on June 17, 2009.
[[Page 53973]]
DATES: We will accept written comments on this amendment until 4 p.m.
(local time), on November 20, 2009. If requested, we will hold a public
hearing on the amendment on November 16, 2009. We will accept requests
to speak at a hearing until 4 p.m. (local time), on November 5, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following two methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
The proposed rule has been assigned Docket ID OSM-2009-0008. If you
would like to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal,
go to https://www.regulations.gov.
Mail/Hand Delivery: Mr. Roger W. Calhoun, Director,
Charleston Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement, 1027 Virginia Street, East, Charleston, West Virginia
25301. Please include the rule identifier (WV-116-FOR) with your
written comments.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency
Docket ID (OSM-2009-0008) for this rulemaking.
For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Public Comment
Procedures'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
You may also request to speak at a public hearing by contacting the
individual listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Docket: The proposed rule and any comments that are submitted may
be viewed over the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Look for
Docket ID OSM-2009-0008. In addition, you may review copies of the West
Virginia program, this amendment, a listing of any scheduled public
hearings, and all written comments received in response to this
document at the addresses listed below during normal business hours,
Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. You may also receive one
free copy of this amendment by contacting OSM's Charleston Field Office
listed below:
Mr. Roger W. Calhoun, Director, Charleston Field Office, Office of
Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1027 Virginia Street, East,
Charleston, West Virginia 25301, Telephone: (304) 347-7158. E-mail:
chfo@osmre.gov.
West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, 601 57th Street,
SE., Charleston, WV 25304, Telephone: (304) 926-0490.
In addition, you may review a copy of the amendment during regular
business hours at the following locations:
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Morgantown Area
Office, 604 Cheat Road, Suite 150, Morgantown, West Virginia 26508,
Telephone: (304) 291-4004 (By Appointment Only).
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Beckley Area
Office, 313 Harper Park Drive, Suite 3, Beckley, West Virginia 25801,
Telephone: (304) 255-5265.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Roger W. Calhoun, Director,
Charleston Field Office, Telephone: (304) 347-7158. E-mail:
chfo@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the West Virginia Program
II. Description of the Proposed Amendment
III. Public Comment Procedures
IV. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the West Virginia Program
Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-
Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that
its program includes, among other things, ``* * * a State law which
provides for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation
operations in accordance with the requirements of the Act * * *; and
rules and regulations consistent with regulations issued by the
Secretary pursuant to the Act.'' See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On
the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior
conditionally approved the West Virginia program on January 21, 1981.
You can find background information on the West Virginia program,
including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and
conditions of approval of the West Virginia program in the January 21,
1981, Federal Register (46 FR 5915). You can also find later actions
concerning West Virginia's program and program amendments at 30 CFR
948.10, 948.12, 948.13, 948.15, and 948.16.
II. Description of the Proposed Amendment
By letter dated May 11, 2009 (Administrative Record Number WV-
1522), the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP)
submitted an amendment to its permanent regulatory program under SMCRA
(30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) and a copy of Committee Substitute for Senate
Bill 153. Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 153 modified the West
Virginia Code of State Regulations (CSR) concerning the continued
oversight of ``approved-persons'' who prepare, sign, or certify mining
permit applications and related materials. This bill also proposes to
modify incidental boundary revision (IBR) requirements for existing
permits by clarifying that certain types of collateral activities are
part of the primary mining operations and therefore subject to the same
acreage limitations, while providing more relevant and exacting
criteria for the Secretary to consider in evaluating an application for
revision; deleting the bonding matrix forms; changing the term from
``bio-oil'' to ``bio-fuel''; and clarifying standards for hayland and
pasture use. The changes regarding the term ``Bio-oil'' to ``Bio-fuel''
in the program amendments are non-substantive in nature.
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 153 authorized revisions to
the State's Surface Mining Reclamation Regulations at 38 CSR 2.
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 153 was adopted by the Legislature
on April 8, 2009, and signed into law by the Governor on April 30,
2009. West Virginia Code at paragraph 64-3-1 (e) authorized WVDEP to
promulgate the revisions to its rules as legislative rules.
By letter date May 22, 2009 (Administrative Record Number WV-1521),
the WVDEP submitted copies of Senate Bill 436 and Committee Substitute
for Senate Bill 600. Senate Bill 436 was adopted by the West Virginia
Legislature on April 3, 2009, and it was approved by the Governor on
April 11, 2009. Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 600, which
authorized changes to the State's alternative bonding system, was
passed by the Legislature on April 10, 2009, and it was approved by the
Governor on May 4, 2009, with an effective date of July 1, 2009.
