[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66220-66225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-31750]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 917

[KY-208-FOR]


Kentucky Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), 
Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: OSM is approving a proposed amendment to the Kentucky 
regulatory program (hereinafter referred to as the ``Kentucky 
program'') under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 
(SMCRA). Kentucky proposed revisions to its regulations pertaining to 
civil penalties, performance bond and liability insurance, 
contemporaneous reclamation, and revegetation. The amendment is 
intended to revise the Kentucky program to be consistent with the 
corresponding Federal regulations and SMCRA.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 17, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William J. Kovacic, Director, OSM, 
Lexington Field Office, 2675 Regency Road, Lexington, Kentucky 40503. 
Telephone: (606) 233-2894.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Kentucky Program
II. Submission to the Proposed Amendment
III. Director's Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. Director's Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations

I. Background on the Kentucky Program

    On May 18, 1982, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally 
approved the Kentucky program. Background information on the Kentucky 
program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of 
comments, and the conditions of approval can be found in the May 18, 
1982, Federal Register (47

[[Page 66221]]

FR 21404). Subsequent actions concerning conditions of approval and 
program amendments can be found at 30 CFR 917.11, 917.15, 917.16, and 
917.17.

II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

    By letter dated July 19, 1994 (Administrative Record No. KY-1304), 
Kentucky submitted a proposed amendment to its program pursuant to 
SMCRA at its own initiative.
    OSM announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the August 9, 
1994 Federal Register (59 FR 40503), and in the same document opened 
the public comment period and provided an opportunity for a public 
hearing on the adequacy of the proposed amendment. The public comment 
period closed on September 8, 1994.
    By letter dated January 11, 1995 (Administrative Record No. KY-
1331), Kentucky resubmitted a proposed amendment that completed its 
regulation promulgation process. The resubmission included changes to 
405 KAR 10:010--Requirements for Bond and Liability Insurance, 405 KAR 
16:010--General Provisions, 16:020 Contemporaneous Reclamation, 405 KAR 
18:010--General Provisions, and a Statement of Consideration.
    Based on the revised information, OSM reopened the public comment 
period in the February 17, 1995 Federal Register (60 FR 9314), and 
provided the opportunity for a public hearing on the adequacy of the 
revised amendment. The public comment period closed on March 20, 1995.
    During its review of the proposed amendment, OSM identified certain 
concerns relating to the revegetation provisions at 405 KAR 16:200 and 
18:200. OSM notified Kentucky of these concerns by letter dated May 10, 
1996 (Administrative Record No. KY-1367). By letter dated June 13, 1996 
(Administrative Record No. KY-1369), Kentucky responded to OSM's 
concerns by submitting additional explanatory information to its 
proposed program amendment. Because the additional information merely 
clarified certain provisions of Kentucky's proposed revisions, OSM did 
not reopen the public comment period.
    By letter dated March 2, 1995 (Administrative Record No. KY-1347), 
Kentucky submitted additional revisions to the proposed amendment 
pertaining to civil penalty assessment and revegetation. Based on the 
revised information. OSM reopened the comment period in the April 17, 
1995, Federal Register (60 FR 19193). During its review of the proposed 
revisions, OSM noted that Kentucky did not submit the January 6, 1995, 
``Procedures for Assessment of Civil Penalties'' incorporated by 
reference in the March 2, 1995, amendment. It was subsequently 
submitted on September 26, 1996. OSM reopened the comment period in the 
October 25, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR 55247).

III. Director's Findings

    Set forth below, pursuant to SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 
30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17, are the Director's findings concerning the 
proposed amendment.
    Revisions not specifically discussed below concern nonsubstantive 
wording changes, or revised cross-references and paragraph notations to 
reflect organizational changes resulting from this amendment.

1. 405 KAR 7:015--Documents Incorporated by Reference

    In section 3, Kentucky proposes to delete the incorporation by 
reference to the Penalty Assessment Manual. This document is superseded 
by the addition of procedures for the assessment of civil penalties at 
405 KAR 7:095, section 7. The Director finds that the proposed deletion 
at 405 KAR 7:015(3) will not render the State program less effective 
than the Federal regulations.

