Rule2024-18040
Kentucky Regulatory Program
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
August 15, 2024
Effective
September 16, 2024
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentSurface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office
Abstract
We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are approving an amendment, with one exception, to the Kentucky regulatory program (Kentucky program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). We are approving changes to statutory provisions that involve civil penalty fund distributions, self-bonding, and major permit revisions related to underground mining. We are not approving a provision that involves civil penalty escrow accounts.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 158 (Thursday, August 15, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 158 (Thursday, August 15, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66214-66218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-18040]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 917
[SATS No. KY-260-FOR; Docket ID: OSM-2018-0008; S1D1S SS08011000
SX064A000 245S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 24XS501520]
Kentucky Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment, with one exception.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
(OSMRE), are approving an amendment, with one exception, to the
Kentucky regulatory program (Kentucky program) under the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). We are
approving changes to statutory provisions that involve civil penalty
fund distributions, self-bonding, and major permit revisions related to
underground mining. We are not approving a provision that involves
civil penalty escrow accounts.
DATES: The rule is effective September 16, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Castle, Field Office Director,
Lexington Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement, Telephone: (859) 260-3900, email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c3aea0a2b0b7afa683acb0aeb1a6eda4acb5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="79141a180a0d151c39160a140b1c571e160f">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Kentucky Program
II. Submission of the Amendment
III. OSMRE's Findings
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
V. OSMRE's Decision
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background on the Kentucky Program
Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-
Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that
its program includes, among other things, State laws and regulations
that govern surface coal mining and reclamation operations in
accordance with the Act and consistent with the Federal regulations.
See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). Based on these criteria, the
Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Kentucky program
effective May 18, 1982. You can find background information on the
Kentucky program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition
of comments, and conditions of approval in the May 18, 1982, Federal
Register (47 FR 21434). You can also find later actions concerning
Kentucky's program and program amendments at 30 CFR 917.11, 917.12,
917.13, 917.15, 917.16, and 917.17. The regulatory authority in
Kentucky is the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, Department of
Natural Resources (herein referred to as the Cabinet).
II. Submission of the Amendment
By letter dated September 19, 2018 (Administrative Record Number
KY-2007-01), the Cabinet submitted an amendment to its program under
SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.), docketed as KY-260-FOR. The amendment
seeks to revise the Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) to include
statutory changes that involve civil penalty escrow accounts, civil
penalty fund distributions, self-bonding, and major permit revisions
related to underground mining.
The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky enacted
statutory changes through House Bill 261, which was signed by the
Governor on April 2, 2018, and became effective on July 14, 2018. See
2018 Ky. Acts ch. 85. These changes are codified at KRS Chapter 350,
Surface Coal Mining, sections 350.0301, 350.064, 350.070, 350.518, and
350.990. The Cabinet was not required to promulgate administrative
regulations as a result of the law.
We announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the May 10, 2019,
Federal Register (84 FR 20595) (Administrative Record No. KY-2007-17).
In the same document, we opened the public comment period and provided
an opportunity for a public hearing or meeting on these provisions. We
did not hold a public hearing or meeting because none was requested.
The public comment period ended on June 10, 2019. No public comments
were received.
III. OSMRE's Findings
The following are the findings we made concerning the amendment
under SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. We
are
[[Page 66215]]
approving the amendment as described below with the exception of
changes to KRS 350.0301. Any revisions that we do not specifically
discuss below concern non-substantive grammatical or editorial changes
and can be found in the full text of the program amendment available at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>.
A. Civil Penalty Escrow Account, KRS 350.0301, Petition challenging
determination of cabinet--Conduct of hearings--Administrative
regulations--Secretary may designate deputy secretary to sign final
orders.
Kentucky seeks to revise KRS 350.0301(5) by removing language
requiring Kentucky's administrative regulations to include provisions
that: (1) require that operators place civil penalty funds in escrow
before a formal hearing on the amount of the assessment of the civil
penalties; and (2) allow Kentucky to waive the escrow requirement for
individuals who demonstrate with substantial evidence an inability to
pay the proposed civil penalty assessment into escrow.
