[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 10 (Friday, January 14, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2364-2367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-970]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 944
[SPATS No. UT-038-FOR]
Utah Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment period and opportunity for public
hearing on proposed amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM)
is announcing receipt of a proposed amendment to the Utah regulatory
program (the ``Utah program'') under the Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). Utah's amendment proposes to change
the State's rules pertaining to: Definitions of ``abandoned site,''
``other treatment facilities,'' ``previously mined area,'' ``qualified
laboratory,'' and ``significant recreational, timber, economic, or
other values incompatible with coal mining and reclamation
operations;'' engineering requirements for impoundments and for
backfilling and grading; hydrologic requirements for impoundments;
requirements for bond release applications; prime farmland acreage;
inspection frequency for abandoned sites; and the period in which to
pay a penalty when requesting
[[Page 2365]]
a formal hearing. Utah wants to revise its program to make it
consistent with the corresponding Federal regulations.
DATES: Will accept written comments on this amendment until 4:00 p.m.
mountain standard time on February 14, 2000. If requested, will hold a
public hearing on the amendment on Tuesday February 8, 2000. Will also
accept requests to speak at the hearing until 4:00 p.m. mountain
standard time on January 31, 2000.
ADDRESSES: You should mail or hand deliver written comments and
requests to speak at the hearing to James F. Fulton, Denver Field
Division Chief, at the address listed below.
You may review copies of the Utah program, this amendment, a
listing of any scheduled public hearings, and all written comments we
received in response to this document at the addresses listed below
during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding
holidays. You may receive one free copy of the amendment by contacting
OSM's Denver Field Division.
James F. Fulton, Chief, Denver Field Division, Western Regional
Coordinating Center, Office of Surface Mining, 1999 Broadway, suite
3320, Denver, Colorado, 80202-5733, telephone (303) 844-1400, extension
1424.
Lowell P. Braxton, Director, Division of Oil, Gas and Mining, 1594 West
North Temple, Suite 1210, P.O. Box 145801, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84114-
5801 telephone (801) 538-5370.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James F. Fulton, Denver Field Division
Chief; telephone: (303) 844-1400, extension 1424; e-mail:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Background on the Utah Program
On January 21, 1981, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally
approved the Utah program. You can find background information about
Utah's program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of
comments, and the conditions of approval of the Utah program can be
found in the January 21, 1981, Federal Register (46 FR 5899). You can
also find later actions concerning Utah's program and program
amendments can be found at 30 CFR 944.15 and 944.30.
II. What Utah Proposes In This Amendment
By letter dated December 23, 1999, Utah sent to us an amendment
(UT-038-FOR, administrative record No. UT-1133) to its program under
SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). The State sent the amendment in
response to a June 19, 1997, letter (administrative record No. UT-1093)
that we sent to Utah in accordance with 30 CFR 732.17(c). The full text
of the program amendment is available for you to read at the locations
listed above under ADDRESSES. Changes to the Utah Administrative Rule
(Utah Admin. R.) that the State proposes to make are summarized below.
A. Changes to Definitions at Utah Admin. R.645-100-200
1. ``Abandoned site'': Utah proposes to revise its definition of
this term by changing the conditions sites must meet to be considered
abandoned and allowing the Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (the
Division) to decide if it wants to inspect abandoned sites less than 12
times a year. The proposed changes also require the division to make
written findings on specific topics to justify a decision to set an
alternative inspection frequency;
2. ``Other treatment facilities'': The State proposes to change
this definition to include neutralization and precipitators. Utah also
proposes to include in this definition those facilities used to prevent
additional contributions of dissolved solids to streamflow or runoff
outside the permit area or to comply with all applicable State and
Federal water quality laws and regulations;
3. ``Previously mined area'': Utah proposes to change its
definition of this term to mean land affected by coal mining and
reclamation operations prior to August 3, 1977, that has not been
reclaimed to the standards of Utah Admin. R.645 or 30 CFR Chapter VII;
4. ``Qualified laboratory'': The State proposes to change this
definition to include those facilities that can provide other services
specified at Utah Admin. R.645-302-299;
5. ``Significant recreational, timber, economic, or other values
incompatible with coal mining operations'': Utah proposes to change its
definition of this term by removing the qualifying statement that
damage to these values caused by mining must be beyond an operator's
ability to repair or restore in order for these values' significance to
be evaluated;
B. Changes to Engineering Requirements for Impoundments
1. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-514.320 and -514.330, Utah proposes to
change its description of inspection requirements for impoundments that
meet, and those that don't meet, the Class B or C criteria of the
Natural Resources Conservation Service's (NRCS) Technical Release 60
(TR-60) or the size or other criteria of 30 CFR 77.216;
2. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-531, the State proposes to require
permit applications to certain detailed design plans for siltation
structures, water impoundments, and coal processing waste banks, dams,
or embankments located inside the permit area;
3. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-533.100 and -533.110, Utah proposes to
include references to provisions of TR-60 in its descriptions of safety
factors required for different sizes and types of impoundments;
4. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-533.200 and -533.210, the State
proposes to include references to provisions of TR-60 for, and expand
its description of, foundation safety factors and stability,
investigation, and testing requirements for different sizes and types
of impoundments;
5. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-533.610, Utah proposes to include TR-60
in its rules by reference and to require impoundments meeting the Class
B or C criteria of TR-60 or the size or other criteria of 30 CFR 77.216
to comply with this section of its rules. Further, at Utah Admin.
