Kentucky Regulatory Program

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 917

[KY-208-FOR]

Kentucky Regulatory Program

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

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.

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

SUMMARY: OSM is approving a proposed amendment to the Kentucky

regulatory program (hereinafter referred to as the ``Kentucky

program'') under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977

(SMCRA). Kentucky proposed revisions to its regulations pertaining to

civil penalties, performance bond and liability insurance,

contemporaneous reclamation, and revegetation. The amendment is

intended to revise the Kentucky program to be consistent with the

corresponding Federal regulations and SMCRA.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 17, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William J. Kovacic, Director, OSM,

Lexington Field Office, 2675 Regency Road, Lexington, Kentucky 40503.

Telephone: (606) 233-2894.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Kentucky Program

II. Submission to the Proposed Amendment

III. Director's Findings

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

V. Director's Decision

VI. Procedural Determinations

I. Background on the Kentucky Program

On May 18, 1982, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally

approved the Kentucky program. Background information on the Kentucky

program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of

comments, and the conditions of approval can be found in the May 18,

1982, Federal Register (47

[[Page 66221]]

FR 21404). Subsequent actions concerning conditions of approval and

program amendments can be found at 30 CFR 917.11, 917.15, 917.16, and

917.17.

II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

By letter dated July 19, 1994 (Administrative Record No. KY-1304),

Kentucky submitted a proposed amendment to its program pursuant to

SMCRA at its own initiative.

OSM announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the August 9,

1994 Federal Register (59 FR 40503), 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 September 8, 1994.

By letter dated January 11, 1995 (Administrative Record No. KY-

1331), Kentucky resubmitted a proposed amendment that completed its

regulation promulgation process. The resubmission included changes to

405 KAR 10:010--Requirements for Bond and Liability Insurance, 405 KAR

16:010--General Provisions, 16:020 Contemporaneous Reclamation, 405 KAR

18:010--General Provisions, and a Statement of Consideration.

Based on the revised information, OSM reopened the public comment

period in the February 17, 1995 Federal Register (60 FR 9314), and

provided the opportunity for a public hearing on the adequacy of the

revised amendment. The public comment period closed on March 20, 1995.

During its review of the proposed amendment, OSM identified certain

concerns relating to the revegetation provisions at 405 KAR 16:200 and

18:200. OSM notified Kentucky of these concerns by letter dated May 10,

1996 (Administrative Record No. KY-1367). By letter dated June 13, 1996

(Administrative Record No. KY-1369), Kentucky responded to OSM's

concerns by submitting additional explanatory information to its

proposed program amendment. Because the additional information merely

clarified certain provisions of Kentucky's proposed revisions, OSM did

not reopen the public comment period.

By letter dated March 2, 1995 (Administrative Record No. KY-1347),

Kentucky submitted additional revisions to the proposed amendment

pertaining to civil penalty assessment and revegetation. Based on the

revised information. OSM reopened the comment period in the April 17,

1995, Federal Register (60 FR 19193). During its review of the proposed

revisions, OSM noted that Kentucky did not submit the January 6, 1995,

``Procedures for Assessment of Civil Penalties'' incorporated by

reference in the March 2, 1995, amendment. It was subsequently

submitted on September 26, 1996. OSM reopened the comment period in the

October 25, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR 55247).

III. Director's Findings

Set forth below, pursuant to SMCRA and the Federal regulations at

30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17, are the Director's findings concerning the

proposed amendment.

Revisions not specifically discussed below concern nonsubstantive

wording changes, or revised cross-references and paragraph notations to

reflect organizational changes resulting from this amendment.

1. 405 KAR 7:015--Documents Incorporated by Reference

In section 3, Kentucky proposes to delete the incorporation by

reference to the Penalty Assessment Manual. This document is superseded

by the addition of procedures for the assessment of civil penalties at

405 KAR 7:095, section 7. The Director finds that the proposed deletion

at 405 KAR 7:015(3) will not render the State program less effective

than the Federal regulations.

