[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 158 (Thursday, August 15, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66214-66218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-18040]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 917

[SATS No. KY-260-FOR; Docket ID: OSM-2018-0008; S1D1S SS08011000 
SX064A000 245S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 24XS501520]


Kentucky Regulatory Program

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

ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment, with one exception.

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

SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 
(OSMRE), are approving an amendment, with one exception, to the 
Kentucky regulatory program (Kentucky program) under the Surface Mining 
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). We are 
approving changes to statutory provisions that involve civil penalty 
fund distributions, self-bonding, and major permit revisions related to 
underground mining. We are not approving a provision that involves 
civil penalty escrow accounts.

DATES: The rule is effective September 16, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Castle, Field Office Director, 
Lexington Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
Enforcement, Telephone: (859) 260-3900, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Kentucky Program
II. Submission of the Amendment
III. OSMRE's Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSMRE's Decision
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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 program includes, among other things, State laws and regulations 
that govern surface coal mining and reclamation operations in 
accordance with the Act and consistent with the Federal regulations. 
See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). Based on these criteria, the 
Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Kentucky program 
effective 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 21434). 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. The regulatory authority in 
Kentucky is the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, Department of 
Natural Resources (herein referred to as the Cabinet).

II. Submission of the Amendment

    By letter dated September 19, 2018 (Administrative Record Number 
KY-2007-01), the Cabinet submitted an amendment to its program under 
SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.), docketed as KY-260-FOR. The amendment 
seeks to revise the Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) to include 
statutory changes that involve civil penalty escrow accounts, civil 
penalty fund distributions, self-bonding, and major permit revisions 
related to underground mining.
    The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky enacted 
statutory changes through House Bill 261, which was signed by the 
Governor on April 2, 2018, and became effective on July 14, 2018. See 
2018 Ky. Acts ch. 85. These changes are codified at KRS Chapter 350, 
Surface Coal Mining, sections 350.0301, 350.064, 350.070, 350.518, and 
350.990. The Cabinet was not required to promulgate administrative 
regulations as a result of the law.
    We announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the May 10, 2019, 
Federal Register (84 FR 20595) (Administrative Record No. KY-2007-17). 
In the same document, we opened the public comment period and provided 
an opportunity for a public hearing or meeting on these provisions. We 
did not hold a public hearing or meeting because none was requested. 
The public comment period ended on June 10, 2019. No public comments 
were received.

III. OSMRE's Findings

    The following are the findings we made concerning the amendment 
under SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. We 
are

[[Page 66215]]