Senate Bill 436 amends WV Code 22-3-8 by changing references to
``the commissioner of the Bureau of Employment Programs'' to
``executive director of the Workforce West Virginia'' and ``the
executive director of the workers' compensation commissioner'' to
``Insurance Commissioner.'' The revisions authorized by Senate Bill 436
are considered non-substantive changes by the State, and it requests
that they not be included in the amendment. Given the nature of the
changes, OSM concurs with the State's assessment and finds them to be
essentially non-substantive changes. Therefore, we are not soliciting
comments on these revisions. However, though perhaps non-substantive,
the revisions proposed would amend a statutory provision of the State's
approved program. Therefore, we will seek comments on these revisions;
if, after the comment
[[Page 53974]]
period, we determine that the changes are indeed non-substantive, we
will approve them without specific findings.
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 600 amended Section 22-3-11 of
the West Virginia Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (WVSCMRA).
As stated in the State's May 22, 2009, letter transmitting the
amendment, Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 600 ``amends Chapter
22-3-11 of the Code of West Virginia to implement actuarial
recommendations relating to the continuing fiscal viability of the
Special Reclamation Fund. The legislation consolidates what has been
known as ``the 7-and-7.4 tax'' (the 7.4 [cents] portion of which is
currently subject to annual renewal) into a 14.4 cent[s] tax per ton of
clean coal mined, reviewable every two years by the Legislature''.
By letter dated July 6, 2009 (Administrative Record Number WV
1523), WVDEP submitted a copy of Senate Bill 1011. Senate Bill 1011
amends the WV Code by requiring surface mine reclamation plans to
comport with approved master land use plans and authorizing surface
mine reclamation plans to contain alternative postmining land uses.
Senate Bill 1011 was passed by the Legislature on June 2, 2009, during
the 1st extraordinary 2009 session, and approved by the Governor on
June 17, 2009.
The amendment is intended to improve the effectiveness of the West
Virginia program and to render the West Virginia program no less
effective than the Federal regulations. Throughout this proposed
amendment, nonsubstantive changes from ``Bio-oil'' to ``Bio-fuel'' are
made but not listed in this Proposed Rule Notice.
West Virginia proposes the following amendments to its regulations
as authorized by Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 153:
1. CSR 38-2-3.15. Permit Applications: Approved Persons
This amendment proposes to add language regarding persons approved
to prepare, sign, or certify permit applications.
Subdivision a is amended by adding (C) after 13(b)(10) to clarify
when an approved person has to be a registered professional engineer or
licensed land surveyor.
Subdivision 3.15.b is amended by adding ``and subject to be renewed
on an annual basis.'' after writing, ``and'' is deleted and ``Approvals
and renewals'' is added before ``shall.''
As amended, subdivision 3.15 reads as follows:
3.15.a. Any person approved by the Secretary, unless otherwise
provided in the Act and this rule, may prepare, sign, or certify
permit application, maps, plans, and design specification or other
similar materials necessary to complete an application; provided,
however, that for purposes of Sections 9(a)(13) and 13(b)(10)(C) of
the Act an approved person shall be a registered professional
engineer or licensed land surveyor.
3.15.b. The Secretary's approval shall be in writing and subject
to be renewed on an annual basis. Approvals and renewals shall be
granted on the basis of the following:
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
approved persons, these proposed revisions fall under the provisions of
30 CFR 777.11, 777.13, and 780.14(c) and sections 507(b)(14) and
515(b)(10)(B)(ii) of SMCRA.
2. CSR 38-2-3.15.b.3 Permit Applications: Approved Persons
This amendment proposes to add a new subparagraph, 3.15.b.3,
regarding obtaining a digital signature approved by the Secretary for
an approved person to prepare, sign, or certify permit applications.
As amended, 3.15.b.3 reads as follows:
3.15.b.3. Any person seeking an approval must obtain a digital
signature approved by the Secretary and maintain the capability of
submitting documents bearing digital signatures to the Secretary. A
digital signature shall have the same effect when affixed to
documents submitted to the Secretary as a signature affixed by other
means.
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
approved persons, these proposed revisions fall under the provisions of
30 CFR 777.11, 777.13, and 780.14(c) and sections 507(b)(14) and
515(b)(10)(B)(ii) of SMCRA.
3. CSR 38-2-3.15.e Permit Applications: Disciplinary Action and
Procedures
This amendment proposes to add a new subdivision, 3.15.e, regarding
disciplinary action and procedures for people approved to prepare,
sign, or certify permit applications.
As amended, 3.15.e reads as follows:
3.15.e. Disciplinary action and Procedures.