R.645-301-533.610 through -533.714, Utah proposes to change its
description of the information to be included in detailed design plans
for various types and sizes of impoundments;
C. Changes to Engineering Requirements for Backfilling and Grading
1. At Utah Admin. R.645-533.700 and -553.800, the State proposes to
revise its definitions of ``thin overburden'' and ``thick overburden'',
respectively, for the purposes of surface coal mining and reclamation
activities;
D. Changes to Hydrologic Requirements for Impoundments
1. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-733.100, Utah proposes to require
permit applications to contain detailed design plans for water
impoundments located inside the permit area;
2. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-733.210, the State proposes to allow
the Division to develop design standards for impoundments not included
in Utah Admin. R.645-301-533.610 (discussed previously under Part
II.B.5 of this document), that ensure stability comparable to a minimum
static safety factor of 1.3 in lieu of requiring engineering tests to
ensure that level of safety;
3. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-742.200, Utah proposes to require
siltation structures to comply with the
[[Page 2366]]
design criteria for sediment control measures in Utah Admin. R.645-301-
742;
4. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-742.224, the State proposes to allow
construction of temporary impoundments as sedimentation ponds that will
contain and control all runoff from a design precipitation without
using spillways, as long as they meet certain conditions;
5. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-742.225.1, for impoundments that meet
the NRCS Class B or C criteria for dams in TR-60 or the size of other
criteria of 30 CFR 77.216(a), Utah proposes to require them to be
designed to control the probable maximum precipitation of a 6-hour
event, or a greater event if specified by the Division;
6. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-742.225.2, for impoundments that don't
fall under subsection -742-225.1 (described above in Part II. D.5 of
this document), Utah proposes to require them to be designed to control
the precipitation of the 100-year, 6-hour event, or a greater event if
specified by the Division;
7. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-743.100, the State proposes to require
impoundments that meet the NRCS Class B or C criteria for dams of TR-60
to comply with this section of Utah's rules and the table in TR-60
entitled, ``Minimum Emergency Spillway Hydrologic Criteria;''
8. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-743.120, Utah proposes to require
impoundments that meet the NRCS Class B or C criteria for dams of TR-60
to comply with the freeboard hydrograph criteria in the TR-60 table
entitled, `` Minimum Emergency Spillway Hydrologic Criteria'';
9. At Utah Admin. R.645-301-743.131.3 through -743.131.6, the State
proposes spillway design precipitation events for temporary and
permanent impoundments of different types and size that meet the
spillway requirements of Utah Admin. R.645-301-743.130;
