[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 208 (Thursday, October 28, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57978-57981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-28230]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 925

[SPATS No. MO-035-FOR]


Missouri 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 an amendment to the Missouri regulatory program (Missouri 
program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 
(SMCRA). Missouri proposed normal husbandry practices that the 
permittee may use without causing the Phase III liability period or the 
five-year responsibility period to be extended. The practices include 
applying pesticides and soil amendments; subsoiling; repairing rills 
and gullies; burning; overseeding; and planting and pruning trees. 
Missouri intends to revise its program to be consistent with the 
corresponding Federal regulations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 28, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John W. Coleman, Office of Surface 
Mining, Mid-Continent Regional Coordinating Center, Alton Federal 
Building, 501 Belle Street, Alton, Illinois 62002. Telephone: (618) 
463-6460. Internet: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

I. Background on the Missouri Program

    On November 21, 1980, the Secretary of Interior conditionally 
approved the Missouri program. You can find general background 
information on the Missouri program, including the Secretary's 
findings, the disposition of comments, and the conditions of approval 
in the November 21, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR 77017). You can find 
later actions on the Missouri program at 30 CFR 925.12, 925.15, and 
925.16.

II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

    By letter dated October 10, 1990, Missouri sent us an amendment to 
its program under SMCRA (Administrative Record No. MO-519). We 
announced receipt of the amendment in the November 1, 1990, Federal 
Register (55 FR 46076) and invited public comment on its adequacy. The 
public comment period closed December 3, 1990. In the September 29, 
1992, Federal Register (57 FR 44660), we approved the amendment with 
exceptions. The exceptions included revisions to

[[Page 57979]]

Missouri's rule at 10 CSR 40-7.021(1)(B)2 concerning normal husbandry 
practices. We did not approve this rule because Missouri had not 
provided evidence to substantiate the use of each proposed practice as 
a normal husbandry practice. As codified at 30 CFR 925.16(p)(15), we 
required Missouri to provide such evidence for the administrative 
record or to delete the rule at 10 CSR 40-7.021(1)(B)2.
    By letter dated June 4, 1999, Missouri submitted agricultural 
publications and guidelines as supporting documentation for the normal 
husbandry practices proposed in its rule at 10 CSR 40-7.021(1)(B)2. We 
announced receipt of the supporting documentation for Missouri's 
proposed normal husbandry practices in the June 17, 1999, Federal 
Register (64 FR 32449). In the same document, we opened the public 
comment period. The public comment period closed on July 19, 1999.
    We are also taking this opportunity to remove the required 
amendments codified at 30 CFR 925.16(p)(7) and 925.16(p)(8). Missouri 
satisfied these required amendments in a previous submittal dated 
December 14, 1995 (Administrative Record No. MO-633).

III. Director's Findings

    Following, under SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15 
and 732.17, are our findings concerning Missouri's amendment.

