[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 190 (Thursday, October 1, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52946-52955]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-26294]



[[Page 52945]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part IX





Department of the Interior





_______________________________________________________________________



Bureau of Land Management



_______________________________________________________________________



43 CFR Part 3100, et al.



Public Availability of Mineral Resources Information; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 190 / Thursday, October 1, 1998 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 52946]]



DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Parts 3100, 3150, 3160, 3180, 3200, 3500, 3510, 3520, 3530, 
3540, 3550, 3580, 3590, 3600, 3800, 3860

[WO-890-1270-02-24 1A]
RIN 1004-AB55


Public Availability of Mineral Resources Information

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) amends 
regulations addressing the public availability of mineral resource 
information. The purpose of this rule is to remove conflicts between 
the Department of the Interior (the Department) regulations 
implementing the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and existing 
regulations that relate to public availability of mineral resource 
information. The rule also removes inconsistencies among the various 
mineral resources regulations relating to release of information under 
FOIA. Finally, it addresses the protection afforded Indian mineral 
information under the Indian Mineral Development Act (IMDA) and FOIA.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 2, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Inquiries or suggestions should be sent to: Director (630), 
Bureau of Land Management, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, DC 20240.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sid Vogelpohl, Jackson District, 
Division of Mineral Resources (601) 977-5400.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Responses to Comments
III. Final Rule as Adopted
IV. Procedural Matters

I. Background

    BLM issued the proposed rule on May 31, 1991 (56 FR 24767) with a 
60-day public comment period. The proposed rule was designed to conform 
several mineral resource regulations with the regulations implementing 
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552 (FOIA), in 43 CFR part 2, 
subpart B, which provides for withholding certain types of information 
from release under FOIA. In administering FOIA, BLM makes some 
information available without a written FOIA request at any agency 
office possessing such information, as provided in standard paragraph 
(a) as revised in this final rule. Other information may be available 
to the public only if a written FOIA request is submitted.
    FOIA provides various exemptions to its disclosure requirements. 
Three of them govern release of information under this rule, Exemptions 
3, 4, and 9, numbered according to their paragraph designations in the 
statute. FOIA ``does not apply to matters that are--
    * * * (3) specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other 
than section 552b of this title [which pertains to agency meetings that 
may be closed to the public under certain circumstances]), provided 
that such statute (A) requires that the matters be withheld from the 
public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the issue, or (B) 
establishes particular criteria for withholding or refers to particular 
types of matters to be withheld;
    ``(4) trade secrets and commercial or financial information 
obtained from a person and privileged or confidential; * * * or
    ``(9) geological and geophysical information and data, including 
maps, concerning wells.''
    Reference in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION to ``standard 
paragraphs'' is reference to the proposed rule wherein it was proposed 
that the regulations for each mineral commodity, including oil and gas, 
solid minerals other than coal, and so forth, would include common or 
standard section provisions consisting of 2 or more of paragraphs (a), 
(b), (c), and (d), which appear in final form in section III of this 
preamble as well as in the regulatory text itself.

II. Responses to Comments

    BLM received comments on the proposed rule from 11 sources: 2 from 
industry associations, 1 from a business entity, 2 from Indian tribes, 
and 6 from government entities. Three additional business entities 
requested and were provided copies of the list of ``public'' and ``non-
public'' mineral resource information noted to be available on request 
in the proposed rule.
    The following paragraphs provide summaries of the submitted 
comments and the BLM response to those comments.

1. Public Land Mineral Interests

    The two industry associations, representing geophysical contractors 
and petroleum companies, expressed concern that confidential 
information would be released as a result of the proposed rule. They 
stated, for example, that geophysical data obtained at considerable 
cost would become available to competitors if the protection provided 
by existing regulations specific to Alaska (43 CFR 3152.6(b)) is 
removed. Specifically, the comments questioned whether such a change 
would affect the ``automatic'' protection currently provided by 43 CFR 
3152.6(b).
    The same respondents objected to the removal of Sec. 3162.8, which 
excepts geophysical and geological data from public inspection, as well 
as removal of the provision for consent from the submitter.
    By cross-referencing the Department's FOIA regulations, the 
regulatory amendments adopted in this final rule will protect 
geophysical and geologic data to the extent that the applicable law, 
FOIA, allows protection. Exemption 9 of FOIA ``protects geological and 
geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells.'' 
Geological and geophysical data obtained through surface methods, as 
opposed to wells, also may be subject to protection under Exemption 4 
if it qualifies as confidential commercial or financial information.
    BLM recognizes the cost associated with developing geophysical 
data, and information about such costs may qualify for exemption from 
disclosure under exemption 4 of FOIA. Therefore, in most cases, 
geophysical data will be protected from disclosure. The protection of 
information urged in the comments exists in current FOIA regulations 
and, by reference, remains in the oil and gas regulations. The 
amendment of section 3152.6(b) refers to 43 CFR part 2, the 
Department's FOIA regulations. Section 2.15(d) of that part requires 
the BLM to contact the submitter whenever the BLM has reason to believe 
that ``disclosure of information may result in commercial or financial 
injury to the submitter.'' On the other hand, in those cases where BLM 
can determine, without additional information, that release will result 
in competitive harm or injury, the request for data will be denied 
without contacting the submitter as provided by Sec. 2.15(d)(4)(i). 
That paragraph provides that notification to the submitter is not 
required if the bureau determines that disclosure of the record should 
be denied. The changes were necessary to conform the rule to the terms 
of FOIA, which mandate release in situations not addressed by FOIA 
exemptions.
    Another comment related to the proposed removal of paragraph (d) of 
Sec. 3162.8, which specifically referred to information submitted to 
BLM that was not required by regulation. The concern expressed was that 
voluntarily submitted information could be released without the 
submitter's consent under the proposed regulations. Voluntarily 
submitted commercial or financial

