[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 31, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 75423-75425]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-32107]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 917

[KY-245-FOR]


Kentucky Regulatory Program

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

ACTION: Final rule; removal of amendment.

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

SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 
(OSM), are announcing the removal of a required amendment to the 
Kentucky regulatory program (the ``Kentucky program''). The Kentucky 
program was established under the Surface Mining Control and 
Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act) and authorizes Kentucky to 
regulate surface coal mining and reclamation operations in Kentucky.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 31, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William J. Kovacic, Field Office 
Director; Telephone: (859) 260-8400; E-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Kentucky Program
II. Purpose of the Rule
III. OSM's Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSM's Decision
VI. Procedural Determinations

I. Background on the Kentucky Program

    Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the 
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-
Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that 
its State program includes, among other things, ``a State law which 
provides for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation 
operations in accordance with the requirements of the Act * * *; and 
rules and regulations consistent with regulations issued by the 
Secretary pursuant to the Act.'' See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On 
the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior 
conditionally approved the Kentucky program on May 18, 1982. You can 
find background information on the Kentucky program, including the 
Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and conditions of 
approval in the May 18, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR 21404). You can 
also find later actions concerning Kentucky's program and program 
amendments at 30 CFR 917.11, 917.12, 917.13, 917.15, 917.16, and 
917.17.

II. Purpose of the Rule

    The required amendment at 30 CFR 917.16(k) reads as follows:

    By October 1, 1993, Kentucky shall submit to OSM either proposed 
amendments or a schedule for the submission of proposed amendments 
to Kentucky Administrative Regulations (KAR) to require that the 
assessment Conference Officer's Report mentioned in 405 KAR 7:092 
Section 4(5) be served in a manner consistent with 405 KAR 7:091 
Section 5, and to specify that the time allowed under 405 KAR 7:092 
Section 6(1)(b) to file a petition for administrative review of the 
proposed penalty set forth in the Conference Officer's Report does 
not begin to run until service is obtained in this manner.

    On March 28, 2003, OSM forwarded a letter to Kentucky requesting 
that the required amendment at 30 CFR 917.16(k) be addressed by 
forwarding to OSM a policy statement that established its procedures on 
mailing of Conference Officer's Reports and the date that begins the 
administrative petition process. In response to this request we 
received a letter from the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental 
Protection Cabinet, Office of Administrative Hearings, dated April 3, 
2003, requesting that its policy of requiring all Conference Officer's 
Reports be sent by certified mail be considered by us as fulfilling the 
requirements of the above-mentioned amendment (Administrative Record 
No. KY-1576). Included in the letter was a copy of a memorandum, dated 
April 2, 2002, sent from the Chief Hearing Officer to the Penalty 
Assessments Coordinator and the Assessment Conference Officer. This 
memorandum reminded its recipients that, according to policy, all 
Conference Officer's Reports should be mailed via certified mail, 
return receipt requested, and that, in calculating the time for the 
filing of an administrative petition, the beginning date should be the 
date of service of the Conference Officer's Report, rather than the 
mailing date. The memorandum acknowledged that Kentucky's regulation, 
which allows service by regular mail, had been found by OSM to be less 
effective than a corresponding Federal regulation (Administrative 
Record No. KY-1605).
    Based on the commitments included in the above-referenced letter 
and accompanying memorandum, we announced our proposal to remove this 
required amendment on October 3, 2003, in the Federal Register (68 FR 
57398). In the same notice we opened the public comment period and 
provided an opportunity for a public hearing or meeting on whether the 
policy letter discussed above meets the requirements of the required 
amendment, thereby eliminating the need for a revision to the Kentucky 
regulatory program. We did not hold a public hearing or meeting because 
no one requested one. The public comment period closed on November 3, 
2003. We received comments from two Federal agencies (U.S. Department 
of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers). We also received comments from the Kentucky Resources 
Council, Inc.

III. OSM's Findings

    In our August 6, 1993, decision we determined that the required 
amendment was necessary because we were concerned that 405 KAR 7:092 
section 4(5) was less effective than its Federal counterpart found at 
30 CFR 845.18 because of the way in which Conference Officer's Reports 
were administratively handled (58 FR 42001, 42006). Although Kentucky 
has not amended its regulations in response to this required amendment, 
Kentucky's policy has been to serve all Conference Officer's Reports by 
certified mail and to begin the period for filing an administrative 
petition from the date of service of the report (Administrative Record 
No. KY-1605). Our analysis of this policy indicates that it clarifies 
the language of the Kentucky regulation, which requires service by 
``mail'', without specifying whether the service must be made by 
``certified'' or ``regular'' mail. 405 KAR 7:092, section 4(5). In 
addition, Kentucky's policy of starting the appeal period from the date 
of service indicates that the State interprets its regulation at 405 
KAR 7:092, section 6(1)(b), which begins the appeal period on the 
mailing date, in a manner consistent with its policy, and with the 
Federal regulations. In other words, it is apparent that Kentucky 
interprets the term ``mailing'' to include service, i.e., receipt, of 
the Conference Officer's Report. Furthermore, the record is devoid of 
any indication that Kentucky has failed to follow this policy in the 
last decade. With these policy clarifications now in place, these 
aspects of the Kentucky program clearly meet the requirements of, and 
are therefore consistent with, the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 845.17 
and 845.18.
    We do recognize that this determination is being made based on 
program implementation based on a State policy, rather than via a 
statutory

[[Page 75424]]

or regulatory change. Should we find that in the future the State's 
actions concerning Conference Officer's Reports are no longer 
consistent with the requirements of 30 CFR 845.17 and 845.18, we will 
take the necessary action at that time to bring their program into 
compliance with this decision.
    Therefore, we have determined that the required amendment at 30 CFR 
917.16(k) is no longer needed and will be removed.

