Montana Regulatory Program, 58022-58025 [2012-23087]
Download as PDF
58022
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
§ 558.355
Monensin.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(7) * * *
(vii) If feed refusals containing
monensin are fed to other groups of
cattle, the concentration of monensin in
the refusals and amount of refusals fed
should be taken into consideration to
prevent monensin overdosing (see
paragraphs (d)(10)(i) and (d)(10)(ii) of
this section).
*
*
*
*
*
(10) * * *
(i) Cattle (as described in paragraphs
(f)(3)(i) through (f)(3)(xii) of this
section): See paragraphs (d)(6), (d)(7)(i),
(d)(7)(v), (d)(7)(vii), and (d)(7)(viii) of
this section. Paragraph (d)(7)(vii) of this
section does not apply to free-choice
Type C medicated feeds as defined in
§ 510.455 of this chapter.
(ii) Dairy cows (as described in
paragraphs (f)(3)(xiii) and (f)(3)(xiv) of
this section): See paragraphs (d)(6),
(d)(7)(i), (d)(7)(vii), (d)(7)(viii), and
(d)(7)(ix) of this section. Paragraph
(d)(7)(vii) of this section does not apply
to free-choice Type C medicated feeds
as defined in § 510.455 of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(7) Free-choice feeds—(i) Amount.
150 milligrams per pound of proteinmineral block (0.033 percent).
(a) [Reserved]
(b) Conditions of use—(1) Indications
for use. For increased rate of weight
gain; and for prevention and control of
coccidiosis caused by Eimeria bovis and
E. zuernii in pasture cattle (slaughter,
stocker, feeder, and dairy and beef
replacement heifers) which may require
supplemental feed.
(2) Limitations. Provide 50 to 200
milligrams of monensin (0.34 to 1.33
pounds of block) per head per day, at
least 1 block per 10 to 12 head of cattle.
Roughage must be available at all times.
Do not allow animals access to other
protein blocks, salt or mineral, while
being fed this product. The effectiveness
of this block in cull cows and bulls has
not been established. See paragraph
(d)(10)(i) of this section.
(ii) Amount. 400 milligrams per
pound of protein-mineral block (0.088
percent).
(a) Sponsor. See No. 067949 in
§ 510.600(c) of this chapter.
(b) Conditions of use—(1) Indications
for use. For increased rate of weight gain
in pasture cattle (slaughter, stocker,
feeder, and dairy and beef replacement
heifers).
(2) Limitations. Provide 80 to 200
milligrams of monensin (0.2 to 0.5
pounds of block) per head per day, at
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:23 Sep 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
least 1 block per 5 head of cattle. Feed
blocks continuously. Do not feed salt or
minerals containing salt. The
effectiveness of this block in cull cows
and bulls has not been established. See
paragraph (d)(10)(i) of this section.
(iii) Amount. 175 milligrams per
pound of protein-mineral block (0.038
percent).
(a) Sponsor. See No. 066071 in
§ 510.600(c) of this chapter.
(b) Conditions of use—(1) Indications
for use. For increased rate of weight gain
in pasture cattle (slaughter, stocker, and
feeder).
(2) Limitations. Provide 40 to 200
milligrams of monensin (0.25 to 1.13
pounds or 4 to 18 ounces of block) per
head per day, at least 1 block per 4 head
of cattle. Do not allow cattle access to
salt or mineral while being fed this
product. Ingestion by cattle of monensin
at levels of 600 milligrams per head per
day and higher has been fatal. The
effectiveness of this block in cull cows
and bulls has not been established. See
paragraph (d)(10)(i) of this section.
(iv) Amount. 400 milligrams per
pound of block (0.088 percent).
(a) Sponsor. See No. 051267 in
§ 510.600(c) of this chapter.
(b) Conditions of use—(1) Indications
for use. For increased rate of weight gain
in pasture cattle (slaughter, stocker,
feeder, and dairy and beef replacement
heifers).
(2) Limitations. Provide 50 to 200
milligrams of monensin (2 to 8 ounces
of block) per head per day, at least 1
block per 5 head of cattle. Feed blocks
continuously. Do not feed salt or
mineral supplements in addition to the
blocks. Ingestion by cattle of monensin
at levels of 600 milligrams per head per
day and higher has been fatal. The
effectiveness of this block in cull cows
and bulls has not been established. See
paragraph (d)(10)(i) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: September 13, 2012.
