[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 14 (Friday, January 22, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3611-3615]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-1462]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 926

[SPATS No. MT-018-FOR]


Montana Regulatory Program

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

ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) 
is approving, with additional requirements, a proposed amendment to the 
Montana regulatory program (hereinafter, the ``Montana program'') under 
the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). Montana 
proposed revisions to rules pertaining to permit renewals, permit 
requirements, and notices of intent to prospect. The amendment was 
intended to revise the Montana program to be consistent with the 
corresponding Federal regulations and SMCRA, to provide additional 
safeguards, clarify ambiguities, and improve operational efficiency.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 22, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy V. Padgett, Telephone: (307) 261-
6550; Internet address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Montana Program

    On April 1, 1980, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally 
approved the Montana program. General background information on the 
Montana program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of 
comments, and conditions of approval of the Montana program can be 
found in the April 1, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR 21560). Subsequent 
actions concerning Montana's program and program amendments can be 
found at 30 CFR 926.15, 926.16 and 926.30.

II. Proposed Amendment

    By letter dated March 5, 1996, Montana submitted a proposed 
amendment to its program (Administrative Record No. MT-15-01) pursuant 
to SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). Montana submitted the proposed 
amendment at its own initiative. The provisions of Administrative Rules 
of Montana (ARM) that Montana proposed to revise were: 26.4.410, ARM 
(permit renewal); 26.4.1001, ARM (prospecting permit requirement); and 
26.4.1001A, ARM (notice of intent to prospect).
    OSM announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the April 10, 
1996, Federal Register (61 FR 15910), provided an opportunity for a 
public hearing or meeting on its substantive adequacy, and invited 
public comment on its adequacy (Administrative Record No. MT-15-04). 
Because no one requested a public hearing or meeting, none was held. 
The public comment period ended on May 10, 1996.
    During its review of the amendment, OSM identified concerns at ARM 
26.4.1001(1)(a) and 26.4.1001A(1) and (1)(b)(ii) relating to the 
removal of more than 250 tons of coal under a notice of intent. OSM 
notified Montana of the concerns by letter dated December 6, 1996 
(Administrative Record No. MT-15-09).
    Montana responded by submitting additional explanatory information 
in a letter dated November 6, 1997 (Administrative Record No. MT-15-
12). The explanatory information consisted of a proposed statutory 
revision for a separate amendment currently under review by OSM (SPATS 
No. MT-017-FOR; Administrative Record No. MT-14-01). Instead of 
revising the proposed rules to address OSM's concerns with prospecting 
permit requirements and a notice of intent to prospect, Montana 
explained that proposed statutory revisions made by the 1997 Montana 
legislature to the Montana Code Annotated at 82.4.226(8), MCA, to 
require a permit for prospecting when more than 250 tons of coal would 
be removed, would resolve OSM's concerns.
    Based upon the additional explanatory information for the proposed 
program amendment submitted by Montana, OSM reopened the public comment 
period in the December 2, 1997, Federal Register (62 FR 63685; 
Administrative Record No. MT-15-13). Because no one requested a public 
hearing or meeting, none was held. The reopened public comment period 
ended on December 17, 1997.
    Also being considered in this final approval of SPATS No. MT-018-
FOR (Administrative Record No. MT-15-01) is language from an earlier 
submitted
amendment, SPATS No. MT-003-FOR (Administrative Record No. MT-12-01; 
dated February 1, 1995) insofar as it relates to the requirements for 
prospecting permits and notices of intent to prospect. Montana 
originally proposed revisions to ARM 26.4 1001 and proposed to add ARM 
26.4 1001A in SPATS No. MT-003-FOR.
    Before OSM was able to take action on MT-003-FOR, Montana proposed 
further revisions to ARM 26.4.1001 and 26.4.1001A as part of the SPATS 
No. MT-018-FOR. Therefore, OSM is considering and taking action on all 
revisions to ARM 26.4.1001 and 26.4.1001A as part of SPATS No. MT-018-
FOR, and is removing the proposed revisions from SPATS NO. MT-003-FOR. 
Montana agreed to this approach in a telephone conversation on January 
23, 1998 (Administrative Record Nos. MT-12-21 and MT-15-14).
    The definition of ``substantially disturb'', which was submitted in 
the State's February 6, 1996, response (SPATS No. MT-003-FOR; 
Administrative Record No. MT-12-19) to OSM's issue letter dated October 
17, 1995 (Administrative Record No. MT-12-16), is also being considered 
for approval in SPATS No. MT-018-FOR and is being withdrawn from SPATS 
No. MT-003-FOR.