A. Required Amendment at 30 CFR 925.16(p)(15): 10 CSR 40-7.021(1)(B)2. 
Normal Husbandry Practices

    1. Missouri's rule at 10 CSR 40-7.021(1)(B)2 would allow the 
permittee to use specified normal husbandry practices. Using these 
practices will not cause the Phase III liability period or the five-
year responsibility period to be extended if the permittee can 
demonstrate that: (1) discontinuance of these measures after the 
liability period expires will not reduce the probability of permanent 
revegetation success; (2) the practices are normal husbandry practices 
within the region on unmined lands having land uses similar to the 
approved postmining land use of the areas; and (3) the practices are 
necessary to prevent exploitation, destruction or neglect of the 
resource and to maintain the prescribed level of use or productivity.
    The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(c)(4) for surface mining 
operations and 817.116(c)(4) for underground mining operations allow 
the regulatory authority to approve selective husbandry practices, 
excluding augmented seeding, fertilization, or irrigation, without 
extending the period of responsibility for revegetation success and 
bond liability, under specified conditions. The regulatory authority 
must obtain prior approval from OSM in accordance with 30 CFR 732.17 
that the practices are normal husbandry practices that can be expected 
to continue as part of the postmining land use, or if discontinuance of 
the practices after the liability period expires will not reduce the 
probability of permanent revegetation success. Approved practices must 
be normal husbandry practices within the region for unmined lands 
having land uses similar to the approved postmining land use of the 
disturbed area. We find that Missouri's requirements at 10 CSR 40-
7.021(1)(B)2. are no less effective than the requirements of the 
counterpart Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(c)(4) and 
817.116(c)(4).
    2. Missouri specified mowing, applying pesticides, applying soil 
amendments, subsoiling, burning, overseeding, and planting and pruning 
trees as normal husbandry practices. The application of soil amendments 
must be equal to or less than that recommended by the high management 
yield goal of the NRCS. Subsoiling must not remove the revegetation 
from the surface and is limited to less than two feet below the 
surface. Overseeding must only be done to maintain the approved 
composition of the vegetation stand. Missouri submitted agricultural 
publications and guidelines developed by the University of Missouri--
Columbia Extension Division (UMC); other cooperative extension services 
in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (DOA); the 
Missouri Department of Conservation (MDOC); and the U.S. Natural 
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) as supporting documentation for 
these practices.
    We determined that the agricultural publications and guidelines 
provided by Missouri demonstrate that the listed practices are normal 
husbandry practices within the region for unmined lands. We find that 
Missouri's proposed normal husbandry practices in 10 CSR 40-
7.021(1)(B)2. meet the requirements of the counterpart Federal 
regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(c)(4) and 817.116(c)(4).
    3. Missouri also proposed the repair of rills and gullies as a 
normal husbandry practice under specified conditions. Repairing rills 
and gullies will not cause the Phase III liability period to be 
extended when rills and gullies develop after the initiation of the 
Phase III liability period and when the repair is restricted to the 
filling, grading, and reseeding of the eroded portion of the area. 
Missouri submitted guidelines from the NRCS to support this practice.
    We determined that the documents submitted by Missouri for this 
provision represent normal husbandry practices in the State for repair 
of rills and gullies. We believe that by restricting the size of areas 
that may be repaired, requiring the eroded portion of the areas to be 
filled, and demonstrating that such practices are supported as normal 
husbandry practices, Missouri has ensured that the probability of 
revegetation success will not be reduced. Therefore, we find that 
Missouri's proposed guidelines for repair of rills and gullies are no 
less effective than the Federal regulation requirements at 30 CFR 
816.116(c)(4) and 817.116(c)(4).

B. Required Amendment at 30 CFR 925.16(p)(7): 10 CSR 40-
3.120(6)(B)2.A., D., and G. and 3.270(6)(B)2.A., D., and G. 
Revegetation Standards for Success for Woodland, Wildlife Habitat, and 
Recreational Postmining Land Uses

    On October 10, 1990, Missouri proposed to amend its rules at 10 CSR 
40-3.120(6)(B) 2.A., D., and G and 3.270(6)(B)2.A., D., and G. 
(Administrative Record No. MO-519). Missouri proposed a ground cover 
success standard of 70 percent for areas to be developed for woodland, 
wildlife habitat, and recreation land use. In the September 29, 1992, 
Federal Register (57 FR 44660), we did not approve the rule changes 
because Missouri did not demonstrate that a vegetative ground cover 
standard of 70 percent would achieve the approved post mining land use 
as required by the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3)(iii) and 
817.116(b)(3)(iii). At 30 CFR 925.16(p)(7) we required Missouri to 
provide statistical proof that a vegetative ground cover of 70 percent 
will in all cases achieve the approved woodland, wildlife habitat, and 
recreational postmining land uses or otherwise amend its program to be 
no less effective than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 
816.116(b)(3)(iii) and 817.117(b)(3)(iii).
    By letter dated December 14, 1995 (Administrative Record No. MO-
633), Missouri submitted a proposed amendment that contained the 
statistical proof that we required. Based on this proof, we approved 
Missouri's rules at 10 CSR 40-3.120(6)(B)2.A., D., G. and 
3.270(6)(B)2.A., D., and G. in the May 28, 1996, Federal Register (61 
FR 26454). Therefore, we are removing the required amendment at 30 CFR 
925.16(p)(7).