[[Page 52947]]

information may be protected by FOIA exemption 4, which allows a 
Government agency to withhold voluntarily submitted information when 
the information is of a kind that customarily would not be released to 
the public by the person from whom it was obtained.
    The comment interpreted the proposed rule to require marking of 
data as confidential ``before any right to protect the data would even 
arise.'' This is not a correct reading of the provision. Absent another 
specific regulation to the contrary, the FOIA regulations of the 
Department require protection of confidential commercial or financial 
information regardless of whether it is marked. Section 2.15(d)(4)(v) 
of title 43 provides for notification of the submitter in the absence 
of marking ``if there is substantial reason to believe that disclosure 
of the information would result in competitive harm.'' Under FOIA, the 
agency is required to make its own determination as to whether the 
information meets this standard for withholding and cannot rely solely 
on the submitter's marking of information as its basis for deciding not 
to release information. The rule requires marking the confidential 
material solely to help the review of material for disclosure or 
protection under FOIA. It will be to the advantage of the submitter to 
mark the material it considers confidential to reduce the possibility 
of it being disclosed inadvertently. Further, if the submitter fails to 
mark every page that it considers confidential, the administrative 
costs of BLM compliance with FOIA will increase.
    Based on the public comments regarding paragraph (b) of the 
proposed standard FOIA provision, and in recognition that the specific 
marking used by a private party to mark information as confidential is 
not critical, we are amending paragraph (b) in the final rule to remove 
the requirement that specific wording be used for this purpose. 
Specific reference to 43 CFR 2.15 has also been removed so that the 
paragraph refers to 43 CFR part 2 as a whole. The requirement that 
material requested to be kept confidential be submitted separately has 
also been removed in the final rule. The BLM is responsible for 
determining whether it is appropriate to withhold information from a 
person requesting information under FOIA, even in the absence of 
marking or separate submission.
    The same comment also made specific reference to a form of 
protection for proprietary information that would be lost if the oil 
and gas regulations were amended merely to refer to the FOIA 
regulations: the current oil and gas regulations state that certain 
information is not to be made available to the public without the 
consent of the submitter. FOIA does not authorize agencies to give 
submitters a veto over disclosure. An agency must disclose commercial 
and financial information that is not competitively sensitive and that 
it had required to be submitted. However, experience indicates that 
information typically considered confidential by industry will also 
typically be viewed as potentially confidential by the BLM. In any case 
of doubt, BLM will notify the submitter before deciding to disclose 
information, as detailed in the FOIA regulations and further discussed 
below.
    A comment agreed that exemptions 4 and 9 would adequately protect 
confidential information from disclosure. No change is necessary in the 
final rule as a result of this comment.

2. Indian Mineral Interests

    Comments of two Indian tribes expressed concern that information 
considered confidential by the Indian mineral owner would be released 
to the public. They pointed out that information in the possession of 
the BLM as a result of its oversight responsibilities may be 
confidential as to the Indian mineral owners, even if the submitter 
does not consider it confidential. BLM recognizes this characteristic 
of information relating to Indian mineral resources, as noted in the 
preamble of the proposed rule, and has addressed the concern by adding 
new paragraph (d) to the proposed rule. BLM will also address the 
subject in internal guidance, as discussed below.
    For each category of Indian and Federal mineral resource 
information, one Departmental office or bureau has been identified in 
the Tripartite Agreement of September 6, 1991, (Tripartite Agreement) 
among BLM, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Minerals 
Management Service (MMS), as the Office of Primary Control (OPC) for 
information shared among agencies, as provided by FOIA. The OPC, under 
43 CFR 2.15(b)(2), decides whether to grant or deny the FOIA request 
based on provisions in the FOIA regulations. The BLM, in concert with 
BIA and MMS, in Appendix D of the Tripartite Agreement, classified 
various types of mineral resources information as ``public'' or ``non-
public.'' ``Public'' information is available without a written FOIA 
request at any agency office possessing such information. ``Non-
public'' information may be available to the public only if a written 
FOIA request is submitted. ``Public'' Indian and Federal information 
would be available on request from any agency possessing the 
information, without a FOIA request. See BLM Manual Section 1278--
External Access to BLM Information. BLM is preparing further internal 
guidance: guidelines that list public and other information for various 
mineral commodities, and an Instruction Memorandum further explaining 
the FOIA exemptions and IMDA, and directing agency officials how to 
proceed under each.
    Any FOIA request for information that is obviously confidential 
will be denied by the OPC without contacting the submitter or BIA. 
Information that may arguably be confidential would be reviewed by the 
OPC for possible disclosure. The OPC would first contact the submitter, 
as provided by 43 CFR part 2, and then, if necessary, BIA. If either 
the submitter or BIA acting on behalf of an Indian mineral owner can 
demonstrate that the requested information is exempt from disclosure 
based on the FOIA regulations, the disclosure request would be denied.
    Lists of ``non-public'' information were developed by mineral 
specialists. The lists are broad and include commercial and financial 
information, trade secrets, reserve data, solid mineral production 
data, geologic and geophysical data, and similar data. The lists are 
available for public review and information as noted in the preamble of 
the proposed rule.
    A comment on behalf of an Indian tribe referred to the tribe's 
development of its own mineral resources and noted that disclosure of 
those items specifically identified by the FOIA exemptions, e.g., 
commercial and financial information, could harm the competitive 
position of the tribe. The BLM agrees with this comment in principle. 
Procedures to consider the impact on Indian mineral owners are provided 
for in paragraph (d) of the standard section.
    The comment also noted that the proposed ``regulations do not make 
it absolutely clear that if an objection is raised by an Indian tribe * 
* * the information will not be released.'' FOIA places the 
responsibility to make an informed decision on a FOIA request with the 
agency. The agency, in turn, considers input from the submitter and 
Indian mineral owner in light of the guidelines in the FOIA regulations 
and any applicable case law. In some instances, the OPC may be 
obligated to disclose information even though the submitter or the 
Indian mineral owner objects.

[[Page 52948]]

