Rule2026-03283
Rescission of Regulations Regarding Leasing of Solid Minerals Other Than Coal and Oil Shale
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
February 19, 2026
Effective
September 15, 2025
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentLand Management Bureau
Abstract
Due to the receipt of a substantive comment on the direct final rule (DFR) rescinding portions of the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) regulations that address the Leasing of Solid Minerals Other Than Coal and Oil Shale, the Department of the Interior, through the BLM, is issuing a new final rule that responds to the comment.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 33 (Thursday, February 19, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 33 (Thursday, February 19, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7855-7856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-03283]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
43 CFR Part 3500
[Docket No. BLM-2025-0004; A2407-014-004-065516, #O2509-014-004-125222]
RIN 1004-AF18
Rescission of Regulations Regarding Leasing of Solid Minerals
Other Than Coal and Oil Shale
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Direct final rule; response to comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Due to the receipt of a substantive comment on the direct
final rule (DFR) rescinding portions of the Bureau of Land Management's
(BLM) regulations that address the Leasing of Solid Minerals Other Than
Coal and Oil Shale, the Department of the Interior, through the BLM, is
issuing a new final rule that responds to the comment.
DATES: The effective date of September 15, 2025, for the direct final
rule published on July 17, 2025 (90 FR 33310) is confirmed. This final
rule is effective on March 23, 2026.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Indra Dahal, Deputy Division Chief,
Division of Solid Minerals, telephone: 202-742-0601; email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bad3dedbd2dbd6fad8d6d794ddd5cc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="157c71747d7479557779783b727a63">[email protected]</span></a>. For technical or regulatory questions, contact Sabry
Hanna, Solid Leasable Other Than Coal Program Lead, telephone: 571-458-
6644; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#98ebf0f9f6f6f9d8faf4f5b6fff7ee"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="710219101f1f1031131d1c5f161e07">[email protected]</span></a>. Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial
711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay
services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay
services offered within their country to make international calls to
the point-of-contact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 17, 2025, the BLM published a DFR
amending the Code of Federal Regulations by rescinding the statewide
acreage limitation for hardrock mineral permits and leases at 43 CFR
3503.37(f) and the provisions for hardrock mineral development
contracts at 43 CFR subpart 3517 (90 FR 33310). The BLM stated in the
DFR that if significant adverse comments were received by August 18,
2025, the BLM would withdraw the DFR or issue a new final rule that
responds to the comments. The BLM received one substantive comment on
August 18, 2025. The BLM elects to issue a new final rule that responds
to the comment.
In issuing the DFR, the BLM determined that paragraph (f) of 43 CFR
3503.37 should be revised to remove the maximum acreage of hardrock
permits and leases in any one State because the acreage limitation for
hardrock permits and leases is not mandated by statute and is
unnecessary. The BLM also determined that 43 CFR subpart 3517,
consisting of Sec. Sec. 3517.10 through 3517.16, should be rescinded
because the purpose of those regulations was to provide an exemption
from the statewide acreage limitation for hardrock permits and leases.
With the removal of the statewide acreage limitation for hardrock
permits and leases in paragraph (f) of 43 CFR 3503.37, the regulations
in 43 CFR subpart 3517 are obsolete and no longer needed.
On August 18, 2025, the BLM received a comment from Northeastern
Minnesotans for Wilderness, The Wilderness Society, Center for
Biological Diversity, and Earthworks opposing the rescission of 43 CFR
3503.37(f) and 43 CFR subpart 3715.
Response to General Assertions
The commenters raised concerns that the DFR will result in large
projects and degrade natural resources. Those concerns, however, are
speculative and the commenters do not explain how the DFR will lead to
those results. The BLM notes that the statewide acreage limitation for
hardrock permits and leases did not limit the overall amount of acreage
that could be included in hardrock permits or leases in any one State
by any number of entities, but rather limited the amount of acreage
that any one entity could hold within a State. The purpose of the
limitation was not related to any question of degradation of natural
resources but was to prevent any one entity from monopolizing access to
the mineral resources in a particular State despite the lack of any
statutory mandate for the regulatory acreage limitation.
The BLM maintains that it has the authority to amend and rescind
regulations pursuant to changing policy so long as such changes are
permissible under applicable statutory authority. The statutes
governing hardrock permits and leases do not contain any provisions
limiting the amount of acreage that any one entity may hold in permits
and leases in a State. The inclusion or removal of acreage limitations
for hardrock permits and leases in the regulations is therefore within
the BLM's discretion. Here, rescinding the statewide acreage limitation
for hardrock permits and leases will ease the regulatory burden by
allowing any one entity to hold as permits and leases the amount of
land needed for hardrock mineral operations without needing to enter
into development contracts or processing and milling arrangements under
43 CFR subpart 3517.
Response to Statutory Compliance Assertions
The commenters raise concerns that the DFR will make it more
difficult for the BLM and the Forest Service to comply with the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, and the Endangered Species Act. In response, the BLM notes
that the commenters do not explain how the rescission of the statewide
acreage limitation relates to compliance with the listed statutes or
explain why the acreage limitation was necessary to ensure compliance
with those statutes. The BLM maintains that the DFR is not related to
and will have no impact on the BLM's ability to comply with applicable
statutes. The DFR does not authorize any mining activities. The BLM
will continue to analyze any prospecting permit applications or
proposals to lease or develop hardrock minerals under 43 CFR part 3500,
as required by those environmental statutes, on a case-by-case basis.
Response to Procedural Comments
The commenters raised procedural concerns for the BLM's
consideration. In response, the BLM notes that the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA) requires that agencies provide all interested
persons with fair notice and an opportunity to comment on the
rulemaking. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and (c). The July 2025 DFR provided the
public with notice of the BLM's actions to rescind the statewide
acreage limitation for hardrock permits and leases and to rescind the
provisions providing for
[[Page 7856]]
development contracts. See 90 FR 33312-13. The BLM also requested
comments on the July 2025 DFR. See 90 FR 33310. Thus, the BLM provided
interested persons with notice and an opportunity to comment as
required by the APA. As a result, there was no need for a good cause
exemption from notice-and-comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
The commenters raised concerns that the DFR does not comply with
NEPA. In response, the BLM maintains that the commenters' alleged
effects on the environment are speculative. The DFR is merely
administrative and in and of itself does not cause any environmental
effects. Therefore, the DFR does not constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Moreover,
the BLM will conduct environmental analysis under NEPA before approving
any prospecting permit application or proposal to lease or develop
hardrock minerals under 43 CFR part 3500.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, the BLM is not withdrawing the July
2025 DFR.
Lanny E. Erdos,
Director, Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation, and Enforcement
Exercising Authority of the Assistant Secretary--Land and Minerals
Management.
[FR Doc. 2026-03283 Filed 2-18-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331-29-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 February 19, 2026.
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.