Petition To Initiate Rulemaking; Use of Explosives on Surface Coal Mining Operations, 9256-9258 [2015-03407]
Download as PDF
9256
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 34 / Friday, February 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules
PART 221—LOW COST AND
MODERATE INCOME MORTGAGE
INSURANCE—SAVINGS CLAUSE
PART 241—SUPPLEMENTARY
FINANCING FOR INSURED PROJECT
MORTGAGES
■
11. The authority citation for part 221
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1715b, 1715l and
1735d; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1715b, 1715z–6 and
1735d; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).
§ 221.762
19. The authority citation for part 241
is revised to read as follows:
20. Revise § 241.261, to read as
follows:
■
[Amended].
12. In § 221.762, remove and reserve
paragraph (a).
§ 241.261
PART 232—MORTGAGE INSURANCE
FOR NURSING HOMES,
INTERMEDIATE CARE FACILITIES,
BOARD AND CARE HOMES, AND
ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES
All of the provisions of § 207.259 of
this chapter relating to insurance
benefits shall apply to multifamily loans
insured under this subpart.
■ 21. Revise § 241.885(a), to read as
follows:
13. The authority citation for part 232
is revised to read as follows:
§ 241.885
■
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1715b, 1715w, 1735d
and 1735f–19; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).
14. Revise § 232.885(a), to read as
follows:
■
§ 232.885
Insurance benefits.
(a) Method of payment. Payment of an
insurance claim shall be made in cash,
in debentures, or in a combination of
both, as determined by the
Commissioner either at, or prior to, the
time of payment.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 235—MORTGAGE INSURANCE
AND ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS FOR
HOME OWNERSHIP AND PROJECT
REHABILITATION
15. The authority citation for part 235
is revised to read as follows:
■
Payment of insurance benefits.
Insurance benefits.
(a) Method of payment. Payment of
insurance claims shall be made in cash,
in debentures, or in a combination of
both, as determined by the
Commissioner either at, or prior to, the
time of payment.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 22. Revise § 241.1205, to read as
follows:
§ 241.1205
Payment of insurance benefits.
All the provisions of § 207.259 of this
chapter relating to insurance benefits
shall apply to an equity or acquisition
loan insured under subpart F of this
part.
Dated: January 15, 2015.
Biniam Gebre,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Housing—
Federal Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2015–03457 Filed 2–19–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1715b, 1715z and
1735d; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
16. Revise § 235.215, to read as
follows:
■
§ 235.215
benefits.
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
Method of paying insurance
If the application for insurance
benefits is acceptable to the Secretary,
the insurance claim shall be paid in
cash, in debentures, or in a combination
of both, as determined by the
Commissioner either at, or prior to, the
time of payment.
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
PART 236—MORTGAGE INSURANCE
AND INTEREST REDUCTION
PAYMENT FOR RENTAL PROJECTS
17. The authority citation for part 236
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1715b, 1715z–1 and
1735d; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).
§ 236.265
[Amended].
18. In § 236.265, remove and reserve
paragraph (a).
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Feb 19, 2015
Jkt 235001
30 CFR Parts 816 and 817
[Docket ID: OSM–2014–0003; S1D1S
SS08011000 SX066A00067F 134S180110;
S2D2S SS08011000 SX066A00 33F
13XS501520]
Petition To Initiate Rulemaking; Use of
Explosives on Surface Coal Mining
Operations
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Decision on petition for
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
We, the Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
(OSMRE or OSM), are announcing our
final decision on a petition for
rulemaking that was submitted by
WildEarth Guardians. The petition
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requested that we revise our current
regulations to prohibit visible nitrogen
oxide clouds during blasting. The
Director has decided to grant the
petition in principle, and although we
do not intend to propose the specific
rule changes requested in the petition,
will instead initiate a rulemaking to
address this issue as discussed more
fully below.
DATES: February 20, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition and
other relevant materials comprising the
administrative record of this petition are
available for public review and copying
at the Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement,
Administrative Record, Room 252 SIB,
1951 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20240.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joshua Rockwell, Division of Regulatory
Support, 1951 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20240; Telephone:
202–208–2633; Email: jrockwell@
osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. How does the petition process operate?
II. What is the substance of the petition?
III. What do our current regulations regarding
the use of explosives require?
IV. What comments did we receive and how
did we address them?
V. What is the Director’s decision?
VI. Procedural Matters and Determinations
I. How does the petition process
operate?