Bernadette Dunham,
Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. 2012–23065 Filed 9–18–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 926
[SATS No. MT–034–FOR; Docket ID No.
OSM–2011–0018]
Final rule; approval of
amendment.
ACTION:
We are approving an
amendment to the Montana regulatory
program (the ‘‘Montana program’’)
under the Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act of 1977 (‘‘SMCRA’’ or
‘‘the Act’’). Montana proposed revisions
to and additions of statutory definitions
of approximate original contour, in situ
coal gasification, and recovery fluid.
Montana revised its program to clarify
ambiguities and improve operational
efficiency. Montana intends to
promulgate regulations pertaining to in
situ coal gasification within one year.
The statutory revisions discussed here
will support that future rulemaking
effort.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
Effective Date: September 19,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeffrey Fleischman, Chief, Casper Field
Office, Telephone: (307) 261–6550,
email address: jfleischman@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Montana Program
II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment
III. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement’s (OSM’s) Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM’s Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Montana Program
Section 503(a) of the Act permits a
State to assume primacy for the
regulation of surface coal mining and
reclamation operations on non-Federal
and non-Indian lands within its borders
by demonstrating that its State program
includes, among other things, ‘‘a State
law which provides for the regulation of
surface coal mining and reclamation
operations in accordance with the
requirements of this Act * * *; and
rules and regulations consistent with
regulations issued by the Secretary
pursuant to this Act.’’ See 30 U.S.C.
1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these
criteria, the Secretary of the Interior
conditionally approved the Montana
program on April 1, 1980. You can find
background information on the Montana
program, including the Secretary’s
findings, the disposition of comments,
and conditions of approval in the April
1, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR 21560).
You can also find later actions
concerning Montana’s program and
program amendments at 30 CFR 926.15
and 926.30.
Montana Regulatory Program
II. Submission of the Proposed
Amendment
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
By letter dated August 19, 2011,
Montana sent us an amendment to its
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
program (Administrative Record No.
MT–31–01) under SMCRA (30 U.S.C.
1201 et seq.). Montana submitted the
amendment at its own initiative.
We announced receipt of the
proposed amendment in the December
6, 2011, Federal Register (76 FR 76111;
Administrative Record No. MT–31–10).
In the same document, we opened the
public comment period and provided an
opportunity for a public hearing or
meeting on the amendment’s adequacy.
We did not hold a public hearing or
meeting because no one requested one.
The public comment period ended on
January 5, 2012. We received comments
from two Federal agencies, one State
agency, and one industry group.
III. OSM’s Findings
Following are the findings we made
concerning the amendment under
SMCRA and the Federal regulations at
30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. We are
approving the amendment.
A. Minor Revisions to Montana’s Statute
Montana proposed recodification
changes to its statutory definitions.
MCA § 82–4–203(27) through (56) have
been recodified as MCA § 82–4–203(28)
through (58). The addition of two new
definitions (discussed below)
necessitated these changes. These nonsubstantive changes do not alter the
definitions’ meaning or effectiveness.
Because these changes are minor, we
find the provisions remain no less
stringent than SMCRA.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Revisions to Montana’s Statute That
Are Not the Same as the Corresponding
Provisions of the Federal Statute
Montana proposed revisions to its
statutory definition of Approximate
Original Contour (AOC). The existing
definition contained language similar to
the Federal definition of AOC as well as
additional stipulations. Montana
proposed to reference its definition of
‘‘hydrologic balance’’ within its existing
AOC definition. The Federal
counterpart definition does not employ
the term hydrologic balance.
The proposed addition has no effect
beyond referring the reader to the
definition of an existing term. This
addition does not alter the definition’s
meaning or effectiveness. This
definition remains no less stringent than
SMCRA.
