Kansas Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Plan

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 916

[SPATS No. KS-015-FOR]

Kansas Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Plan

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

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.

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

[[Page 31110]]

SUMMARY: OSM is approving a proposed amendment to the Kansas abandoned

mine land reclamation plan (hereinafter referred to as the ``Kansas

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

(SMCRA). Kansas proposed revisions and additions to its plan pertaining

to project ranking and selection procedures and purchasing and

procurement systems. The amendment is intended to revise the Kansas

plan to be consistent with the corresponding Federal regulations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 8, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Russell W. Frum, Office of Surface Mining, Mid-Continent Regional

Coordinating Center, Alton Federal Building, 501 Belle Street, Alton,

Illinois 62002. Telephone: (618) 463-6460.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Kansas Plan

II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

III. Director's Findings

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

V. Director's Decision

VI. Procedural Determinations

I. Background on the Kansas Plan

On February 1, 1982, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally

approved the Kansas plan. Background information on the Kansas plan,

including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and

the conditions of approval can be found in the February 1, 1982,

Federal Register (47 FR 4513). Information on the removal of the

conditions of approval can be found in the June 3, 1983, Federal

Register (48 FR 24874). Subsequent actions concerning amendments to the

plan can be found at 30 CFR 916.25.

II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

By letter dated March 17, 1998 (Administrative Record No. AML-KS-

171), Kansas submitted a proposed amendment to its plan pursuant to

SMCRA. Kansas submitted the proposed amendment in response to a

September 24, 1994, letter (Administrative Record No. AML-KS-169) that

OSM sent to Kansas in accordance with 30 CFR 884.15(d).

OSM announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the April 6,

1998, Federal Register (63 FR 16728), 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 May 6, 1998.

During its review of the amendment, OSM identified concerns

relating to project selection. OSM notified Kansas of these concerns by

telephone on April 10, 1998 (Administrative Record No. AML-KS-171.2).

By letter dated April 10, 1998 (Administrative Record No. AML-KS-

171.3), Kansas responded to OSM's concerns by submitting revisions to

its proposed plan amendment. Kansas proposed additional revisions to

State Reclamation Plan Section 884.13(c)(2) Step 3, Project Selection.

Because the additional information merely clarified certain provisions

of Kansas' proposed amendment, OSM did not reopen the public comment

period.

III. Director's Findings

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

30 CFR 884.14 and 884.15, 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.

A. State Reclamation Plan Section 884.13(c)(2), Projection Ranking and

Selection Procedures

1. Kansas proposed to replace the reference to the ``Kansas Mined

Land Conservation and Reclamation Board'' with the ``Kansas Department

of Health and Environment, Surface Mining Section,'' throughout this

section. The Director is approving this amendment because it only

updates the agency name.

2. In its discussion of considerations during the project selection

process, Kansas proposed to replace the reference to ``30 CFR 874.14''

with a reference to OSM's AML Program Guidelines published on December

30, 1996, entitled, ``Office of Surface Mining, Abandoned Mine Land

Reclamation Program Guidelines.'' The Director is approving the update

of this reference.

3. Kansas proposed to revise the process for selecting sites for

reclamation from four steps to three steps. The Director is approving

this change because it is not inconsistent with the Federal regulation

at 30 CFR 884.13(c)(2). Kansas also proposed to change the language to

focus ranking of potential projects on ``AML Inventory Problem Areas''

instead of ``sites.'' The term ``sites'' is undefined in State or OSM

policies, whereas, the term ``AML Problem Area'' is defined in OSM

directive AML-1. Problem areas have distinct geographic boundaries and

are recognized in the national inventory. The Director is approving

this change because it is consistent with section 403(c) of SMCRA and

the Federal regulation at 30 CFR 884.13(c)(2).

