779&783.mod.09

Supporting Statement for Paperwork Reduction Act FOR 30 CFR Parts 779 & 783

OMB Control Number 1029-0035

Terms of Clearance: None

General Instructions

A Supporting Statement, including the text of the notice to the public required by 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(i)(iv) and its actual or estimated date of publication in the Federal Register, must accompany each request for approval of a collection of information. The Supporting Statement must be prepared in the format described below, and must contain the information specified in Section A below. If an item is not applicable, provide a brief explanation. When Item 17 of the OMB Form 83-I is checked "Yes", Section B of the Supporting Statement must be completed. OMB reserves the right to require the submission of additional information with respect to any request for approval.

Specific Instructions

A. Justification

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of information.

2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received from the current collection. [Be specific. If this collection is a form or a questionnaire, every question needs to be justified.]

3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also describe any consideration of using information technology to reduce burden [and specifically how this collection meets GPEA requirements.].

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2 above.

5. If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities (Item 5 of OMB Form 83-I), describe any methods used to minimize burden.

6. Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.

7. Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be conducted in a manner:

* requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than quarterly;

* requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;

* requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any document;

* requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical, government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than three years;

* in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to produce valid and reliable results that can be generalized to the universe of study;

* requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and approved by OMB;

* that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority established in statute or regulation, that is not supported by disclosure and data security policies that are consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes sharing of data with other agencies for compatible confidential use; or

* requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secrets, or other confidential information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to protect the information's confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

8. If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publication in the Federal Register of the agency's notice, required by 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting comments on the information collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments received in response to that notice [and in response to the PRA statement associated with the collection over the past three years] and describe actions taken by the agency in response to these comments. Specifically address comments received on cost and hour burden.

Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported. [Please list the names, titles, addresses, and phone numbers of persons contacted.]

Consultation with representatives of those from whom information is to be obtained or those who must compile records should occur at least once every 3 years — even if the collection of information activity is the same as in prior periods. There may be circumstances that may preclude consultation in a specific situation. These circumstances should be explained.

9. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. The statement should:

* Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated. Unless directed to do so, agencies should not conduct special surveys to obtain information on which to base hour burden estimates. Consultation with a sample (fewer than 10) of potential respondents is desirable. If the hour burden on respondents is expected to vary widely because of differences in activity, size, or complexity, show the range of estimated hour burden, and explain the reasons for the variance. Generally, estimates should not include burden hours for customary and usual business practices.

* If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate hour burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens in Item 13 of OMB Form 83-I.

* Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens for collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories. The cost of contracting out or paying outside parties for information collection activities should not be included here. Instead, this cost should be included in Item 14.

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual [non-hour] cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information. (Do not include the cost of any hour burden shown in Items 12 and 14).

* The cost estimate should be split into two components: (a) a total capital and start-up cost component (annualized over its expected useful life) and (b) a total operation and maintenance and purchase of services component. The estimates should take into account costs associated with generating, maintaining, and disclosing or providing the information [including filing fees paid]. Include descriptions of methods used to estimate major cost factors including system and technology acquisition, expected useful life of capital equipment, the discount rate(s), and the time period over which costs will be incurred. Capital and start-up costs include, among other items, preparations for collecting information such as purchasing computers and software; monitoring, sampling, drilling and testing equipment; and record storage facilities.

* If cost estimates are expected to vary widely, agencies should present ranges of cost burdens and explain the reasons for the variance. The cost of purchasing or contracting out information collection services should be a part of this cost burden estimate. In developing cost burden estimates, agencies may consult with a sample of respondents (fewer than 10), utilize the 60-day pre-OMB submission public comment process and use existing economic or regulatory impact analysis associated with the rulemaking containing the information collection, as appropriate.

* Generally, estimates should not include purchases of equipment or services, or portions thereof, made: (1) prior to October 1, 1995, (2) to achieve regulatory compliance with requirements not associated with the information collection, (3) for reasons other than to provide information or keep records for the government, or (4) as part of customary and usual business or private practices.

14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government. Also, provide a description of the method used to estimate cost, which should include quantification of hours, operational expenses (such as equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff), and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of information. Agencies also may aggregate cost estimates from Items 12, 13, and 14 in a single table.

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB Form 83-I.

16. For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication. Address any complex analytical techniques that will be used. Provide the time schedule for the entire project, including beginning and ending dates of the collection of information, completion of report, publication dates, and other actions.