On April 18, 2014, we received a
petition from WildEarth Guardians
(petitioner) requesting that OSMRE
promulgate rules to prohibit the
production of visible nitrogen oxides
(NOX) emissions (including nitric oxide
and nitrogen dioxide) during blasting at
surface coal mining operations in order
to protect the health, welfare, and safety
of the public and of mine workers and
to prevent injury to persons. WildEarth
Guardians submitted this petition
pursuant to section 201(g) of the Surface
Mining Control and Reclamation Act of
1977 (SMCRA), 30 U.S.C. 1201(g),
which provides that any person may
petition the Director of OSMRE to
initiate a proceeding for the issuance,
amendment, or repeal of any regulation
adopted under SMCRA. OSMRE
adopted regulations at 30 CFR 700.12 to
implement this statutory provision.
In accordance with our regulation at
30 CFR 700.12(c), we determined that
WildEarth Guardians’ petition set forth
‘‘facts, technical justification and law’’
establishing a ‘‘reasonable basis’’ for
amending our regulations. Therefore, on
E:\FR\FM\20FEP1.SGM
20FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 34 / Friday, February 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
July 25, 2014, we published a notice in
the Federal Register (79 FR 43326)
seeking comments on whether we
should grant or deny the petition. The
comment period closed on September
25, 2014. One hundred nineteen persons
submitted comments during the public
comment period.
After reviewing the petition and
public comments, the Director has
decided to grant WildEarth Guardians’
petition. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(e) and
section 201(c)(2) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C.
1211(c)(2), we plan to initiate
rulemaking and publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking with an
appropriate public comment period.
Although we are still considering the
content of the proposed rule, we expect
that it will contain clarifications to our
regulations to ensure that operators and
surface coal mining regulatory
authorities protect people and property
from toxic gases and fumes generated by
blasting at surface mine sites. However,
OSMRE does not intend to propose the
petitioner’s suggested rule language
because the petitioner’s language
focused solely on nitrogen oxide
emissions, instead of all blast-generated
fumes and toxic gases.
II. What is the substance of the petition?
WildEarth Guardians’ petition states:
‘‘Too often, blasting at coal mines leads
to the production of dangerous levels of
nitrogen dioxide emissions, which are
seen as orange to red clouds. These
clouds of toxic gas represent significant
threats to public health and welfare and
must be curtailed to prevent injuries to
persons as required by SMCRA.’’ The
petition requests that OSMRE amend
our regulations at 30 CFR 816.67
(surface mining) and 817.67
(underground mining) to prohibit
visible NOX emissions during blasting
and to require that the operator visually
monitor all blasting activities and report
all instances of visible emissions of NOX
to the regulatory authority. The
petitioner asserts that exposure to low
levels of NOX gases may cause
‘‘irritation of eyes, nose, throat, and
lungs.’’ According to the petitioner,
exposure to high levels of NOX gases
may cause ‘‘rapid burning, spasms, and
swelling of the throat and upper
respiratory tract issues, as well as
death.’’
In support of its petition, petitioner
cites SMCRA section 102(a), 30 U.S.C.
1202(a), which lists one of SMCRA’s
goals as ‘‘protect[ing] society and the
environment from the adverse effects of
surface coal mining operations,’’ as well
as SMCRA section 515(b)(15)(C)(i)–(ii),
30 U.S.C. 1265(b)(15)(C)(i)–(ii), which
states that blasting activities should be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:47 Feb 19, 2015
Jkt 235001
limited in order to ‘‘prevent injury to
persons. . . and damage to public and
private property outside the permit
area.’’
The petitioner asserts that revisions to
our existing regulations are necessary to
close a gap with regard to regulation of
NOX emissions. The petitioner
requested that we ‘‘remedy this
regulatory gap and promulgate explicit
and enforceable standards to ensure that
when explosives are used at coal mining
operations, emissions of nitrogen oxides
are controlled to prevent injury to
persons and to protect the general
health, welfare, and safety of the public
and mine workers.’’
The petitioner suggested that we
revise 30 CFR 816.67 and 817.67 by
adding a new paragraph (f) to read:
(1) Blasting shall be conducted so as to
prevent visible emissions of nitrogen oxides,
including nitrogen dioxide, and (2) The
operator shall visually monitor all blasting
activities (through the use of remote
surveillance or other acceptable methods for
detecting visible emissions) and within 24hours report in writing any instances of
visible emissions of nitrogen oxides to the
regulatory authority.
III. What do our current regulations
regarding the use of explosives require?