2. 405 KAR 7:095--Assessment of Civil Penalties

At section 5(2), Kentucky proposes to clarify that the provisions

of subsection (2) are in addition to the civil penalty provided for in

subsection (1). At section 7, Kentucky proposes to incorporate by

reference ``Procedures for Assessment of Civil Penalties,'' (January 6,

1995). The document establishes procedures for determining how and when

penalties will be assessed, assessing continuing violations, and

waiving the point system for calculating penalties. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR part 845 provide procedures for the assessment of

civil penalties. The Director finds that the proposed regulations at

405 KAR 7:095 (2) and (7) contain procedural requirements which are the

same or similar to those contained in section 518 of SMCRA, and which

are consistent with the Federal regulations at 30 CFR part 845.

3. 405 KAR 10:010--General Requirements for Performance Bond and

Liability Insurance

At section 2(4), Kentucky proposes to require that a rider to the

applicable performance bond confirming coverage of a revision be

submitted by the applicant if the acreage of the permit area is

unchanged but if the revision: (a) Adds a coal washer, a crush and load

facility, a refuse pile, or a coal mine waste impoundment to the

existing permit or (b) alters the boundary of a permit area or

increment. The Federal regulations at 30 CFR 800.15(d) require that

bonds be adjusted to conform to the permit as revised. Kentucky also

proposes to add a new section 5 which incorporates by reference the

following documents: Performance Bond, SME-42, February, 1991;

Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit; Confirmation of Irrevocable

Standby Letter of Credit; Certificate of Liability Insurance; Notice of

Change of Liability Insurance; and Escrow Agreement. While there are no

direct Federal counterparts, the Director finds that the proposed

revisions at 405 KAR 10:010(2)(4) is not inconsistent with the Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 800.15(d), which requires a regulatory authority

to review the adequacy of a bond for a permit which has been revised.

Also, the Director finds that the incorporation by reference of the

above-listed forms in 405 KAR 10:010(5) will not render the Kentucky

program less effective than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 800.11,

800.21(b) and 800.60.

4. 405 KAR 16:020--Contemporaneous Reclamation

At section 2, Kentucky proposes to revise its backfilling and

grading plan requirements to allow more than one pit per permit if the

permittee makes certain demonstrations. If alternative distance limits

are approved or additional pits allowed, the applicant is required to

provide supplemental assurance in accordance with section 6 of the

regulations. Kentucky also proposes to revise the backfilling and

grading provisions of sections 2(1)-(6). At section 2(1)--Area Mining,

only one pit per permit area is allowed. At section 2(2)--Auger Mining,

the deadline for completion of coal removal is proposed to be 60

calendar days after the initial excavation for the purpose of removal

of topsoil or overburden, instead of 60 calendar days after the initial

surface disturbance. Only one auger mining operation per permit

operation is allowed. At section 2(3)--Contour Mining, the phrase

``surface disturbance'' is replaced by ``excavation for the purpose of

removal of topsoil or overburden,'' in the same manner as described

above for section 2(2). Only one pit per permit area is allowed. At

section 2(4)--Multiple-seam Contour Mining, only one multiple seam

operation per permit is allowed. At section 2(5)--Combined Contour and

Auger Mining, only one contour mining pit and one auger mining

operation per

[[Page 66222]]

permit area are allowed. At section 2(6)--Mountaintop Removal, if the

mountaintop removal operation begins by mining a contour cut around all

or part of the mountaintop, the time and distance limits for contour

mining shall apply to that cut unless alternative limits are approved.

There are no backfilling time and distance limitation, or limits on the

number of pits allowed per permit area in the current Federal

regulations. States must, however, impose time and distance limitations

which ensure that reclamation occurs as contemporaneously as

practicable with mining operations, in accordance with 30 CFR 816.100

and 817.100. The Director finds that the proposed revisions at 405 KAR

16:020 section 2, which now more clearly define the deadline for

completion of coal removal for area and auger mining operations, are

not inconsistent with the general Federal provisions pertaining to

contemporaneous reclamation at 30 CFR 816.100.

