[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 63 (Monday, April 4, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17014-17018]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-6601]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 913

[Docket No. IL-103-FOR]


Illinois 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: We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 
(OSM), are announcing receipt of a proposed amendment to the Illinois 
regulatory program (Illinois program) under the Surface Mining Control 
and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Illinois proposes to 
revise its regulations about revegetation success standards, to update 
statutory citations, to correct regulatory citations, and to clarify 
language in various provisions. Illinois intends to revise its program 
to clarify ambiguities and to improve operational efficiency.
    This document gives the times and locations that the Illinois 
program and proposed amendment to that program are available for your 
inspection, the comment period during which you may submit written 
comments on the amendment, and the procedures that we will follow for 
the public hearing, if one is requested.

DATES: We will accept written comments on this amendment until 4 p.m., 
e.s.t., May 4, 2005. If requested, we will hold a public hearing on the 
amendment on April 29, 2005. We will accept requests to speak at a 
hearing until 4 p.m., e.s.t. on April 19, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. IL-103-
FOR, by any of the following methods:
     E-mail: [email protected]. Include Docket No. IL-103-FOR 
in the subject line of the message.
     Mail/Hand Delivery: Andrew R. Gilmore, Chief, Alton Field 
Division--Indianapolis Area Office, Office of Surface Mining 
Reclamation and Enforcement, Minton-Capehart Federal Building, 575 
North Pennsylvania Street, Room 301, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

[[Page 17015]]

     Fax: (317) 226-6182
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number for this rulemaking. For detailed instructions on 
submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking 
process, see the ``Public Comment Procedures'' heading of the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to review copies of the Illinois 
program, this amendment, a listing of any scheduled public hearings, 
and all written comments received in response to this document, you 
must go to the address listed below during normal business hours, 
Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. You may receive one free 
copy of the amendment by contacting OSM's Indianapolis Area Office.
    Andrew R. Gilmore, Chief, Alton Field Division--Indianapolis Area 
Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Minton-
Capehart Federal Building, 575 North Pennsylvania Street, Room 301, 
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204, Telephone: (317) 226-6700, E-mail: 
[email protected].
    In addition, you may review a copy of the amendment during regular 
business hours at the following location: Illinois Department of 
Natural Resources, Office of Mines and Minerals, Land Reclamation 
Division, One Natural Resources Way, Springfield, Illinois 62701, 
Telephone: (217) 782-4970.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew R. Gilmore, Chief, Alton Field 
Division--Indianapolis Area Office. Telephone: (317) 226-6700. E-mail: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Illinois Program
II. Description of the Proposed Amendment
III. Public Comment Procedures
IV. Procedural Determinations

I. Background on the Illinois 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 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 this Act * * *; and rules and 
regulations consistent with regulations issued by the Secretary 
pursuant to this 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 Illinois program on June 1, 1982. You can find background 
information on the Illinois program, including the Secretary's 
findings, the disposition of comments, and the conditions of approval 
of the Illinois program in the June 1, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR 
23858). You can also find later actions concerning the Illinois program 
and program amendments at 30 CFR 913.10, 913.15, 913.16, and 913.17.

II. Description of the Proposed Amendment

    By letter dated February 1, 2005 (Administrative Record No. IL-
5088), Illinois sent us an amendment to its program under SMCRA (30 
U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). Illinois sent the amendment at its own 
initiative. Illinois is proposing to amend its regulations at 62 
Illinois Administrative Code (IAC) Parts 1816, 1817, and 1823. Below is 
a summary of the changes proposed by Illinois. The full text of the 
program amendment is available for you to read at the locations listed 
above under ADDRESSES.