approving the amendment as described below with the exception of 
changes to KRS 350.0301. Any revisions that we do not specifically 
discuss below concern non-substantive grammatical or editorial changes 
and can be found in the full text of the program amendment available at 
www.regulations.gov.
    A. Civil Penalty Escrow Account, KRS 350.0301, Petition challenging 
determination of cabinet--Conduct of hearings--Administrative 
regulations--Secretary may designate deputy secretary to sign final 
orders.
    Kentucky seeks to revise KRS 350.0301(5) by removing language 
requiring Kentucky's administrative regulations to include provisions 
that: (1) require that operators place civil penalty funds in escrow 
before a formal hearing on the amount of the assessment of the civil 
penalties; and (2) allow Kentucky to waive the escrow requirement for 
individuals who demonstrate with substantial evidence an inability to 
pay the proposed civil penalty assessment into escrow.
    OSMRE Finding: In 2005, the Supreme Court of Kentucky decided 
Commonwealth of Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection 
Cabinet v. Kentec Coal Co., Inc., 177 S.W.3d 718 (Ky. 2005), in which 
the Court concluded that Kentucky's prepayment requirements, codified 
at the time in the Kentucky Administrative Regulations at 405 KAR 
7:092, were in violation of the due process and equal protection 
clauses of the United States Constitution and section 2 of the Kentucky 
Constitution, which prohibits arbitrary State action. In response to 
the Court's decision, Kentucky first removed notice of its prepayment 
requirements from two documents provided to operators, a Notice of 
Assessment of Civil Penalties and a Penalty Assessment Conference 
Officer's Report, and Kentucky added language to those documents making 
clear that prepayment was no longer required to request a formal 
administrative hearing. By letter dated March 28, 2006, Kentucky sent 
us notice of these revisions, which we docketed as Program Amendment 
No. KY-250-FOR and subsequently disapproved on September 18, 2006 (71 
FR 54586).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In 2017, Kentucky removed the prepayment requirement from 
405 KAR 7:092, see 43 Ky.R. 1876 (April 1, 2017), and subsequently 
recodified this provision to 400 KAR 1:110, effective August 4, 
2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In our decision of September 18, 2006 (71 FR 54586), we concluded 
that removing the requirement to place civil penalty funds in escrow 
prior to a formal hearing on the assessment renders the program less 
stringent than section 518(c) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. 1268, and less 
effective than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 845.19(a), and 
therefore disapproved the amendment. As stated in that document, the 
Supreme Court of Kentucky rulings notwithstanding, section 518(c) of 
SMCRA and the Federal regulations require prepayment of a proposed 
penalty if a hearing is requested. Section 518(c) of SMCRA states that 
should the person charged with the penalty wish to contest the amount 
of the penalty or the fact of the violation, that person must forward 
the proposed amount of the penalty to the Secretary for placement into 
an escrow account pending resolution of the contest. 30 U.S.C. 1268(c). 
Section 518(c) further states that failure to forward the money 
accordingly shall result in a waiver of all legal rights to contest the 
violation or the amount of the penalty. Id. The Federal regulations 
repeat this requirement, specifying that the petition and proposed 
penalty amount must be submitted to the Office of Hearings and Appeals. 
30 CFR 845.19(a). Federal courts of appeals have found these provisions 
consistent with the due process and equal protection requirements of 
the United States Constitution. See, e.g., Graham vs. Office of Surface 
Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement, 722 F.2d 1106 (3d Cir. 1983).
    Kentucky's proposed revision to KRS 350.0301 directly relates to 
the same revisions that we disapproved on September 18, 2006, codified 
at 30 CFR 917.12(f). Kentucky's further steps to remove the requirement 
to prepay the assessed penalty into escrow when administrative hearing 
is requested continues to render Kentucky's program less stringent that 
section 518(c) of SMCRA and less effective than the Federal regulations 
at 30 CFR 845.19(a), and therefore are not approved.
    B. Self-Bonding--KRS 350.064, Reclamation bond to be filed by 
applicant.
    Kentucky seeks to revise KRS 350.064(2) by removing language that 
allows self-bonding in the State. A self-bond is a bond of the 
applicant and is backed only by the overall financial health of the 
applicant, without separate surety or specific pledges of collateral. 
In order to have qualified and received approval for self-bond in 
Kentucky, the applicant must successfully demonstrate a history of 
financial solvency and continuous operation and the existence of a 
suitable agent to receive service of process.
    OSMRE Finding: Section 509(c) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. 1259, and its 
implementing regulations at 30 CFR 800.4(d), Regulatory Authority 
Responsibilities; 30 CFR 800.5, Definitions; 30 CFR 800.12, Form of the 
Performance Bond; and 30 CFR 800.23, Self-bonding, permit a regulatory 
authority to accept different forms of performance bonds, including 
self-bonds, as a mechanism to ensure that funds will be available to 
complete the reclamation plan if the work has to be performed by the 
regulatory authority in the event of a forfeiture. The regulatory 
authority may accept a self-bond without separate surety when the 
applicant demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the regulatory 
authority, the existence of a suitable agent to receive service of 
process and a history of financial solvency and continuous operation 
sufficient for authorization to self-insure or bond such amount. Some 
State regulatory programs have accepted self-bonds to guarantee 
reclamation.
    It is reasonable that Kentucky reconsider acceptance of this type 
of performance bond as a reclamation guarantee. In fact, there are no 
active self-bonds being held by Kentucky at this time. SMCRA and its 
implementing regulations do not require that a regulatory authority 
include a self-bond in their regulatory programs; therefore, we find 
that the elimination of self-bonding in the Kentucky program renders 
the program no less stringent than SMCRA and no less effective than the 
Federal regulations, and we approve this change.
    C. Permit Revisions--KRS 350.070, Permit revisions.
    Kentucky seeks to revise KRS 350.070(1) by removing language that 
requires an operator to submit a major permit revision application for 
an extension of an underground mining area that is more than incidental 
boundary revisions, but which does not include planned subsidence or 
other new proposed surface disturbances. Kentucky also seeks to delete 
subsection (6)(b), which defines the maximum number of acres for a 
revision to be considered an incidental boundary revision involving 
underground operations.
    OSMRE Finding: Kentucky originally added the above requirement, 
which we approved, through Kentucky House Bill 707 of 1994, enacted 
1995 Ky. Acts ch. 301. See 60 FR 33110 (June 27, 1995). In our 
approval, we explained that the Federal regulations do not require that 
areas overlying proposed underground workings be included in the permit 
area if no surface disturbance is planned. Id. At 33113. Therefore, 
under those circumstances, where no surface disturbance is planned by 
an extension