    The same comment questioned the interpretation of IMDA (25 U.S.C. 
2101 et seq.) as it relates to public access to information. In the 
preamble of the proposed rule, BLM took the position that Section 4(c) 
of IMDA, 25 U.S.C. 2103(c), protects information relating to the 
findings that form the basis of the decision of the Secretary of the 
Interior (the Secretary) to approve or disapprove an agreement, 
including the terms and conditions of such agreements and the agreed 
manner of disposition of the mineral resource. Such information is 
confidential under the IMDA statute and thus is not subject to 
disclosure, as recognized by exemption 3 of FOIA (specifically exempted 
from disclosure by statute).
    Two comments inquired as to why exemption 3 status was not also 
provided to mineral production information received after approval of 
an IMDA agreement, since ``production,'' ``products,'' and ``proceeds'' 
are referred to in Section 4(c) of IMDA. BLM agrees with the comment, 
noting that the legislative history of Section 4(c) of IMDA reflects an 
intention to protect ``all information of a business or financial 
character relating to such agreements.'' H.R. Rep. No. 746, 97th Cong. 
2nd Sess. 5 (1982). Therefore, projections, studies, data, or other 
information regarding the terms and conditions of the agreement, the 
financial return from the agreement, and information as to the extent, 
nature, value, or disposition of mineral resources, all enjoy exemption 
3 status. So does proprietary information on exploration, development, 
and production pertaining to an agreement, but created after the 
Secretary's approval of the agreement. We have revised standard 
paragraph (c) in the final rule accordingly.
    A tribal comment noted that the Indian mineral owner does not have 
the opportunity to mark Indian information as confidential as required 
by the proposed rule. The comment recommended that the standard 
paragraphs be changed to require Indian mineral owners to mark all 
Indian information as confidential, allowing no release without prior 
approval of the mineral owner. For the submitter to mark all Indian 
information confidential is not appropriate, because Indian information 
held by BLM is subject to FOIA disclosure except to the extent it is 
protected by a specific exemption. Moreover, marking is not a 
prerequisite to protection. Whether the information is marked or not, 
BLM must review it to determine whether disclosure is appropriate. As 
noted above, the impact of disclosure on both the Indian mineral owner 
and submitter, based on the FOIA exemptions, will be considered in the 
OPC's decision.
    The same comment requested that standard paragraph (c) be expanded 
to state that all Indian information relating to IMDA, or the Indian 
Mineral Leasing Act of 1938, or any other act of Congress, including 
well applications and reports, will be held confidential unless 
disclosure is approved by the Indian mineral owner. Paragraph (c) 
codifies the special protections afforded information furnished in 
connection with the Secretary's approval of mineral development 
agreements authorized by IMDA. There is no similar basis for exempting 
all other Indian information from the disclosure requirements of FOIA. 
As noted above, a change in standard paragraph (c) has been made to 
clarify the scope of Section 4(c) of the IMDA.
    The comment recommended a provision that would give Indian and 
Indian land information a presumption of privilege and confidentiality. 
The writer also expressed concern that the rule as proposed would 
adversely affect Indian tribes whose land holdings have oil and gas 
development potential. The oil and gas regulations, as previously 
written at section 3162.8, specifically made reference to 
``confidential and privileged'' Indian information, requiring that such 
information not be released without ``the express authorization'' of 
the Indian mineral owner. We do not anticipate any significant impact 
on Indian mineral owners, because FOIA has always required disclosure 
in the absence of a FOIA exemption or a statutory guarantee of 
confidentiality. To the extent that prior regulations may have been 
read otherwise, those regulations were unenforceable. Under the final 
rule, ``confidential and privileged'' Indian information will not be 
disclosed. However, it is the responsibility of the OPC to reach an 
informed decision as to whether particular information is 
``confidential and privileged,'' based on FOIA regulations, which would 
include considering the effect of disclosure on the Indian mineral 
owner. Additionally, as previously stated, it will be BLM policy to 
consult with the Indian mineral owner through the BIA, if the requested 
information is not clearly confidential. In situations where it is 
clear, the OPC would reach a decision without consultation.
    A second Indian tribe also commented that the Indian information 
differs from Federal information in the BLM's possession in that it was 
obtained to fulfill a trust responsibility to the Indians. The comment 
went on to state that disclosure of Indian information, when it does 
not protect the best interests of the Indian mineral owner, would 
violate that trust. The comment noted that exemption 4 protects certain 
information from disclosure, that FOIA does not limit consultation to 
the submitter, and that contact must be made with the land or mineral 
owner.
    Absent statutory authority otherwise, records in the possession and 
control of the United States are subject to FOIA, regardless of the 
reason the government received the information. However, being subject 
to FOIA does not mean that all information will be disclosed. The 
information exempted from disclosure under FOIA will not be disclosed. 
While certain information is obviously exempt from disclosure, the 
status of some information is ambiguous. It is this ambiguity which 
requires a review of any request for some borderline information with 
specific attention to the interests of the submitter and the Indian 
mineral owner. Abiding by the provisions of FOIA fulfills BLM's trust 
responsibilities.
    BLM agrees with the comment that Indian mineral owners may have a 
commercial interest in data submitted by a company that through lease 
or other contract has information concerning the Indian minerals, even 
if the submitting company does not have such an interest in protecting 
that information. For example, the company may be prepared to 
relinquish the lease, whereupon the Indian mineral owner is likely to 
re-offer the tract for lease. The disclosure of data from the existing 
lessee's seismic work, drilling, or production could significantly 
affect the number and level of potential bids to lease the Indian 
minerals.
    The protection of exemption 4 of FOIA extends to commercial and 
financial information of an Indian mineral owner obtained from a person 
outside the government, if release would be competitively harmful to 
the Indian mineral owner. That protection is not lost merely because 
the immediate submitter of the data to the Department was not the 
Indian mineral owner, but a party in contractual privity with the 
Indian mineral owner. Sensitive data concerning the Indian's minerals 
must be provided to the government by the lessee/contractor, because of 
the trust relationship, which the government does not receive for other 
private lands. Therefore, construing the exemption to protect only the 
immediate submitter (lessee/contractor) would put the Indian in a 
disadvantageous position vis-a-vis other

[[Page 52949]]