2. 405 KAR 7:095--Assessment of Civil Penalties

    At section 5(2), Kentucky proposes to clarify that the provisions 
of subsection (2) are in addition to the civil penalty provided for in 
subsection (1). At section 7, Kentucky proposes to incorporate by 
reference ``Procedures for Assessment of Civil Penalties,'' (January 6, 
1995). The document establishes procedures for determining how and when 
penalties will be assessed, assessing continuing violations, and 
waiving the point system for calculating penalties. The Federal 
regulations at 30 CFR part 845 provide procedures for the assessment of 
civil penalties. The Director finds that the proposed regulations at 
405 KAR 7:095 (2) and (7) contain procedural requirements which are the 
same or similar to those contained in section 518 of SMCRA, and which 
are consistent with the Federal regulations at 30 CFR part 845.

3. 405 KAR 10:010--General Requirements for Performance Bond and 
Liability Insurance

    At section 2(4), Kentucky proposes to require that a rider to the 
applicable performance bond confirming coverage of a revision be 
submitted by the applicant if the acreage of the permit area is 
unchanged but if the revision: (a) Adds a coal washer, a crush and load 
facility, a refuse pile, or a coal mine waste impoundment to the 
existing permit or (b) alters the boundary of a permit area or 
increment. The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 800.15(d) require that 
bonds be adjusted to conform to the permit as revised. Kentucky also 
proposes to add a new section 5 which incorporates by reference the 
following documents: Performance Bond, SME-42, February, 1991; 
Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit; Confirmation of Irrevocable 
Standby Letter of Credit; Certificate of Liability Insurance; Notice of 
Change of Liability Insurance; and Escrow Agreement. While there are no 
direct Federal counterparts, the Director finds that the proposed 
revisions at 405 KAR 10:010(2)(4) is not inconsistent with the Federal 
regulations at 30 CFR 800.15(d), which requires a regulatory authority 
to review the adequacy of a bond for a permit which has been revised. 
Also, the Director finds that the incorporation by reference of the 
above-listed forms in 405 KAR 10:010(5) will not render the Kentucky 
program less effective than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 800.11, 
800.21(b) and 800.60.

4. 405 KAR 16:020--Contemporaneous Reclamation

    At section 2, Kentucky proposes to revise its backfilling and 
grading plan requirements to allow more than one pit per permit if the 
permittee makes certain demonstrations. If alternative distance limits 
are approved or additional pits allowed, the applicant is required to 
provide supplemental assurance in accordance with section 6 of the 
regulations. Kentucky also proposes to revise the backfilling and 
grading provisions of sections 2(1)-(6). At section 2(1)--Area Mining, 
only one pit per permit area is allowed. At section 2(2)--Auger Mining, 
the deadline for completion of coal removal is proposed to be 60 
calendar days after the initial excavation for the purpose of removal 
of topsoil or overburden, instead of 60 calendar days after the initial 
surface disturbance. Only one auger mining operation per permit 
operation is allowed. At section 2(3)--Contour Mining, the phrase 
``surface disturbance'' is replaced by ``excavation for the purpose of 
removal of topsoil or overburden,'' in the same manner as described 
above for section 2(2). Only one pit per permit area is allowed. At 
section 2(4)--Multiple-seam Contour Mining, only one multiple seam 
operation per permit is allowed. At section 2(5)--Combined Contour and 
Auger Mining, only one contour mining pit and one auger mining 
operation per

[[Page 66222]]