[[Page 57980]]

C. Required Amendment at 30 CFR 925.16(p)(8): 10 CSR 40-3.120(6)(B)2.E. 
and 3.270(6)(B)2.E. Revegetation Standards for Success for Pasture Land 
Use

    On October 10, 1990, Missouri proposed to amend its rules at 10 CSR 
40-3.120(6)(B) 2.E. and 3.270(6)(B)2.E. (Administrative Record No. MO-
519). Missouri proposed a ground cover success standard of 90 percent 
for areas to be developed for pasture land use. In the September 29, 
1992, Federal Register (57 FR 44660), we did not approve this provision 
because Missouri did not demonstrate that a vegetative ground cover 
standard of 90 percent would achieve the approved post mining land use 
as required by the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(a)(2) and 
817.116(a)(2). At 30 CFR 925.16(p)(8) we required Missouri to provide 
statistical proof that a vegetative ground cover of 90 percent will in 
all cases achieve the approved pasture postmining land use, or 
otherwise amend its program to be no less effective than the Federal 
regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2).
    By letter dated December 14, 1995 (Administrative Record No. MO-
633), Missouri submitted a proposed amendment that contained the 
statistical proof that we required. Based on this proof, we approved 
Missouri's provisions at 10 CSR 40-3.120(6)(B)2.E. and 3.270(6)(B)2.E. 
in the May 28, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR 26454). Therefore, we are 
removing the required amendment at 30 CFR 925.16(p)(8).

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

Public Comments

    We requested public comments on the amendment, but did not receive 
any.

Federal Agency Comments

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments on the 
amendment from various Federal agencies with an actual or potential 
interest in the Missouri program (Administrative Record No. MO-656.1). 
We did not receive any comments on the amendment.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to get a written 
agreement from the EPA with respect to those provisions of the program 
amendment that relate to air or water quality standards issued 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.). None of the revisions that 
Missouri proposed to make in this amendment pertain to air or water 
quality standards. Therefore, we did not ask the EPA to agree on the 
amendment.
    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments on the 
amendment from the EPA (Administrative Record No. 656.1). The EPA did 
not respond to our request.

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

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are required to request comments from 
the SHPO and ACHP on amendments that may have an effect on historic 
properties. On June 9, 1999, we requested comments on Missouri's 
amendment (Administrative Record No. MO-656.1), but neither responded 
to our request.

V. Director's Decision

    Based on the above findings, we approve the amendment as sent to us 
by Missouri on June 4, 1999.
    To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal regulations 
at 30 CFR Part 925, which codify decisions concerning the Missouri 
program. We are making this final rule effective immediately to 
expedite the State program amendment process and to encourage Missouri 
to bring its program into conformity with the Federal standards. SMCRA 
requires consistency of State and Federal standards.

VI. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) exempts this rule from 
review under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review).

Executive Order 12988

    The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required 
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) and has 
determined that, to the extent allowed by law, this rule meets the 
applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that section. 
However, these standards are not applicable to the actual language of 
State regulatory programs and program amendments since each such 
program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by OSM. 
Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and 30 
CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on State regulatory 
programs and program amendments must be based solely on a determination 
of whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing 
Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR Parts 
730, 731, and 732 have been met.

National Environmental Policy Act

    This rule does not require an environmental impact statement since 
section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency 
decisions on State regulatory program provisions do not constitute 
major Federal actions within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the 
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not contain information collection requirements that 
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
3507 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior has determined that this rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 
The State submittal which is the subject of this rule is based upon 
corresponding Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was 
prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a 
significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small 
entities. Therefore, this rule will ensure that existing requirements 
previously published 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 corresponding Federal regulations.

Unfunded Mandates

    OSM has determined and certifies under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq.) that this rule will not impose a cost of 
$100 million or more in any given year on local, state, or tribal 
governments or private entities.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 925

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: October 13, 1999.
Richard J. Seibel,
Acting Regional Director, Mid-Continent Regional Coordinating Center.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR Part 925 is amended 
as set forth below:

PART 925--MISSOURI

    1. The authority citation for part 925 continues to read as 
follows:

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


[[Page 57981]]


    2. Section 925.15 is amended in the table by adding a new entry in 
chronological order by ``Date of final publication'' to read as 
follows:


Sec. 925.15  Approval of Missouri regulatory program amendments.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Original amendment submission    Date of final
             date                  publication      Citation/description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *
                  *                  *                  *
June 4, 1999..................            10-28-9
                                 9.                  10 CSR 40-
                                                    7.021(1)(B)2........
                                                    ....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 925.16  [Amended]

    3. Section 925.16 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs 
(p)(7), (p)(8), and (p)(15).

[FR Doc. 99-28230 Filed 10-27-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P