III. Director's Findings

    As discussed below, the Director, in accordance with SMCRA and 30 
CFR 732.15 and 732.17, finds, with additional requirements, that the 
proposed program amendments submitted by Montana on March 5, 1996, and 
as supplemented with additional explanatory information on November 6, 
1997, is no less effective than the corresponding Federal regulations 
and no less stringent than SMCRA. Accordingly, the Director approves 
the proposed amendment.

1. Nonsubstantive Revisions to Montana's Rules

    Montana proposed revisions to the following previously-approved 
rules that are nonsubstantive in nature and consist of minor editorial, 
grammatical, or recodification changes (corresponding Federal 
provisions are listed in parentheses):

26.4.1001, ARM, subsections (1) (codification) and (2) (introductory 
text and codification), (30 CFR 772.12), prospecting (coal 
exploration) permits.

    Because the proposed revisions to these previously-approved rules 
are nonsubstantive in nature, the Director

[[Page 3612]]

finds that these proposed Montana rules revisions are no less effective 
than the Federal regulations. The Director approves these proposed 
rules.

2. Substantive Revisions to Montana's Rules That Are Substantively 
Identical to the Corresponding Provisions of the Federal Regulations

    Montana proposed to revise its programs by adding the following 
rules that are substantive in nature and contain language that is 
substantively identical to the requirements of the corresponding 
Federal regulation provisions (listed in parentheses).

26.4.1001, ARM, subsection (1)(b), (30 CFR 772.12(a) (in part)), 
requirements for prospecting permits;
26.4.1001, ARM, subsection (2)(c), (30 CFR 772.12(b)), requirements 
for prospecting permits;
26.4.1001, ARM, subsection (2)(g)(iii)(A) and (C), (30 CFR 
772.12(b)), requirements for prospecting permits;
26.4.1001, ARM, subsections (4) and (5), (30 CFR 815.13, 772.13, and 
815.1), performance standards applicable to prospecting (coal 
exploration) under prospecting permits and requirements to keep the 
permit on-site;
26.4.1001A, ARM, subsections (1), (3) (introductory text), (3)(a), 
(4) (introductory text), and (4)(a), (30 CFR 772.11(a) (in part) and 
(b)), requirements for notices of intent to prospect (conduct coal 
exploration); and
26.4.1001A, ARM, subsections (4)(c) (in part), (6), and (7), (30 CFR 
772.13 and 815.13), performance standards applicable to prospecting 
(coal exploration) under notices of intent and requirement to keep 
documents on-site.

    Because these proposed Montana rules are substantively identical to 
the corresponding provisions of the Federal regulations, the Director 
finds that they are no less effective than the Federal regulations. The 
Director approves these proposed rules.

