Alabama Regulatory Program, 11577-11579 [2013-03776]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
legal process would pose an impossible
administrative burden on BOP and may
alert subjects of investigations, who
might otherwise be unaware, to the fact
of those investigations.
(11) From subsection (f) to the extent
that this system is exempt from the
provisions of subsection (d).
(12) From subsection (g) to the extent
that this system is exempted from other
provisions of the Act.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: February 12, 2013.
Joo Y. Chung,
Acting Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties
Officer, United States Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2013–03693 Filed 2–15–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 901
[SATS No. AL–077–FOR; Docket No. OSM–
2012–0016]
Alabama 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 Alabama regulatory program
(Alabama program) under the Surface
Mining Control and Reclamation Act of
1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Alabama
proposed revisions to its Program
regarding revegetation success
standards. Alabama intends to revise its
program to improve operational
efficiency.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
Effective Date: February 19,
2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Sherry Wilson, Director, Birmingham
Field Office. Telephone: (205) 290–
7280. Email: swilson@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Alabama Program
II. Submission of the Amendment
III. OSM’s Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM’s Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Alabama 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:41 Feb 15, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 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 Alabama
program effective May 20, 1982. You
can find background information on the
Alabama program, including the
Secretary’s findings, the disposition of
comments, and the conditions of
approval of the Alabama program in the
May 20, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR
22030). You can also find later actions
concerning the Alabama program and
program amendments at 30 CFR 901.10,
901.15, and 901.16.
II. Submission of the Amendment
By letter dated June 26, 2012
(Administrative Record No. AL–0664),
Alabama sent us an amendment to its
program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201
et seq.). Alabama sent the amendment
on its own initiative.
We announced receipt of the
proposed amendment in the September
5, 2012, Federal Register (77 FR 54490).
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
requested one. The public comment
period ended on October 5, 2012.
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.
Alabama 880–X–10C–.62 Revegetation:
Standards for Success; and Alabama
880–X–10D–.56 Revegetation: Standards
for Success
Alabama proposed to add new
subsections 880–X–10C–.62(1)(c) and
(d) of its surface mining regulations and
880–X–10D–.56(1)(c) and (d) of its
underground mining regulations
regarding the revegetation standards for
success related to its ground cover
requirements and determining stocking
success for trees and shrubs. Alabama’s
new subsections contain substantially
the same language as their Federal
counterparts at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3)(ii)
and (iii) and 30 CFR 817.116(b)(3)(ii)
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
11577
and (iii), respectively. Concerning its
tree and shrub stocking requirements,
Alabama replaces the Federal
requirement related to the phrase ‘‘for
60 percent of the applicable minimum
period of responsibility’’ with the
phrase ‘‘three years.’’ The minimum
applicable period of responsibility for
Alabama is five years. Since three years
would be 60 percent of the five-year
responsibility period, OSM finds the
revised language no less effective than
the Federal and is approving the
changes. Furthermore, Alabama
proposed to delete subsections 880–X–
10C–.62(2)(c)(iv) of its surface mining
regulations and 880–X–10C–.56(2)(c)(iv)
of its underground mining regulations
regarding tree count requirements on
forest land use areas because these
subsections became redundant by
addition of the previously mentioned
subsections. Therefore, we approve
Alabama’s deletion of these subsections.
Alabama revised subsections 880–X–
10C–.62(2)(e) and (g) of its surface
mining regulations and 880–X–10D–
.56(2)(e) and (g) of its underground
mining regulations regarding ground
cover requirements and woody plant
standards for areas with the post-mining
land uses of recreation, wildlife habitat,
or undeveloped land. These proposed
changes to Alabama’s regulations are
counterpart to the Federal regulations at
30 CFR 816.116(b)(3) and 30 CFR
817.116(b)(3). Alabama requires that in
order to avoid competition, herbaceous
ground cover on areas planted with
woody vegetation or planted to food
plots shall be limited to that necessary
to adequately control erosion.
Herbaceous ground cover on areas not
planted with woody vegetation or as
food plots shall equal or exceed 80
percent. We find that this proposed
language is no less effective than the
Federal requirement that vegetative
ground cover shall not be less than that
required to achieve the approved
postmining land use. Therefore we are
approving the change.