17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19, "Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions," of OMB Form 83-I.

Introduction

This information collection clearance package is being submitted by the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) to request information collection renewal authority under 30 CFR Part 779 and 30 CFR Part 783 of the OSM permanent regulatory program. These regulations govern the minimum requirements for information on environmental resources for mining permit applications. Previously, these two Parts were completed as two separate information collection packages. With both Parts requiring identical information, OSM is combining the two packages in order to streamline the information collection process. The information collection for Part 779, Surface Mining Permit Applications – Minimum Requirements for Information on Environmental Resources, was previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned clearance number 1029-0035. The information collection for Part 783, Underground Mining Permit Applications – Minimum Requirements for Information on Environmental Resources, was previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned clearance number 1029-0038. Upon OMB approval of this collection OSM will discontinue 1029-0038 and the 28,856 burden hours associated with it.

Since the last request for both Parts was approved in 2006, there have been no program changes. The burden changes stem from the combination of two previously submitted information collection packages into one single collection request, and increases in applicant burden from the most recent data received from the engineering consultant.

INFORMATION COLLECTION SUMMARY FOR 30 CFR PARTS 779 & 783
Sections	Applicant Responses	State Responses	Hours per Applicant	Hours per State	Total Hours Requested	Current ICB hours	Change to ICB hours
779/783.11 & .12	314	309	433	5	136,117	11,905	124,212
779/783.18	314	309	3	1	1,251	507	744
779/783.19	314	309	16	.25	5,101	6,143	-1,042
779/783.24	314	309	112	7	37,331	9,130	28,201
779/783.25	314	309	186	7.25	60,644	27,182	33,462
TOTALS	314	309			240,444	54,867	185,577

REASON FOR CHANGE
	Program Change Due to Agency Discretion	Adjustment
779/783.11 & .12	3,128	121,084
779/783.18	78	666
779/783.19	2,050	(3,092)
779/783.24	9,720	18,481
779/783.25	13,880	19,582
Total	28,856	156,721

In 2009, to prepare this clearance package, two entities with vast experience in mining permit application preparations have been contacted. Their names, addresses and phone numbers can be found in item number 8.

Each section under Part 779/783 will be combined as the sections have identical requirements under each Part. Each section will be discussed separately. However, the five sections described contain similar statements that are noted below.

ITEMS FOR WHICH RESPONSES ARE IDENTICAL FOR ALL SECTIONS

3. OSM continues to work with State Regulatory Authorities (SRAs) and coal companies to develop procedures for the preparation and processing of permit applications electronically. Progress has been made in most States to increase the use of electronic and information technology to improve efficiency and reduce the time and cost burden to permit applicants and SRAs. Virtually all SRAs have the capability of receiving permit applications electronically, either through an ftp site or via CD-ROM or DVD. Some permit applicants use computer technology to create, store, and submit information electronically, but the percentage varies based on the size of the company and their technical abilities. Larger coal companies have in-house staff or hire engineering firms to prepare their applications. These companies use automated technology to prepare and submit the applications to SRAs. Small coal companies, which may not have the technical capability or personnel capable of preparing and submitting applications, may still submit paper forms. Once the SRAs receive paper applications, they frequently will convert the applications to an electronic format for review and processing. The States with the greatest number of permit applications, such as Kentucky and Virginia, receive approximately 90% electronically, while some receive 0%. Nationally, OSM estimates that the SRAs receive approximately 50% of permit applications electronically.

It must be noted that the vast majority of permit applications are received by SRAs where OSM does not have the authority to require submissions of permit applications electronically. OSM can only recommend utilizing electronic methods and assist in that development to improve efficiency.

Unless otherwise noted, this information collection request estimates that there are 314 permit applications submitted each year (based on OSM’s FY 2007 annual report), with 309 processed by the SRAs and 5 processed by OSM.

4. No similar information is collected by OSM or by other federal agencies. Also, circumstances vary with each proposed coalmine site in which a permit application has been received. Therefore, there is no available information which can be used in lieu of that supplied on each application.

5. There are no special provisions for small organizations. However, small operators may be eligible for assistance under OSM’s Small Operator Assistance Program. OMB has approved and assigned that clearance number 1029-0061.

6. Information is collected only at the time an application is made; therefore, frequency of collection does not apply here.