Kentucky proposes to add new section 6--Supplemental Assurance. If

alternative distance limits or additional pits are approved, the

applicant is required to submit supplemental assurance in the amounts

specified for the purpose of assuring the reclamation of the additional

unreclaimed disturbed area. This supplemental assurance is in addition

to the performance bond required under 405 KAR Chapter 10. While the

bonding requirements of 405 KAR 10:030, 10:035, and 10:050 shall apply

to supplemental assurance, the bond release requirements of 405 KAR

10:040 shall not apply. Supplemental assurance amounts are specified

for contour, mountaintop removal, and area mining. Supplemental

assurance will be returned upon application and after inspection and

documentation of the completion of backfilling, grading, or highwall

removal, as appropriate. While there are no direct Federal

counterparts, the Director finds that the proposed provisions at 405

KAR 16:020 section 6 are consistent with the Federal regulations

pertaining to adjustment of bond amounts at 30 CFR 800.15(a). However,

the Director notes that additional bond is still required for any

proposal to add acreage to the permit area.

Kentucky proposes to add new section 7--Documents Incorporated by

Reference. Supplemental assurance and escrow agreement forms are

incorporated by reference. Office addresses where the documents may be

reviewed are listed. There are no Federal counterparts to these

provisions. However, the Director finds that the proposed provisions at

405 KAR 16:020 section 7 are not inconsistent with the requirements of

SMCRA and the Federal regulations.

5. 405 KAR 16:200--Revegetation/Surface Mining Activities

405 KAR 18:200--Revegetation/Underground Mining Activities

At section 1(4), Kentucky proposes to clarify for cropland or

pastureland postmining land use, compliance with sections 16:180 3(2)

and 18:180 3(2) for cropland is required. The Director finds that the

proposed revisions at 405 KAR 16:200 1(4) and 18:200 1(4) are no less

effective than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816:97(h) and

817.97(h) and satisfy a portion of the required amendment at 30 CFR

917.16(i), pertaining to Finding number 1 of the June 9, 1993, Federal

Register Notice (58 FR 32283, 32284).

At section 1(5)(b), Kentucky is proposing to delete the reference

to Technical Reclamation Memorandum (TRM) #20 and incorporate by

reference TRM #21 ``Plant Species, Distribution Patterns, Seeding

Rates, and Planting Arrangements for Revegetation of Mined Lands,''

(January 6, 1995). In its review dated April 18, 1996, OSM found TRM

#21 to be technically sound with certain exceptions relating to

stocking standards and soil degradation. Kentucky responded to OSM's

concerns pertaining to stocking standards in its letter dated June 13,

1996 (Administrative Record No. KY-1369). Kentucky's regulations at 405

KAR 16:050 and 18:050--Topsoil--provide for the removal, storage, and

redistribution of topsoil to sustain the appropriate vegetation. The

specific provisions at section 4(1) require that the land be scarified

or otherwise treated to promote root penetration. The Director finds

that the proposed revisions at 405 KAR 16:200 1(5)(b) and 18:200

1(5)(b) are consistent with the Federal provisions pertaining to

revegetation at 30 CFR 816.111 and 817.111, as well as 30 CFR 816.116

and 817.116. The revisions also satisfy a portion of the required

amendment at 30 CFR 917.16(i), pertaining to Finding number 1 of the

June 9, 1993, Federal Register Notice (58 FR 32284).

At section 5(2) (a)2,3 and (b)(2), Kentucky is proposing to

reference the ``Kentucky Agricultural Statistics'' publication as the

source of ground cover success standards. The Federal regulation at 30

CFR 816.116(a)(1) and 817.116(a)(1) allow the regulatory authority to

select standards for success and valid sampling techniques. The

Director finds that the proposed revisions at 405 KAR 16:200 5(2)

(a)2,3 and (b)(2) and 18:200 5(2) (a)2,3 and (b)(2) are no less

effective than the corresponding Federal regulations, and satisfy two

portions of the required amendment at 30 CFR 917.16(i), pertaining to

Finding number 5 of the June 9, 1993, Federal Register Notice (58 FR

32287).