mineral owners. Contrariwise, the United States owes special duties to 
the Indian mineral owner. While the trust relationship, in and of 
itself, does not afford confidentiality to data that would otherwise be 
releasable, the trust relationship should not cause Indian mineral 
owners to lose the confidentiality enjoyed by those private mineral 
owners whose mineral information is not disclosed to the Federal 
Government. Therefore, BLM agrees with the comment that the Indian 
mineral owner should have notice, and an opportunity to object if the 
submitter has not established that the Indian interest in the record 
can be protected. The bases for such consultation are the submitter's 
contractual privity with the Indian mineral owner and the trust 
responsibility of the Secretary.
    In the preamble of the proposed rule, BLM announced its intention 
to consult with the Indian mineral owner when it receives a request for 
commercial or financial information that may be protected by exemption 
4. BLM received no comments opposing this policy. Accordingly, the 
final rule contains an additional paragraph (d) providing Indian 
mineral owners an opportunity to object to disclosure, when BLM is 
uncertain whether the information is data protected by exemption 4.
    Paragraph (d)(1) reflects BLM's commitment to asserting such FOIA 
exemptions as are available to protect the confidentiality of Indian 
information. Paragraph (2) addresses the situation in which, following 
consultation with the submitter, BLM determines that the submitter has 
no interest in withholding the data that can be protected, but Indian 
mineral owners may have interests protected by exemption 4. It provides 
that the agency will notify the Indian mineral owners of record of such 
requests and offer to consider the owner's view as to whether there are 
grounds under exemption 4 for withholding the information requested.
    This parallels the procedures for consultation with submitters and 
will apply only in the cases in which BLM is unable to determine 
independently whether the information is protected under exemption 4, 
taking into account the nature and age of the data. No notification 
will take place if BLM can determine that the data is commercial or 
financial information that can be protected. BLM is dependent on the 
records of BIA for the identity and addresses of the Indian mineral 
owners. BLM fulfills the requirements of paragraph (d) when it mails 
notice of the opportunity to object to disclosure to the last known 
address of the record mineral owner and waits a reasonable time for a 
response.
    The same comment also stated that Indian tribes have enacted tribal 
laws prohibiting their lessees from publicly disclosing information 
regardless of the authorizing leasing statute. The comment stated that 
the BLM may not ``undercut'' tribal law. The FOIA places statutory 
requirements and responsibilities on the BLM. Public disclosure is 
required by FOIA, but FOIA also provides exemptions to avoid 
competitive harm, protect trade secrets, and prevent unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy. Tribal laws cannot exempt BLM from 
compliance with Federal statutes, such as FOIA. However, the OPC will 
fully weigh the reasons for any objection from the Indian mineral 
owner, and to the extent permitted by Federal law will protect the 
confidentiality of these data. With the range of exemptions and court 
interpretation of those exemptions, BLM expects to be able to protect 
justifiable Indian mineral owner expectations of confidentiality. To 
emphasize the BLM policy of consulting with the Indian or Indian tribe 
when appropriate, paragraph (d) is added as noted in the previous 
paragraph.
    The comment further noted that exemption 4 protects certain 
information from disclosure, that FOIA does not limit consultation to 
the submitter, and that contact must be made with the landowner. FOIA 
requires contact with the ``submitter.'' However, in the case of public 
request for Indian mineral information, when BLM determines that it is 
appropriate to contact the submitter, we will contact the industry 
submitter first as provided in 43 CFR 2.15(d). If BLM determines that 
the submitter does not have an interest in withholding the records that 
can be protected under FOIA, and we have reason to believe but are not 
certain that disclosure of the information may result in commercial or 
financial injury to the Indian mineral owner, we will give notice to 
the Indian mineral owner. The OPC will be particularly sensitive to 
impacts on the Indian mineral owner to the extent allowed by law.
    The comment noted that exemption 9 pertains to a myriad of 
information in BLM files and would permit the BLM to withhold most 
Indian mineral information. The comment is correct, but this exemption 
concerns ``wells'' only. Under BLM policy, this exemption applies to 
geologic and geophysical information obtained from a well, exploration 
hole, or any excavation revealing such information. Information that 
does not concern a ``well'' could be exempt under another exemption, 
especially exemption 4 (commercial and financial information).
    The comment rejected ``the notion that compliance with FOIA 
requires that the BLM adopt the proposed regulations.'' As stated 
above, BLM cannot by regulation protect what Federal statute requires 
to be disclosed.
    The comment noted that contact with the Indian mineral owner would 
be helpful in determining whether the Indian mineral owner will be 
adversely affected, and that contact would be needed for consent to 
disclosure. As noted previously, the OPC will consult the submitter and 
then, if necessary, the Indian mineral owner, when such consultation is 
appropriate under FOIA. Once the OPC has determined that certain 
information is exempt from disclosure, the FOIA request would be denied 
without further contact with the Indian mineral owner or the submitter. 
Nonconsent, absent protection by a FOIA exemption, cannot prevent 
disclosure after full consideration of relevant information and 
consultation.
    All of the commenting governmental agencies generally supported the 
goals of the proposed rule. One comment suggested that the BLM 
coordinate closely with the BIA or the Indian mineral owner prior to 
disclosure of information. As previously discussed, the OPC will 
contact the submitter first, and then, if necessary because there is a 
question as to whether Indian interests will be put at risk, the Indian 
mineral owner(s) as disclosed in BIA records. A FOIA request may be 
denied if either of these parties demonstrates to the satisfaction of 
BLM that the information may be withheld from the public based on the 
FOIA exemptions.
    Another agency's comment suggested that to expect a private party 
to mark confidential information with specific notations, and to 
separate it from other information, is not realistic. The comment 
suggested that any marking that clearly indicates confidential 
information is sufficient. BLM agrees. As noted above, a change in 
standard paragraph (b) should resolve this concern.
    One internal comment stated that removal of section 3590.1 would 
hamper administration of solid mineral leases and permits. The section 
has not been restored in the final rule, but section 3500.5-2 of the 
final rule pertains to information submitted under part 3590 as well as 
the rest of the regulations on leasing and management of solid minerals 
other than coal.

[[Page 52950]]

III. Final Rule as Adopted

    To summarize, the standard paragraphs presented in the proposed 
rule have been modified and paragraph (d) has been added. These 
paragraphs are added to BLM's mineral regulations in this final rule 
where and as appropriate. All four paragraphs have been added to the 
introductory regulations on oil and gas leasing in part 3100, the 
regulations on geothermal resources leasing in part 3200, and the 
regulations on leasing of solid minerals other than coal and oil shale 
in part 3500. Only paragraphs (a) and (b) have been incorporated in the 
regulations on mineral material disposal and sale in part 3600 and the 
regulations on mining under the mining laws in part 3800.
    The standard paragraphs are:
    (a) All data and information concerning Federal and Indian minerals 
submitted under parts ________ are subject to part 2 of this title, 
except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section. Part 2 of this 
title includes the regulations of the Department of the Interior 
covering the public disclosure of data and information contained in 
Department of the Interior records. Certain mineral information not 
protected from public disclosure under part 2 of this title may be made 
available for inspection without a Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 
552) request.
    (b) When you submit data and information under parts ________ that 
you believe to be exempt from disclosure to the public, you must 
clearly mark each page that you believe contains confidential 
information. BLM will keep all data and information confidential to the 
extent allowed by Sec. 2.13(c) of this title.
    (c) Under the Indian Mineral Development Act of 1982 (IMDA) (25 
U.S.C. 2101 et seq.), the Department of the Interior will hold as 
privileged proprietary information of the affected Indian or Indian 
tribe--
    (1) All findings forming the basis of the Secretary's intent to 
approve or disapprove any Minerals Agreement under IMDA; and
    (2) All projections, studies, data, or other information concerning 
a Minerals Agreement under IMDA, regardless of the date received, 
related to--
    (i) The terms, conditions, or financial return to the Indian 
parties;
    (ii) The extent, nature, value, or disposition of the Indian 
mineral resources; or
    (iii) The production, products, or proceeds thereof.
    (d) For information concerning Indian minerals not covered by 
paragraph (c) of this section--
    (1) BLM will withhold such records as may be withheld under an 
exemption to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) when it receives a 
request for information related to tribal or Indian minerals held in 
trust or subject to restrictions on alienation;
    (2) BLM will notify the Indian mineral owner(s) identified in the 
records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and BIA, and give them a 
reasonable period of time to state objections to disclosure, using the 
standards and procedures of Sec. 2.15(d) of this title, before making a 
decision about the applicability of FOIA exemption 4 to:
    (i) Information obtained from a person outside the United States 
Government; when
    (ii) Following consultation with a submitter under Sec. 2.15(d) of 
this title, BLM determines that the submitter does not have an interest 
in withholding the records that can be protected under FOIA; but
    (iii) BLM has reason to believe that disclosure of the information 
may result in commercial or financial injury to the Indian mineral 
owner(s), but is uncertain that such is the case.
    As indicated in the proposed rule, the standard paragraphs will 
eventually be incorporated in all BLM mineral regulations. The 
provision for coal (part 3400), will be added in a subsequent proposed 
rule amending other aspects of that program.
    We have amended sections 3514.5, 3524.5, 3534.5, 3544.5, 3554.5, 
and 3585.5-9 editorially in this final rule to restore language to the 
provision that was inadvertently removed in the proposed rule. This 
language allows BLM to make public any information submitted under an 
exploration license once BLM has issued a solid mineral lease.
    In response to a Congressional moratorium on publishing amendments 
of 43 CFR subpart 3809 (see Section 339 of the Department of the 
Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1998, P.L. 105-83), 
we have removed from this final rule the provision adding standard 
paragraphs (a) and (b) to subpart 3809.