permit area are allowed. At section 2(6)--Mountaintop Removal, if the 
mountaintop removal operation begins by mining a contour cut around all 
or part of the mountaintop, the time and distance limits for contour 
mining shall apply to that cut unless alternative limits are approved. 
There are no backfilling time and distance limitation, or limits on the 
number of pits allowed per permit area in the current Federal 
regulations. States must, however, impose time and distance limitations 
which ensure that reclamation occurs as contemporaneously as 
practicable with mining operations, in accordance with 30 CFR 816.100 
and 817.100. The Director finds that the proposed revisions at 405 KAR 
16:020 section 2, which now more clearly define the deadline for 
completion of coal removal for area and auger mining operations, are 
not inconsistent with the general Federal provisions pertaining to 
contemporaneous reclamation at 30 CFR 816.100.
    Kentucky proposes to add new section 6--Supplemental Assurance. If 
alternative distance limits or additional pits are approved, the 
applicant is required to submit supplemental assurance in the amounts 
specified for the purpose of assuring the reclamation of the additional 
unreclaimed disturbed area. This supplemental assurance is in addition 
to the performance bond required under 405 KAR Chapter 10. While the 
bonding requirements of 405 KAR 10:030, 10:035, and 10:050 shall apply 
to supplemental assurance, the bond release requirements of 405 KAR 
10:040 shall not apply. Supplemental assurance amounts are specified 
for contour, mountaintop removal, and area mining. Supplemental 
assurance will be returned upon application and after inspection and 
documentation of the completion of backfilling, grading, or highwall 
removal, as appropriate. While there are no direct Federal 
counterparts, the Director finds that the proposed provisions at 405 
KAR 16:020 section 6 are consistent with the Federal regulations 
pertaining to adjustment of bond amounts at 30 CFR 800.15(a). However, 
the Director notes that additional bond is still required for any 
proposal to add acreage to the permit area.
    Kentucky proposes to add new section 7--Documents Incorporated by 
Reference. Supplemental assurance and escrow agreement forms are 
incorporated by reference. Office addresses where the documents may be 
reviewed are listed. There are no Federal counterparts to these 
provisions. However, the Director finds that the proposed provisions at 
405 KAR 16:020 section 7 are not inconsistent with the requirements of 
SMCRA and the Federal regulations.

5. 405 KAR 16:200--Revegetation/Surface Mining Activities

405 KAR 18:200--Revegetation/Underground Mining Activities

    At section 1(4), Kentucky proposes to clarify for cropland or 
pastureland postmining land use, compliance with sections 16:180 3(2) 
and 18:180 3(2) for cropland is required. The Director finds that the 
proposed revisions at 405 KAR 16:200 1(4) and 18:200 1(4) are no less 
effective than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816:97(h) and 
817.97(h) and satisfy a portion of the required amendment at 30 CFR 
917.16(i), pertaining to Finding number 1 of the June 9, 1993, Federal 
Register Notice (58 FR 32283, 32284).
    At section 1(5)(b), Kentucky is proposing to delete the reference 
to Technical Reclamation Memorandum (TRM) #20 and incorporate by 
reference TRM #21 ``Plant Species, Distribution Patterns, Seeding 
Rates, and Planting Arrangements for Revegetation of Mined Lands,'' 
(January 6, 1995). In its review dated April 18, 1996, OSM found TRM 
#21 to be technically sound with certain exceptions relating to 
stocking standards and soil degradation. Kentucky responded to OSM's 
concerns pertaining to stocking standards in its letter dated June 13, 
1996 (Administrative Record No. KY-1369). Kentucky's regulations at 405 
KAR 16:050 and 18:050--Topsoil--provide for the removal, storage, and 
redistribution of topsoil to sustain the appropriate vegetation. The 
specific provisions at section 4(1) require that the land be scarified 
or otherwise treated to promote root penetration. The Director finds 
that the proposed revisions at 405 KAR 16:200 1(5)(b) and 18:200 
1(5)(b) are consistent with the Federal provisions pertaining to 
revegetation at 30 CFR 816.111 and 817.111, as well as 30 CFR 816.116 
and 817.116. The revisions also satisfy a portion of the required 
amendment at 30 CFR 917.16(i), pertaining to Finding number 1 of the 
June 9, 1993, Federal Register Notice (58 FR 32284).
    At section 5(2) (a)2,3 and (b)(2), Kentucky is proposing to 
reference the ``Kentucky Agricultural Statistics'' publication as the 
source of ground cover success standards. The Federal regulation at 30 
CFR 816.116(a)(1) and 817.116(a)(1) allow the regulatory authority to 
select standards for success and valid sampling techniques. The 
Director finds that the proposed revisions at 405 KAR 16:200 5(2) 
(a)2,3 and (b)(2) and 18:200 5(2) (a)2,3 and (b)(2) are no less 
effective than the corresponding Federal regulations, and satisfy two 
portions of the required amendment at 30 CFR 917.16(i), pertaining to 
Finding number 5 of the June 9, 1993, Federal Register Notice (58 FR 
32287).
    At section 6(1), Kentucky is proposing to require a minimum 
stocking density of 300 trees or trees and shrubs, with tree species 
comprising at least 75% of the total stock on at least 70% of the area 
stocked if forest land is the approved postmining landuse. At section 
6(2)(b)1, Kentucky is proposing to require that the minimum stocking 
density be 300 woody plants per acre, including volunteers. At least 
four species of trees or shrubs listed in Appendix A of TRM #21, 
including at least one hard mast species, one conifer species, and two 
soft mast or shrub species, shall be present and the stocking densities 
of these species shall be at least 90 hard mast plants per acre, 30 
conifer plants per acre, and 30 plants per acre for each of the two 
soft mast or shrub species. Stocking densities shall be determined with 
a statistical confidence of 90%. Section 6(2)(b)(2) provides that, in 
place of the requirements of section 6(2)(b)(1), the cabinet may, if 
requested by the applicant, approve stocking densities and woody plant 
species that are recommended by the Kentucky Department of Fish and 
Wildlife Resources for the permit area based upon site-specific 
considerations.
    However, the stocking density of recommended species must still be 
at least 150 woody plants per acre, including volunteers, with stocking 
densities determined with a statistical confidence of 90%. Section 
6(2)(b)4 provides that this amendment to this paragraph shall apply to 
original applications for permits and applications for permit 
amendments submitted after the effective date of this amendment. 
Permits issued or applications submitted prior to the effective date of 
this amendment may be revised to comply fully with this paragraph. At 
section 6(2)(c), Kentucky is proposing to require that the stocking 
density for woody plants be 300 plants per acre for recreation areas, 
greenbelts, fence rows, woodlots, or shelter belts for wildlife, or 
where the planting of trees and shrubs will otherwise facilitate the 
postmining land use. At section 6(3)(f), Kentucky is proposing to 
permit the counting of volunteer plants that meet all applicable 
requirements to determine tree or shrub stocking success. The Federal 
regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3)(I) and 817.116(b)(3)(I)