3.15.e.1. The Secretary may:
3.15.e.1.A. Revoke an approved person authorization;
3.15.e.1.B. Suspend an approved person authorization for a
period of time, not exceeding two years, subject to such conditions
as the Secretary may specify or
3.15.e.1.C. Make the continuation of a person's approved person
status subject to such conditions as the Secretary may specify.
3.15.e.2. The Secretary may suspend or revoke a person's
approved person status, or refuse to approve, restore, or renew any
continuation of a person's approved person status, or impose
conditions upon approval, restoration, or renewal, or may reprimand
any approved person who has:
3.15.e.2.A. Engaged or has caused others to engage in fraud or
deceit in obtaining or renewing his or her approved person status;
3.15.e.2.B. Been negligent, incompetent or committed an act of
misconduct as an approved person;
3.15.e.2.C. Failed to comply with any of the provisions of
Chapter 22 Article 3 of the Code of West Virginia or any of the
rules promulgated thereunder;
3.15.e.2.D. Been disciplined by a professional or occupational
licensing body, or by any State or Federal agency;
3.15.e.2.E. Made false statements or signed false statements,
certificates or affidavits; or
3.15.e.2.F. Aided or assisted another person in violating any
provision of Chapter 22 Article 3 of the Code of West Virginia or
any of the rules promulgated thereunder;
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
approved persons, these proposed revisions fall under the provisions of
30 CFR 777.11, 777.13, and 780.14(c) and sections 507(b)(14) and
515(b)(10)(B)(ii) of SMCRA.
4. CSR 38-2-3.15.f Permit Applications: Imposition of Conditions,
Suspension and Revocation
This amendment proposes to add a new subdivision, 3.15.f, regarding
the imposition of conditions, suspension and revocation of disciplinary
action and procedures for people approved to prepare, sign, or certify
permit applications.
As amended, 3.15.f reads as follows:
3.15.f. Imposition of Conditions, Suspension and Revocation.
3.15.f.1. If the Secretary takes one or more of the actions
specified in subsection 3.15.e., the person adversely affected shall
be notified.
3.15.f.2. Such notice shall inform the person of the conditions
or provisions violated and his or her right to request a hearing for
the purpose of showing cause why his or her approved person status
should not be revoked, suspended, made subject to conditions, or
otherwise abridged.
3.15.f.3. Upon request made in writing within fifteen days of
service of the notice, the person shall be granted a hearing before
the Secretary to show cause why his or her approved person status
should not be suspended, revoked, made subject to conditions, or
otherwise abridged.
3.15.f.4. If the approved person requests a hearing, a hearing
shall be held within thirty (30) days. Within sixty (60) days
following the hearing, the Secretary shall determine whether cause
exists, and furnish to the approved person a written decision or
order setting forth the reasons therefor.
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
approved persons, these proposed revisions fall under the provisions of
30 CFR 777.11,
[[Page 53975]]
777.13, and 780.14(c) and sections 507(b)(14) and 515(b)(10)(B)(ii) of
SMCRA.
5. CSR 38-2-3.28.b.1 Permit Revision
This amendment proposes to add the references ``subdivisions
3.2.b., 3.2.c., and 3.2.d. of this rule:'' for additional clarification
of the public notice requirements for a significant permit revision. As
amended, subparagraph 3.28.b.1 reads as follows:
3.28.b.1. Where the permit revision constitutes a significant
departure from the terms and conditions of the existing permit which
may result in a significant impact in any of the following areas, it
shall be deemed to be a significant revision and be subject to the
public notice requirements of subdivisions 3.2.a, 3.2.b., 3.2.c. and
3.2.d. of this rule:
These proposed revisions fall under the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13
and section 511(a)(2) of SMCRA.
6. CSR 38-2-3.29.a Incidental Boundary Revisions
This amendment proposes to delete language regarding incidental
boundary revisions (IBRs) that involve the abatement of a violation
where encroachment goes beyond the permit boundary, unless an equal
amount of acreage covered under the IBR for encroachment is deleted
from the permitted area and transferred to the encroachment area. As
amended, subdivision 3.29.a reads as follows:
3.29.a. Incidental Boundary Revisions (IBRs) shall be limited to
minor shifts or extensions of the permit boundary into non-coal
areas or areas where any coal extraction is incidental to or of only
secondary consideration to the intended purpose of the IBR. IBRs
shall also include the deletion of bonded acreage which is
overbonded by another valid permit and for which full liability is
assumed in writing by the successive permittee. Incidental Boundary
Revisions shall not be granted for any prospecting operations.
These proposed revisions fall under the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13
and section 511(a)(3) of SMCRA.
7. CSR 38-2-3.29.b.2 Incidental Boundary Revisions--Acreage Limitation
This amendment proposes to add language regarding the acreage
limitation for underground mining and other related mining operations.