IV. Summary and Disposition of
Comments
Public Comments
We asked for public comments on the
amendment, but did not receive any.
Federal Agency Comments
On July 11, 2012, 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 Alabama program
(Administrative Record No. AL–0664–
02). We did not receive any comments.
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
11578
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Concurrence and Comments
based on the analysis performed for the
counterpart Federal regulation.
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we
are required to get a written concurrence
from EPA for those provisions of the
program amendment that relate to air or
water quality standards issued under
the authority of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act
(42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). None of the
revisions that Alabama proposed to
make in this amendment pertain to air
or water quality standards. Therefore,
we did not ask EPA to concur on the
amendment. However, on July 11, 2012,
under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we
requested comments from the EPA on
the amendment (Administrative Record
No. AL–0664–02). The EPA did not
respond to our request.
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.
State Historical Preservation Officer
(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation (ACHP)
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are
required to request comments from the
SHPO and ACHP on amendments that
may have an effect on historic
properties. On July 11, 2012, we
requested comments on Alabama’s
amendment (Administrative Record No.
AL–0664–02). We received a comment
letter from the Alabama SHPO stating
that Alabama’s proposed revisions
regarding its revegetation success
standards will have no adverse effect on
cultural resources listed on, or eligible
for, the National Registry of Historic
Places (Administrative Record No. AL–
0664–03). The ACHP did not respond to
our request.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. OSM’s Decision
Based on the above findings, we
approve the amendment Alabama sent
us on June 26, 2012 (Administrative
Record No. AL–0664).
To implement this decision, we are
amending the Federal regulations, at 30
CFR part 901, that codify decisions
concerning the Alabama 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 demonstrate that the State has
the capability of carrying out the
provisions of the Act and meeting its
purposes. Making this rule effective
immediately will expedite that process.
SMCRA requires consistency of State
and Federal standards.
VI. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12630—Takings
This rule does not have takings
implications. This determination is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:41 Feb 15, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 Federal
regulations 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
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
This rule: (a) Does not have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million;
(b) Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions; and (c) Does not
have significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or the ability
of U.S.-based enterprises to compete
with foreign-based enterprises. This
determination is based upon the fact
that the State submittal, which is the
subject of this rule, is based upon
counterpart Federal regulations for
which an analysis was prepared and a
determination made that the Federal
Original amendment
submission date
*
June 26, 2012 ..............
This rule will not impose an
unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector
of $100 million or more in any given
year. This determination is based upon
the fact that the State submittal, which
is the subject of this rule, is based upon
counterpart Federal regulations for
which an analysis was prepared and a
determination made that the Federal
regulation did not impose an unfunded
mandate.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 901
Intergovernmental relations, Surface
mining, Underground mining.
Dated: November 28, 2012.
Ervin J. Barchenger,
Regional Director, Mid-Continent Region.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 30 CFR part 901 is amended
as set forth below:
PART 901—ALABAMA
1. The authority citation for part 901
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
2. Section 901.15 is amended in the
table by adding a new entry in
chronological order by ‘‘Date of final
publication’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 901.15 Approval of Alabama regulatory
program amendments.
*
*
*
*
*
Citation/description
*
*
*
*
*
*
February 19, 2013 ...... ASMC sections 880–X–10C–.62(1)(c) and (d); 880–X–10C–.62(2)(c)(iv), (e), and (g); 880–X–
10D–.56(1)(c) and (d); and 880–X–10D–.56 (2)(c)(iv), (e), and (g).
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 943
[SATS No. TX–065–FOR; Docket ID: OSM–
2012–0019]
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:
definitions; responsibilities;
identification of interests and
compliance information (surface and
underground mining); identification of
interests; mining in previously mined
areas; review of permit applications;
criteria for permit approval or denial;
commission review of outstanding
permits; challenge of ownership or
control and applicant/violator system
procedures; revegetation standards of
SUMMARY:
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Unfunded Mandates
Date of final
publication
[FR Doc. 2013–03776 Filed 2–15–13; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
regulation was not considered a major
rule.