IV. Procedural Matters

    The principal author of this final rule is Sid Vogelpohl, Jackson 
District, Division of Mineral Resources, assisted by Ted Hudson of the 
Regulatory Affairs Group, BLM, and Dennis Daugherty of the Office of 
the Solicitor, Department of the Interior.

National Environmental Policy Act

    It is hereby determined that this final rule does not constitute a 
major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human 
environment, and that no detailed statement pursuant to Section 
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
4332(2)(C)) is required. The BLM has determined that this final rule is 
categorically excluded from further environmental review pursuant to 
516 Departmental Manual (DM), Chapter 2, Appendix 1, Item 1.10, and 
that the proposal would not significantly affect the 10 criteria for 
exceptions listed in 516 DM 2, Appendix 2. Pursuant to the Council on 
Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and environmental 
policies and procedures of the Department, ``categorical exclusions'' 
means a category of actions that the Department has determined 
ordinarily do not individually or cumulatively have a significant 
effect on the human environment. In this case, the regulations are 
purely of an administrative and procedural nature, relating to the form 
in which information relating to mineral exploration and development 
must be submitted to keep it confidential, and how BLM will handle such 
information.

Executive Order No. 12866

    This rule was not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget under Executive Order 12866. The rule enhances competition by 
providing mechanisms to protect proprietary and other information used 
by mineral interests to protect their competitive positions, among 
other purposes. The only substantive requirement the rule imposes on 
the regulated public is to mark the material that such public wishes to 
be kept confidential. (Some of the regulations that are superseded by 
this final rule have similar requirements.) The effect of the rule on 
the national economy will be minimal, and would by no means approach 
$100 million annually.
    As of September 30, 1997, there were on public and related lands:
    19,061 competitive oil and gas and geothermal leases;
    27,014 noncompetitive oil and gas and geothermal leases;
    538 solid mineral (other than coal) leases, permits, licenses, 
etc.;
    3,239 mineral material sales & free use permits;
    3,040,117 recorded mining claims (324,651 active), of which 1,073 
filed notices with BLM, and 248 filed plans of operations with BLM.
    Comparatively few of these mineral authorizations involve the 
submission of proprietary, financial, or other data that need to be 
marked as confidential. For example, of the 46,000 fluid mineral

[[Page 52951]]

leases shown above in the data for FY 1997, on only about 2,700 were 
there new wells started or producible wells completed during the year. 
Of these, a very small percentage probably involved submission of such 
data. Even assuming that all 2,700 involved such data, the clerical 
costs of marking it would have to exceed $37,000 per lease to approach 
the $100 million annual threshold.
    Of course, oil and gas is just one of the mineral programs affected 
by this final rule, but the amount of confidential material submitted 
to BLM is probably greatest in this program. The cost of complying with 
the rule is clearly minimal.
    A large number of entities are affected in a small-to-minuscule way 
by this rule. Of course, not all of these entities submit information 
that is affected by the final rule, and it is impossible to quantify 
those that do each year.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department has determined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that it will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Many of BLM's 
customers are small businesses, and both business entities and 
government entities, including local governments that may qualify as 
small entities, can apply for benefits under BLM's mineral development 
regulations. BLM cannot quantify the number of business and government 
entities that may explore for minerals, obtain mineral leases, locate 
mining claims, obtain mineral material permits, or seek patents under 
the mining laws, and qualify as small under the Act. However, the only 
cost imposed by this final rule is the clerical cost of marking each 
page that the entity wishes to protect from disclosure under FOIA, a 
cost that is already required by some of the existing regulations that 
are being replaced.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA). This rule:
    a. Will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or 
more.
    Very many of the leases, permits, claims, etc., referred to in the 
previous two sections are held or operated by small entities, including 
individual mining claimants with 10 or fewer claims, small towns that 
buy sand and gravel from public lands, and probably 90 percent of oil 
and gas operators. From the data available, however, it is impossible 
to say precisely how many meet the definition of a small entity. 
However, even if it is a substantial number, it is very unlikely, as 
shown in the previous section, that the economic effects on any of them 
will be measurable, much less significant.
    b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government 
agencies, or geographic regions. The rule will not affect government 
agencies other than BLM, for which we hope it will marginally reduce 
costs. Based on the discussion in the section on Executive Order 12866, 
above, we conclude that the effect of the rule on industry and ripple 
effects on the economy will be de minimis.
    c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of 
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. See 
the discussion in the section on Executive Order No. 12866, above.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This final rule does not include any Federal mandate that may 
result in expenditures of $100 million or more in any one year by 
State, local, and tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the 
private sector. The only expenditure resulting from the rule will be 
the additional clerical cost to the entity submitting mineral 
information of marking certain pages of that information 
``confidential'' that the entity wishes to be withheld from disclosure. 
Therefore, a Section 202 statement under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act is not required.

Executive Order No. 12612

    Because the rule does not impose requirements on any government 
entity other than the Federal Government, BLM has determined that the 
final rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant 
BLM preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Executive Order No. 12630

    The Department has determined that this final rule does not 
represent a governmental action capable of interference with 
constitutionally protected property rights. The rule does not relate to 
the physical taking of real or personal property. The rule does provide 
mechanisms for protection of property rights in proprietary information 
to the extent allowed by law. Therefore, as required by Executive Order 
12630, the Department certifies that the rule would not cause a taking 
of private property.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not contain information collection requirements that 
require approval by the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.