[[Page 66216]]

of the underground mining area, no permit revision is required.
    For the same reason that we approved the inclusion of this 
requirement in 1994, we approve its removal. Neither SMCRA nor the 
Federal regulations require Kentucky to include those areas within the 
permit area. Thus, this amendment does not render Kentucky's program 
less stringent than SMCRA or less effective than the Federal 
regulations at 30 CFR 774.13, Permit revisions, or 30 CFR part 784, 
Underground Mining Permit Applications--Minimum Requirements for 
Reclamation and Operation Plan.
    D. Civil Penalty Funds and Distribution--KRS 350.518, [relating to 
Kentucky's bond pool], and KRS 350.990, Penalties.
    Kentucky seeks to delete KRS 350.518(11), which requires penalty 
funds in excess of $800,000 in any fiscal year to be equally deposited 
between: (a) the Kentucky Reclamation Guaranty Fund (KRGF), which 
finances Kentucky's alternative bonding system, or bond pool; and (b) 
the Abandoned Mine Land (AML) supplemental fund, which was established 
under KRS 350.139 and consists primarily of interest generated on funds 
derived from the forfeiture of conventional bonds, and which is to be 
used to supplement forfeited conventional bonds that are inadequate to 
complete the reclamation plan. In a complementary revision, Kentucky 
seeks to delete similar language from KRS 350.990(1). KRS 350.990(1) 
further directs that the money disbursed to the KRGF be used for the 
purposes set forth in KRS 350.500-350.521 (relating to Kentucky's bond 
pool) and KRS 350.595 (relating to Kentucky's Abandoned Mine Land 
Enhancement Program, which provides partial bond coverage for eligible 
remining operations), and that money disbursed to the AML supplemental 
fund established under KRS 350.139(1) be used for the purposes of that 
section. In place of these deleted allocations, Kentucky seeks to add 
language to KRS 350.990(1) that directs that penalties in excess of 
$800,000 in any fiscal year be deposited into the restricted fund 
account of the Office of the Commissioner of the Department for Natural 
Resources to be disbursed for the purposes set out in KRS chapters 350 
(Surface Coal Mining), 351 (Department for Natural Resources), and 352 
(Mining Regulations). KRS chapters 351 and 352 consist of Kentucky's 
coal mine safety laws.
    OSMRE Finding: We approved the provision to equally distribute 
civil penalty funds in excess of $800,000 into two specific reclamation 
funds in KY-218 on May 10, 2000 (65 FR 29949). At that time, civil 
penalties collected in any fiscal year up to $800,000 were deposited 
with the State Treasury to the credit of Kentucky's general fund, see 
KRS 350.139, and any sums in excess of $800,000 were to go to the 
Kentucky Bond Pool Fund (BPF) (the predecessor to the KRGF). From 
there, one half of the excess would go to a new bond forfeiture 
supplemental fund but only when the balance of the BPF was above the 
maximum of the operating range necessary to ensure solvency ($16 
million at the time). A review of the adequacy of the BPF was conducted 
in 2011; the findings concluded that reclamation performance bonds were 
not always sufficient to complete reclamation required in approved 
permits. As a result, the program was amended by KY-256 on January 29, 
2018 (83 FR 3948) to ensure bond amounts were adequate to complete 
reclamation in the event of forfeiture. As part of that effort, 
Kentucky eliminated the BPF and replaced it with the KRGF, which 
carried greater safeguards, such as periodic actuarial studies to 
determine the amount necessary to ensure its solvency. At the same 
time, Kentucky removed the $16 million minimum balance and, instead, 
required periodic actuarial studies in order to determine the necessary 
balance of the KRGF.
    In our 2000 approval, we noted that Kentucky was not diverting any 
money away from the BPF except for proceeds in excess of the amount 
necessary to guarantee its solvency. See 65 FR 29949 at 29950. In our 
2018 approval, we noted that the safeguards provided in the KRGF ensure 
the KRGF's solvency, and therefore removing the commitment of civil 
penalty money to the KRGF to achieving a particular minimum balance was 
not inconsistent with SMCRA or its implementing regulations. See 83 FR 
3948 at 3953.
    The Kentucky revisions described above broaden the potential uses 
of civil penalty funds to any purposes set out in KRS chapters 350, 
351, and 352, which would include the current purposes laid out for the 
KRGF and the AML supplemental fund established under chapter 350. 
Kentucky has the discretion to allocate its funds in a manner that 
supports the objectives of its program. Unlike performance bond funds, 
no Federal requirements exist that direct penalty funds be used for 
reclamation. Our regulations at 30 CFR 845.21 explain our use of 
Federal civil penalties for reclamation subject to Congressional 
authorization; however, this provision was the result of a continuing 
resolution by Congress in 1987, which, for the first time, authorized 
us to use civil penalty money in this manner and was not part of the 
broader SMCRA program required of the States. See 53 FR 16016 (May 4, 
1988). Because, as was the case when we approved this requirement in 
2000, neither SMCRA nor the Federal regulations require civil penalty 
funds to be used on reclamation, Kentucky's program is not less 
stringent than SMCRA or less effective than the Federal regulations at 
30 CFR 845.21 by using these funds for other purposes; therefore, we 
approve these revisions.