11579
15:41 Feb 15, 2013
Jkt 229001
success (surface and underground
mining); responsibility: general;
alternative enforcement; cessation
orders; conditions of permit
environment; application approval and
notice; permit revisions; permit
renewals: completed application;
transfer, assignment or sale of permit
rights: obtaining approval; and
requirements for new permits for
persons succeeding to rights granted
under a permit. Texas intends to revise
its program to be no less effective than
corresponding Federal regulations, to
clarify ambiguities, and to improve
operational efficiency.
DATES: Effective Date: February 19,
2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alfred L. Clayborne, Director, Tulsa
Field Office. Telephone: (918) 581–
6430. Email: aclayborne@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Texas Program
II. Submission of the Amendment
III. OSM’s Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM’s Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the 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 program
includes, among other things, ‘‘a State
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 of the Texas program in the
February 27, 1980, Federal Register (45
FR 12998). You can also find later
actions concerning the Texas program
and program amendments at 30 CFR
943.10, 943.15, and 943.16.
II. Submission of the Amendment
By email dated August 9, 2012
(Administrative Record No. TX–702),
Texas sent us an amendment to its
program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201
et seq.). Texas submitted the proposed
amendment in response to a September
30, 2009, letter (Administrative Record
No. TX–665) from OSM, in accordance
with 30 CFR 732.17(c), concerning
multiple changes to its ownership and
control requirements. Texas also made
additional changes to its regulations on
its own initiative. The specific sections
in the Texas program are discussed in
Part III OSM’s Findings. Texas intends
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 33 (Tuesday, February 19, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11577-11579]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03776]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 901
[SATS No. AL-077-FOR; Docket No. OSM-2012-0016]
Alabama Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
(OSM), are approving an amendment to the Alabama regulatory program
(Alabama program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act
of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Alabama proposed revisions to its Program
regarding revegetation success standards. Alabama intends to revise its
program to improve operational efficiency.
DATES: Effective Date: February 19, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sherry Wilson, Director, Birmingham
Field Office. Telephone: (205) 290-7280. Email: swilson@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Alabama Program
II. Submission of the Amendment
III. OSM's Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM's Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations
I. Background on the Alabama 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 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 Alabama program effective May 20, 1982. You can find background
information on the Alabama program, including the Secretary's findings,
the disposition of comments, and the conditions of approval of the
Alabama program in the May 20, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR 22030).
You can also find later actions concerning the Alabama program and
program amendments at 30 CFR 901.10, 901.15, and 901.16.
II. Submission of the Amendment
By letter dated June 26, 2012 (Administrative Record No. AL-0664),
Alabama sent us an amendment to its program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201
et seq.). Alabama sent the amendment on its own initiative.
We announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the September 5,
2012, Federal Register (77 FR 54490). 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 requested one. The public
comment period ended on October 5, 2012.
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.
Alabama 880-X-10C-.62 Revegetation: Standards for Success; and Alabama
880-X-10D-.56 Revegetation: Standards for Success
Alabama proposed to add new subsections 880-X-10C-.62(1)(c) and (d)
of its surface mining regulations and 880-X-10D-.56(1)(c) and (d) of
its underground mining regulations regarding the revegetation standards
for success related to its ground cover requirements and determining
stocking success for trees and shrubs. Alabama's new subsections
contain substantially the same language as their Federal counterparts
at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3)(ii) and (iii) and 30 CFR 817.116(b)(3)(ii) and
(iii), respectively. Concerning its tree and shrub stocking
requirements, Alabama replaces the Federal requirement related to the
phrase ``for 60 percent of the applicable minimum period of
responsibility'' with the phrase ``three years.'' The minimum
applicable period of responsibility for Alabama is five years. Since
three years would be 60 percent of the five-year responsibility period,
OSM finds the revised language no less effective than the Federal and
is approving the changes. Furthermore, Alabama proposed to delete
subsections 880-X-10C-.62(2)(c)(iv) of its surface mining regulations
and 880-X-10C-.56(2)(c)(iv) of its underground mining regulations
regarding tree count requirements on forest land use areas because
these subsections became redundant by addition of the previously
mentioned subsections. Therefore, we approve Alabama's deletion of
these subsections.