At section 6(1), Kentucky is proposing to require a minimum

stocking density of 300 trees or trees and shrubs, with tree species

comprising at least 75% of the total stock on at least 70% of the area

stocked if forest land is the approved postmining landuse. At section

6(2)(b)1, Kentucky is proposing to require that the minimum stocking

density be 300 woody plants per acre, including volunteers. At least

four species of trees or shrubs listed in Appendix A of TRM #21,

including at least one hard mast species, one conifer species, and two

soft mast or shrub species, shall be present and the stocking densities

of these species shall be at least 90 hard mast plants per acre, 30

conifer plants per acre, and 30 plants per acre for each of the two

soft mast or shrub species. Stocking densities shall be determined with

a statistical confidence of 90%. Section 6(2)(b)(2) provides that, in

place of the requirements of section 6(2)(b)(1), the cabinet may, if

requested by the applicant, approve stocking densities and woody plant

species that are recommended by the Kentucky Department of Fish and

Wildlife Resources for the permit area based upon site-specific

considerations.

However, the stocking density of recommended species must still be

at least 150 woody plants per acre, including volunteers, with stocking

densities determined with a statistical confidence of 90%. Section

6(2)(b)4 provides that this amendment to this paragraph shall apply to

original applications for permits and applications for permit

amendments submitted after the effective date of this amendment.

Permits issued or applications submitted prior to the effective date of

this amendment may be revised to comply fully with this paragraph. At

section 6(2)(c), Kentucky is proposing to require that the stocking

density for woody plants be 300 plants per acre for recreation areas,

greenbelts, fence rows, woodlots, or shelter belts for wildlife, or

where the planting of trees and shrubs will otherwise facilitate the

postmining land use. At section 6(3)(f), Kentucky is proposing to

permit the counting of volunteer plants that meet all applicable

requirements to determine tree or shrub stocking success. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3)(I) and 817.116(b)(3)(I)

[[Page 66223]]

allow the regulatory authority to specify minimum stocking and planting

arrangements. By cover letter to OSM dated May 3, 1995, Kentucky

submitted letters of approval from the Kentucky Department of Fish and

Wildlife Services and the Department for Natural Resources, Division of

Forestry, for 405 KAR 16:200 and 18:200, sections 6(1) and 6(2), and

for TRM 3521 (Administrative Record No. KY-1353). OSM notified

Kentucky, by letter dated May 10, 1996, that it must also provide

rationale to support its proposed reduction, at 405 KAR 16:200 and

18:200, section 6(1), in standards for acceptable tree stocking on

forestry postmining land use (Administrative Record No. KY-1367). By

letter dated June 13, 1996, Kentucky responded to OSM's concern by

including an October 20, 1993, memorandum from the Division of Forestry

(Administrative Record No. KY-1369). This memorandum specifically

recommends the stocking standards for the forestry postmining land use

which Kentucky adopted in section 6(1), and which were approved by both

the Division of Forestry and the Department of Fish and Wildlife

Services. Therefore, based upon the supporting documentation provided

by Kentucky, the Director finds that the proposed revisions at 405 KAR

16:200 6(1), 6(2)(b)1 and 2, 6(2)(c), and 6(3)(f) and 18:200 6(1),

6(2)(b)1 and 2, 6(2)(c), and 6(3)(f) are no less effective than the

corresponding Federal regulations. In addition, these approved changes

satisfy a portion of the required amendments at 30 CFR 917.16(i),

pertaining to Finding number 6 of the June 9, 1993, Federal Register

Notice (58 FR 32288).