Our current regulations at 30 CFR
816.67 and 817.67 establish a
framework for addressing the adverse
effects associated with the use of
explosives. Paragraph (a) of both
sections mirrors the language in SMCRA
section 515(b)(15)(C)(i)–(ii), 30 U.S.C.
1265(b)(15)(C)(i)–(ii). It states that
blasting shall be conducted to prevent
injury to persons, damage to public or
private property outside the permit area.
The remaining paragraphs in 30 CFR
816.67 and 817.67 contain specific
performance standards for airblast,
flyrock, and ground vibration.
In addition, our regulation 30 CFR
843.11(a)(1)(i) requires that an inspector
order the cessation of any surface coal
mining and reclamation operations if an
imminent danger to the health or safety
of the public exists.
IV. What comments did we receive and
how did we address them?
We received 119 comments on the
petition for rulemaking. These
comments can be divided into two
major groups: Those in favor of the
rulemaking (over two-thirds) and those
opposed (less than one-third). The
comments in favor of the petition
generally came from citizens and groups
that seek to protect the public and
environment. In contrast, those
comments opposed generally came from
citizens, state regulatory authorities, and
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9257
organizations related to the explosives,
manufacturing, and mining industries.
Those in support of the petition were
primarily concerned that our current
regulations do not provide for adequate
protection from fumes generated by
blasting, including, but not limited to,
NOX fumes. Additionally, some of these
commenters alleged that not all of the
state regulatory authorities are willing to
regulate toxic gases produced during
blasting. These commenters contend
that the lack of regulation by some state
regulatory authorities is due to
OSMRE’s regulatory silence on the
specific issue of NOX emissions.
The comments received from those
opposed to the rulemaking expressed
concern that the petitioner’s suggested
rule language would create, ‘‘an
unlawful, unnecessary, and unattainable
emissions standard under OSMRE’s
federal regulatory program’’ that would
effectively prevent operators from coal
mining altogether. Several of the
comments opposing the petition
referred to In re Permanent Surface Min.
Regulation Litig. I, Round II, 1980 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 17660 at *43–44 (D.D.C.,
May 16, 1980), which held that we
could not regulate fugitive dust from
blasting. These commenters contend
that this precedent prevents OSMRE
from regulating visible NOX clouds
produced by blasting. In addition, the
commenters opposing the petition noted
that SMCRA and the implementing
regulations already contain adequate
protection from the effects of blasting; as
support for this position, they cite
primarily to section 515 of SMCRA, 30
CFR 780.13, 816.61–816.68, 817.61–
817.68, part 842, and part 850, as well
as the equivalent provisions in the state
regulatory programs.
V. What is the Director’s decision?
After reviewing the petition and
supporting materials, and after careful
consideration of all comments received,
the Director has decided to grant the
petition. However, we do not plan to
propose adoption of the specific
regulatory changes suggested by the
petitioner. Instead, we intend to propose
regulatory changes to ensure that
operators and regulatory authorities
prevent injury to people and damage to
property from any harm that could
result from all toxic gases generated by
blasting at coal mines, including NOX
and carbon monoxide (CO).
It is undisputed that when blasting is
not properly conducted, it can cause
damage to property and injury to
people. Despite this fact, during our
evaluation of the petition and the
comments, we discovered that there is
a difference in how the state regulatory
E:\FR\FM\20FEP1.SGM
20FEP1
9258
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 34 / Friday, February 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
authorities are addressing toxic fumes
generated by blasting. Some, but not all,
state regulatory authorities have taken
permitting or enforcement actions in
response to toxic fumes released during
blasting. Others, however, are hesitant
to act because they believe our
regulations, as currently written, are
ambiguous as to whether and how toxic
gases should be controlled. Likewise,
while a number of mine operators and
blasters recognize the dangers posed by
toxic gases from blasting and take
precautions to manage the risks, many
do not. We have concluded that the
current silence in our regulations on
toxic gases released during blasting is
no longer acceptable and only
perpetuates the disparities between the
various practices of the state regulatory
authorities. In light of these findings,
OSMRE intends to propose a number of
changes to our regulations. We plan to
propose a definition of ‘‘blasting area’’
to help ensure that the areas affected by
blasting are properly secured and that
the public is adequately protected. We
also intend to specify that toxic gases
are one of the dangers posed by blasting.
We anticipate clarifying that 30 CFR
816.67(a) and 817.67(a) require the
proper management of toxic blasting
gases in order to protect people and
property from the adverse effects of coal
mining. Lastly, we expect to propose
amendments to the training and testing
requirements for certified blasters at 30
CFR 850.13 to ensure that blasters can
identify and mitigate the impacts of
blast fumes.