Under the proposed revision, the State proposes to apply its
underground mining acreage limit and waiver provisions to loadout
operations, coal refuse disposal operations, and coal preparation
operations. As amended, subparagraph 3.29.b.2 reads as follows:
3.29.b.2. For purposes of surface mining operations, the maximum
total acreage to be permitted under one or more IBR(s) shall not
exceed twenty (20) percent of the original permitted acreage or a
maximum of fifty (50) acres, whichever is less, throughout the life
of the permit. Acreage limitation for IBR(s) on underground mining
operations and other mining operations including but not limited to
loadout operations, coal refuse disposal operations and coal
preparation operations shall be limited to one hundred fifty (150)
percent of the original permitted acreage or a maximum of fifty (50)
acres, whichever is less, throughout the life of the permit;
Provided, That the Secretary may grant a waiver specifying larger
acre limits where the applicant demonstrates that the nature and
complexity of the operation clearly requires more than fifty (50)
acres for additional facilities to include but not be limited to
site development, air shafts, fan ways, vent holes, roads, staging
areas, etc.
These proposed revisions fall under the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13
and section 511(a)(3) of SMCRA.
8. CSR 38-2-3.29.d Incidental Boundary Revisions
This amendment proposes to delete language regarding the findings
the Secretary must make prior to approving IBRs. Currently, the
Secretary must make six required findings prior to approving an IBR. As
proposed, the State intends to delete language requiring the Secretary
to find that the IBR does not constitute a change in postmining land
use; will only involve lands for which the approved PHC is applicable;
does not constitute a change in the mining method; and will not result
in adverse environmental impacts of a larger scope or different nature
from those described in the approved permit. Due to the proposed
deletion of these four IBR findings, the State proposes to renumber
3.29.d.5 and 3.29.d.6 as 3.29.d.1 and 3.29.d.2, respectively. As
amended, subparagraph 3.29.d now only has two required findings and
reads as follows:
3.29.d. The Secretary shall make the following findings prior to
approval of an IBR:
3.29.d.1 The IBR will facilitate the orderly and continuous
conduct of mining and reclamation operations.
3.29.d.2 Except for underground operations, an area permitted
under an IBR must be contiguous to the original permitted area.
These proposed revisions fall under the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13
and section 511(a)(3) of SMCRA.
9. CSR 38-2-3.29.e Incidental Boundary Revisions--Hydrologic--
Consequences/Assessment--Significant or Non-significant
This amendment proposes to delete language which gives the
Secretary the authority to require IBR applications to be advertised
and to provide for a 10-day public comment period. The amendment also
proposes to add new language regarding the review of applications for
IBR's to determine if an updated probable hydrologic consequences
determination or cumulative hydrologic impact assessment is required.
The State also added language setting forth the basis by which an IBR
is determined to be significant or non-significant. As amended,
subparagraph 3.29.e reads as follows:
3.29.e. Each application for an IBR shall be subject to review
and approval by the Secretary. Each application shall be reviewed by
the Secretary to determine if an updated probable hydrologic
consequences determination or cumulative hydrologic impact
assessment is required. The Secretary shall make a determination, on
the basis of information provided in the IBR application, whether
the IBR is of a significant or non-significant nature. The following
criteria shall provide guidance for making such a determination.
3.29.e.1. Where the IBR constitutes a significant departure from
the terms and conditions of the existing permit which may result in
a significant impact in any of the following areas, it shall be
deemed to be significant and be subject to the public notice
requirements of subdivisions 3.2.a., 3.2.b., 3.2.c. and 3.2.d. of
this rule:
3.29.e.1.A. The health, safety, or welfare of the public;
3.29.e.1.B. The hydrologic balance in the area of operation;
3.29.e.1.C. The postmining land use;
3.29.e.1.D. The method of mining;
3.29.e.1.E. Adverse environmental impacts of a larger scope or
different nature from those described in the approved permit;
3.29.e.1.F. Areas prohibited from mining pursuant to the
provisions of subsection (d) section 22 of the Act; and
3.29.e.1.G. An individual's legal right to receive notice, as
prescribed by the provisions of this rule.
3.29.e.2. Where the IBR constitutes only an insignificant
departure from the terms and conditions of the approved existing
permit, it shall be deemed to be non-significant, requiring no
public notice.
These proposed revisions fall under the provisions of 30 CFR 774.13
and section 511(a)(2) of SMCRA.
10. CSR 38-2-9.3.f Revegetation Success Standards
This amendment proposes to delete ``Where the postmining land use
requires legumes and perennial grasses,'' and add ``For areas to be
[[Page 53976]]
developed for hayland or pasture use,'' As amended, subparagraph 9.3.f
reads as follows:
9.3.f. For areas to be developed for hayland or pasture use, the
operator shall achieve at least a ninety (90) percent ground cover
and a productivity level as set forth by the Secretary during any
two years of the responsibility period except for the first year.