[[Page 66223]]

allow the regulatory authority to specify minimum stocking and planting 
arrangements. By cover letter to OSM dated May 3, 1995, Kentucky 
submitted letters of approval from the Kentucky Department of Fish and 
Wildlife Services and the Department for Natural Resources, Division of 
Forestry, for 405 KAR 16:200 and 18:200, sections 6(1) and 6(2), and 
for TRM 3521 (Administrative Record No. KY-1353). OSM notified 
Kentucky, by letter dated May 10, 1996, that it must also provide 
rationale to support its proposed reduction, at 405 KAR 16:200 and 
18:200, section 6(1), in standards for acceptable tree stocking on 
forestry postmining land use (Administrative Record No. KY-1367). By 
letter dated June 13, 1996, Kentucky responded to OSM's concern by 
including an October 20, 1993, memorandum from the Division of Forestry 
(Administrative Record No. KY-1369). This memorandum specifically 
recommends the stocking standards for the forestry postmining land use 
which Kentucky adopted in section 6(1), and which were approved by both 
the Division of Forestry and the Department of Fish and Wildlife 
Services. Therefore, based upon the supporting documentation provided 
by Kentucky, the Director finds that the proposed revisions at 405 KAR 
16:200 6(1), 6(2)(b)1 and 2, 6(2)(c), and 6(3)(f) and 18:200 6(1), 
6(2)(b)1 and 2, 6(2)(c), and 6(3)(f) are no less effective than the 
corresponding Federal regulations. In addition, these approved changes 
satisfy a portion of the required amendments at 30 CFR 917.16(i), 
pertaining to Finding number 6 of the June 9, 1993, Federal Register 
Notice (58 FR 32288).
    At 405 KAR 16:200 and 18:200, sections 9(3)(c) and 9(6), Kentucky 
is proposing to delete the productivity test area option as a 
measurement of vegetation success for cropland where hay is grown that 
is not prime farmland and for pastureland. Productivity must be 
measured by either the techniques established by TRM #19 or by 
determining total yield. The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 
816.116(a)(1) and 817.116(a)(1) allow the regulatory authority to 
select standards for success and valid sampling techniques. As noted 
above, Kentucky retains two other options for measuring productivity at 
sections 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(b). The Director find that the deletion of 
the provisions at 405 KAR 16:200 and 18:200, sections 9(3)(c) and 9(6) 
does not render the State program less effective than the Federal 
regulations. In addition, the deletion satisfies a portion of the 
required amendment at 30 CFR 917.16(i), pertaining to Finding number 9 
of the June 9, 1993, Federal Register Notice (58 FR 32289).

