Utah Regulatory Program

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 944

Utah Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.

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

SUMMARY: OSM is approving an amendment to the Utah regulatory program

(hereinafter referred to as the ``Utah program'') under the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). Utah proposed

revisions to rules pertaining to significant permit revisions. The

amendment was intended to improve operational efficiency and simplify

the processing and approval of coal permit changes ordered by the Utah

Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (Division).

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 24, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas E. Ehmett, Telephone: (505) 766-1486.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Utah Program

On January 21, 1981, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally

approved the Utah program. General background information on the Utah

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).

Subsequent actions concerning Utah's program and program amendments can

be found at 30 CFR 944.15, 944.16, and 944.30.

II. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated March 7, 1994, Utah submitted a proposed amendment

to its program pursuant to SMCRA (administrative record No. UT-899).

Utah submitted the proposed amendment on its own initiative to

``streamline the Utah program and to simplify the process for revising

permits.'' The provisions of the Utah Coal Mining Rules that Utah

proposed to revise were Utah Administrative Rules (Utah Admin. R.) 645-

303-224.400, .500, and .600, regarding the requirements for significant

permit revisions.

OSM announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the March 28,

1994, Federal Register (59 FR 14377), provided an opportunity for a

public hearing or meeting on its substantive adequacy, and invited

public comment on its adequacy (administrative record No. UT-910).

Because no one requested a public hearing or meeting, none was held.

The public comment period ended on April 27, 1994.

III. Director's Findings

As discussed below, the Director, in accordance with SMCRA and 30

CFR 732.15 and 732.17, finds that the proposed program amendment

submitted by Utah on March 7, 1994, is no less effective than the

corresponding Federal regulations and no less stringent than SMCRA.

Accordingly, the Director approves the proposed amendment.

Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224.400, .500, and .600, Significant Permit

Revisions

Utah's rules at Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224 set forth those

conditions under which an operator's application for a permit change

must be processed by Utah as a significant permit revision. In these

rules, Utah proposed to delete Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224.400 and to

recodify Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224.500 and .600 as Utah Admin. R. 645-

303-224.400 and .500, respectively. The rule proposed for deletion

requires that permit changes that are ordered by the Division in

accordance with Utah Admin. R. 645-303-212 and 213 (the provisions

authorizing the Division to order permit revisions) must always be

processed as significant permit revisions.

The Federal regulation at 30 CFR 774.13(b)(2) requires each State

with primacy to establish guidelines for determining when a permit

revision must be subjected to all of the permit application information

requirements and procedures of 30 CFR, Subchapter G, including the

notice, public participation, and notice of decision requirements at 30

CFR 773.13, 773.19(b) (1) and (3), and 778.21. In addition, 30 CFR

774.13(b)(2) requires that the above requirements and procedures shall

apply, at a minimum, to all ``significant'' permit revisions. The

Federal regulation does not define the term ``significant.'' Instead,

the Federal regulation allows each State to determine, for itself, when

a permit revision is significant, and when it is not significant.

Utah has met the above Federal requirement by promulgating the

criteria at Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224.100 through .600, which

determine when a permit change must be processed as a ``significant''

permit revision. Under Utah's program, at Utah Admin. R. 645-303-226, a

significant permit revision is subjected to all of the permit

application information requirements at Utah Admin. R. 645-300-100,

645-300-200, 645-301, and 645-302.

One of the criteria for determining when a permit change must be

processed as a significant permit revision is existing Utah Admin. R.

645-303-224.400, which requires that, when a permit change is ordered

by the Division, rather than proposed by an operator on its own

initiative, the permit change must be processed as a significant permit

revision. As set forth at Utah Admin. R. 645-303-211 through 645-303-

213, division-ordered permit changes are required when the review of a

permit reveals that a change in the permit is needed to ensure

compliance with the State program.

Since the Federal regulation at 30 CFR 774.13(b)(2) does not

require that any specific kind of permit revision be processed as a

``significant'' revision, it does not require that a permit revision

ordered by a State regulatory authority be processed as a significant

permit revision. Therefore, Utah's proposal to delete from its program

the requirement at Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224.400 that all permit

changes ordered by the Division be processed as significant permit

revisions is not inconsistent with and is no less effective than the

Federal regulation at 30 CFR 774.13(b)(2). Therefore, the Director

approves the proposed deletion and recodification.

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

1. Public Comments

OSM invited public comments on the proposed amendment, but none

were received.

2. Federal Agency Comments

Pursuant to 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM solicited comments on the

proposed amendment from various Federal agencies with an actual or

potential interest in the Utah program.

The U.S. Bureau of Mines responded on March 27, 1994, by telephone

conversation, that it had no comments on the proposed amendment

(administrative record No. UT-905).

3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), OSM is required to solicit

the written concurrence of EPA with respect to those provisions of the

proposed program amendment that relate to air or water quality

standards promulgated 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 Utah proposed to make in its amendment

pertain to air or water quality standards. Therefore, OSM did not

request EPA's concurrence.

Pursuant to 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM solicited comments on the

proposed amendment from EPA (administrative record No. UT-902). It

responded on March 30, 1994, that it had no comments on the proposed

amendment (administrative record No. UT-912).

4. State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council

on Historic Preservation (ACHP)

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), OSM solicited comments on the

proposed amendment from the SHPO and the ACHP. Neither the SHPO nor the

ACHP responded to OSM's request.

V. Director's Decision

Based on the above finding, the Director approves Utah's proposed

amendment as submitted on March 7, 1994.

The Director approves Utah's revisions of its significant permit

revision rules, including the deletion of Utah Admin. R. 645-303-

224.400 and the recodification of Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224.500 and

.600 as Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224.400 and .500, respectively.

The Director approves the rules as proposed by Utah with the

provision that they be fully promulgated in identical form to the rules

submitted to and reviewed by OSM and the public.

The Federal regulations at 30 CFR Part 944, codifying decisions

concerning the Utah program, are being amended to implement this

decision. This final rule is being made effective immediately to

expedite the State program amendment process and to encourage States to

bring their programs into conformity with the Federal standards without

undue delay. Consistency of State and Federal standards is required by

SMCRA.

VI. 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 12778

The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required

by section 2 of Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform) 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 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 12550) 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.

3. National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is required for this rule since

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 of 1969 (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C)).

4. 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.).

5. 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 that is the subject of this rule is based upon

counterpart 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. Accordingly, this rule will ensure that existing requirements

previously promulgated 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 counterpart Federal regulations.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR 944

Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

Dated: May 17, 1994.

Linda M. Wagner,

Acting Assistant Director, Western Support Center.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, Title 30, Chapter VII,

Subchapter T, of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set

forth below:

PART 944--UTAH

1. The authority citation for part 944 continues to read as

follows:

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

2. Section 944.15 is amended by adding paragraph (y) to read as

follows:

Sec. 944.15 Approval of amendments to the Utah regulatory program.

* * * * *

(y) Revisions to Utah's significant permit revisions rules,

including the deletion of Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224.400 and

recodification of Utah Admin. R. 645-303-224.500 and .600, as Utah

Admin. R. 645-303-224.400 and .500, respectively, as submitted to OSM

on March 7, 1994, are approved effective May 24, 1994.

[FR Doc. 94-12605 Filed 5-23-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-05-M