Substandard areas shall not exceed one-fourth (\1/4\) acre in size
nor total more than ten (10) percent of the area seeded. Exceptions
to this standard may be authorized by the Secretary based on the
following:
These proposed revisions fall under the provisions of 30 CFR
816.116(b)(1) and 817.116(b)(1).
11. Site Specific Bonding Tables
This amendment is proposing to delete the Coal Bonding Calculations
Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 in subsection 11.5. In addition, subdivisions
11.5.c, 11.5.d, 11.5.e, and 11.5.f propose to delete language referring
to the Bonding Calculations Tables. The criterion for calculating site
specific bonds remains the same in the existing regulations.
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
bonding calculations, these proposed revisions fall under the
provisions of 30 CFR 800.14.
12. Section 5B-2A-3: Definitions
This amendment is proposing to add the following definitions to the
West Virginia Code 5B-2A-3.
(2) ``Master land use plan'' means a plan as defined in 145 CSR 8;
(3) Is renumbered (4) and the following definition for ``Operator''
is added: ``Operator'' means the definition in section three, article
three, chapter twenty-two of this code;
(4) Is renumbered (5) and the following definition for ``Renewable
and alternative energy'' is added: ``Renewable and alternative energy''
means energy produced or generated from natural or replenishable
resources other than traditional fossil fuels or nuclear resources and
includes, without limitation, solar energy, wind power, hydropower,
geothermal energy, biomass energy, biologically derived fuels, energy
produced with advanced coal technologies, coalbed methane, fuel
produced by a coal gasification or liquefaction facility, synthetic
gas, waste coal, tire-derived fuel, pumped storage hydroelectric power
or similar energy sources.
As amended, West Virginia Code 5B-2A-3 reads as follows:
(a) For the purpose of this article, the following terms have
the meanings ascribed to them:
(2) ``Master land use plan'' means a plan as defined in 145 CSR
8;
(4) ``Operator'' means the definition in section three, article
three, chapter twenty-two of this code;
(5) ``Renewable and alternative energy'' means energy produced
or generated from natural or replenishable resources other than
traditional fossil fuels or nuclear resources and includes, without
limitation, solar energy, wind power, hydropower, geothermal energy,
biomass energy, biologically derived fuels, energy produced with
advanced coal technologies, coalbed methane, fuel produced by a coal
gasification or liquefaction facility, synthetic gas, waste coal,
tire-derived fuel, pumped storage hydroelectric power or similar
energy sources.
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
master land use plans, these proposed revisions fall under the
provisions of SMCRA 507, 508, and 515(b), (c), (d) and (e) and 30 CFR
780.23, 784.15, 784.16, 816/817.133 and 824.
13. Section 5B-2A-5: Powers and Duties
This amendment proposes to add ``shall'' after ``assistance'' in
West Virginia Code 5B-2A-5(8). As amended, West Virginia Code 5B-2A-
5(8) reads as follows:
(8) On its own initiative or at the request of a community in
close proximity to a mining operation, offer assistance to
facilitate the development of economic or community assets. Such
assistance shall include the preparation of a master land use plan
pursuant to the provisions of section nine of this article.
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
master land use plans, these proposed revisions fall under the
provisions of SMCRA 508 and 30 CFR 780.23.
14. Section 5B-2A-6: Community Impact Statement
This amendment proposes to replace at West Virginia Code 5B-2A-6
(2) ``division's'' with ``department's''; add ``county'' after
``local''; delete ``economic'' after ``regional'' and add ``or
redevelopment'' after ``development''. This amendment proposes to add
new language at (9) regarding a master land use plan; and at (9)(d)
regarding receipt of a community impact statement. The old (d) is
relettered to (e) and in (e)(1), ``the effective date of this article''
is deleted and ``June 11, 1999'' is added.
As amended, West Virginia Code 5B-2A-6 reads as follows:
(a)(2) The operator shall provide copies of the community impact
statement to the division's department's office of mining
reclamation and office of explosives and blasting and to the county
commissions, county clerks' offices and local, county or regional
economic development or redevelopment authorities of the areas to be
affected by the surface mining operations.
(b) The community impact statement, where practicable, shall not
be a highly technical or legalistic document, but shall be written
in a clear and concise manner understandable to all citizens. The
community impact statement shall include the following:
(9) An acknowledgment of the recommendations of any approved
master land use plan that pertains to the land proposed to be mined,
including an acknowledgment of the infrastructure components needed
to accomplish the designated post-mine land use required by the
plan.