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

Public Comments

    We solicited public comments and provided an opportunity for a 
public hearing on the proposed amendment in the May 10, 2019, Federal 
Register document announcing receipt of this amendment (84 FR 20595). 
Because no one requested an opportunity to speak at a public hearing, 
none was held. We did not receive any comments from the public.

Federal Agency Comments

    On December 3, 2018, under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and section 
503(b) of SMCRA, we requested comments on the amendment from various 
Federal agencies with an actual or potential interest in the Kentucky 
program (Administrative Record Nos. KY-2007-08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 
14). We did not receive any comments.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to obtain written 
concurrence from EPA for 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 Kentucky proposed to 
make in this amendment pertain to air or water quality standards. 
Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the amendment. However, on 
December 3, 2018, under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments 
from the EPA on the amendment (Administrative Record No. KY-2007-09 and 
10). We did not receive any comments from EPA.

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 the ACHP on amendments

[[Page 66217]]

that may have an effect on historic properties. On December 3, 2018, we 
requested comments on the amendment from the SHPO (Administrative 
Record No. KY-2007-13) and the ACHP (Administrative Record No. KY-2007-
11). SHPO responded on December 26, 2018, that they had no comment as 
the amendment is not likely to cause changes that could impact cultural 
resources (Administrative Record No. KY-2007-16). We did not receive a 
response from the ACHP.

V. OSMRE's Decision

    Based on the above findings, we are approving Kentucky's amendment 
submitted to OSMRE on September 19, 2018 (Administrative Record No. KY-
2007-01), with one exception. For the reasons stated above, removal of 
the requirement for civil penalty funds to be placed in escrow before a 
formal hearing is not approved, and therefore the requirement is not 
eliminated from Kentucky's program.
    To implement the approval of the remaining four provisions, we are 
amending the Federal regulations at 30 CFR part 917 that codify 
decisions concerning the Kentucky program. In accordance with the 
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 500 et seq.), this rule will 
take effect 30 days after the date of publication.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12630--Governmental Actions and Interference With 
Constitutionality Protected Property Rights

    This rule would not effect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications that would result in private 
property being taken for government use without just compensation under 
the law. Therefore, a takings implication assessment is not required. 
This determination is based on an analysis of the relevant Federal 
regulations.

Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review, Executive Order 
13563--Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, and Executive Order 
14094--Modernizing Regulatory Review

    Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094, 
provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will review all significant 
rules. Pursuant to OMB guidance, dated October 12, 1993 (OMB Memo M-94-
3), the approval of State program and/or plan amendments is exempted 
from OMB review under Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive 
Order 14094. Executive Order 13563, which reaffirms and supplements 
Executive Order 12866, retains this exemption.

Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform

    The Department of the Interior has reviewed this rule as required 
by section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988. The Department has determined 
that this Federal Register document meets the criteria of section 3 of 
Executive Order 12988, which is intended to ensure that the agency 
review its legislation and proposed regulations to eliminate drafting 
errors and ambiguity; that the agency write its legislation and 
regulations to minimize litigation; and that the agency's legislation 
and regulations provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct 
rather than a general standard, and promote simplification and burden 
reduction. Because section 3 focuses on the quality of Federal 
legislation and regulations, the Department limited its review under 
this Executive order to the quality of this Federal Register document 
and to changes to the Federal regulations. The review under this 
Executive order does not extend to the language of the State regulatory 
program or to the program amendment that the Commonwealth of Kentucky 
drafted.