C. Revisions to Montana’s Statutes With
No Corresponding Federal Statutes
Montana proposed two new
definitions which do not have Federal
counterparts under SMCRA: ‘‘in situ
coal gasification’’ and ‘‘recovery fluid.’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:23 Sep 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
Montana proposed to define ‘‘in situ
coal gasification’’ whereas SMCRA
defines ‘‘in situ processing.’’ The
Federal definition lists in situ
gasification as one type of in situ
processing. Montana is proposing to
define a subset of what the Federal
Program defines. Montana’s proposed
language directly mirrors Wyoming’s
existing definition of ‘‘in situ mining.’’
Wyoming’s definition was approved on
March 31, 1980 (45 FR 20930), under
the partial approval of its original
program. That approval set precedent
for the definition Montana recently
proposed.
Montana’s proposed definition
excludes ‘‘the storage of carbon dioxide
in a geologic storage reservoir’’ from
inclusion under in situ coal gasification.
This phrase precludes in situ
gasification projects from including
carbon capture and sequestration (CCS)
under the Montana coal regulatory
program.
Montana Senate Bill 498 (SB498)
designated the Board of Oil and Gas
Conservation as the regulatory authority
for CCS activities within the State.
SB498 generally established that land
surface owners own the pore space
below the surface unless it is otherwise
documented. As such, the Board would
regulate any proposed CCS activities
appropriately. CCS operations have
potential environmental impacts such as
groundwater contamination which, by
exclusion from regulation under in situ
coal gasification, would be avoided
under Montana’s coal regulatory
program (CCS would invoke a separate
regulatory scheme). For this reason,
excluding CCS from in situ coal
gasification is more stringent than the
Federal Program because the Federal
Program does not address this issue at
all.
Montana’s new definition provides a
technically accurate description of in
situ coal gasification. Because there is
precedent for Montana’s proposed
definition, the proposed language
exceeds what is defined or restricted
under the Federal program, and the
definition is technically accurate, this
addition is no less stringent than
SMCRA.
Montana proposed to define
‘‘recovery fluid.’’ The Federal Program
does not define this term; however, the
Wyoming program approved by OSM on
March 31, 1980 (45 FR 20930) defines
this term. That approval set precedent
for the definition Montana recently
proposed. Montana’s new definition
provides a technically accurate
description of recovery fluid. Because
there is precedent for Montana’s
proposed definition, the proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
58023
language is technically accurate, and
Montana exceeds what is defined under
the Federal program, this addition is no
less stringent than SMCRA.
We are approving all of Montana’s
August 19, 2011 proposed amendments.
IV. Summary and Disposition of
Comments
Public Comments
We asked for public comments on the
amendment (Administrative Record ID
No. MT–31–10), but did not receive any.
Federal Agency Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and
section 503(b) of SMCRA, we requested
comments on the amendment from
various Federal agencies with an actual
or potential interest in the Montana
program (Administrative Record ID No.
MT–31–3).
By letter dated November 1, 2011, the
Mine Safety and Health Administration
(MSHA) responded to our request
(Administrative Record ID No. MT–31–
08). MSHA concurs with the proposed
revisions. We agree with MSHA that the
proposed revisions are acceptable.
By letter dated November 1, 2011, the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
Montana State Office responded to our
request (Administrative Record ID No.
MT–31–09). The BLM stated that the
proposed changes appear to be
substantially in agreement with the
corresponding Federal regulations and
are therefore no less stringent than
SMCRA. The BLM has no objection to
the proposed amendments. We agree
with BLM’s assessment.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Concurrence and Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we
are required to obtain concurrence from
EPA for those provisions of the program
amendment that relate to air or water
quality standards issued under the
authority of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act
(42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). None of the
revisions that Montana proposed to
make in this amendment pertains to air
or water quality standards. Therefore,
we did not ask EPA to concur on the
amendment.
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM
requested comments on the amendment
from EPA (Administrative Record
Document ID No. MT–31–3) by letter
dated September 28, 2011. EPA did not
respond to our request.
State Historic Preservation Officer
(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation (ACHP)
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are
required to request comments from the
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
58024
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
SHPO and ACHP on amendments that
may have an effect on historic
properties. On September 28, 2011, we
requested comments on Montana’s
amendment (Administrative Record ID
Nos. MT–31–4 and MT–31–5). By letter
dated September 26, 2011, the SHPO
responded to our request
(Administrative Record ID No. MT–31–
07). The SHPO believes the proposed
changes do not appear to degrade
consideration of cultural resources in
any less effective fashion than required
in Federal regulations. We agree with
the SHPO’s assessment.