E. Adding Requirements for Bond Release Applications at Utah Admin.
R.645-301-880.130
This proposed rule will require permittees to include in a bond
release application a notarized statement certifying that all
applicable reclamation activities have been completed as required by
the Utah Code Annotated Section 40-10-1 et seq., the regulatory
program, and the approved reclamation plan. Also, each application for
each phase of bond release must include this certification;
F. Adding Requirements for Prime Farmland Acreage at Utah Admin. R.645-
302-316.500
This proposed rule doesn't allow a decrease in the aggregate total
acreage of prime farmland after reclamation from the acreage that
existed before mining. It requires Division approval of water bodies
built during mining and reclamation along with the consent of all
affected property owners in the permit area. Also, the proposed rule
requires water bodies to be located in parts of the permit area that
won't be reclaimed to prime farmland;
G. Adding an Alternative Inspection Frequency for Abandoned Sites at
Utah Admin. R.645-400-132
Utah proposes to allow the Division to inspect abandoned sites on a
frequency that it sets using procedures proposed under the definition
of ``abandoned site'' at Utah Admin. R.645-100-200. The State's
proposed definition changes are described in Part II.A of this
document; and
H. Changing the Time in Which To Pay a Penalty When Requesting a Formal
Hearing at Utah Admin. R.645-401-800
The State proposes to extend to 30 days the period in which a
permittee, charged with a violation, must pay a reassessed or affirmed
civil penalty to the Division when requesting a formal hearing. The 30-
day period begins with the date of service of a conference officer's
action.
III. How You Can Comment on This Amendment
Under the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), we are requesting your
comments on whether the amendment satisfies the applicable program
approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If we approve the amendment, it
will become part of the Utah regulatory program.
Send Written Comments to Us
Send your written comments to us at the location shown under
ADDRESSES. We'll make the comments, and the names and addresses of
people who send us comments, available for public review during normal
business hours. If you, as an individual, comment on the amendment and
want us to keep your name and/or address confidential, you must state
this prominently at the beginning of your comments. We'll honor your
request to the extent allowed by law. However, we won't consider
anonymous comments. Also, we'll make all submissions from organizations
or businesses, and from individuals who identify themselves as
representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available
for public review in their entirety.
Please submit Internet comments to us as an ASCII file and don't
use special characters and any form of encryption. Please also include
``Attn: SPATS No. UT-R038-FOR'' and your name and return address in
your Internet message. If you don't receive a confirmation that we've
received your Internet message, contact the Denver Field Division at
(303) 844-1400, extension 1424.
Your written comments should be specific and pertain only to the
issues proposed in this rulemaking. Please explain your reasons for any
changes you recommend. In the final rulemaking, we won't necessarily
consider or include in the Administrative Record any comments we
received after the time indicated under DATES or at locations other
than the Denver Field Division.
Speak at a Public Hearing
If you want to speak at a public hearing, contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., mountain standard
time on January 31, 2000. If you're disabled and need special
accommodations to attend a public hearing, contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We'll arrange when and where to
hold a hearing with those persons who request the hearing. If no one
asks for an opportunity to speak at a public hearing, we won't hold
one.
To help the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we ask, if
possible, that each person who speaks at a public hearing give us a
written copy of his or her testimony. The public hearing will continue
on the specified date until everyone scheduled to speak and want to,
you'll be allowed to after those who have been scheduled. We'll end the
hearing after everyone scheduled to speak and others who want to speak
have been heard.
Attend a Public Meeting
If only one person requests an opportunity to speak at a hearing,
we might hold a public meeting instead. If you want to meet with us to
discuss the amendment, ask for a meeting by contacting the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings will be
open to the public. If possible, we'll post meeting notices at the
locations listed under ADDRESSES. We'll make a written summary of each
meeting part of the administrative record.
[[Page 2367]]
IV. 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 conducted the reviews required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) and
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 don't apply to the actual language of State
regulatory programs and program amendments because each 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 must be based
solely on a determination of whether the submittal is consistent with
SMCRA and its implementation Federal regulations and whether the other
requirements of 30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met.
3. National Environmental Policy Act
This rule doesn't require an environmental impact statement because
section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency
decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions aren't 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 doesn't 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 determined that this rule won't 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 on counterpart
Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and
certification made that such regulations would not have a significant
economic effect on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore,
this rule will ensure that the State will implement existing
requirements that OSM previously published. In determining whether this
rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied on
the data and assumptions for the corresponding Federal regulations.
6. Unfunded Mandates
OSM has determined and certifies under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq.) that this rule won't 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 944
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: January 6, 2000.
Brent Wahlquest,
Regional Director, Western Regional Coordinating Center.
[FR Doc. 00-970 Filed 1-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-M