A. 62 IAC 1816.116 Revegetation Success Standards

    Illinois proposes to amend its regulations at 62 IAC 1816.116 to 
(1) incorporate a new productivity alternative to the Agricultural 
Lands Productivity Formula (ALPF), for determining success of 
revegetation of cropland, pasture land, hayland, and/or grazing land; 
(2) to update references to and requirements in existing regulations 
concerning the new productivity alternative; (3) to update requirements 
pertaining to adjustment for abnormal, catastrophic, growing conditions 
when the ALPF or the new productivity alternative is used for 
determining success of revegetation, (4) to remove references to oats 
as a crop that may be used to prove productivity success; (5) to update 
information in the soil master file, county average yield file, the 
agricultural lands productivity formula sampling methods, and Exhibit A 
in the ALPF, and (6) to delete Tables A through D from the ALPF.
    1. 62 IAC 1816.116(a)(3)(C) and (E). At subsections (a)(3)(C) and 
(E), Illinois proposes to add a reference to new subsection (a)(6) and 
to add the following requirement at the end of each of the subsections:
    Once chosen by the permittee, the productivity alternative in 
subsection (a)(6) may not be modified without approval from the 
Department.
    2. 62 IAC 1816.116(a)(4). At subsection (a)(4), Illinois proposes 
to reference the new productivity alternative in subsection (a)(6); to 
update requirements pertaining to adjustment for abnormal, 
catastrophic, growing conditions when the ALPF or the new productivity 
alternative is used for determining success of revegetation; and to 
remove a reference to oat crops from several provisions.
    a. In the introductory paragraph of subsection (a)(4), Illinois 
proposes to add a reference to the new productivity alternative at 
subsection (a)(6).
    b. Illinois proposes to change the requirements of subsection 
(a)(4)(C) concerning adjustments for abnormal growing conditions to 
read as follows:

    (C) Adjustments for abnormal growing conditions shall be 
accepted by the Department if such adjustments are certified by a 
qualified professional (American Society of Agronomy certified) or 
National Association of State Departments of Agriculture crop 
enumerators used under this Section, whose ability to perform such 
adjustments has been previously approved by the Department.

    c. At subsection (a)(4)(D), Illinois proposes to remove a reference 
to ``oats'' as a type of crop commonly grown on surrounding unmined 
cropland and as a crop that may be used for one year to demonstrate 
productivity on prime farmland and other cropland areas. Illinois also 
proposes to add the following requirement concerning deep tillage of 
prime farmland and other cropland areas:

    If deep tillage has been completed to a minimum depth of 36 
inches prior to bond release, the applicant may use more than one 
successful year of hay or wheat as a crop to be used for the 
productivity demonstration. The requirement for one successful year 
of corn remains unchanged under this provision.

    3. 62 IAC 1816.116(a)(6). Illinois proposes a new productivity 
alternative at new subsection (a)(6). It reads as follows:

    (6) In order to use the alternative to the Agricultural Lands 
Productivity Formula, Appendix A, to determine success of 
revegetation, the following shall apply: use of this alternative is 
contingent that the permittee can demonstrate for the entire field 
that the soil strength of the entire soil profile will average <= 
200 psi or has been deep tilled to a minimum depth of 36 inches 
prior to bond release, and soil fertility will average Optimum 
Management for pH, P and K values as defined under the current 
Illinois Agronomy Handbook, and intensive land leveling is 
implemented, as needed, for the entire field. Areas to be tested are 
allowed under the provisions of subsections (a)(4)(B) or (C).
    (A) The following substitution of Column F--Appendix A--County 
Average Yield File shall read:

[[Page 17016]]

    Column F is a derived optimum management production (Figure) 
obtained by multiplying the figures in Column D times the figures in 
Column E. This production figure will normally exceed actual 
production because the optimum level management yield is used. The 
purpose of using the optimum management production is to derive a 
weighted average optimum management yield which is the total optimum 
management production (Column F) divided by the total grain acres in 
the county (Column D). The weighted optimum management yield figure 
will be used to derive a ``factor'' as described below:
    Factor = Average of Official County Crop Yield for the Five 
Previous Years ) Average of Weighted Optimum Management Yield for 
the Five Years
    (B) When the above ``factor'' and hand sampling is used, the 
harvest loss will be calculated by averaging the harvest loss of the 
five previous years for the crop being tested.