Alabama revised subsections 880-X-10C-.62(2)(e) and (g) of its
surface mining regulations and 880-X-10D-.56(2)(e) and (g) of its
underground mining regulations regarding ground cover requirements and
woody plant standards for areas with the post-mining land uses of
recreation, wildlife habitat, or undeveloped land. These proposed
changes to Alabama's regulations are counterpart to the Federal
regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3) and 30 CFR 817.116(b)(3). Alabama
requires that in order to avoid competition, herbaceous ground cover on
areas planted with woody vegetation or planted to food plots shall be
limited to that necessary to adequately control erosion. Herbaceous
ground cover on areas not planted with woody vegetation or as food
plots shall equal or exceed 80 percent. We find that this proposed
language is no less effective than the Federal requirement that
vegetative ground cover shall not be less than that required to achieve
the approved postmining land use. Therefore we are approving the
change.
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
Public Comments
We asked for public comments on the amendment, but did not receive
any.
Federal Agency Comments
On July 11, 2012, 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 Alabama program
(Administrative Record No. AL-0664-02). We did not receive any
comments.
[[Page 11578]]
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to get a written
concurrence from EPA for those provisions of the 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 Alabama proposed to
make in this amendment pertain to air or water quality standards.
Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the amendment. However, on
July 11, 2012, under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments
from the EPA on the amendment (Administrative Record No. AL-0664-02).
The EPA did not respond to our request.
State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation (ACHP)
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are required to request comments from
the SHPO and ACHP on amendments that may have an effect on historic
properties. On July 11, 2012, we requested comments on Alabama's
amendment (Administrative Record No. AL-0664-02). We received a comment
letter from the Alabama SHPO stating that Alabama's proposed revisions
regarding its revegetation success standards will have no adverse
effect on cultural resources listed on, or eligible for, the National
Registry of Historic Places (Administrative Record No. AL-0664-03). The
ACHP did not respond to our request.
V. OSM's Decision
Based on the above findings, we approve the amendment Alabama sent
us on June 26, 2012 (Administrative Record No. AL-0664).
To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal
regulations, at 30 CFR part 901, that codify decisions concerning the
Alabama 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 demonstrate that the State
has the capability of carrying out the provisions of the Act and
meeting its purposes. Making this rule effective immediately will
expedite that process. SMCRA requires consistency of State and Federal
standards.
VI. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12630--Takings
This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is
based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.
Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that this rule
meets the applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that
section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual
language of State regulatory programs and program amendments because
each program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by
OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),
decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments
submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of
whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing
Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR Parts
730, 731, and 732 have been met.
Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates
the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of
the purposes of SMCRA is to ``establish a nationwide program to protect
society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal
mining operations.'' Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State
laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be ``in
accordance with'' the requirements of SMCRA, and section 503(a)(7)
requires that State programs contain rules and regulations ``consistent
with'' regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.
Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the
potential effects of this rule on federally recognized Indian tribes
and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
The basis for this determination is that our decision is on a State
regulatory program and does not involve Federal regulations 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
[[Page 11579]]
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) Does not have an
annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) Will not cause a
major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries,
Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions;
and (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This
determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is
the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations
for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the
Federal regulation was not considered a major rule.
Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any
given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State
submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart
Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a
determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an
unfunded mandate.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 901
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: November 28, 2012.
Ervin J. Barchenger,
Regional Director, Mid-Continent Region.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 901 is amended
as set forth below:
PART 901--ALABAMA
0
1. The authority citation for part 901 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
0
2. Section 901.15 is amended in the table by adding a new entry in
chronological order by ``Date of final publication'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 901.15 Approval of Alabama regulatory program amendments.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original amendment submission Date of final
date publication Citation/description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
June 26, 2012................. February 19, 2013 ASMC sections 880-X-
10C-.62(1)(c) and
(d); 880-X-10C-
.62(2)(c)(iv), (e),
and (g); 880-X-10D-
.56(1)(c) and (d);
and 880-X-10D-.56
(2)(c)(iv), (e), and
(g).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2013-03776 Filed 2-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P