OSMRE Finding: In 2005, the Supreme Court of Kentucky decided
Commonwealth of Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection
Cabinet v. Kentec Coal Co., Inc., 177 S.W.3d 718 (Ky. 2005), in which
the Court concluded that Kentucky's prepayment requirements, codified
at the time in the Kentucky Administrative Regulations at 405 KAR
7:092, were in violation of the due process and equal protection
clauses of the United States Constitution and section 2 of the Kentucky
Constitution, which prohibits arbitrary State action. In response to
the Court's decision, Kentucky first removed notice of its prepayment
requirements from two documents provided to operators, a Notice of
Assessment of Civil Penalties and a Penalty Assessment Conference
Officer's Report, and Kentucky added language to those documents making
clear that prepayment was no longer required to request a formal
administrative hearing. By letter dated March 28, 2006, Kentucky sent
us notice of these revisions, which we docketed as Program Amendment
No. KY-250-FOR and subsequently disapproved on September 18, 2006 (71
FR 54586).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In 2017, Kentucky removed the prepayment requirement from
405 KAR 7:092, see 43 Ky.R. 1876 (April 1, 2017), and subsequently
recodified this provision to 400 KAR 1:110, effective August 4,
2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In our decision of September 18, 2006 (71 FR 54586), we concluded
that removing the requirement to place civil penalty funds in escrow
prior to a formal hearing on the assessment renders the program less
stringent than section 518(c) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. 1268, and less
effective than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 845.19(a), and
therefore disapproved the amendment. As stated in that document, the
Supreme Court of Kentucky rulings notwithstanding, section 518(c) of
SMCRA and the Federal regulations require prepayment of a proposed
penalty if a hearing is requested. Section 518(c) of SMCRA states that
should the person charged with the penalty wish to contest the amount
of the penalty or the fact of the violation, that person must forward
the proposed amount of the penalty to the Secretary for placement into
an escrow account pending resolution of the contest. 30 U.S.C. 1268(c).
Section 518(c) further states that failure to forward the money
accordingly shall result in a waiver of all legal rights to contest the
violation or the amount of the penalty. Id. The Federal regulations
repeat this requirement, specifying that the petition and proposed
penalty amount must be submitted to the Office of Hearings and Appeals.
30 CFR 845.19(a). Federal courts of appeals have found these provisions
consistent with the due process and equal protection requirements of
the United States Constitution. See, e.g., Graham vs. Office of Surface
Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement, 722 F.2d 1106 (3d Cir. 1983).
Kentucky's proposed revision to KRS 350.0301 directly relates to
the same revisions that we disapproved on September 18, 2006, codified
at 30 CFR 917.12(f). Kentucky's further steps to remove the requirement
to prepay the assessed penalty into escrow when administrative hearing
is requested continues to render Kentucky's program less stringent that
section 518(c) of SMCRA and less effective than the Federal regulations
at 30 CFR 845.19(a), and therefore are not approved.
B. Self-Bonding--KRS 350.064, Reclamation bond to be filed by
applicant.
Kentucky seeks to revise KRS 350.064(2) by removing language that
allows self-bonding in the State. A self-bond is a bond of the
applicant and is backed only by the overall financial health of the
applicant, without separate surety or specific pledges of collateral.
In order to have qualified and received approval for self-bond in
Kentucky, the applicant must successfully demonstrate a history of
financial solvency and continuous operation and the existence of a
suitable agent to receive service of process.
OSMRE Finding: Section 509(c) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. 1259, and its
implementing regulations at 30 CFR 800.4(d), Regulatory Authority
Responsibilities; 30 CFR 800.5, Definitions; 30 CFR 800.12, Form of the
Performance Bond; and 30 CFR 800.23, Self-bonding, permit a regulatory
authority to accept different forms of performance bonds, including
self-bonds, as a mechanism to ensure that funds will be available to
complete the reclamation plan if the work has to be performed by the
regulatory authority in the event of a forfeiture. The regulatory
authority may accept a self-bond without separate surety when the
applicant demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the regulatory
authority, the existence of a suitable agent to receive service of
process and a history of financial solvency and continuous operation
sufficient for authorization to self-insure or bond such amount. Some
State regulatory programs have accepted self-bonds to guarantee
reclamation.
It is reasonable that Kentucky reconsider acceptance of this type
of performance bond as a reclamation guarantee. In fact, there are no
active self-bonds being held by Kentucky at this time. SMCRA and its
implementing regulations do not require that a regulatory authority
include a self-bond in their regulatory programs; therefore, we find
that the elimination of self-bonding in the Kentucky program renders
the program no less stringent than SMCRA and no less effective than the
Federal regulations, and we approve this change.
