Ohio Regulatory Program

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 935

Ohio Regulatory Program

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

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: OSM is reopening the public comment period for proposed

Program Amendment Number 63 (PA 63) to the Ohio permanent regulatory

program and AML program (hereinafter referred to as the Ohio programs)

under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA).

Ohio has submitted additional information to expand upon its original

submission of PA 63.

DATES: Written comments must be received by 4 p.m., E.D.T., June 24,

1994.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed or hand delivered to

Richard J. Seibel, Director, Columbus Field Office, at the address

listed below.

Copies of the Ohio programs, the proposed amendment, and all

written comments received in response to this document will be

available for public review at the addresses listed below during normal

business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. Each

requester may receive one free copy of the proposed amendment by

contacting OSM's Columbus Field Office.

Richard J. Seibel, Director, Columbus Field Office, Office of Surface

Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 4480 Refugee Road, suite 201,

Columbus, Ohio 43232, Telephone: (614) 866-0578

Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Reclamation, 1855

Fountain Square Court, Building H-3, Columbus, Ohio 43224, Telephone:

(614) 265-6675.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard J. Seibel, Director, Columbus Field Office, (614) 866-0578.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On August 16, 1982, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally

approved the Ohio programs. Information on the general background of

the Ohio program submissions, including the Secretary's findings, the

disposition of comments, and a detailed explanation of the conditions

of approval of the Ohio programs, can be found in the August 10, 1982,

Federal Register (47 FR 34688). Subsequent actions concerning the

conditions of approval and program amendments are identified at 30 CFR

935.11, 935.12, 935.15, and 935.16.

II. Discussion of the Proposed Amendment

By letter dated March 15, 1993 (Administrative Record No. OH-1845),

the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Reclamation

(Ohio), submitted proposed PA 63. In that submission, Ohio proposed to

reduce the staff of the Ohio programs by abolishing 28 existing

positions. Ohio also proposed to reorganize the remaining staff

positions to assume the existing job duties.

PA 63 included seven attachments intended to describe Ohio's

proposal for the staffing reduction and reorganization and to provide

the rationale for those actions. The amendment contains no proposed

revisions to Ohio's coal mining law in the Ohio Revised Code or coal

mining rules in the Ohio Administrative Code.

The seven attachments to PA 63 are summarized briefly in the notice

of the receipt of the proposed amendment which OSM published in the

Federal Register (55 FR 18185) on April 8, 1993. The public comment

period ended on May 10, 1993. The public hearing scheduled for May 3,

1993, was not held because no one requested an opportunity to testify.

By letter dated June 16, 1993 (Administrative Record No. OH-1890),

Ohio submitted additional information concerning the reduction of

staffing levels. In addition, Ohio included seven attachments. The

first attachment was a chart for the years 1987 through 1992 showing

coal production, active mining permits, and new permits issued; the

second attachment was a chart showing the acreage of Phase I, Phase II,

and Phase III bond releases from 1983 through 1992; the third

attachment was a draft policy/procedure directive concerning the role

of the inspectors in inspecting forfeited sites and in assisting in

plan review and preparation and in completing the paperwork associated

with forfeitures; the fourth attachment was the monthly enforcement

report; the fifth attachment was a draft policy/procedure directive

concerning the participation of Abandoned Mine Lands (AML) staff in

small project designs; the sixth attachment was a description of the

workload of the inspection and enforcement engineer; and the seventh

attachment concerned engineering guidelines. Through an oversight, OSM

did not reopen the comment period at that time.

Subsequently, by letter dated November 2, 1993 (Administrative

Record No. OH-1948), OSM provided its questions and comments to Ohio on

the March 15, 1993, and June 16, 1993, submissions of PA 63. OSM's

questions and comments were listed under the following six headings:

Streamlining of AML Designs; Engineering--Bond Forfeitures;

Engineering--Inspection and Enforcement Issues; Position Descriptions;

Bond Forfeiture Program; and SOAP Program.

By letter dated December 6, 1993 (Administrative Record No. OH-

1971), Ohio provided its responses to OSM's questions and comments

under the six headings listed above. In addition, Ohio included two

attachments. One attachment is a letter addressed to OSM dated November

5, 1993. This letter explains organizational responsibilities in Ohio's

engineering/geotechnical support group and the AML program.

The other attachment is a log of engineering inspection and

enforcement activity.

OSM announced receipt of Ohio's additional Administrative Record

information in the January 21, 1994, Federal Register (59 FR 3325), and

in the same document opened the public comment period and provided an

opportunity for a public hearing on the adequacy of the proposed

amendment. The public comment period closed on February 7, 1994.

In response to OSM's concerns regarding engineering practices and

engineering workload, on April 21, 1994 (Administrative Record No. OH-

2014), Ohio submitted additional information on both of these items.

III. Public Comment Procedures

OSM is reopening the comment period on the proposed Ohio program

amendment to provide the public an opportunity to reconsider the

adequacy of the proposed amendment in light of the additional materials

submitted.

In accordance with the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), OSM is now

seeking comments on whether the proposed amendment satisfies the

applicable program approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If the amendment

is deemed adequate, it will become part of the Ohio program.

Written Comments

Written comments should be specific, pertain only to the issues

proposed in this rulemaking, and include explanations in support of the

commenter's recommendations. Comments received after the time indicated

under DATES or at locations other than the Columbus Field Office will

not necessarily be considered in the final rulemaking or included in

the Administrative Record.

IV. Procedural Determinations

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).

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, to the extent allowed by law, 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 1255) and 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.

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 (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 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 submittal which is the subject of this rule 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. 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 in the analyses for the corresponding Federal regulations.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 935

Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

Dated: June 3, 1994.

Robert J. Biggi,

Acting Assistant Director, Eastern Support Center.

[FR Doc. 94-14055 Filed 6-8-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-05-M