    4. 62 IAC 1816. Appendix A--ALPF. Illinois proposes to update 
information in the soil master file, county cropped acreage file, 
county average yield file, the agricultural lands productivity formula 
sampling methods, and Exhibit A in the ALPF and to delete Tables A 
through D from the ALPF.
    a. Citation Corrections. In the soil master file and the county 
cropped acreage file, Illinois is changing a citation reference to the 
Illinois Department of Agriculture from ``20 [Illinois Compiled 
Statutes] ILCS 205/40.38'' to ``20 ILCS 205-115.''
    b. Soil Master File. Illinois proposes to revise the introductory 
paragraph by changing the word ``high'' to the word ``optimum'' in its 
reference to the ``high level of management yields'' and by adding the 
following sentence at the end of the paragraph:

    The reference document for information contained in the soil 
master file shall be Bulletin 811, ``Optimum Crop Productivity 
Ratings for Illinois Soil,'' University of Illinois, College of 
Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, Office of 
Research, August 2002.

    Illinois also proposes to remove the information on additional 
components of the soil master file.
    c. County Average Yield File. In the fifth paragraph, Illinois 
proposes to remove its reference to ``oats'' as a grain crop. In the 
seventh paragraph, Illinois proposes to change the word ``high'' to the 
word ``optimum'' in the phrase ``high management yield.'' In the eighth 
paragraph, Illinois proposes to change the word ``high'' to the word 
``optimum'' in the phrase ``high management yield'' and to add the 
following new information:

    If official county crop yields are unavailable for a specific 
crop in a given year, the Department, in consultation with the 
permittee, and with the concurrence of the Illinois Department of 
Agriculture, will substitute a county crop yield from an adjacent 
county with similar soils, if it can be determined that similar 
weather conditions occurred in that year.

    d. Agricultural Lands Productivity Formula Sampling Methods. In the 
introductory paragraph, Illinois proposes to remove its reference to 
``oats'' as a grain crop. Illinois proposes to revise Step 10 under the 
section heading ``Corn Sampling Technique'' by removing the existing 
information on the row factor and replacing this information with 
``average row width in feet x 15 feet of row / 43560 square feet/
acre.'' Illinois also proposes to remove the sections ``Oats Sampling 
Technique (Rows <8'')'' and ``Oats Sampling Technique (Discernible 
Rows)'' from the ALPF.
    e. Exhibit A, County Crop Yields by Soil Mapping Unit. Illinois 
proposes to change the word ``high'' to the word ``optimum'' in columns 
E and F and to remove a reference to oats.
    f. Illinois proposes to delete tables A through D from the ALPF.

B. 62 IAC Part 1817 Permanent Program Performance Standards--
Underground Mining Operations

    Illinois proposes to update statutory citations, to correct 
regulation references, and to add clarifying language to several 
regulations.
    1. 62 IAC 1817.42 Hydrologic Balance-Water Quality Standards and 
Effluent Limitations. Illinois proposes to change the statutory 
citation for the Illinois Environmental Protection Act from ``(Ill. 
Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 111\1/2\, pars. 1001 et seq.)'' to ``[415 ILCS 
5].''
    2. 62 IAC 1817.43 Diversions:
    a. At subsection (a)(2)(D) Illinois proposes to change the 
statutory citation for the Illinois Rivers, Lakes, and Streams Act from 
``(Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 19, pars. 52-79)'' to ``[615 ILCS 5].''
    b. At subsections (b) and (c), Illinois is proposing to simplify 
its use of numbers.
    3. 62 IAC 1817.116 Revegetation Success Standards:
    a. At subsections (a)(3)(C) and (E), Illinois proposes to add a 
reference to the newly proposed productivity alternative at 62 IAC 
1816.116(a)(6) and to add the following requirement at the end of each 
subsection:
    Once chosen by the permittee, the productivity alternative in 
subsection (a)(6) may not be modified without approval from the 
Department.
    b. At subsection (a)(4), Illinois proposes to add a reference to 
the newly proposed productivity alternative at 62 IAC 1816.116(a)(6).
    c. At subsection (b)(2), Illinois proposes to correct a regulation 
citation reference by changing it from ``62 IAC 1785.15'' to ``62 IAC 
1823.15.''
    4. 62 IAC 1817.121 Subsidence Control:
    a. At subsection (c), Repair of Damage, Illinois proposes to add 
the following new introductory paragraph:
    The requirements of this subsection apply only to subsidence-
related damage caused by underground coal extraction conducted after 
February 1, 1983, except as noted in Section 1817.41(j).
    b. At subsection (c)(2), Illinois proposes to remove the last 
sentence.