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

Public comments

    The Director solicited public comments and provided an opportunity 
for a public hearing on the proposed amendment. Three separate 
submissions were received from the same commenter. Because no one 
requested an opportunity to speak at a public hearing, no hearing was 
held.
    The commenter generally supported the revisions to 405 KAR 10:010 
which requires a rider to confirm coverage of permit revisions which 
alter permit areas or boundaries. The commenter also supported the 
concept of providing a supplemental assurance mechanism in addition to 
the base bond as provided in 405 KAR 16:020 but stated that Kentucky 
should clarify that the mechanism is not to be released in a partial 
manner. The Director notes that section 6(6) provides for return of 
supplemental assurance funds only upon verification that the area for 
which it was submitted has been backfilled and graded. Therefore, even 
if partial release is permitted, only that amount of the supplemental 
assurance no longer needed to ensure backfilling and grading of a 
portion of the disturbed area could be returned. Several of the 
commenter's initial concerns were satisfied by Kentucky's subsequent 
revisions to its original submission. At 405 KAR 7:095 3(3), the 
commenter felt that Kentucky should provide further clarification as to 
whether it would attribute all acts of persons working on the mine site 
or only attribute violations, in terms of calculating civil penalty 
points to be assigned for negligence. The Director notes that the 
section of the regulations to which the commenter refers is not being 
revised at this time and is, therefore, outside the scope of this 
rulemaking. With regard to the document, ``Procedures for Assessment of 
Civil Penalties,'' the commenter stated that it should be stressed to 
the civil penalty assessor that penalties are imposed to achieve a 
deterrent effect and to penalize violations of the law and the 
regulations. While the Director agrees with the commenter that civil 
penalties are intended to serve as deterrents as well as punishment, he 
notes that neither SMCRA nor the Federal regulations explicitly state 
the goals of civil penalty assessment. Therefore, he cannot require 
Kentucky to make the suggested change. The commenter also believed that 
the threshold for seriousness points should be lowered to reflect the 
goal of environmental damage prevention. OSM cannot require that states 
impose a uniform civil penalty point system [See In Re Permanent 
Surface Mining Regulation Litigation, 14 Env't. Rep. Case 1083, 1089 
(D.D.C. February 26, 1980)]. Therefore, the Director cannot require 
that Kentucky make the suggested change. At 405 KAR 16:200 and 18:200, 
the commenter opposes the use of undifferentiated average county yields 
for measurement of productivity of lands with a postmining use of 
hayland or pastureland. The Director notes that OSM considered this 
issue in an earlier Kentucky amendment and found Kentucky's 
productivity standards acceptable and no less effective than the 
Federal regulations (see 58 FR 32290, June 9, 1993). In addition, the 
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky 
affirmed OSM's decision to approve the use of undifferentiated average 
county yields, in KRC v. Babbitt, No. 93-78 (E.D. Ky., March 30, 1995).

Federal Agency Comments

    Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(I), the Director solicited 
comments on the proposed amendment from various Federal agencies with 
an actual or potential interest in the Kentucky program. The following 
agencies concurred without comment: the Department of Agriculture, 
Natural Resources Conservation Service; the Department of Labor, Mine 
Safety and Health Administration; and the Department of the Interior, 
Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Mines.
    The Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, noted 
that the Soil Survey Manual--Handbook #18 referenced at 405 KAR 7:015 
3(4) has been revised and it provided the updated information. The 
director notes that the section of the regulations referenced is not 
being revised at this time and is, therefore, outside the scope of this 
rulemaking. However, Kentucky is aware of the revision and will make 
the appropriate changes at a later date.
    The Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, noted a 
possible discrepancy in 405 KAR 7:095 3(4) regarding the assessment of 
good faith points in that Kentucky's point system appears to be less 
stringent than the Federal regulations. The Director notes that the 
section of the regulations referenced is not being revised at this time 
and is, therefore, outside the scope of this rulemaking. The Director 
also notes that the provisions of OSM Directive REG-5 dated August 31, 
1991,