Executive Order 13132--Federalism

    This rule has potential federalism implications as defined under 
section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132, which directs agencies to 
``grant the States the maximum administrative discretion possible'' 
with respect to Federal statutes and regulations administered by the 
States. Kentucky, through its approved regulatory program, implements 
and administers SMCRA and its implementing regulations at the State 
level. This rule approves an amendment to the Kentucky program 
submitted and drafted by the State and, thus, is consistent with the 
direction to provide maximum administrative direction to States.

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

    The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its 
government-to-government relationship with Tribes through a commitment 
to consultation with Tribes and recognition of their right to self-
governance and Tribal sovereignty. We have evaluated this rule under 
the Department's consultation policy and under the criteria in 
Executive Order 13175 and have determined that it has no substantial 
direct effects on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Tribes. The basis for this 
determination is that our decision on the Kentucky program does not 
include Indian lands as defined by SMCRA or other Tribal lands and it 
does not affect the regulation of activities on Indian lands or other 
Tribal lands. Indian lands under SMCRA are regulated independently 
under the applicable Federal Indian program. The Department's 
consultation policy also acknowledges that our rules may have Tribal 
implications where the State proposing the amendment encompasses 
ancestral lands in areas with mineable coal. We are currently working 
to identify and engage appropriate Tribal stakeholders to devise a 
constructive approach for consulting on these amendments.

Executive Order 13211--Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare a Statement of 
Energy Effects for a rulemaking 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 
significant energy action under the definition in Executive Order 
13211, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.

National Environmental Policy Act

    Consistent with sections 501(a) and 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 
1251(a) and 1292(d), respectively) and the U.S. Department of the 
Interior Departmental Manual, part 516, section 13.5(A), State program 
amendments are not 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 include requests and requirements of an 
individual, partnership, or corporation to obtain information and 
report it to a Federal agency. As this rule does not contain 
information collection requirements, a submission to the Office of 
Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.) is not required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the

[[Page 66218]]

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal, 
which is the subject of this rule, mostly reflects the State's policy 
choices not required by or prohibited by Federal law. The part of this 
rule disapproving one of the State's proposed revisions 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. In making the determination as to whether this part of the 
rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied 
upon the data and assumptions for the corresponding 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 on an analysis of the State 
submittal, which mostly reflects State policy choices not required by 
or prohibited by Federal law. For the part of this rule disapproving 
one of the State's proposed revisions, the determination is based on an 
analysis of the corresponding Federal regulations, which were 
determined not to constitute a major rule.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 
Tribal governments, or the private sector of more than $100 million per 
year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State, 
local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. This determination 
is based on an analysis of the State submittal, which mostly reflects 
State policy choices not required by or prohibited by Federal law. For 
the part of this rule disapproving one of the State's proposed 
revisions, the determination is based on an analysis of the 
corresponding Federal regulations, which were determined not to impose 
an unfunded mandate. Therefore, a statement containing the information 
required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is 
not required.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 917

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

Thomas D. Shope,
Regional Director, North Atlantic--Appalachian Region.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Office of Surface 
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement amends 30 CFR part 917 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.


0
2. Section 917.12 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  917.12  State regulatory program and proposed program amendment 
provisions not approved.

* * * * *
    (i) We are not approving revisions to KRS 350.0301 made by 2018 Ky. 
Acts ch. 85 that would have eliminated a requirement that Kentucky 
promulgate regulations providing that operators must place proposed 
civil penalty assessments into an escrow account prior to a formal 
hearing on the amount of the assessment.

0
3. Section 917.15 is amended by adding a new entry to the table in 
paragraph (a) in chronological order by ``Date of Final Publication'' 
to read as follows:


Sec.  917.15  Approval of Kentucky regulatory program amendments.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Original amendment submission    Date of final
             date                  publication      Citation/description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
September 19, 2018............  August 15, 2024..  KRS 350.064, KRS
                                                    350.070, KRS
                                                    350.518, and KRS
                                                    350.990.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2024-18040 Filed 8-14-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P