At 405 KAR 16:200 and 18:200, sections 9(3)(c) and 9(6), Kentucky

is proposing to delete the productivity test area option as a

measurement of vegetation success for cropland where hay is grown that

is not prime farmland and for pastureland. Productivity must be

measured by either the techniques established by TRM #19 or by

determining total yield. The Federal regulations at 30 CFR

816.116(a)(1) and 817.116(a)(1) allow the regulatory authority to

select standards for success and valid sampling techniques. As noted

above, Kentucky retains two other options for measuring productivity at

sections 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(b). The Director find that the deletion of

the provisions at 405 KAR 16:200 and 18:200, sections 9(3)(c) and 9(6)

does not render the State program less effective than the Federal

regulations. In addition, the deletion satisfies a portion of the

required amendment at 30 CFR 917.16(i), pertaining to Finding number 9

of the June 9, 1993, Federal Register Notice (58 FR 32289).

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

Public comments

The Director solicited public comments and provided an opportunity

for a public hearing on the proposed amendment. Three separate

submissions were received from the same commenter. Because no one

requested an opportunity to speak at a public hearing, no hearing was

held.

The commenter generally supported the revisions to 405 KAR 10:010

which requires a rider to confirm coverage of permit revisions which

alter permit areas or boundaries. The commenter also supported the

concept of providing a supplemental assurance mechanism in addition to

the base bond as provided in 405 KAR 16:020 but stated that Kentucky

should clarify that the mechanism is not to be released in a partial

manner. The Director notes that section 6(6) provides for return of

supplemental assurance funds only upon verification that the area for

which it was submitted has been backfilled and graded. Therefore, even

if partial release is permitted, only that amount of the supplemental

assurance no longer needed to ensure backfilling and grading of a

portion of the disturbed area could be returned. Several of the

commenter's initial concerns were satisfied by Kentucky's subsequent

revisions to its original submission. At 405 KAR 7:095 3(3), the

commenter felt that Kentucky should provide further clarification as to

whether it would attribute all acts of persons working on the mine site

or only attribute violations, in terms of calculating civil penalty

points to be assigned for negligence. The Director notes that the

section of the regulations to which the commenter refers is not being

revised at this time and is, therefore, outside the scope of this

rulemaking. With regard to the document, ``Procedures for Assessment of

Civil Penalties,'' the commenter stated that it should be stressed to

the civil penalty assessor that penalties are imposed to achieve a

deterrent effect and to penalize violations of the law and the

regulations. While the Director agrees with the commenter that civil

penalties are intended to serve as deterrents as well as punishment, he

notes that neither SMCRA nor the Federal regulations explicitly state

the goals of civil penalty assessment. Therefore, he cannot require

Kentucky to make the suggested change. The commenter also believed that

the threshold for seriousness points should be lowered to reflect the

goal of environmental damage prevention. OSM cannot require that states

impose a uniform civil penalty point system [See In Re Permanent

Surface Mining Regulation Litigation, 14 Env't. Rep. Case 1083, 1089

(D.D.C. February 26, 1980)]. Therefore, the Director cannot require

that Kentucky make the suggested change. At 405 KAR 16:200 and 18:200,

the commenter opposes the use of undifferentiated average county yields

for measurement of productivity of lands with a postmining use of

hayland or pastureland. The Director notes that OSM considered this

issue in an earlier Kentucky amendment and found Kentucky's

productivity standards acceptable and no less effective than the

Federal regulations (see 58 FR 32290, June 9, 1993). In addition, the

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky

affirmed OSM's decision to approve the use of undifferentiated average

county yields, in KRC v. Babbitt, No. 93-78 (E.D. Ky., March 30, 1995).

Federal Agency Comments

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(I), the Director solicited

comments on the proposed amendment from various Federal agencies with

an actual or potential interest in the Kentucky program. The following

agencies concurred without comment: the Department of Agriculture,

Natural Resources Conservation Service; the Department of Labor, Mine

Safety and Health Administration; and the Department of the Interior,

Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Mines.

The Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, noted

that the Soil Survey Manual--Handbook #18 referenced at 405 KAR 7:015

3(4) has been revised and it provided the updated information. The

director notes that the section of the regulations referenced is not

being revised at this time and is, therefore, outside the scope of this

rulemaking. However, Kentucky is aware of the revision and will make

the appropriate changes at a later date.

The Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, noted a

possible discrepancy in 405 KAR 7:095 3(4) regarding the assessment of

good faith points in that Kentucky's point system appears to be less

stringent than the Federal regulations. The Director notes that the

section of the regulations referenced is not being revised at this time

and is, therefore, outside the scope of this rulemaking. The Director

also notes that the provisions of OSM Directive REG-5 dated August 31,

1991,

[[Page 66224]]

provide that if a State program requires consideration of the four

mandatory statutory criteria (history of previous violations,

seriousness of violations, negligence of operator, and good faith) in

determining whether to assess a penalty and determining the amount, the

program meets the requirements of section 518 of SMCRA. The penalty

amounts need not be equivalent to those specified at 30 CFR part 845.

See also, In Re Permanent Surface Mining Regulation Litigation, 14

Env't. Rep. Cas 1083, 1089 (D.D.C., February 26, 1980).

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

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

written concurrence of the 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.)

On August 3, 1994, OSM solicited EPA's concurrence with the

proposed amendment. On August 26, 1994, EPA have its written

concurrence (Administrative Record No. KY-1311).

V. Director's Decision

Based on the above findings, the Director approves the proposed

amendment as submitted by Kentucky on July 19, 1994, and as revised on

January 11, 1995.

The Director's approval herein of the proposed amendments has

satisfied a portion of the required amendment codified at 30 CFR

917.16. Therefore, the Director is amending 30 CFR 917.16(i) to refer

specifically to those portions of the required amendment which remain

unsatisfied.

The Federal regulations at 30 CFR Part 917, codifying decisions

concerning the Kentucky 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

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 12988

The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required

by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (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 State 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 of the corresponding Federal regulations.

Unfunded Mandates

This rule will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any

given year on any governmental entity or the private sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR 917

Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

Dated: November 19, 1996.

Michael K. Robinson,

Acting Regional Director, Appalachian Regional Coordinating 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 917--KENTUCKY

1. The authority citation for Part 917 continues to read as

follows:

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

2. Section 917.15 is amended by adding paragraph (aaa) to read as

follows:

Sec. 917.15 Approval of regulatory program amendments.

* * * * *

(aaa) The following rules, as submitted to OSM on July 19, 1994,

and as revised on January 11, 1995, and March 2, 1995, are approved

effective December 17, 1996.

405 KAR 7:015 section 3

Documents Incorporated by Reference

405 KAR 7:095 sections 5(2),7

Assessment of Civil Penalties

405 KAR 10:010 section 2(4)

General Requirements for Performance

Bond and Liability Insurance

405 KAR 16:020 sections 2, 6 (new), and 7 (new)

Contemporaneous Reclamation

405 KAR 16:200

Revegetation--Surface Mining

405 KAR 18:200 sections 1(4), 1(5)(b), 5(2)(a)2, 3 and (b)(2), 6(1),

6(2)(b) 1, 2, 6(2)(c), 6(3)(f), 9(2)(c), 9(5).

Revegetation--Underground Mining

3. Section 917.16 is amended by revising (i) to read as follows:

Sec. 917.161 Required regulatory program amendments.

* * * * *

(i) By December 17, 1996, Kentucky shall submit to the Director

either a proposed written amendment or a description of an amendment to

be proposed which revises 405 KAR 16:200 and 405 KAR 18:200, sections

1(7)(a) 1 through 5, 1(7)(b) and 1(7)(d), in accordance with the

Director's findings published in the June 9, 1993, Federal Register (58

FR 32283), and a timetable for enactment which is consistent with

[[Page 66225]]

established administrative and legislative procedures in the State.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96-31750 Filed 12-16-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-05-M