We believe that revisions to our
regulations, such as those described
above, will better (1) ensure a level
playing field as described in section
101(g) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. 1201(g),
which specifies that national standards
are essential in order to ensure ‘‘that
competition in interstate commerce
among sellers of coal produced in
different States will not be used to
undermine the ability of the several
States to improve and maintain
adequate standards on coal mining
operations within their borders;’’ and,
most importantly, (2) prevent harm to
people and property from blasting
associated with surface coal mining
operations.
VI. Procedural Matters and Required
Determinations
This notice is not a proposed or final
rule, policy, or guidance. Therefore, it is
not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act, the
Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, or
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, 12630,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:47 Feb 19, 2015
Jkt 235001
13132, 12988, 13175, and 13211. We
will conduct the analyses required by
these laws and executive orders when
we develop a proposed rule.
In developing this notice, we did not
conduct or use a study, experiment, or
survey requiring peer review under the
Information Quality Act (Pub. L. 106–
554, section 15).
This notice is not subject to the
requirement to prepare an
Environmental Assessment or
Environmental Impact Statement under
the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), because
no proposed action, as described in 40
CFR 1508.18(a) and (b), yet exists. This
notice only announces the Director’s
decision to grant the petition and
initiate rulemaking. We will prepare the
appropriate NEPA compliance
documents as part of the rulemaking
process.
Dated: February 3, 2015.
Joseph G. Pizarchik,
Director, Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2015–03407 Filed 2–19–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0504; FRL–9921–43–
Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois;
VOM Definition
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
revision to the Illinois State
Implementation Plan. The revision
amends the Illinois Administrative Code
by updating the definition of volatile
organic material or volatile organic
compound to exclude additional
compounds. This revision is in response
to EPA rulemakings in 2013 which
exempted these chemical compounds
from the Federal definition of volatile
organic compounds because, in their
intended uses, the compounds have a
negligible contribution to tropospheric
ozone formation.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before March 23, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2014–0504, by one of the
following methods:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.
4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano,
Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Please see the direct final rule which is
located in the Rules section of this
Federal Register for detailed
instructions on how to submit
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Douglas Aburano, Section Chief,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6960,
Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State’s
SIP submittal as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are
received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA
receives adverse comments, the direct
final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. For additional information,
see the direct final rule which is located
E:\FR\FM\20FEP1.SGM
20FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 34 (Friday, February 20, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9256-9258]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03407]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Parts 816 and 817
[Docket ID: OSM-2014-0003; S1D1S SS08011000 SX066A00067F 134S180110;
S2D2S SS08011000 SX066A00 33F 13XS501520]
Petition To Initiate Rulemaking; Use of Explosives on Surface
Coal Mining Operations
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Decision on petition for rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
(OSMRE or OSM), are announcing our final decision on a petition for
rulemaking that was submitted by WildEarth Guardians. The petition
requested that we revise our current regulations to prohibit visible
nitrogen oxide clouds during blasting. The Director has decided to
grant the petition in principle, and although we do not intend to
propose the specific rule changes requested in the petition, will
instead initiate a rulemaking to address this issue as discussed more
fully below.
DATES: February 20, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition and other relevant materials
comprising the administrative record of this petition are available for
public review and copying at the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement, Administrative Record, Room 252 SIB, 1951 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20240.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua Rockwell, Division of
Regulatory Support, 1951 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20240;
Telephone: 202-208-2633; Email: jrockwell@osmre.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. How does the petition process operate?
II. What is the substance of the petition?
III. What do our current regulations regarding the use of explosives
require?
IV. What comments did we receive and how did we address them?
V. What is the Director's decision?
VI. Procedural Matters and Determinations
I. How does the petition process operate?
On April 18, 2014, we received a petition from WildEarth Guardians
(petitioner) requesting that OSMRE promulgate rules to prohibit the
production of visible nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions
(including nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide) during blasting at
surface coal mining operations in order to protect the health, welfare,
and safety of the public and of mine workers and to prevent injury to
persons. WildEarth Guardians submitted this petition pursuant to
section 201(g) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of
1977 (SMCRA), 30 U.S.C. 1201(g), which provides that any person may
petition the Director of OSMRE to initiate a proceeding for the
issuance, amendment, or repeal of any regulation adopted under SMCRA.
OSMRE adopted regulations at 30 CFR 700.12 to implement this statutory
provision.