4. Project Selection, Step 1-Identification and Establishment of

Reclamation Priority Problem Areas. Kansas revised this step to

reference the five priorities for expenditure of AML funds as described

in section 403(a) of SMCRA. The introductory paragraph of Step 1 which

references a State process independent of the National AML Inventory is

deleted. A new introductory paragraph is added and reads as follows:

The State program will classify problem areas into five OSM

approved priority categories listed in the Office of Surface Mining

Abandoned Mine Land Inventory Manual. Site conditions will be

utilized by the AML Program Staff in identifying problem areas which

fit within these priority categories. The problem areas will be

evaluated based on site hazards and conditions. The results of the

evaluations of all site hazards and site conditions on a parameter

will be numerically scored according to its degree of impact and the

score will then be adjusted by a standard weighting factor which

reflects the parameter's significance relative to the total problem.

The resultant total score for each site will be used to rank problem

areas within each priority category. A master list will be

maintained by the AML Program staff for use by the SMS in selecting

projects for funding. Preference among problem areas competing for

available resources will be given to projects meeting higher

priority objectives and scoring higher on the Problem Area Ranking

Matrix.

The Director is approving this amendment because it is consistent

with the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 884.13(c) and section 403(a) of

SMCRA.

5. Project Selection, Step 2-Eligibility Determination. Kansas

proposed to changed the title of this step from ``Elimination of

Selected Problem Sites'' to ``Eligibility Determinations'' to more

accurately reflect the purpose of this step. Item 3 of Step 2 is

removed because it is redundant with the state regulations at K.A.R.

47-16-1. The Director is approving these amendments because they add

clarifying language and remove redundant language from the Kansas plan.

6. Project Selection, Step 3-Project Selection.

a. At Item 2, Kansas deleted its former Priority IV objective

concerning AML problems, which present a potential for research and

demonstration projects related to mine reclamation, and renumbered

former Priority V and VI as priority IV and V, respectively. Kansas

also deleted Item 3(vii) dealing with Research and Demonstration. The

Director is approving the revisions

[[Page 31111]]

because they render the Kansas plan consistent with section 403(a) of

SMCRA.

b. In Item 4, Kansas revised the wording to clarify the importance

of selecting reclamation project solutions which minimize maintenance

and achieve self-sustaining reclamation. The Director is approving this

revision because it more clearly follows the spirit of the December 30,

1996, revised AML Reclamation Program Guidelines at Part B.3.b.(3), and

it is consistent with 30 CFR 884.13(c).

c. Item 6 originally addressed the issue of remaining coal

resources on the reclamation site. Kansas proposed to revise this item

to state that problems, on sites where remining could potentially

occur, will be addressed before any remining takes place if the

problems seriously imperil public health or safety. The Director is

approving this revision because it is not inconsistent with section

403(a) of SMCRA.

d. Kansas added a new item, Item 9, to indicate that reclamation

must be cost effective and consistent with the intended post mining

land use of the owner. The Director is approving this revision because

it is not inconsistent with the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 884.13.

e. Kansas proposed to delete Step 4--Selection of Projects and add

a new paragraph to Step 3. The new paragraph states that the final

selection process will consider ranking score, cost effectiveness of

doing lower priority work, availability of funding, and geographic

distribution of projects. The Director is approving these revisions

because they are not inconsistent with the Federal Regulations at 30

CFR 884.13.

7. Accomomplishment Reporting. Kansas proposed to add a new section

entitled, ``Accomplishments Reporting,'' at the end of Section

884.13(c)(2). It states that upon completion of any AML project, the

Kansas Surface Mining Section will submit Form OSM-76 or other

appropriate form(s) to report the accomplishments achieved through the

project. The Director finds that the new paragraph is substantively the

same as the Federal regulation at 30 CFR 886.23(b).

B. State Reclamation Plan Section 884.13(d)(3), Purchasing and

Procurement Systems

Kansas proposed to add two new paragraphs under the sub-section,

``Other Contract Provisions,'' to read as follows:

All successful Bidders for AML contracts must be eligible per

regulation at the time of contract award to receive a permit or

conditional permit to conduct surface coal mining operations.

Eligibility will be confirmed by consulting the Office of Surface

Mining's automated system for identifying and tracking ownership and

control links involving permit applicants, permittees, and persons

cited in violation notices. This provision will also apply to

successful bidders on any non-coal sites eligible for reclamation.