C. Permit Revisions--KRS 350.070, Permit revisions.
Kentucky seeks to revise KRS 350.070(1) by removing language that
requires an operator to submit a major permit revision application for
an extension of an underground mining area that is more than incidental
boundary revisions, but which does not include planned subsidence or
other new proposed surface disturbances. Kentucky also seeks to delete
subsection (6)(b), which defines the maximum number of acres for a
revision to be considered an incidental boundary revision involving
underground operations.
OSMRE Finding: Kentucky originally added the above requirement,
which we approved, through Kentucky House Bill 707 of 1994, enacted
1995 Ky. Acts ch. 301. See 60 FR 33110 (June 27, 1995). In our
approval, we explained that the Federal regulations do not require that
areas overlying proposed underground workings be included in the permit
area if no surface disturbance is planned. Id. At 33113. Therefore,
under those circumstances, where no surface disturbance is planned by
an extension
[[Page 66216]]
of the underground mining area, no permit revision is required.
For the same reason that we approved the inclusion of this
requirement in 1994, we approve its removal. Neither SMCRA nor the
Federal regulations require Kentucky to include those areas within the
permit area. Thus, this amendment does not render Kentucky's program
less stringent than SMCRA or less effective than the Federal
regulations at 30 CFR 774.13, Permit revisions, or 30 CFR part 784,
Underground Mining Permit Applications--Minimum Requirements for
Reclamation and Operation Plan.
D. Civil Penalty Funds and Distribution--KRS 350.518, [relating to
Kentucky's bond pool], and KRS 350.990, Penalties.
Kentucky seeks to delete KRS 350.518(11), which requires penalty
funds in excess of $800,000 in any fiscal year to be equally deposited
between: (a) the Kentucky Reclamation Guaranty Fund (KRGF), which
finances Kentucky's alternative bonding system, or bond pool; and (b)
the Abandoned Mine Land (AML) supplemental fund, which was established
under KRS 350.139 and consists primarily of interest generated on funds
derived from the forfeiture of conventional bonds, and which is to be
used to supplement forfeited conventional bonds that are inadequate to
complete the reclamation plan. In a complementary revision, Kentucky
seeks to delete similar language from KRS 350.990(1). KRS 350.990(1)
further directs that the money disbursed to the KRGF be used for the
purposes set forth in KRS 350.500-350.521 (relating to Kentucky's bond
pool) and KRS 350.595 (relating to Kentucky's Abandoned Mine Land
Enhancement Program, which provides partial bond coverage for eligible
remining operations), and that money disbursed to the AML supplemental
fund established under KRS 350.139(1) be used for the purposes of that
section. In place of these deleted allocations, Kentucky seeks to add
language to KRS 350.990(1) that directs that penalties in excess of
$800,000 in any fiscal year be deposited into the restricted fund
account of the Office of the Commissioner of the Department for Natural
Resources to be disbursed for the purposes set out in KRS chapters 350
(Surface Coal Mining), 351 (Department for Natural Resources), and 352
(Mining Regulations). KRS chapters 351 and 352 consist of Kentucky's
coal mine safety laws.
OSMRE Finding: We approved the provision to equally distribute
civil penalty funds in excess of $800,000 into two specific reclamation
funds in KY-218 on May 10, 2000 (65 FR 29949). At that time, civil
penalties collected in any fiscal year up to $800,000 were deposited
with the State Treasury to the credit of Kentucky's general fund, see
KRS 350.139, and any sums in excess of $800,000 were to go to the
Kentucky Bond Pool Fund (BPF) (the predecessor to the KRGF). From
there, one half of the excess would go to a new bond forfeiture
supplemental fund but only when the balance of the BPF was above the
maximum of the operating range necessary to ensure solvency ($16
million at the time). A review of the adequacy of the BPF was conducted
in 2011; the findings concluded that reclamation performance bonds were
not always sufficient to complete reclamation required in approved
permits. As a result, the program was amended by KY-256 on January 29,
2018 (83 FR 3948) to ensure bond amounts were adequate to complete
reclamation in the event of forfeiture. As part of that effort,
Kentucky eliminated the BPF and replaced it with the KRGF, which
carried greater safeguards, such as periodic actuarial studies to
determine the amount necessary to ensure its solvency. At the same
time, Kentucky removed the $16 million minimum balance and, instead,
required periodic actuarial studies in order to determine the necessary
balance of the KRGF.