3. ARM 26.4301(114), Definition of ``Substantially Disturb''

    On February 6, 1996, Montana proposed a definition of 
``substantially disturb'' which is substantially similar to the Federal 
definition at 30 CFR 701.5, except that it does not include the removal 
of more than 250 tons of coal (SPATS No. MT-003-FOR; Administrative 
Record No. MT-12-19).
    The Federal definition of ``substantially disturb'' at 30 CFR 701.5 
provides that anytime an exploration operation removes more than 250 
tons of coal, the operation would ``substantially disturb'' the natural 
land surface. This would require that performance standards be met, as 
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 815.1 and 772.13(a) provide that the 
performance standards therein apply to coal exploration and reclamation 
activities which ``substantially disturb'' the natural land surface.
    Montana subsequently proposed a statutory revision at MCA 82-4-
226(8) in a response dated November 6, 1997. The revised statute would 
require that: (1) prospecting which removes less than 250 tons of coal 
is not subject to the prospecting permit requirements of MCA 82-4-226 
(1) through (7) (except if conducted on lands unsuitable); and (2) 
prospecting conducted to determine the location, quality, or quantity 
of a mineral deposit outside an area designated unsuitable, that does 
not remove more than 250 tons of coal, and that does not substantially 
disturb the natural land surface, is not subject to the prospecting 
permit requirements at MCA 82-4-226 (1) through (7) (SPATS No. MT-017-
FOR; Administrative Record No. MT-15-12). These revisions now require 
the operator to obtain a permit when more than 250 tons of coal will be 
removed or which will take place on lands designated as unsuitable for 
surface mining.
    The 250 ton limit serves two purposes in the Federal regulations: 
(1) it determines when a notice of intent to explore (prospect) may be 
allowed, as opposed to when a permit is required (30 CFR 772.11(a) vs. 
772.12(a)); and (2) it determines if the performance standards of 30 
CFR Part 815 must be met (30 CFR 772.13 and 815.1). Montana's statutory 
changes in SPATS No. MT-017, Administrative Record No. Series MT-014-
FOR, satisfactorily accomplish purpose # 1 above. Purpose # 2 above is 
addressed at proposed ARM 26.4.1001(5) and 1001A(7) which require all 
prospecting, regardless of extent of disturbance (under permits or 
notice of intent, respectively), to meet the performance standards of 
ARM, Chapter 10. ARM 26.4.1001(5) specifically states that prospecting 
operations under a permit are subject to the performance standards of 
ARM, Chapter 10. ARM 26.4.1001A(7) states that prospecting operations 
under a notice of intent are subject to all the performance standards 
of ARM, Chapter 10, except those which relate to a permit, permit 
transfer, bonding, and permit renewal. OSM notes that the performance 
standards of Chapter 10 are currently being revised in connection with 
the program amendment submitted February 1, 1995, as SPATS No. MT-003-
FOR (Administrative Record No. MT-12-01). Based on the above 
discussion, the Director is approving the definition of ``substantially 
disturb'' at ARM 26.4.1001.

4. ARM 26.4.410, Permit Renewal

    Montana proposes to require that an application for permit renewal 
be filed at least 240 days, and no more than 300 days, prior to permit 
expiration. Both the State and Federal regulations provide a procedural 
time period for the involved parties to file an application for permit 
renewal prior to the expiration of the valid permit. Section 506(d)(3) 
of SMCRA and 30 CFR 774.15(b)(1) only require that such filing shall be 
made at least 120 days prior to the expiration of the valid permit. The 
Federal requirement, unlike the State's proposal, does not set a limit 
on how far in advance an applicant may submit an application for permit 
renewal. The State proposal is a procedural requirement which provides 
involved parties with similar rights and remedies as those provided by 
SMCRA at Section 506(d)(3) and 30 CFR 774.15(b)(1).
    The Director finds that the State's proposed revision is no less 
stringent than SMCRA and no less effective than the Federal regulations 
at 30 CFR 774.15(b)(1). The Director approves the proposed amendment.
    Montana has proposed an identical change to its statutes at MCA 82-
4-221(1) which is also under consideration by OSM at this time (SPATS 
No. MT-017-FOR; Administrative Record No. MT-14-01). A final Federal 
Register notice is being published simultaneously on the statutory 
revision.