V. OSM’s Decision
Based on the above findings, we
approve Montana’s August 19, 2011
amendment. To implement this
decision, we are amending the Federal
regulations at 30 CFR Part 926, which
codify decisions concerning the
Montana program. We find that good
cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to
make this final rule effective
immediately. Section 503(a) of SMCRA
requires that the State’s program
demonstrates that the State has the
capability of carrying out the provisions
of the Act and meeting its purposes.
Making this regulation effective
immediately will expedite that process.
SMCRA requires consistency of State
and Federal standards.
VI. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12630—Takings
This rule does not have takings
implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the
counterpart Federal regulation.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Executive Order 12866—Regulatory
Planning and Review
This rule is exempted from review by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under Executive Order 12866
(Regulatory Planning and Review).
Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice
Reform
The Department of the Interior has
conducted the reviews required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and
has determined that 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:23 Sep 18, 2012
Jkt 226001
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.
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) et seq.).
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.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain
information collection requirements that
require approval by OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
Executive Order 13175—Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
In accordance with Executive Order
13175, we have evaluated the potential
effects of this rule on Federally
recognized Indian Tribes and have
determined that the rule does not have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian Tribes.
The rule does not involve or affect
Indian Tribes in any way.
Executive Order 13211—Regulations
That Significantly Affect The Supply,
Distribution, or Use of Energy
On May 18, 2001, the President issued
Executive Order 13211, which requires
agencies to prepare a Statement of
Energy Effects for a rule that is (1)
considered significant under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Because
this rule is exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866 and is not
expected to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects
is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act
This rule does not require an
environmental impact statement
because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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), of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
This rule:
a. Does not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million.
b. Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions.
c. Does not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of U.S. based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises.
This determination is based upon the
fact that the State submittal, which is
the subject of this rule, is based upon
counterpart Federal regulations for
which an analysis was prepared and a
determination made that the Federal
regulation was not considered a major
rule.
Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose an
unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector
of $100 million or more in any given
year. This determination is based upon
the fact that the State submittal, which
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
58025
is the subject of this rule, is based upon
counterpart Federal regulations for
which an analysis was prepared and a
determination made that the federal
regulation did not impose an unfunded
mandate.
Dated: April 27, 2012.
Allen D. Klein
Director, Western Region.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 926
PART 926—MONTANA
§ 926.15 Approval of Montana regulatory
program amendments
Intergovernmental relations, Surface
mining, Underground mining.
■
1. The authority citation for part 926
continues to read as follows:
*
Original amendment submission
date
*
*
August 19, 2011 .............................
*
*
*
Citation/description
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM’s Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 943
[SATS No. TX–064–FOR; Docket ID: OSM–
2012–0005]
Texas Regulatory Program
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of
amendment.
AGENCY:
We, the Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
(OSM), are approving an amendment to
the Texas regulatory program (Texas
program) under the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977
(SMCRA or the Act). Texas proposed
revisions to its regulations regarding
annual permit fees. Texas revised its
program at its own initiative to raise
revenues sufficient to cover its
anticipated share of costs to administer
the coal regulatory program and to
encourage mining companies to more
quickly reclaim lands and request bond
release, thereby fulfilling SMCRA’s
purpose of assuring the reclamation of
mined land as quickly as possible.
DATES: Effective Date: September 19,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alfred L. Clayborne, Director, Tulsa
Field Office. Telephone: (918) 581–
6430. Email: aclayborne@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
*
September 19, 2012 ...................... MCA 82–4–203(4)(c) (definition of AOC); addition of –203(27) ‘‘in situ
coal gasification;’’ –203(44) ‘‘recovery fluid;’’ recodification of former
–203(27) through (56).
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
I. Background on the Texas Program
II. Submission of the Amendment
III. OSM’s Findings
19:23 Sep 18, 2012
2. Section 926.15 is amended in the
table by adding a new entry in
chronological order by ‘‘Date of final
publication’’ to read as follows:
■
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 30 CFR part 926 is amended
as set forth below:
Date of final publication
[FR Doc. 2012–23087 Filed 9–18–12; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
Jkt 226001
requested one. The public comment
period ended on April 27, 2012. We did
not receive any public comments.