In our 2000 approval, we noted that Kentucky was not diverting any
money away from the BPF except for proceeds in excess of the amount
necessary to guarantee its solvency. See 65 FR 29949 at 29950. In our
2018 approval, we noted that the safeguards provided in the KRGF ensure
the KRGF's solvency, and therefore removing the commitment of civil
penalty money to the KRGF to achieving a particular minimum balance was
not inconsistent with SMCRA or its implementing regulations. See 83 FR
3948 at 3953.
The Kentucky revisions described above broaden the potential uses
of civil penalty funds to any purposes set out in KRS chapters 350,
351, and 352, which would include the current purposes laid out for the
KRGF and the AML supplemental fund established under chapter 350.
Kentucky has the discretion to allocate its funds in a manner that
supports the objectives of its program. Unlike performance bond funds,
no Federal requirements exist that direct penalty funds be used for
reclamation. Our regulations at 30 CFR 845.21 explain our use of
Federal civil penalties for reclamation subject to Congressional
authorization; however, this provision was the result of a continuing
resolution by Congress in 1987, which, for the first time, authorized
us to use civil penalty money in this manner and was not part of the
broader SMCRA program required of the States. See 53 FR 16016 (May 4,
1988). Because, as was the case when we approved this requirement in
2000, neither SMCRA nor the Federal regulations require civil penalty
funds to be used on reclamation, Kentucky's program is not less
stringent than SMCRA or less effective than the Federal regulations at
30 CFR 845.21 by using these funds for other purposes; therefore, we
approve these revisions.
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
Public Comments
We solicited public comments and provided an opportunity for a
public hearing on the proposed amendment in the May 10, 2019, Federal
Register document announcing receipt of this amendment (84 FR 20595).
Because no one requested an opportunity to speak at a public hearing,
none was held. We did not receive any comments from the public.
Federal Agency Comments
On December 3, 2018, under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and section
503(b) of SMCRA, we requested comments on the amendment from various
Federal agencies with an actual or potential interest in the Kentucky
program (Administrative Record Nos. KY-2007-08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14). We did not receive any comments.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to obtain written
concurrence from EPA for those provisions of the program amendment that
relate to air or water quality standards issued 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 Kentucky proposed to
make in this amendment pertain to air or water quality standards.
Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the amendment. However, on
December 3, 2018, under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments
from the EPA on the amendment (Administrative Record No. KY-2007-09 and
10). We did not receive any comments from EPA.
State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation (ACHP)
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are required to request comments from
the SHPO and the ACHP on amendments
[[Page 66217]]
that may have an effect on historic properties. On December 3, 2018, we
requested comments on the amendment from the SHPO (Administrative
Record No. KY-2007-13) and the ACHP (Administrative Record No. KY-2007-
11). SHPO responded on December 26, 2018, that they had no comment as
the amendment is not likely to cause changes that could impact cultural
resources (Administrative Record No. KY-2007-16). We did not receive a
response from the ACHP.
V. OSMRE's Decision
Based on the above findings, we are approving Kentucky's amendment
submitted to OSMRE on September 19, 2018 (Administrative Record No. KY-
2007-01), with one exception. For the reasons stated above, removal of
the requirement for civil penalty funds to be placed in escrow before a
formal hearing is not approved, and therefore the requirement is not
eliminated from Kentucky's program.
To implement the approval of the remaining four provisions, we are
amending the Federal regulations at 30 CFR part 917 that codify
decisions concerning the Kentucky program. In accordance with the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 500 et seq.), this rule will
take effect 30 days after the date of publication.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12630--Governmental Actions and Interference With
Constitutionality Protected Property Rights
This rule would not effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications that would result in private
property being taken for government use without just compensation under
the law. Therefore, a takings implication assessment is not required.
This determination is based on an analysis of the relevant Federal
regulations.
Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review, Executive Order
13563--Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, and Executive Order
14094--Modernizing Regulatory Review
Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094,
provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will review all significant
rules. Pursuant to OMB guidance, dated October 12, 1993 (OMB Memo M-94-
3), the approval of State program and/or plan amendments is exempted
from OMB review under Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive
Order 14094. Executive Order 13563, which reaffirms and supplements
Executive Order 12866, retains this exemption.
Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
The Department of the Interior has reviewed this rule as required
by section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988. The Department has determined
that this Federal Register document meets the criteria of section 3 of
Executive Order 12988, which is intended to ensure that the agency
review its legislation and proposed regulations to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity; that the agency write its legislation and
regulations to minimize litigation; and that the agency's legislation
and regulations provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct
rather than a general standard, and promote simplification and burden
reduction. Because section 3 focuses on the quality of Federal
legislation and regulations, the Department limited its review under
this Executive order to the quality of this Federal Register document
and to changes to the Federal regulations. The review under this
Executive order does not extend to the language of the State regulatory
program or to the program amendment that the Commonwealth of Kentucky
drafted.
Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This rule has potential federalism implications as defined under
section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132, which directs agencies to
``grant the States the maximum administrative discretion possible''
with respect to Federal statutes and regulations administered by the
States. Kentucky, through its approved regulatory program, implements
and administers SMCRA and its implementing regulations at the State
level. This rule approves an amendment to the Kentucky program
submitted and drafted by the State and, thus, is consistent with the
direction to provide maximum administrative direction to States.
Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its
government-to-government relationship with Tribes through a commitment
to consultation with Tribes and recognition of their right to self-
governance and Tribal sovereignty. We have evaluated this rule under
the Department's consultation policy and under the criteria in
Executive Order 13175 and have determined that it has no substantial
direct effects on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Tribes. The basis for this
determination is that our decision on the Kentucky program does not
include Indian lands as defined by SMCRA or other Tribal lands and it
does not affect the regulation of activities on Indian lands or other
Tribal lands. Indian lands under SMCRA are regulated independently
under the applicable Federal Indian program. The Department's
consultation policy also acknowledges that our rules may have Tribal
implications where the State proposing the amendment encompasses
ancestral lands in areas with mineable coal. We are currently working
to identify and engage appropriate Tribal stakeholders to devise a
constructive approach for consulting on these amendments.
Executive Order 13211--Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare a Statement of
Energy Effects for a rulemaking that is (1) considered significant
under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because
this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not
significant energy action under the definition in Executive Order
13211, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act
Consistent with sections 501(a) and 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C.
1251(a) and 1292(d), respectively) and the U.S. Department of the
Interior Departmental Manual, part 516, section 13.5(A), State program
amendments are not 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 include requests and requirements of an
individual, partnership, or corporation to obtain information and
report it to a Federal agency. As this rule does not contain
information collection requirements, a submission to the Office of
Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.) is not required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the
[[Page 66218]]
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal,
which is the subject of this rule, mostly reflects the State's policy
choices not required by or prohibited by Federal law. The part of this
rule disapproving one of the State's proposed revisions 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. In making the determination as to whether this part of the
rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied
upon the data and assumptions for the corresponding Federal
regulations.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) does not
have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) will not
cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual
industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic
regions; and (c) does not have significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the
ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based
enterprises. This determination is based on an analysis of the State
submittal, which mostly reflects State policy choices not required by
or prohibited by Federal law. For the part of this rule disapproving
one of the State's proposed revisions, the determination is based on an
analysis of the corresponding Federal regulations, which were
determined not to constitute a major rule.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
Tribal governments, or the private sector of more than $100 million per
year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State,
local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. This determination
is based on an analysis of the State submittal, which mostly reflects
State policy choices not required by or prohibited by Federal law. For
the part of this rule disapproving one of the State's proposed
revisions, the determination is based on an analysis of the
corresponding Federal regulations, which were determined not to impose
an unfunded mandate. Therefore, a statement containing the information
required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is
not required.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 917
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Thomas D. Shope,
Regional Director, North Atlantic--Appalachian Region.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement amends 30 CFR part 917 as set forth
below:
PART 917--KENTUCKY
0
1. The authority citation for part 917 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
0
2. Section 917.12 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
Sec. 917.12 State regulatory program and proposed program amendment
provisions not approved.
* * * * *
(i) We are not approving revisions to KRS 350.0301 made by 2018 Ky.
Acts ch. 85 that would have eliminated a requirement that Kentucky
promulgate regulations providing that operators must place proposed
civil penalty assessments into an escrow account prior to a formal
hearing on the amount of the assessment.
0
3. Section 917.15 is amended by adding a new entry to the table in
paragraph (a) in chronological order by ``Date of Final Publication''
to read as follows:
Sec. 917.15 Approval of Kentucky regulatory program amendments.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original amendment submission Date of final
date publication Citation/description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
September 19, 2018............ August 15, 2024.. KRS 350.064, KRS
350.070, KRS
350.518, and KRS
350.990.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2024-18040 Filed 8-14-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on August 15, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.