5. ARM 26.4.1001 and 26.4.1001A, Prospecting

    Montana initiated proposed revisions to ARM 26.4.1001 and the 
addition of 26.6.1001A in its February 1, 1995, submittal (SPATS No. 
MT-003-FOR; Administrative Record No. MT-12-01), in order to implement 
the new statutory provision for prospecting under notices of intent 
that was approved by OSM on February 1, 1995 (60 FR 6006). On March 5, 
1996, Montana submitted further revisions to ARM 26.4.1001 and 
26.4.1001A in a new submittal, now the subject of this Federal Register 
action (SPATS No. MT-018-FOR; Administrative Record No. MT-15-01). Many 
of the proposed revisions or additions are nonsubstantive or are 
substantively identical to the corresponding Federal counterparts and 
are addressed in Finding Nos. 1 and 2 above. Montana has also proposed 
statutory revisions addressing prospecting, which are being considered 
in a separate rule making action being published concurrently with this 
one.

[[Page 3613]]

a. Proposed Requirements for Prospecting Permits
    Montana proposes at ARM 26.4.1001(1) that a prospecting operation 
must be conducted under a prospecting permit if it will either: (1) be 
conducted on lands designated unsuitable for mining (no matter what the 
purpose or scope of the operation); or (2) is intended to collect data 
on the minerals (rather than on the environment) and will substantially 
disturb the land surface. A proposed statutory provision being 
concurrently evaluated (82-4-226(8), MCA; see SPATS No. MT-017-FOR) 
also requires that any prospecting operation that removes more than 250 
tons of coal must be conducted under a prospecting permit. In sum, a 
prospecting permit would be required for any prospecting operation 
which: (1) is conducted on lands unsuitable; (2) removes more than 250 
tons of coal; or (3) is conducted to collect mineral rather than 
environmental data and substantially disturbs the land surface.
    The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 772.12(a) similarly require a 
coal exploration permit for operations which will be conducted on lands 
designated as unsuitable for mining or which will remove more than 250 
tons of coal. There is no Federal provision requiring a prospecting 
permit for the third class of operations proposed by Montana; however, 
OSM believes that requiring prospecting permits for this class of 
operations will assist Montana in the effective implementation of its 
program. Under 30 CFR 730.11(b), no State rule providing for more 
stringent environmental controls shall be found to be inconsistent with 
OSM regulations. With the understanding that the proposed statutory 
provisions at 82-4-226(8), MCA, is being simultaneously approved, the 
Director finds that the proposed rule revisions at ARM 26.4.1001(1) are 
no less effective than the Federal requirements at 30 CFR 772.12(a) and 
is approving the revisions.
b. Proposed Requirements for Prospecting Under Notice of Intent To 
Prospect
    Montana proposes at ARM 26.4.1001A(1) that prospecting operations 
may be conducted under a notice of intent to prospect (rather than 
requiring a prospecting permit) if the proposed prospecting operation: 
(1) will not be conducted on lands designated unsuitable for mining; 
and either (2), is intended to collect data on the environment (rather 
than on the minerals); or (3), is intended to collect data on the 
minerals but will not substantially disturb the land surface. A 
proposed statutory provision being concurrently evaluated (82-4-226(8), 
MCA; see SPATS No. MT-017-FOR) also requires that any prospecting 
operation that removes more than 250 tons of coal must be conducted 
under a prospecting permit. In sum, a notice of intent to prospect 
would be allowed only for those prospecting operations which: (1) are 
not conducted on lands unsuitable; (2) remove less than 250 tons of 
coal; and (3) are conducted to collect environmental data or, if 
conducted to collect mineral data, will not substantially disturb the 
land surface.
    The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 772.11(a) similarly allow notices 
of intent for operations which will not be conducted on lands 