Executive Order No. 12988

    The Department hereby certifies to the Office of Management and 
Budget that this final rule meets the applicable standards provided in 
Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.

List of Subjects

43 CFR Part 3100

    Confidential business information, Freedom of information, 
Government contracts, Indians--lands, Mineral royalties, Oil and gas 
exploration, Public lands--mineral resources, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Surety bonds.

43 CFR Part 3150

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alaska, Oil and gas 
exploration, Public lands--mineral resources, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Surety bonds.

43 CFR Part 3160

    Administrative practice and procedure, Government contracts, 
Indians--lands, Mineral royalties, Oil and gas exploration, Penalties, 
Public lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

43 CFR Part 3180

    Government contracts, Mineral royalties, Oil and gas exploration, 
Public lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

43 CFR Part 3200

    Confidential business information, Freedom of information, 
Geothermal energy, Government contracts, Indians--lands, Mineral 
royalties, Public lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Surety bonds.

43 CFR Part 3500

    Confidential business information, Freedom of information, 
Government contracts, Indians--lands, Mineral royalties, Mines, Public 
lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Surety bonds.

43 CFR Part 3510

    Government contracts, Mineral royalties, Mines, Phosphate, Public 
lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Surety bonds.

[[Page 52952]]

43 CFR Part 3520

    Government contracts, Mineral royalties, Mines, Public lands--
mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sodium, 
Surety bonds.

43 CFR Part 3530

    Government contracts, Mineral royalties, Mines, Potassium, Public 
lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Surety bonds.

43 CFR Part 3540

    Government contracts, Mineral royalties, Mines, Public lands--
mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur, 
Surety bonds.

43 CFR Part 3550

    Government contracts, Hydrocarbons, Mineral royalties, Mines, 
Public lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Surety bonds.

43 CFR Part 3580

    Government contracts, Mineral royalties, Mines, Public lands--
mineral resources, Recreation and recreation areas, Surety bonds.

43 CFR Part 3590

    Environmental protection, Government contracts, Indians--lands, 
Mines, Public lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

43 CFR Part 3600

    Confidential business information, Freedom of information, Public 
lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

43 CFR Part 3800

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Environmental protection, Freedom of information, 
Intergovernmental relations, Mines, Public lands--mineral resources, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surety bonds, Wilderness 
areas.

43 CFR Part 3860

    Mines, Public lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: September 28, 1998.
Sylvia V. Baca,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

    For the reasons stated in the Preamble, and under the authority of 
the Freedom of Information Act as amended and supplemented (5 U.S.C. 
552), parts 3100, 3150, 3160, 3180, 3200, 3500, 3510, 3520, 3530, 3540, 
3550, 3580, 3590, 3600, 3800, and 3860, Subchapter C, Chapter II, Title 
43 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as set forth below:

PART 3100--OIL AND GAS LEASING

    1. The authority citation for part 3100 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3150(b) and 668dd; 30 U.S.C. 189, 306, and 
359; 43 U.S.C. 1201, 1732(b), 1733, 1734, and 1740; 95 Stat. 748; 
and 111 Stat. 1629.

    2. Section 3100.4 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 3100.4  Public availability of information.

    (a) All data and information concerning Federal and Indian minerals 
submitted under this part 3100 and parts 3110 through 3190 of this 
chapter are subject to part 2 of this title, except as provided in 
paragraph (c) of this section. Part 2 of this title includes the 
regulations of the Department of the Interior covering the public 
disclosure of data and information contained in Department of the 
Interior records. Certain mineral information not protected from public 
disclosure under part 2 of this title may be made available for 
inspection without a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552) 
request.
    (b) When you submit data and information under this part 3100 and 
parts 3110 through 3190 of this chapter that you believe to be exempt 
from disclosure to the public, you must clearly mark each page that you 
believe includes confidential information. BLM will keep all such data 
and information confidential to the extent allowed by Sec. 2.13(c) of 
this title.
    (c) Under the Indian Mineral Development Act of 1982 (IMDA) (25 
U.S.C. 2101 et seq.), the Department of the Interior will hold as 
privileged proprietary information of the affected Indian or Indian 
tribe--
    (1) All findings forming the basis of the Secretary's intent to 
approve or disapprove any Minerals Agreement under IMDA; and
    (2) All projections, studies, data, or other information concerning 
a Minerals Agreement under IMDA, regardless of the date received, 
related to--
    (i) The terms, conditions, or financial return to the Indian 
parties;
    (ii) The extent, nature, value, or disposition of the Indian 
mineral resources; or
    (iii) The production, products, or proceeds thereof.
    (d) For information concerning Indian minerals not covered by 
paragraph (c) of this section--
    (1) BLM will withhold such records as may be withheld under an 
exemption to FOIA when it receives a request for information related to 
tribal or Indian minerals held in trust or subject to restrictions on 
alienation;
    (2) BLM will notify the Indian mineral owner(s) identified in the 
records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and BIA, and give them a 
reasonable period of time to state objections to disclosure, using the 
standards and procedures of Sec. 2.15(d) of this title, before making a 
decision about the applicability of FOIA exemption 4 to:
    (i) Information obtained from a person outside the United States 
Government; when
    (ii) Following consultation with a submitter under Sec. 2.15(d) of 
this title, BLM determines that the submitter does not have an interest 
in withholding the records that can be protected under FOIA; but
    (iii) BLM has reason to believe that disclosure of the information 
may result in commercial or financial injury to the Indian mineral 
owner(s), but is uncertain that such is the case.

PART 3150--ONSHORE OIL AND GAS GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION

    3. The authority citation for part 3150 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3150(b) and 668dd; 30 U.S.C. 189 and 359; 
42 U.S.C. 6508; 43 U.S.C. 1201, 1732(b), 1733, 1734, 1740.

    4. Section 3152.6(b) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 3152.6  Collection and submission of data.

* * * * *
    (b) All information submitted under this section is subject to part 
2 of this title, which sets forth the rules of the Department of the 
Interior relating to public availability of information contained in 
Departmental records, as provided at Sec. 3100.4 of this chapter.

PART 3160--ONSHORE OIL AND GAS OPERATIONS

    5. The authority citation for part 3160 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 25 U.S.C. 396d and 2107; 30 U.S.C. 189, 306, 359, and 
1751; and 43 U.S.C. 1732(b), 1733, and 1740.