C. 62 IAC Part 1823.15 Prime Farmland-Revegetation

    a. At subsection (b)(2), Illinois proposes to add a reference to 
the newly proposed productivity alternative under 62 IAC 
1816.116(a)(6).
    b. At subsection (b)(3), Illinois proposes to add a reference to 
the newly proposed productivity alternative under 62 IAC 
1816.116(a)(6), to simplify its use of numbers, and to add the 
following new requirement:
    Once chosen by the permittee, the productivity alternative in 
subsection (a)(6) may not be modified without approval from the 
Department.

III. Public Comment Procedures

    Under the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), we are seeking 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 State program.

Written Comments

    Send your written or electronic comments to OSM at the address 
given above. Your written comments should be specific, pertain only to 
the issues proposed in this rulemaking, and include explanations in 
support of your recommendations. We will not consider or respond to 
your comments when developing the final rule if they are received after 
the close of the comment period (see DATES). We will make every attempt 
to log all comments into the administrative record, but comments 
delivered to an address other than the Indianapolis Area Office may not 
be logged in.

Electronic Comments

    Please submit Internet comments as an ASCII or Word file avoiding 
the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Please also 
include ``Attn: Docket No. IL-103-FOR'' and your name and return 
address in your

[[Page 17017]]

Internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation that we have 
received your Internet message, contact the Indianapolis Area Office at 
(317) 226-6700.

Availability of Comments

    We will make comments, including names and addresses of 
respondents, available for public review during normal business hours. 
We will not consider anonymous comments. If individual respondents 
request confidentiality, we will honor their request to the extent 
allowable by law. Individual respondents who wish to withhold their 
name or address from public review, except for the city or town, must 
state this prominently at the beginning of their comments. We will make 
all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals 
identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations 
or businesses, available for public review in their entirety.

Public Hearing

    If you wish to speak at the public hearing, contact the person 
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4 p.m., e.s.t. on April 
19, 2005. If you are disabled and need special accommodations to attend 
a public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT. We will arrange the location and time of the 
hearing with those persons requesting the hearing. If no one requests 
an opportunity to speak, we will not hold a hearing.
    To assist the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we 
request, if possible, that each person who speaks at the public hearing 
provide us with a written copy of his or her comments. The public 
hearing will continue on the specified date until everyone scheduled to 
speak has been given an opportunity to be heard. If you are in the 
audience and have not been scheduled to speak and wish to do so, you 
will be allowed to speak after those who have been scheduled. We will 
end the hearing after everyone scheduled to speak and others present in 
the audience who wish to speak, have been heard.

Public Meeting

    If only one person requests an opportunity to speak, we may hold a 
public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with 
us to discuss the amendment, please request a meeting by contacting the 
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings 
are open to the public and, if possible, we will post notices of 
meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES. We will make a 
written summary of each meeting a part of the administrative record.

IV. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12630--Takings

    This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is 
based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.

Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) 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. However, these standards are not applicable 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 
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.

Executive Order 13132--Federalism

    This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates 
the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the 
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of 
the purposes of SMCRA is to ``establish a nationwide program to protect 
society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal 
mining operations.'' Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State 
laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be ``in 
accordance with'' the requirements of SMCRA, and section 503(a)(7) 
requires that State programs contain rules and regulations ``consistent 
with'' regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.

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 Illinois program does 
not regulate coal exploration and surface coal mining and reclamation 
operations on Indian lands. Therefore, the Illinois 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 is not expected to 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 
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 State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon 
counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was

[[Page 17018]]

prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a 
significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small 
entities. 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.

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. 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. This determination is based upon the fact that the State 
submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart 
Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a 
determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a 
major rule.

Unfunded Mandates

    This rule 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. This determination is based upon the fact that the State 
submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart 
Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a 
determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an 
unfunded mandate.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 913

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: March 1, 2005.
Charles E. Sandberg,
Regional Director, Mid-Continent Regional Coordinating Center.
[FR Doc. 05-6601 Filed 4-1-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P