In accordance with our regulation at 30 CFR 700.12(c), we
determined that WildEarth Guardians' petition set forth ``facts,
technical justification and law'' establishing a ``reasonable basis''
for amending our regulations. Therefore, on
[[Page 9257]]
July 25, 2014, we published a notice in the Federal Register (79 FR
43326) seeking comments on whether we should grant or deny the
petition. The comment period closed on September 25, 2014. One hundred
nineteen persons submitted comments during the public comment period.
After reviewing the petition and public comments, the Director has
decided to grant WildEarth Guardians' petition. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
553(e) and section 201(c)(2) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. 1211(c)(2), we plan to
initiate rulemaking and publish a notice of proposed rulemaking with an
appropriate public comment period. Although we are still considering
the content of the proposed rule, we expect that it will contain
clarifications to our regulations to ensure that operators and surface
coal mining regulatory authorities protect people and property from
toxic gases and fumes generated by blasting at surface mine sites.
However, OSMRE does not intend to propose the petitioner's suggested
rule language because the petitioner's language focused solely on
nitrogen oxide emissions, instead of all blast-generated fumes and
toxic gases.
II. What is the substance of the petition?
WildEarth Guardians' petition states: ``Too often, blasting at coal
mines leads to the production of dangerous levels of nitrogen dioxide
emissions, which are seen as orange to red clouds. These clouds of
toxic gas represent significant threats to public health and welfare
and must be curtailed to prevent injuries to persons as required by
SMCRA.'' The petition requests that OSMRE amend our regulations at 30
CFR 816.67 (surface mining) and 817.67 (underground mining) to prohibit
visible NOX emissions during blasting and to require that
the operator visually monitor all blasting activities and report all
instances of visible emissions of NOX to the regulatory
authority. The petitioner asserts that exposure to low levels of
NOX gases may cause ``irritation of eyes, nose, throat, and
lungs.'' According to the petitioner, exposure to high levels of
NOX gases may cause ``rapid burning, spasms, and swelling of
the throat and upper respiratory tract issues, as well as death.''
In support of its petition, petitioner cites SMCRA section 102(a),
30 U.S.C. 1202(a), which lists one of SMCRA's goals as ``protect[ing]
society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal
mining operations,'' as well as SMCRA section 515(b)(15)(C)(i)-(ii), 30
U.S.C. 1265(b)(15)(C)(i)-(ii), which states that blasting activities
should be limited in order to ``prevent injury to persons. . . and
damage to public and private property outside the permit area.''
The petitioner asserts that revisions to our existing regulations
are necessary to close a gap with regard to regulation of
NOX emissions. The petitioner requested that we ``remedy
this regulatory gap and promulgate explicit and enforceable standards
to ensure that when explosives are used at coal mining operations,
emissions of nitrogen oxides are controlled to prevent injury to
persons and to protect the general health, welfare, and safety of the
public and mine workers.''
The petitioner suggested that we revise 30 CFR 816.67 and 817.67 by
adding a new paragraph (f) to read:
(1) Blasting shall be conducted so as to prevent visible emissions
of nitrogen oxides, including nitrogen dioxide, and (2) The operator
shall visually monitor all blasting activities (through the use of
remote surveillance or other acceptable methods for detecting
visible emissions) and within 24-hours report in writing any
instances of visible emissions of nitrogen oxides to the regulatory
authority.
III. What do our current regulations regarding the use of explosives
require?
Our current regulations at 30 CFR 816.67 and 817.67 establish a
framework for addressing the adverse effects associated with the use of
explosives. Paragraph (a) of both sections mirrors the language in
SMCRA section 515(b)(15)(C)(i)-(ii), 30 U.S.C. 1265(b)(15)(C)(i)-(ii).
It states that blasting shall be conducted to prevent injury to
persons, damage to public or private property outside the permit area.
The remaining paragraphs in 30 CFR 816.67 and 817.67 contain specific
performance standards for airblast, flyrock, and ground vibration.
In addition, our regulation 30 CFR 843.11(a)(1)(i) requires that an
inspector order the cessation of any surface coal mining and
reclamation operations if an imminent danger to the health or safety of
the public exists.
IV. What comments did we receive and how did we address them?
We received 119 comments on the petition for rulemaking. These
comments can be divided into two major groups: Those in favor of the
rulemaking (over two-thirds) and those opposed (less than one-third).
The comments in favor of the petition generally came from citizens and
groups that seek to protect the public and environment. In contrast,
those comments opposed generally came from citizens, state regulatory
authorities, and organizations related to the explosives,
manufacturing, and mining industries.
