Alaska Regulatory Program

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

30 CFR Part 902

[AK-005-FOR, Amendment No. V]

Alaska Regulatory Program

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

ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM)

is approving a proposed amendment to the Alaska regulatory program

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

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

revisions to and additions of rules pertaining to self-bonding. The

amendment revised the Alaska program to be consistent with the

corresponding Federal regulations.

EFFECTIVE DATES: March 31, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James F. Fulton, Telephone: (303) 844-1424.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Alaska Program

On March 23, 1983, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally

approved the Alaska program. General background information on the

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

comments, and conditions of approval of the Alaska program can be found

in the March 23, 1983, Federal Register (48 FR 12274). Subsequent

actions concerning Alaska's program and program amendments can be found

at 30 CFR 902.15 and 902.16.

II. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated December 12, 1996, Alaska submitted a proposed

amendment to its program pursuant to SMCRA (amendment No. V,

administrative record No. AK-F-1, 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). Alaska

submitted the proposed amendment in response to the required program

amendment at 30

[[Page 15116]]

CFR 902.16(b)(1) (61 FR 48835, 48843; September 17, 1996). The

provisions of the Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) that Alaska proposed

to revise were: 11 AAC 90.207(f)(3), conditions for accepting a self-

bond. The provisions of the Alaska Administrative Code that Alaska

proposed to add were: 11 AAC 90.207(f)(8), definitions of self-bonding

terms.

OSM announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the January 8,

1997, Federal Register (62 FR 1074), provided an opportunity for a

public hearing or meeting on its substantive adequacy, and invited

public comment on its adequacy (administrative record No. AK-F-2).

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

The public comment period ended on February 9, 1997.

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 Alaska on December 12, 1996, is no less effective than the

corresponding Federal regulations. Accordingly, the Director approves

the proposed amendment.

11 AAC 90.207(f) (3) and (8), Self-bonding

On September 17, 1996, OSM at 30 CFR 902.16(b)(1) (finding No. 6,

61 FR 48835, 48837) required Alaska to revise 11 AAC 90.207(f)(3) to

require the applicant for a self-bond that is guaranteed by a corporate

guarantor to retain his or her own agent for service in Alaska and to

further revise 11 AAC 90.207(f) to add definitions for the term ``self-

bond'' and other financial terms used to describe self bonds. In

response to the required amendment, Alaska revised 11 AAC 90.207(f)(3)

by referencing as a condition for acceptance by the Commissioner of the

Department of Natural Resources the requirement that the applicant for

a self-bond that is guaranteed by a corporate guarantor retain an agent

for service in Alaska. The proposed revision is consistent with the

counterpart Federal regulation at 30 CFR 800.23(c)(2), which provides

the specific criteria for approval of a self-bond guaranteed by a

corporate guarantor.

In addition, Alaska proposed new regulations at 11 AAC 90.207(f)(8)

(A) through (H) that provide definitions of the terms ``self-bond,''

``current assets,'' ``current liabilities,'' ``fixed assets,''

``liabilities,'' ``net worth,'' ``parent corporation,'' and ``tangible

net worth.'' The proposed definitions contain language that is

substantively identical to the requirements of the corresponding

Federal regulations at 30 CFR 800.5 and 800.23(a).

For the above reasons, the Director finds that the proposed

revision at 11 AAC 90.207(f)(3) and the proposed addition of

definitions associated with self-bonding are no less effective than the

counterpart Federal regulations. Accordingly, the Director approves the

proposed revision of and additions to these rules and removes the

required amendment at 30 CFR 902.16(b)(1).

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

Following are summaries of all substantive written comments on the

proposed amendment that were received by OSM, and OSM's responses to

them.

1. Public comments

In response to OSM's invitation of public comments, an individual

responded on January 26, 1997, that she supported approval of the

amendment (administrative record No. AK-F-5).

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 Alaska program (administrative record No. AK-

F-4).

Minerals Management Service, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Region,

responded on February 19, 1997, that it had no comments on the

amendment (administrative record No. AK-F-6).

The Bureau of Indian Affairs, Juneau Area Office, responded on

February 20, 1997, that it had no comments specific to the amendment

(administrative record No. AK-F-7).

The United States Department of Energy, Alaska Power

Administration, responded on February 20, 1997, that it had no comments

on the proposed amendment (administrative record No. AK-F-8).

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service responded on February 13, 1997,

that it had no comments on the amendment (administrative record No. AK-

F-9).

The Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office, responded on

February 28, 1997, that it felt that the proposed amendment should be

adopted (administrative record No. AK-F-10).

3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments

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 Alaska 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. AK-F-3). It did

not respond to OSM's request.

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 ACHP (administrative record No.

AK-F-3). Neither the SHPO nor ACHP responded to OSM's request.

V. Director's Decision

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

amendment as submitted on December 12, 1996.

The Director approves 11 AAC 90.207(f)(3), concerning conditions of

acceptance for a self-bond, and 11 AAC 90.207(f)(8), concerning

definitions of self-bonding terms.

The Director approves the rules as proposed by Alaska 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 902, codifying decisions

concerning the Alaska 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 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 this rule meets the applicable standards of subsections

(a) and (b) of that section. However, these

[[Page 15117]]

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 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 (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.

6. 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 Part 902

Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

Dated: March 13, 1997.

James F. Fulton,

Acting Regional Director, Western 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 902--ALASKA

1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as

follows:

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

2. Section 902.15 is amended in the table by adding a new entry in

chronological order by ``Date of Final Publication'' to read as

follows:

Sec. 902.15 Approval of Alaska regulatory program amendments.

* * * * *

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

Original amendment submission date Date of final publication Citation/description

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

* * * * * * *

December 12, 1996.................. [Insert date of publication in the Federal Register]..... 11 AAC 90.207(f) (3) and (8).

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

3. Section 902.16 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph

(b)(1).

[FR Doc. 97-8104 Filed 3-28-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-05-M