(d) Within thirty days of receipt of a community impact
statement pursuant to subdivision (2), subsection (a) of this
section or a revised community impact statement pursuant to
subsection (c) of this section, the local, county or regional
development or redevelopment authorities of the areas to be affected
by the surface mining operations shall provide a written
acknowledgment of the receipt of this community impact statement or
revised community impact statement to the department's Division of
Mining Reclamation, to the county commission or county commissions
and to the office.
(e) The provisions of this section shall apply as follows:
(1) To all surface mining permits granted after June 11, 1999;
and
(2) At the first renewal date of all previously issued permits:
Provided, That the permittee shall be afforded ninety days from said
date to comply with the provisions of this section.
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
master land use plans, these proposed revisions fall under the
provisions of SMCRA 507, 508, and 515(b), (c), (d) and (e) and 30 CFR
780.23, 784.15, 784.16, 816/817.133 and 824.
15. Section 5B-2A-9: Securing Developable Land and Infrastructure
This amendment proposes to delete from (f) ``Participation in a
master land use plan is voluntary.'' At (f)(1) delete ``State, local,
county or regional development or redevelopment authorities may'' and
add ``The county commission or other governing body for each county in
which there are surface mining operations that are subject to this
article shall'' after ``may''; delete ``that include'' after ``needs''
and add ``, including, but not limited to, renewable and alternative
energy uses, residential uses, highway uses,''; add new language at the
end of (f)(1) regarding designation of development or redevelopment
authority and adoption of a master land use plan. (f)(2) is deleted and
new language is added to (f)(2), (3)(A), (3)(B), (3)(C), and (3)(D)
regarding master land
[[Page 53977]]
plan use; (3) is renumbered to (4) and ``subdivision (1) of this
subsection'' is deleted and ``a master land use plan'' is added;
``relevant State, local,'' is deleted after ``the''; ``regional'' is
deleted after ``or''; and ``its designated'' is added after ``or'';
``State, local,'' is deleted after ``respective'' and ``regional'' is
deleted after ``or''; ``State, local,'' is added after ``relevant'' in
(4)(ii); ``or other county governing body'' is added after
``commissions''; and (4) is renumbered to (5).
As amended, West Virginia Code 5B-2A-9(f) reads as follows:
(f) The office may secure developable land and infrastructure
for a development office or county through the preparation of a
master land use plan for inclusion into a reclamation plan prepared
pursuant to the provisions of section ten, article three, chapter
twenty-two of this code. No provision of this section may be
construed to modify requirements of article three of said chapter.
(1) The county commission or other governing body for each
county in which there are surface mining operations that are subject
to this article shall determine land and infrastructure needs within
their jurisdictions through the development of a master land use
plan which incorporates post-mining land use needs, including, but
not limited to, renewable and alternative energy uses, residential
uses, highway uses, industrial uses, commercial uses, agricultural
uses, public facility uses or recreational facility uses. A county
commission or other governing body of a county may designate a
local, county, or regional development or redevelopment authority to
assist in the preparation of a master land use plan. A county
commission or other governing body of a county may adopt a master
land use plan developed after July 1, 2009, only after a reasonable
public comment period;
(2) Upon the request of a county or designated development or
redevelopment authority, the office shall assist the county or
development or redevelopment authority with the development of a
master land use plan;
(3)(A) The Department of Environmental Protection and the Office
of Coalfield Community Development shall review master land use
plans existing as of July 1, 2009. If the office determines that a
master land use plan complies with the requirements of this article
and the rules promulgated pursuant to this article, the office shall
approve the plan on or before July 1, 2010;
(B) Master land use plans developed after July 1, 2009, shall be
submitted to the department and the office for review. The office
shall determine whether to approve a master land use plan submitted
pursuant to this subdivision within three months of submission. The
office shall approve the plan if it complies with the requirements
of this article and the rules promulgated pursuant to this article;
(C) The office shall review a master land use plan approved
under this section every three years. No later than six months
before the review of a master land use plan, the county or
designated development or redevelopment authority shall submit an
updated master land use plan to the department and the office for
review. The county may submit its updated master land use plan only
after a reasonable public comment period. The office shall approve
the master land use plan if the updated plan complies with the
requirements of this article and the rules promulgated pursuant to
this article;
(D) If the office does not approve a master land use plan, the
county or designated development or redevelopment authority shall
submit a supplemental master land use plan to the office for
approval;
(4) The required infrastructure component standards needed to
accomplish the designated post-mining land uses identified in a
master land use plan shall be developed by the county or its
designated development or redevelopment authority. These standards
must be in place before the respective county or development or
redevelopment authority can accept ownership of property donated
pursuant to a master land use plan. Acceptance of ownership of such
property by a county or development or redevelopment authority may
not occur unless it is determined that: (i) The property use is
compatible with adjacent land uses; (ii) the use satisfies the
relevant county or development or redevelopment authority's
anticipated need and market use; (iii) the property has in place
necessary infrastructure components needed to achieve the
anticipated use; (iv) the use is supported by all other appropriate
public agencies; (v) the property is eligible for bond release in
accordance with section twenty-three, article three, chapter twenty-
two of this code; and (vi) the use is feasible. Required
infrastructure component standards require approval of the relevant
county commission, commissions or other county governing body before
such standards are accepted. County commission or other county
governing body approval may be rendered only after a reasonable
public comment period;
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
master land use plans, these proposed revisions fall under the
provisions of SMCRA 507, 508, and 515(b), (c), (d) and (e) and 30 CFR
780.23, 784.15, 784.16, 816/817.133 and 824.