I. Background on the Texas Program
Section 503(a) of the Act permits a
State to assume primacy for the
regulation of surface coal mining and
reclamation operations on non-Federal
and non-Indian lands within its borders
by demonstrating that its State program
includes, among other things, ‘‘a State
law which provides for the regulation of
surface coal mining and reclamation
operations in accordance with the
requirements of this Act * * *; and
rules and regulations consistent with
regulations issued by the Secretary
pursuant to this Act.’’ See 30 U.S.C.
1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these
criteria, the Secretary of the Interior
conditionally approved the Texas
program effective February 16, 1980.
You can find background information
on the Texas program, including the
Secretary’s findings, the disposition of
comments, and the conditions of
approval, in the February 27, 1980,
Federal Register (45 FR 12998). You can
find later actions on the Texas program
at 30 CFR 943.10, 943.15, and 943.16.
III. OSM’s Findings
The following are the findings we
made concerning the amendment under
SMCRA and the Federal regulations at
30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. We are
approving the amendment as described
below.
II. Submission of the Amendment
By letter dated February 9, 2012
(Administrative Record No. TX–700),
Texas sent us an amendment to its
program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201
et seq.). Texas sent the amendment on
its own initiative.
We announced receipt of the
proposed amendment in the March 28,
2012, Federal Register (77 FR 18738). In
the same document, we opened the
public comment period and provided an
opportunity for a public hearing or
meeting on the adequacy of the
amendment. We did not hold a public
hearing or meeting because no one
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
16 Texas Administrative Code (TAC)
Section 12.108 Permit Fees
Texas proposed to revise its
regulations at 16 TAC sections
12.108(b)(1)–(3), adjusting the annual
coal mining permit fees for calendar
year 2011 and 2012. Fees for mining
activity during calendar year 2011 must
be paid by coal mine operations by
March 15, 2012, which is in Texas’ 2012
fiscal year. Similarly, fees for mining
activity during calendar year 2012 are
due by March 15, 2013, which is in
Texas’ 2013 fiscal year.
By this amendment, Texas is:
(1) Increasing the current $130.00 per
acre fee to $154.00 per acre, the amount
in paragraph (b)(1) for each acre of land
within the permit area on which coal or
lignite was actually removed during the
calendar year;
(2) Increasing the current $5.50 per
acre fee to $10.40 per acre, the amount
in paragraph (b)(2) for each acre of land
within a permit area covered by a
reclamation bond on December 31st of
the year; and
(3) Increasing the current $4,250.00
fee to $6,900.00, the amount in
paragraph (b)(3) for each permit in effect
on December 31st of the year.
The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
777.17, concerning permit fees, provide
that applications for surface coal mining
permits must be accompanied by a fee
determined by the regulatory authority.
E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM
19SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58022-58025]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23087]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 926
[SATS No. MT-034-FOR; Docket ID No. OSM-2011-0018]
Montana Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are approving an amendment to the Montana regulatory
program (the ``Montana program'') under the Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act of 1977 (``SMCRA'' or ``the Act''). Montana proposed
revisions to and additions of statutory definitions of approximate
original contour, in situ coal gasification, and recovery fluid.
Montana revised its program to clarify ambiguities and improve
operational efficiency. Montana intends to promulgate regulations
pertaining to in situ coal gasification within one year. The statutory
revisions discussed here will support that future rulemaking effort.
DATES: Effective Date: September 19, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Fleischman, Chief, Casper
Field Office, Telephone: (307) 261-6550, email address:
jfleischman@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Montana Program
II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment
III. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement's (OSM's) Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM's Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Montana Program
Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-
Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that
its State program includes, among other things, ``a State law which
provides for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation
operations in accordance with the requirements of this Act * * *; and
rules and regulations consistent with regulations issued by the
Secretary pursuant to this Act.'' See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On
the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior
conditionally approved the Montana program on April 1, 1980. You can
find background information on the Montana program, including the
Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and conditions of
approval in the April 1, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR 21560). You can
also find later actions concerning Montana's program and program
amendments at 30 CFR 926.15 and 926.30.