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

Public Comments

    The Kentucky Citizens Coal Law Project (KCCLP), a division of the 
Kentucky Resources Council, submitted comments dated October 28, 2003 
(Administrative Record No. KY-1603). These comments primarily relate to 
two specific concerns which we address below:
    (1) KCCLP does not believe the Kentucky policy resolves the 
conflict between State and Federal regulations concerning the timing 
for appeal of the Conference Officer's Report.
    As we discussed in the above finding, Kentucky has stated, in its 
policy, that the date for filing an administrative petition begins on 
the date of service. Therefore, we have determined that the 
implementation of this program is consistent with the Federal 
requirements. If we subsequently find that Kentucky is no longer able 
or willing to enforce its program in a manner consistent with Federal 
regulations, we will take appropriate action to bring the program back 
into compliance.
    (2) KCCLP does not believe that a Kentucky policy of serving 
Conference Officer's Reports by certified mail is as effective as its 
Federal counterpart and violates State and Federal law. This comment 
appears to rest with both 30 U.S.C. 1253(1)-(7), which requires that 
State laws and regulations be consistent, and in accordance, with 
Federal requirements, and Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 13A.130, 
which prohibits agencies in Kentucky from adopting or enforcing any 
policy that modifies or alters a regulation.
    We agree with the commenter that 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1)-(7) require 
laws and regulations consistent with and in accordance with Federal 
requirements. We also agree with the commenter on what the Federal 
requirement is regarding service of Conference Officer Reports. 
However, we have determined that Kentucky's implementation of its 
program is consistent with the Federal requirements. The State 
regulation at issue, 405 KAR 7:092, section 4(5), sets forth that 
``[t]he Conference Officer's Report shall be promptly served by mail * 
* *'' (Emphasis added.) The regulation does not specify, however, the 
type of mail delivery required. For example, it does not require the 
report to be served by ``regular'' mail. As such, a policy specifying 
that service be accomplished by ``certified'' mail is not inconsistent 
with the State regulatory requirement. Further, since documentation of 
receipt is an integral part of the certified mail process, a policy 
that begins the period for appeal upon receipt of the certified mail is 
not inconsistent with the State regulations even though it may not be 
expressly mandated by that regulation. Kentucky has been operating in a 
manner consistent with this policy and the Federal requirements for the 
past decade. Therefore that policy constitutes ample grounds for 
removing the required amendment. Nevertheless, if in the future we 
determine that Kentucky is not implementing its program in a manner 
consistent with the Federal requirements we will revisit this issue and 
take whatever action is necessary to ensure the State's administrative 
handling of Conference Officer's Reports occurs in accordance with 
Federal requirements.
    Regarding the State's law, we believe that any step taken by OSM to 
analyze and interpret KRS 13A.130 in a manner inconsistent with 
Kentucky's documented policy and practice in applying that law is 
clearly outside the scope of our jurisdiction. We believe it is within 
the discretion of the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental 
Protection Cabinet to determine that it is complying with Kentucky's 
statutory limits in interpreting its regulation in the above-described 
way.

Federal Agency Comments

    The U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service 
submitted a letter dated October 29, 2003 (Administrative Record No. 
KY-1605), in which they indicated it has no substantive comments 
regarding the removal of the required amendment.
    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers submitted a statement dated 
October 31, 2003 (Administrative Record No. KY-1606), in which it 
indicated it had no comments on the proposed rule.

V. OSM's Decision

    Based on the above findings we have determined that the required 
amendment at 30 CFR 917.16(k) is no longer needed and will be removed.

VI. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12630--Takings

    This rule is a technical amendment and does not have takings 
implications.

Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is exempt from review by the Office of Management and 
Budget under Executive Order 12866.

Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform

    The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required 
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that this rule 
meets the applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that 
section.

Executive Order 13132--Federalism

    This rule is a technical amendment and does not have federalism 
implications.

Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the 
potential effects of this rule on federally-recognized Indian tribes 
and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct 
effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes. 
This determination is based on the fact that the Kentucky program does 
not regulate coal exploration and surface coal mining and reclamation 
operations on Indian lands. Therefore, the Kentucky program has no 
effect on federally-recognized Indian tribes.

Executive Order 13211--Regulations That Significantly Affect the 
Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy

    On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 which 
requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule 
that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) 
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review 
under Executive Order 12866 and will not have a significant adverse 
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of 
Energy Effects is not required.

National Environmental Policy Act

    This rule does not require an Environmental Impact Statement

[[Page 75425]]

because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that 
agency decisions on proposed state regulatory program provisions do not 
constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 
4332(2)(C)).

Paperwork Reduction Act

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

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies 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 rule is a technical amendment that does not impose any additional 
requirements on small entities.

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. For the reasons stated 
above, this rule: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of 
$100 million; (b) will not cause a major increase in costs or prices 
for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local 
government agencies, or geographic regions; and (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.

Unfunded Mandates

    This rule is a technical amendment and will not impose an unfunded 
mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of 
$100 million or more in any given year.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 917

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: December 8, 2003.
Brent Wahlquist,
Regional Director, Appalachian Regional Coordinating Center.


0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 917 is amended as 
set forth below:

PART 917--KENTUCKY

0
1. The authority citation for part 917 continues to read as follows:

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


Sec.  917.16  [Amended]

0
2. Section 917.16 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (k).

[FR Doc. 03-32107 Filed 12-30-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P