16. Section 22-3-10: Reclamation Plan Requirements
This amendment proposes to add new language to West Virginia Code
22-3-10(a)(3) regarding a variety of alternative uses; delete language
regarding master plan for postmining land use; add new language
regarding postmining land use; delete language regarding surface permit
application and add language regarding master land use plan. This
amendment also proposes to add new language at the end regarding the
effective date of these amendments.
As amended, West Virginia Code 22-3-10(a)(3) will read as follows:
Each reclamation plan * * * shall include * * * a statement of:
(3) The use which is proposed to be made of the land following
reclamation, including a discussion of the utility and capacity of
the reclaimed land to support a variety of alternative uses,
including, but not limited to, renewable and alternative energy
uses, residential uses, highway uses, industrial uses, commercial
uses, agricultural uses, public facility uses or recreational
facility uses, and the relationship of the use to existing land use
policies and plans and the comments of any owner of the surface,
other State agencies and local governments which would have to
initiate, implement, approve or authorize the proposed use of the
land following reclamation;
(A) The post-mining land use proposed in any reclamation plan
for lands proposed to be mined by surface mining methods shall
comport with the land use that is specified in the approved master
land use plan for the area as provided in section nine, article two-
a, chapter five-b of this code: Provided, That the secretary may
approve an alternative post-mining land use where the applicant
demonstrates that:
(i) The proposed post-mining land use is a higher and better use
than the land use specified in the approved master land use plan;
(ii) Site-specific conditions make attainment of a post-mining
land use which comports with the land use that is specified in the
approved master land use plan for the area impractical; or
(iii) The post-mining land use specified in the approved master
land use plan would substantially interfere with the future
extraction of mineable coal, as that term is defined in 110 CSR 1 or
a successor rule, from the land to be mined.
(B) Existing permits with approved reclamation plans may be
modified by the operator through an appropriate permit revision to
include a post-mining land use which comports with the land use that
is specified in the approved master land use plan for the area as
provided in section nine, article two-a, chapter five-b of this
code;
(C) By complying with a master land use plan that has been
approved in accordance with article two-a, chapter five-b of this
code, a post-mining land use satisfies the requirements for an
alternative post-mining land use and satisfies the variance
requirements set forth in subsection (c), section thirteen, article
three, chapter twenty- two of this code if applicable to the
proposed use;
(b) A reclamation plan pending approval as of the effective date
of this section may be amended by the operator to provide for a
post-mining land use that comports with a master land use plan that
has been approved in accordance with article two-a, chapter five-b
of this code.
(d) The amendments to this section by the first extraordinary
session of the Legislature in 2009 are effective upon the approval
of the corresponding amendments to West Virginia's State program, as
that term is defined in the Federal Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 1291, by the Federal Office of
Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
[[Page 53978]]
Although there are no specific Federal requirements governing
master land use plans, these proposed revisions fall under the
provisions of SMCRA 507, 508, and 515(b), (c), (d) and (e) and 30 CFR
780.23, 784.15, 784.16, 816/817.133 and 824.
17. Section 22-3-11 Bonds
Subsection 22-3-11(h)(1) of the WVSCMRA is amended by deleting the
year 2008, and adding language to provide that, ``For tax periods
commencing on and after July 1, 2009, every person conducting coal
surface mining shall remit a special reclamation tax * * *'' Former
subparagraph (A) is revised by deleting language which provides that
the special reclamation tax be remitted for the initial period of
twelve months, ending June 30, 2009, and the word ``seven'' is deleted.
As modified, the special reclamation tax is increased from seven and
four-tenths to fourteen and four-tenths cents per ton of clean coal
mined.