Sec. 3162.8   [Removed]

    6. Section 3162.8 is removed in its entirety.

PART 3180--ONSHORE OIL AND GAS UNIT AGREEMENTS: UNPROVEN AREAS

    7. The authority citation for part 3180 is revised to read as 
follows:


[[Page 52953]]


    Authority: 30 U.S.C. 189.

    8. Section 3181.2 is amended by revising the sixth sentence, to 
read as follows:


Sec. 3181.2  Designation of unit area; depth of test well.

    * * * All information submitted under this section is subject to 
part 2 of this title, which sets forth the rules of the Department of 
the Interior relating to public availability of information contained 
in Departmental records, as provided under this part at Sec. 3100.4 of 
this chapter. * * *

PART 3200--GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES LEASING: GENERAL

    9. The authority citation for part 3200 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 25 U.S.C. 396d, 2107; 30 U.S.C. 1023.

    10. Section 3255.13 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 3255.13  How will BLM treat Indian information submitted under the 
Indian Mineral Development Act?

    Under the Indian Mineral Development Act of 1982 (IMDA) (25 U.S.C. 
2101 et seq.), the Department of the Interior will hold as privileged 
proprietary information of the affected Indian or Indian tribe--
    (a) All findings forming the basis of the Secretary's intent to 
approve or disapprove any Minerals Agreement under IMDA; and
    (b) All projections, studies, data, or other information concerning 
a Minerals Agreement under IMDA, regardless of the date received, 
related to--
    (1) The terms, conditions, or financial return to the Indian 
parties;
    (2) The extent, nature, value, or disposition of the Indian mineral 
resources; or
    (3) The production, products, or proceeds thereof.
    11. Section 3255.14 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 3255.14  How will BLM administer information concerning other 
Indian minerals?

    For information concerning Indian minerals not covered by 
Sec. 3255.13, BLM will withhold such records as may be withheld under 
an exemption to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552) 
when it receives a request for information related to tribal or Indian 
minerals held in trust or subject to restrictions on alienation.
    12. Section 3255.15 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 3255.15  When will BLM consult with Indian mineral owners when 
information concerning their minerals is the subject of a FOIA request?

    BLM will notify the Indian mineral owner(s) identified in the 
records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and BIA, and give them a 
reasonable period of time to state objections to disclosure, using the 
standards and procedures of Sec. 2.15(d) of this title, before making a 
decision about the applicability of FOIA exemption 4 to:
    (a) Information obtained from a person outside the United States 
Government; when
    (b) Following consultation with a submitter under Sec. 2.15(d) of 
this title, BLM determines that the submitter does not have an interest 
in withholding the records that can be protected under FOIA; but
    (c) BLM has reason to believe that disclosure of the information 
may result in commercial or financial injury to the Indian mineral 
owner(s), but is uncertain that such is the case.

PART 3500--LEASING OF SOLID MINERALS OTHER THAN COAL AND OIL SHALE

    13. The authority citation for part 3500 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 5 U.S.C. appendix; 16 U.S.C. 90c-1, 
460n-5, 460q-5, 460dd-2, 460mm-4, 508(b); 25 U.S.C. 396d, 2107; 30 
U.S.C. 189, 192c, 293, 359; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 1201, 1732(b), 
1733, 1740; 47 Stat. 1487.

    14. Section 3500.5 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 3500.5  Document submission and availability.

    15. Section 3500.5-1 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 3500.5-1  Filing of documents.

    All necessary documents must be filed in the proper BLM office. A 
document will be considered filed when it is received in the proper BLM 
office.
    16. Section 3500.5-2 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 3500.5-2  Public availability of information.

    (a) All data and information concerning Federal and Indian minerals 
submitted under this part 3500 and parts 3510, 3520, 3530, 3540, 3550, 
3560, 3570, 3580, and 3590 of this chapter are subject to part 2 of 
this title, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section. Part 2 
of this title includes the regulations of the Department of the 
Interior covering the public disclosure of data and information 
contained in Department of the Interior records. Certain mineral 
information not protected from public disclosure under part 2 of this 
title may be made available for inspection without a Freedom of 
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552) request.
    (b) When you submit data and information under this part 3500 and 
parts 3510, 3520, 3530, 3540, 3550, 3560, 3570, 3580, and 3590 of this 
chapter that you believe to be exempt from disclosure to the public, 
you must clearly mark each page that you believe includes confidential 
information. BLM will keep all data and information confidential to the 
extent allowed by Sec. 2.13(c) of this title.
    (c) Under the Indian Mineral Development Act of 1982 (IMDA) (25 
U.S.C. 2101 et seq.), the Department of the Interior will hold as 
privileged proprietary information of the affected Indian or Indian 
tribe--
    (1) All findings forming the basis of the Secretary's intent to 
approve or disapprove any Minerals Agreement under IMDA; and
    (2) All projections, studies, data, or other information concerning 
a Minerals Agreement under IMDA, regardless of the date received, 
related to--
    (i) The terms, conditions, or financial return to the Indian 
parties;
    (ii) The extent, nature, value, or disposition of the Indian 
mineral resources; or
    (iii) The production, products, or proceeds thereof.
    (d) For information concerning Indian minerals not covered by 
paragraph (c) of this section--
    (1) BLM will withhold such records as may be withheld under an 
exemption to FOIA when it receives a request for information related to 
tribal or Indian minerals held in trust or subject to restrictions on 
alienation;
    (2) BLM will notify the Indian mineral owner(s), as identified in 
the records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and BIA, and give 
them a reasonable period of time to state objections to disclosure 
using the standards and procedures of Sec. 2.15(d) of this title, 
before making a decision about the applicability of FOIA exemption 4 
to:
    (i) Information obtained from a person outside the United States 
Government; when
    (ii) Following consultation with a submitter under Sec. 2.15(d) of 
this title, BLM determines that the submitter does not have an interest 
in withholding the records that can be protected under FOIA; but
    (iii) BLM has reason to believe that disclosure of the information 
may result in commercial or financial injury to the

[[Page 52954]]

Indian mineral owner(s), but is uncertain that such is the case.

PART 3510--PHOSPHATE

    17. The authority citation for part 3510 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 90c-1, 460n-5, 460q-5, 460dd-2, 460mm-4; 30 
U.S.C. 189, 359; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 1201, 1732(b), 1733, 
1740; 47 Stat. 1487.

    18. Section 3514.5 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 3514.5  Submission of data.

    The licensee must furnish to BLM copies of all data obtained during 
exploration. If part 2 of this title requires any of such data to be 
held confidential, BLM will not make it public.