Those in support of the petition were primarily concerned that our
current regulations do not provide for adequate protection from fumes
generated by blasting, including, but not limited to, NOX
fumes. Additionally, some of these commenters alleged that not all of
the state regulatory authorities are willing to regulate toxic gases
produced during blasting. These commenters contend that the lack of
regulation by some state regulatory authorities is due to OSMRE's
regulatory silence on the specific issue of NOX emissions.
The comments received from those opposed to the rulemaking
expressed concern that the petitioner's suggested rule language would
create, ``an unlawful, unnecessary, and unattainable emissions standard
under OSMRE's federal regulatory program'' that would effectively
prevent operators from coal mining altogether. Several of the comments
opposing the petition referred to In re Permanent Surface Min.
Regulation Litig. I, Round II, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17660 at *43-44
(D.D.C., May 16, 1980), which held that we could not regulate fugitive
dust from blasting. These commenters contend that this precedent
prevents OSMRE from regulating visible NOX clouds produced
by blasting. In addition, the commenters opposing the petition noted
that SMCRA and the implementing regulations already contain adequate
protection from the effects of blasting; as support for this position,
they cite primarily to section 515 of SMCRA, 30 CFR 780.13, 816.61-
816.68, 817.61-817.68, part 842, and part 850, as well as the
equivalent provisions in the state regulatory programs.
V. What is the Director's decision?
After reviewing the petition and supporting materials, and after
careful consideration of all comments received, the Director has
decided to grant the petition. However, we do not plan to propose
adoption of the specific regulatory changes suggested by the
petitioner. Instead, we intend to propose regulatory changes to ensure
that operators and regulatory authorities prevent injury to people and
damage to property from any harm that could result from all toxic gases
generated by blasting at coal mines, including NOX and
carbon monoxide (CO).
It is undisputed that when blasting is not properly conducted, it
can cause damage to property and injury to people. Despite this fact,
during our evaluation of the petition and the comments, we discovered
that there is a difference in how the state regulatory
[[Page 9258]]
authorities are addressing toxic fumes generated by blasting. Some, but
not all, state regulatory authorities have taken permitting or
enforcement actions in response to toxic fumes released during
blasting. Others, however, are hesitant to act because they believe our
regulations, as currently written, are ambiguous as to whether and how
toxic gases should be controlled. Likewise, while a number of mine
operators and blasters recognize the dangers posed by toxic gases from
blasting and take precautions to manage the risks, many do not. We have
concluded that the current silence in our regulations on toxic gases
released during blasting is no longer acceptable and only perpetuates
the disparities between the various practices of the state regulatory
authorities. In light of these findings, OSMRE intends to propose a
number of changes to our regulations. We plan to propose a definition
of ``blasting area'' to help ensure that the areas affected by blasting
are properly secured and that the public is adequately protected. We
also intend to specify that toxic gases are one of the dangers posed by
blasting. We anticipate clarifying that 30 CFR 816.67(a) and 817.67(a)
require the proper management of toxic blasting gases in order to
protect people and property from the adverse effects of coal mining.
Lastly, we expect to propose amendments to the training and testing
requirements for certified blasters at 30 CFR 850.13 to ensure that
blasters can identify and mitigate the impacts of blast fumes.
We believe that revisions to our regulations, such as those
described above, will better (1) ensure a level playing field as
described in section 101(g) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. 1201(g), which
specifies that national standards are essential in order to ensure
``that competition in interstate commerce among sellers of coal
produced in different States will not be used to undermine the ability
of the several States to improve and maintain adequate standards on
coal mining operations within their borders;'' and, most importantly,
(2) prevent harm to people and property from blasting associated with
surface coal mining operations.
VI. Procedural Matters and Required Determinations
This notice is not a proposed or final rule, policy, or guidance.
Therefore, it is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, the Paperwork
Reduction Act, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, or Executive Orders
12866, 13563, 12630, 13132, 12988, 13175, and 13211. We will conduct
the analyses required by these laws and executive orders when we
develop a proposed rule.
In developing this notice, we did not conduct or use a study,
experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Information
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554, section 15).
This notice is not subject to the requirement to prepare an
Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), because
no proposed action, as described in 40 CFR 1508.18(a) and (b), yet
exists. This notice only announces the Director's decision to grant the
petition and initiate rulemaking. We will prepare the appropriate NEPA
compliance documents as part of the rulemaking process.
Dated: February 3, 2015.
Joseph G. Pizarchik,
Director, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2015-03407 Filed 2-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P