[[Page 66224]]

provide that if a State program requires consideration of the four 
mandatory statutory criteria (history of previous violations, 
seriousness of violations, negligence of operator, and good faith) in 
determining whether to assess a penalty and determining the amount, the 
program meets the requirements of section 518 of SMCRA. The penalty 
amounts need not be equivalent to those specified at 30 CFR part 845. 
See also, In Re Permanent Surface Mining Regulation Litigation, 14 
Env't. Rep. Cas 1083, 1089 (D.D.C., February 26, 1980).

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

    Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), OSM is required to obtain the 
written concurrence of the EPA with respect to those provisions of the 
proposed program amendment that relate to air or water quality 
standards promulgated 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.)
    On August 3, 1994, OSM solicited EPA's concurrence with the 
proposed amendment. On August 26, 1994, EPA have its written 
concurrence (Administrative Record No. KY-1311).

V. Director's Decision

    Based on the above findings, the Director approves the proposed 
amendment as submitted by Kentucky on July 19, 1994, and as revised on 
January 11, 1995.
    The Director's approval herein of the proposed amendments has 
satisfied a portion of the required amendment codified at 30 CFR 
917.16. Therefore, the Director is amending 30 CFR 917.16(i) to refer 
specifically to those portions of the required amendment which remain 
unsatisfied.
    The Federal regulations at 30 CFR Part 917, codifying decisions 
concerning the Kentucky program, are being amended to implement this 
decision. This final rule is being made effective immediately to 
expedite the State program amendment process and to encourage States to 
bring their programs into conformity with the Federal standards without 
undue delay. Consistency of State and Federal standards is required by 
SMCRA.

VI. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12866

    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

    The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required 
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) and has 
determined that, to the extent allowed by law, 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 since each such 
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 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.

National Environmental Policy Act

    No environmental impact statement is required for this rule since 
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 has determined 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 
corresponding 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. Accordingly, this rule will ensure that existing requirements 
previously promulgated by OSM will be implemented by the State. In 
making the determination as to whether this rule would have a 
significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and 
assumptions of the corresponding Federal regulations.

Unfunded Mandates

    This rule will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any 
given year on any governmental entity or the private sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR 917

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: November 19, 1996.
Michael K. Robinson,
Acting Regional Director, Appalachian Regional Coordinating Center.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, Title 30, Chapter VII, 
Subchapter T of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth 
below:

PART 917--KENTUCKY

    1. The authority citation for Part 917 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.

    2. Section 917.15 is amended by adding paragraph (aaa) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 917.15  Approval of regulatory program amendments.

* * * * *
    (aaa) The following rules, as submitted to OSM on July 19, 1994, 
and as revised on January 11, 1995, and March 2, 1995, are approved 
effective December 17, 1996.

405 KAR 7:015 section 3
    Documents Incorporated by Reference
405 KAR 7:095 sections 5(2),7
    Assessment of Civil Penalties
405 KAR 10:010 section 2(4)
    General Requirements for Performance
    Bond and Liability Insurance
405 KAR 16:020 sections 2, 6 (new), and 7 (new)
    Contemporaneous Reclamation
405 KAR 16:200
    Revegetation--Surface Mining
405 KAR 18:200 sections 1(4), 1(5)(b), 5(2)(a)2, 3 and (b)(2), 6(1), 
6(2)(b) 1, 2, 6(2)(c), 6(3)(f), 9(2)(c), 9(5).
    Revegetation--Underground Mining

    3. Section 917.16 is amended by revising (i) to read as follows:


Sec. 917.161  Required regulatory program amendments.

* * * * *
    (i) By December 17, 1996, Kentucky shall submit to the Director 
either a proposed written amendment or a description of an amendment to 
be proposed which revises 405 KAR 16:200 and 405 KAR 18:200, sections 
1(7)(a) 1 through 5, 1(7)(b) and 1(7)(d), in accordance with the 
Director's findings published in the June 9, 1993, Federal Register (58 
FR 32283), and a timetable for enactment which is consistent with

[[Page 66225]]

established administrative and legislative procedures in the State.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-31750 Filed 12-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-M