PART 3520--SODIUM

    19. The authority citation for part 3520 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 90c-1, 460n-5, 460q-5, 460dd-2, 460mm-4; 30 
U.S.C. 189, 359; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 1201, 1732(b), 1733, 
1740; 47 Stat. 1487.

    20. Section 3524.5 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 3524.5  Submission of data.

    The licensee must furnish to BLM copies of all data obtained during 
exploration. If part 2 of this title requires any such data to be held 
confidential, BLM will not make it public.

PART 3530--POTASSIUM

    21. The authority citation for part 3530 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 90c-1, 460n-5, 460q-5, 460dd-2, 460mm-4; 30 
U.S.C. 189, 359; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 1201, 1732(b), 1733, 
1740; 47 Stat. 1487.

    22. Section 3534.5 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 3534.5  Submission of data.

    The licensee must furnish to BLM copies of all data obtained during 
exploration. If part 2 of this title requires any such data to be held 
confidential, BLM will not make it public.

PART 3540--SULPHUR

    23. The authority citation for part 3540 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 90c-1, 460n-5, 460q-5, 460dd-2, 460mm-4; 30 
U.S.C. 189, 359; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C.1201, 1732(b), 1733, 1740; 
47 Stat. 1487.

    24. Section 3544.5 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 3544.5  Submission of data.

    The licensee must furnish to BLM copies of all data obtained during 
exploration. If part 2 of this title requires any such data to be held 
confidential, BLM will not make it public.

PART 3550--``GILSONITE'' (INCLUDING ALL VEIN-TYPE SOLID 
HYDROCARBONS)

    25. The authority citation for part 3550 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 30 U.S.C. 189, 359; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 1201, 
1732(b), 1733, 1740.

    26. Section 3554.5 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 3554.5  Submission of data.

    The licensee must furnish to BLM copies of all data obtained during 
exploration. If part 2 of this title requires any such data to be held 
confidential, BLM will not make it public.

PART 3580--SPECIAL LEASING AREAS

    27. The authority citation for part 3580 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 90c-1, 460n-5, 460q-5, 460dd-2, 460mm-4; 30 
U.S.C. 189, 293, 359; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 1201, 1732(b), 1733, 
1740; 47 Stat. 1487.

    28. Section 3585.5-9 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 3585.5-9  Submission of data.

    The licensee must furnish to BLM copies of all data obtained during 
exploration. If part 2 of this title requires any such data to be held 
confidential, BLM will not make it public.

PART 3590--SOLID MINERALS (OTHER THAN COAL) EXPLORATION AND MINING 
OPERATIONS

    29. The authority citation for part 3590 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. Appendix; 16 U.S.C. 90c-1, 460n-5, 460q-5, 
460dd-2 et seq., 460mm-4, 508(b); 25 U.S.C. 396d, 2107; 30 U.S.C. 
189, 192c, 293, 359; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 43 
U.S.C. 1201, 1732(b), 1733, 1740; 35 Stat. 315; 47 Stat. 1487.


Sec. 3590.1  [Removed]

    30. Section 3590.1 is removed.

PART 3600--MINERAL MATERIALS DISPOSAL: GENERAL

    31. An authority citation for part 3600 is added to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 30 U.S.C. 601; 43 U.S.C. 1201, 1732(b), 
1733, 1740; Sec. 2, Act of September 28, 1962 (76 Stat. 652).

    32. Section 3600.0-8 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 3600.0-8  Public availability of information.

    (a) All data and information concerning Federal and Indian minerals 
submitted under this part 3600 and parts 3610 and 3620 of this chapter 
are subject to part 2 of this title. Part 2 of this title includes the 
regulations of the Department of the Interior covering the public 
disclosure of data and information contained in Department of the 
Interior records. Certain mineral information not protected from public 
disclosure under part 2 of this title may be made available for 
inspection without a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552) 
request.
    (b) When you submit data and information under this part 3600 and 
parts 3610 and 3620 of this chapter that you believe to be exempt from 
disclosure to the public, you must clearly mark each page that you 
believe includes confidential information. BLM will keep all data and 
information confidential to the extent allowed by Sec. 2.13(c) of this 
title.
    33. Section 3602.2 is amended by removing the last two sentences of 
paragraph (a), and adding a sentence in their place to read as follows:


Sec. 3602.2  Sampling and testing.

    (a) * * * All information submitted under this section is subject 
to part 2 of this title, which sets forth the rules of the Department 
of the Interior relating to public availability of information 
contained in Departmental records, as provided under this part at 
Sec. 3600.0-8.
* * * * *

PART 3800--MINING CLAIMS UNDER THE GENERAL MINING LAWS

    34. The authority citation for part 3800 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 16 U.S.C. 1131-1136, 1271-1287, 1901; 
25 U.S.C. 463; 30 U.S.C. 21 et seq., 21a, 22 et seq., 36, 621 et 
seq., 1601; 43 U.S.C. 2, 154, 299, 687b-687b-4, 1068 et seq., 1201, 
1701 et seq.; 62 Stat. 162.

    35. Section 3802.6 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 3802.6  Public availability of information.

    (a) All data and information concerning Federal and Indian minerals 
submitted under this subpart 3802 are subject to part 2 of this title. 
Part 2 of this title includes the regulations of the Department of the 
Interior covering the

[[Page 52955]]

public disclosure of data and information contained in Department of 
the Interior records. Certain mineral information not protected from 
public disclosure under part 2 may of this title be made available for 
inspection without a Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) request.
    (b) When you submit data and information under this subpart 3802 
that you believe to be exempt from disclosure to the public, you must 
clearly mark each page that you believe includes confidential 
information. BLM will keep all data and information confidential to the 
extent allowed by Sec. 2.13(c) of this title.

PART 3860--MINERAL PATENT APPLICATIONS

    36. The authority citation for part 3860 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 30 U.S.C. 22 et seq.

    37. Section 3862.9 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 3862.9  Public availability of information.

    (a) All data and information concerning Federal and Indian minerals 
submitted under this part 3860 are subject to part 2 of this title. 
Part 2 of this title includes the regulations of the Department of the 
Interior covering the public disclosure of data and information 
contained in Department of the Interior records. Certain mineral 
information not protected from public disclosure under part 2 of this 
title may be made available for inspection without a Freedom of 
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) request.
    (b) When you submit data and information under this part 3860 that 
you believe to be exempt from disclosure to the public, you must 
clearly mark each page that you believe includes confidential 
information. BLM will keep all data and information confidential to the 
extent allowed by Sec. 2.13(c) of this title.

[FR Doc. 98-26294 Filed 9-30-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-84-P