Former subparagraph (B) is amended by deleting language which
provides that ``[A]n additional seven cents per ton of clean coal
mined, the proceeds of which shall be deposited in the Special
Reclamation Fund.'' This revision eliminates the additional seven cents
tax which previously funded the Special Reclamation Fund.
Furthermore, language is deleted which provides that the additional
seven cents tax shall be reviewed and, if necessary, adjusted annually
by the Legislature upon the recommendation of the council pursuant to
the provisions of section seventeen, article one of this chapter. This
provision is modified to provide that, ``Beginning with the tax period
commencing on July 1, 2009, and every two years thereafter, the special
reclamation tax shall be reviewed by the Legislature to determine
whether the tax should be continued:''
As amended, West Virginia Code 22-3-11(h)(1) reads as follows:
(h)(1) For tax periods commencing on and after July 1, 2009,
every person conducting coal surface mining shall remit a special
reclamation tax of fourteen and four-tenths cents per ton of clean
coal mined, the proceeds of which shall be allocated by the
secretary for deposit in the Special Reclamation Fund and the
Special Reclamation Water Trust Fund. The tax shall be levied upon
each ton of clean coal severed or clean coal obtained from refuse
pile and slurry pond recovery, or clean coal from other mining
methods extracting a combination of coal and waste material as part
of a fuel supply. Beginning with the tax period commencing on July
1, 2009, and every two years thereafter, the special reclamation tax
shall be reviewed by the Legislature to determine whether the tax
should be continued: Provided That the tax may not be reduced until
the Special Reclamation Fund and Special Reclamation Water Trust
Fund have sufficient moneys to meet the reclamation responsibilities
of the State established in this section.
This proposed amendment was announced earlier in the July 22, 2009,
Federal Register (74 FR 36113-36226) as an interim rule (WV-115-FOR)
and approved on a temporary basis.
III. Public Comment Procedures
Under the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), we are seeking your
comments on whether these amendments satisfy the applicable program
approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If we approve these revisions, they
will become part of the West Virginia program.
Written Comments
Send your written comments to OSM at one of the addresses given
above. Your comments should be specific, pertain only to the issues
proposed in this rulemaking, and include explanations in support of
your recommendations. We may not consider or respond to your comments
when developing the final rule if they are received after the close of
the comment period (see DATES) or sent to an address other than those
listed above (see ADDRESSES).
Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Public Hearing
If you wish to speak at the public hearing, contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT until 4 p.m. (local time),
on November 5, 2009. If you are disabled and need reasonable
accommodations to attend a public hearing, contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will arrange the location and
time of the hearing with those persons requesting the hearing. If no
one requests an opportunity to speak, we will not hold a hearing. To
assist the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we request, if
possible, that each person who speaks at the public hearing provide us
with a written copy of his or her comments. The public hearing will
continue on the specified date until everyone scheduled to speak has
been given an opportunity to be heard. If you are in the audience and
have not been scheduled to speak and wish to do so, you will be allowed
to speak after those who have been scheduled. We will end the hearing
after everyone scheduled to speak and others present in the audience
who wish to speak, have been heard.
Public Meeting
If only one person requests an opportunity to speak, we may hold a
public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with
us to discuss the amendment, please request a meeting by contacting the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings
will be open to the public and, if possible, we will post notices of
meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES. We will make a
written summary of each meeting a part of the Administrative Record.
IV. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12630--Takings
This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.
Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is exempt from review by the Office of Management and
Budget under Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that this rule
meets the applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that
section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual
language of State regulatory programs and program amendments because
each program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by
OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),
decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments
submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of
whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing
Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR Parts
730, 731, and 732 have been met.
[[Page 53979]]
Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates
the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of
the purposes of SMCRA is to ``establish a nationwide program to protect
society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal
mining operations.'' Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State
laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be ``in
accordance with'' the requirements of SMCRA, and section 503(a)(7)
requires that State programs contain rules and regulations ``consistent
with'' regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.
Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments
In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the
potential effects of this rule on Federally-recognized Indian Tribes
and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
The basis for this determination is that our decision is on a State
regulatory program and does not involve a Federal regulation involving
Indian lands.
Executive Order 13211--Regulations that Significantly Affect the
Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 which
requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule
that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2)
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review
under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a
Statement of Energy Effects is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act
This rule does not require an environmental impact statement
because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that
agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not
constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)).
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain information collection requirements that
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3507 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
The State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is 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 analysis performed
under various laws and executive orders for the counterpart Federal
regulations.
Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
Tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any
given year. This determination is based upon the analysis performed
under various laws and executive orders for the counterpart Federal
regulations.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 948
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: August 8, 2009.
Michael K. Robinson,
Acting Regional Director, Appalachian Region.
[FR Doc. E9-25314 Filed 10-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P