designated as unsuitable for mining and which will not remove more than 
250 tons of coal (summary items #1 and #2 above). The Federal 
regulations do not address the purpose of exploration and hence, do not 
address Montana's third class of operations. However, OSM notes that 
any of that third class of prospecting operations (those conducted to 
obtain mineral data but do not substantially disturb the land surface 
and those that collect only environmental data), would be required by 
proposed ARM 26.4.1001(1) (discussed under Finding No. 5a above) to 
operate under a prospecting permit if they either: (1) occur on lands 
unsuitable or, (2) remove more than 250 tons of coal. In the event that 
these two rule requirements might be interpreted to conflict, the 
proposed statutory provision at MCA 82-4-226(8) (being concurrently 
evaluated) clearly limits notices of intent to prospecting that does 
not occur on lands unsuitable and that does not remove more than 250 
tons of coal; see also the discussion under Finding No. 3 above. 
Therefore, under the Montana proposal taken together with the proposed 
statutory revision, no prospecting operation could be conducted under a 
notice of intent that would, under the Federal requirements, require a 
coal exploration permit.
    With the understanding that the proposed statutory provision at 82-
4-226(8), MCA, is being simultaneously approved, the Director finds 
that the proposed rule additions at ARM 26.4.1001A(1) are no less 
effective than the Federal requirements at 30 CFR 772.11(a) and is 
approving the revisions.
c. Content Requirements for Notices of Intent to prospect
    Montana has proposed several requirements for the contents of 
notices of intent; most are approved in Finding No. 2 above. But 
Montana has also proposed requirements for which there is no 
corresponding Federal provision, particularly at ARM 26.4.1001A(2) and 
(3)(b) (information needed for Montana to determine the purpose of the 
prospecting and whether it will substantially disturb the land 
surface), and ARM 26.4.1001A(4)(b) (reports to be provided to assist 
investigations).
    OSM notes that the Federal program does not address the purpose of 
exploration activities, but believes that these provisions will assist 
Montana in the effective implementation of its program. OSM also notes 
that under Montana's proposal, all prospecting operations would be 
required to meet prospecting performance standards, regardless of their 
purpose and whether they substantially disturb the land surface (see 
proposed ARM 26.4.1001(5) and 26.4.1001(7) which are approved in 
Finding No. 2 above). Therefore the Director finds that these proposed 
rule additions do not conflict with any Federal requirements, and 
approves the proposed rules.
d. Procedural Requirements for Prospecting Permits and Notices of 
Intent
    Montana has proposed several requirements for processing notices of 
intent and prospecting permits for which there is no corresponding 
Federal provision, particularly at ARM 26.4.1001(3) (in part) and 
26.4.1001A(2) (in part) (expiration of permit and notice of intent 
after one year); and 26.4.1001A(5) (Departmental response to applicant 
on notice of intent regarding proposed extent of disturbance).
    OSM believes that these provisions will assist Montana in the 
effective implementation of its program. OSM also notes that under 
Montana's proposal, all prospecting operations would be required to 
meet prospecting performance standards, regardless of whether they 
substantially disturb the land surface (see proposed ARM 26.4.1001(5) 
and 26.4.1001A(7) which are approved in Finding No. 2 above). Therefore 
the Director finds that these proposed rule additions do not conflict 
with any Federal requirements, and approves the proposed rules.
    However, in the course of evaluating this submittal, OSM noted that 
proposed ARM 26.4.1001(3) would provide that prospecting permits are 
subject to renewal, suspension, and revocation in the same manner as 
mining permits; but the proposal would not provide for permit issuance 
procedures, which would include such requirements as public review and

