[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