II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment
By letter dated August 19, 2011, Montana sent us an amendment to
its
[[Page 58023]]
program (Administrative Record No. MT-31-01) under SMCRA (30 U.S.C.
1201 et seq.). Montana submitted the amendment at its own initiative.
We announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the December 6,
2011, Federal Register (76 FR 76111; Administrative Record No. MT-31-
10). In the same document, we opened the public comment period and
provided an opportunity for a public hearing or meeting on the
amendment's adequacy. We did not hold a public hearing or meeting
because no one requested one. The public comment period ended on
January 5, 2012. We received comments from two Federal agencies, one
State agency, and one industry group.
III. OSM's Findings
Following are the findings we made concerning the amendment under
SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. We are
approving the amendment.
A. Minor Revisions to Montana's Statute
Montana proposed recodification changes to its statutory
definitions. MCA Sec. 82-4-203(27) through (56) have been recodified
as MCA Sec. 82-4-203(28) through (58). The addition of two new
definitions (discussed below) necessitated these changes. These non-
substantive changes do not alter the definitions' meaning or
effectiveness.
Because these changes are minor, we find the provisions remain no
less stringent than SMCRA.
B. Revisions to Montana's Statute That Are Not the Same as the
Corresponding Provisions of the Federal Statute
Montana proposed revisions to its statutory definition of
Approximate Original Contour (AOC). The existing definition contained
language similar to the Federal definition of AOC as well as additional
stipulations. Montana proposed to reference its definition of
``hydrologic balance'' within its existing AOC definition. The Federal
counterpart definition does not employ the term hydrologic balance.
The proposed addition has no effect beyond referring the reader to
the definition of an existing term. This addition does not alter the
definition's meaning or effectiveness. This definition remains no less
stringent than SMCRA.
C. Revisions to Montana's Statutes With No Corresponding Federal
Statutes
Montana proposed two new definitions which do not have Federal
counterparts under SMCRA: ``in situ coal gasification'' and ``recovery
fluid.''
Montana proposed to define ``in situ coal gasification'' whereas
SMCRA defines ``in situ processing.'' The Federal definition lists in
situ gasification as one type of in situ processing. Montana is
proposing to define a subset of what the Federal Program defines.
Montana's proposed language directly mirrors Wyoming's existing
definition of ``in situ mining.'' Wyoming's definition was approved on
March 31, 1980 (45 FR 20930), under the partial approval of its
original program. That approval set precedent for the definition
Montana recently proposed.
Montana's proposed definition excludes ``the storage of carbon
dioxide in a geologic storage reservoir'' from inclusion under in situ
coal gasification. This phrase precludes in situ gasification projects
from including carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) under the Montana
coal regulatory program.
Montana Senate Bill 498 (SB498) designated the Board of Oil and Gas
Conservation as the regulatory authority for CCS activities within the
State. SB498 generally established that land surface owners own the
pore space below the surface unless it is otherwise documented. As
such, the Board would regulate any proposed CCS activities
appropriately. CCS operations have potential environmental impacts such
as groundwater contamination which, by exclusion from regulation under
in situ coal gasification, would be avoided under Montana's coal
regulatory program (CCS would invoke a separate regulatory scheme). For
this reason, excluding CCS from in situ coal gasification is more
stringent than the Federal Program because the Federal Program does not
address this issue at all.
Montana's new definition provides a technically accurate
description of in situ coal gasification. Because there is precedent
for Montana's proposed definition, the proposed language exceeds what
is defined or restricted under the Federal program, and the definition
is technically accurate, this addition is no less stringent than SMCRA.
Montana proposed to define ``recovery fluid.'' The Federal Program
does not define this term; however, the Wyoming program approved by OSM
on March 31, 1980 (45 FR 20930) defines this term. That approval set
precedent for the definition Montana recently proposed. Montana's new
definition provides a technically accurate description of recovery
fluid. Because there is precedent for Montana's proposed definition,
the proposed language is technically accurate, and Montana exceeds what
is defined under the Federal program, this addition is no less
stringent than SMCRA.