[[Page 3614]]

comment, and administrative and judicial appeals. Upon further review, 
OSM found that under the Montana program only ``test pit prospecting 
permits'' are subject to the permit issuance procedures of Subchapter 4 
(see ARM 26.4.401(1)).
    The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 772.12(c), (d), and (e), and 
772.15, provide for public notice and opportunity to comment on 
prospecting permit applications, regulatory authority decisions on such 
applications, notice and hearing requirements on the prospecting 
applications, and for public availability of permit information. These 
Federal requirements apply to all prospecting permits, not just those 
that involve surface excavations. Therefore the Director is requiring 
Montana to amend its program (at ARM 26.4.401, 26.4.1001, or otherwise) 
to provide for permit issuance procedures, including public comment, 
administrative and judicial appeal, and public availability of 
information, for all prospecting permits.

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

    Following are summaries of all substantive written comments on the 
proposed amendment that were received by OSM, and OSM's responses to 
them.

1. Public Comments

    OSM invited public comments on the proposed amendment, but none 
were received.

2. Federal Agency Comments

    Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM solicited comments on the 
proposed amendment from various Federal agencies with an actual or 
potential interest in the Montana program.
    Three agencies responded that they had no comments: the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers (April 15, 1997; Administrative Record No. MT-15-
05); the Bureau of Indian Affairs (April 19, 1997; Administrative 
Record No. MT-15-07); and the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and 
Parks (May 10, 1997; Administrative Record No. MT-15-08).

3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments

    Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), OSM is required to solicit 
the written concurrence of EPA with respect to those provisions of the 
proposed 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.).
    Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM solicited comments on the 
proposed amendment from EPA (Administrative Record No. MT-15-03). The 
proposed amendment does not concern air quality or water quality, and 
EPA did not submit comments.

4. State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council 
on Historic Preservation (ACHP)

    Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), OSM solicited comments on the 
proposed amendment from the SHPO and the ACHP (Administrative Record 
No. MT-15-03). The SHPO responded on April 19, 1997, that they had no 
comments (Administrative Record No. MT-15-06). The ACHP did not 
respond.

V. Director's Decision

    Based on the above findings, the Director approves, with certain 
additional requirements, Montana's proposed amendment as submitted on 
March 5, 1996, and as supplemented with additional explanatory 
information on November 6, 1997.
    The Director approves, as discussed in: Finding No. 3, ARM 
26.4.301(114), the definition of substantially disturb; Finding No. 4, 
ARM 26.4.410, concerning permit renewals; Finding Nos. 1, 2, 5a and 5d, 
ARM 26.4.1001 (except 26.4.1001(3)); and Finding Nos. 2, 5b, 5c, and 
5d, ARM 26.4.1001A, concerning notices of intent to prospect.
    With the requirement that Montana further revise its program, the 
Director approves, as discussed in Finding No. 5d, ARM 26.4.1001(3), 
concerning the procedural requirements for prospecting permits.
    The Federal regulations at 30 CFR Part 926, codifying decisions 
concerning the Montana 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

1. 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).

2. 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 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 the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 
732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed State regulatory 
programs and program amendments submitted by the States must be based 
solely on a determination of whether the submittal is consistent with 
SMCRA and its implementing Federal regulations and whether the other 
requirements of 30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met.

3. 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)).

4. 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.).

5. 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 that is the subject of this rule is based upon 
counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was 
prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a 
significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small 
entities. 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 for the counterpart Federal regulations.

6. Unfunded Mandates

    This rule will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any 
given year

[[Page 3615]]

on any governmental entity or the private sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 926

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: December 28, 1998.
Russell F. Price,
Acting Regional Director, Western 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 926--MONTANA

    1. The authority citation for part 926 continues to read as 
follows:

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

    2. Section 926.15 is amended in the table by adding a new entry in 
chronological order by ``Date of Final Publication'' to read as 
follows:


Sec. 926.15  Approval of Montana regulatory program amendments.

* * * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Date of final
 Original amendment submission date        publication                       Citation/description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
March 5, 1996......................  January 22, 1999......  ARM 26.4.301(114); 26.4.410; 26.4.1001; and
                                                              26.4.1001A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Section 926.16 is amended by adding paragraph (l) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 936.16  Required program amendments.

* * * * *
    (l) By March 23, 1999, Montana shall revise ARM 26.4.1001, ARM 
26.4.401, or otherwise modify its program, to provide for public notice 
and opportunity to comment on prospecting permit applications, 
regulatory authority decisions on such applications, and notice and 
hearing requirements on prospecting permit applications, to be no less 
effective than 30 CFR 772.12(c), (d), and (e), and 772.15.
[FR Doc. 99-1462 Filed 1-21-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-M