No monies from the AML fund will be expended for reclamation on

any non-coal sites designated for remedial action pursuant to the

Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, the

Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act

of 1980, or other such regulations deemed excludable from funding by

the Office of Surface Mining.

The Director is approving these additions because they render the

Kansas plan consistent with the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 874.16,

875.16, and 875.20.

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments

Public Comments

OSM solicited public comments and provided an opportunity for a

public hearing on the proposed amendment. No public comments were

received, and because no one requested an opportunity to speak at a

public hearing, no hearing was held.

Federal Agency Comments

Pursuant to 884.14(a)(2) and 884.15(a), the Director solicited

comments on the proposed amendment from various other Federal agencies

with an actual or potential interest in the Kansas plan. OSM received

comments from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources

Conservation Service (NRCS) dated April 23, 1998 (Administrative Record

No. AML-KS-171.5). The NRCS suggested that AML problem areas that are

under contract with NRCS for the Rural Abandoned Mine Program (RAMP),

should not be included in Kansas' selection process unless Kansas

coordinates with them. The proposed change to Kansas' policy and

procedure at Section 884.13(c)(2), Step 2 identify certain AML problem

areas that will be eliminated from project selection consideration. One

of the two categories to be eliminated is projects where there is

ongoing or planned reclamation which would be totally financed by the

RAMP or other public or private entity. This provision appears adequate

to satisfy the NRCS's concern.

In addition, Kansas' existing policy and procedure at Section

884.13(c)(3) outline the coordination of activities between Kansas and

the RAMP. The policy and procedure state that the Kansas AML Program

will work closely with the NRCS District Conservationist in each county

in identifying problem AML sites and selecting reclamation methods.

Furthermore, ``To avoid duplication, all information in a given county

pertaining to AML inventories, site evaluation, and proposed and active

reclamation projects will be shared with each District

Conservationist.'' The Director concludes that the concerns of the NRCS

regarding RAMP projects are addressed in both the proposed revisions

and in other unchanged portions of the Kansas AML Reclamation Plan.

V. Director's Decision

Based on the above findings, the Director approves the proposed

plan amendment as submitted by Kansas on March 17, 1998, and as revised

on April 10, 1998.

The Director approves the plan as proposed by Kansas with the

provision that it be fully promulgated in identical form to the plan

submitted to and reviewed by OSM and the public.

The Federal regulations at 30 CFR Part 916, codifying decisions

concerning the Kansas plan, are being amended to implement this

decision. This final rule is being made effective immediately to

expedite the State plan amendment process and to encourage States to

bring their plans 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 and Tribal abandoned mine land reclamation plans and revisions

thereof since each such plan is drafted and promulgated by a specific

State or Tribe, not by OSM. Decisions on proposed abandoned mine land

reclamation plans and revisions thereof submitted by a State of Tribe

are based on a determination of whether the submittal meets the

requirements of

[[Page 31112]]

Title IV of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1231-1243) and 30 CFR Part 884.

National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is required for this rule since

agency decisions on proposed State and Tribal abandoned mine land

reclamation plans and revisions thereof are categorically excluded from

compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332)

by the Manual of the Department of the Interior (516 DM 6, appendix 8,

paragraph 8.4B(29)).

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. 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.

Unfunded Mandates

OSM has determined and certifies pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq.) that this rule will not impose a

cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local, state, or

tribal governments or private entities.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 916

Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

Dated: May 26, 1998.

Brent Wahlquist,

Regional Director, Mid-Continent Regional Coordinating Center.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR Part 916 is amended

as set forth below:

PART 916--KANSAS

1. The authority citation for part 916 continues to read as

follows:

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

2. Section 916.25 is amended in the table by adding a new entry in

chronological order by ``Date of final publication'' to read as

follows:

Sec. 916.25 Approval of Kansas abandoned mine land reclamation plan

amendments.

* * * * *

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

Original amendment submission Date of final Citation/

date publication description

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

* * * * *

March 17, 1998.................. June 8, 1998...... Section

884.13(c)(2) and

(d)(3).

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

[FR Doc. 98-15137 Filed 6-5-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-05-M