We are approving all of Montana's August 19, 2011 proposed
amendments.
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
Public Comments
We asked for public comments on the amendment (Administrative
Record ID No. MT-31-10), but did not receive any.
Federal Agency Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and section 503(b) of SMCRA, we
requested comments on the amendment from various Federal agencies with
an actual or potential interest in the Montana program (Administrative
Record ID No. MT-31-3).
By letter dated November 1, 2011, the Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA) responded to our request (Administrative Record
ID No. MT-31-08). MSHA concurs with the proposed revisions. We agree
with MSHA that the proposed revisions are acceptable.
By letter dated November 1, 2011, the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) Montana State Office responded to our request (Administrative
Record ID No. MT-31-09). The BLM stated that the proposed changes
appear to be substantially in agreement with the corresponding Federal
regulations and are therefore no less stringent than SMCRA. The BLM has
no objection to the proposed amendments. We agree with BLM's
assessment.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to obtain
concurrence from EPA for those provisions of the program amendment that
relate to air or water quality standards issued under the authority of
the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act (42
U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). None of the revisions that Montana proposed to
make in this amendment pertains to air or water quality standards.
Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the amendment.
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM requested comments on the
amendment from EPA (Administrative Record Document ID No. MT-31-3) by
letter dated September 28, 2011. EPA did not respond to our request.
State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation (ACHP)
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are required to request comments from
the
[[Page 58024]]
SHPO and ACHP on amendments that may have an effect on historic
properties. On September 28, 2011, we requested comments on Montana's
amendment (Administrative Record ID Nos. MT-31-4 and MT-31-5). By
letter dated September 26, 2011, the SHPO responded to our request
(Administrative Record ID No. MT-31-07). The SHPO believes the proposed
changes do not appear to degrade consideration of cultural resources in
any less effective fashion than required in Federal regulations. We
agree with the SHPO's assessment.
V. OSM's Decision
Based on the above findings, we approve Montana's August 19, 2011
amendment. To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal
regulations at 30 CFR Part 926, which codify decisions concerning the
Montana program. We find that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3) to make this final rule effective immediately. Section 503(a)
of SMCRA requires that the State's program demonstrates that the State
has the capability of carrying out the provisions of the Act and
meeting its purposes. Making this regulation effective immediately will
expedite that process. SMCRA requires consistency of State and Federal
standards.
VI. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12630--Takings
This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.
Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review).
Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that this rule
meets the applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that
section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual
language of State regulatory programs and program amendments because
each program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by
OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),
decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments
submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of
whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing
Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR parts
730, 731, and 732 have been met.
Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates
the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of
the purposes of SMCRA is to ``establish a nationwide program to protect
society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal
mining operations.'' Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State
laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be ``in
accordance with'' the requirements of SMCRA, and section 503(a)(7)
requires that State programs contain rules and regulations ``consistent
with'' regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.
Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the
potential effects of this rule on Federally recognized Indian Tribes
and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian Tribes.
The rule does not involve or affect Indian Tribes in any way.
Executive Order 13211--Regulations That Significantly Affect The
Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211, which
requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule
that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2)
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review
under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a
Statement of Energy Effects is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act
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) et seq.).
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain information collection requirements that
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
The State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon
counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was
prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a
significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small
entities. In making the determination as to whether this rule would
have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data
and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million.
b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions.
c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S. based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal,
which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal
regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made
that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule.
Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any
given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State
submittal, which
[[Page 58025]]
is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal
regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made
that the federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 926
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: April 27, 2012.
Allen D. Klein
Director, Western Region.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 926 is amended
as set forth below:
PART 926--MONTANA
0
1. The authority citation for part 926 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
0
2. Section 926.15 is amended in the table by adding a new entry in
chronological order by ``Date of final publication'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 926.15 Approval of Montana regulatory program amendments
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original amendment submission Date of final
date publication Citation/description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
August 19, 2011............... September 19, MCA 82-4-203(4)(c)
2012. (definition of AOC);
addition of -203(27)
``in situ coal
gasification;'' -
203(44) ``recovery
fluid;''
recodification of
former -203(27)
through (56).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2012-23087 Filed 9-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P