7. This information collection is consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2). The number of copies of each permit application submitted to the SRA is determined by State regulations and may not be limited by OSM.

8. The following respondents were contacted during 2009 to determine the estimated burden Part 779/783 places on respondents:

Mr. Bill Winters, Technical Supervisor

OSM-Knoxville FO-RA Tennessee

710 Locust St., 2^nd Floor

Knoxville, TN 37902

(865) 545-4103 ext. 170

Sanford M. Hendon, PE

McGehee Engineering

P.O. Box 3431

Jasper, AL 35507

(205) 221-0686

The engineering firm (applicant) had no concerns regarding the availability of data, frequency of collection, clarity of instructions and record keeping of the required information to be collected.

The regulatory authority (RA) had no concerns regarding the availability of data, frequency of collection, clarity of instructions and record keeping of the required information to be collected.

These individuals provided the following estimated burden hours:

Section	Winters (RA)	Hendon (applicant)
779/783.11 & .12	.5	433
779/783.18	1	3
779/783.19	.25	16
779/783.24	7.5	112
779/783.25	7.25	186

On December 15, 2008, OSM published in the Federal Register (73 FR 76056) a notice requesting comments from the public regarding the need for the collection of information, the accuracy of the burden estimate, ways to enhance the information collection, and ways to minimize the burden on respondents. This notice gave the public 60 days in which to comment. However, no comments were received.

9. Payments or gifts are not provided to respondents.

10. While §§ 507(b)(17), 508(a)(12), and 508(b) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA or the Act) require that certain types of permit application information may be kept confidential, 30 CFR 773.13(d) specifies that each permit application must be available for public inspection. The applicant has the right to request confidentiality for certain types of information in the application, such as analyses of the physical and chemical properties of the coal and the location of archaeological resources.

11. Not applicable. Sensitive questions are not asked.

12. OSM uses the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor

Statistics (BLS) figures for calculating cost burden placed on respondents and on the Federal government. These figures are derived for mining companies found at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_212100.htm and for State government engineers found at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_999200.htm#b17-0000. We have also included a benefits factor of 1.4 for the coal companies, and a benefits factor of 1.5 for State government employees. These benefit estimates were developed in accordance with the BLS release for EMPLOYER COSTS FOR EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION—SEPTEMBER 2007 at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_12112007.pdf.

14. OSM has calculated our employee costs using Federal employee pay tables from the Office of Personnel Management’s website at http://www.opm.gov/oca/09tables/html/gs_h.asp. We have included a 1.5 multiplier for benefits as discussed in the BLS release http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ ecec_12112007.pdf.

16. There are no plans for publication of this information.

17. OSM is not seeking a waiver from the requirement to display the expiration date for OMB approval, when appropriate.

18. There is no exception to the certification.

Supporting Statement for Reporting Requirements of

Sections 779/783.11 & .12:

General Requirements and

General Environmental Resources Information

A. JUSTIFICATION

1. Sections 507 and 508 of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (Act) require that the permit application contain adequate descriptions of the premining environmental resources and cultural, historic, and archeological values existing within the permit area and adjacent areas. The information required of an applicant is needed by the regulatory authority to determine the premining condition of the permit area and adjacent areas so that these resources and values may be protected from any adverse effects of coal mining.

2. Section 779/783.11 requires a mining permit application to contain a description of the existing premining environmental resources within the proposed permit area and adjacent areas that may be affected or impacted by the proposed mining activities.

Section 779/783.12 establishes permitting requirements that describe the coal mining operation, its size, and the sequence and timing of the operation. It further requires the identification of cultural, historic and archeological values that may be lost to man. This material allows for the specific identification of operational changes and the development of remedial measures. Section 779/783.12 requires that each permit application describe and identify the following:

(a)--The lands subject to surface coal mining operations over the estimated life of those operations and the size, location and timing of each phase of the operation. This information is necessary to determine the impact of the coal mining operation, its physical boundaries and reclamation and operational impacts over the estimated life of the coal mining operation. This allows for the identification of critical environmental impacts, physical impacts, the degree and timing of specific impacts and the identification of operational impacts. It allows the operator, the regulatory authority and the public to identify potential adverse impacts to human safety, health and welfare as well as to the environment. It provides the necessary data to identify, over time, cumulative impacts and allows for the design of necessary remedial actions and operational changes.

(b) -- Identification of cultural, historic, and archeological data essential to identify, evaluate, and prevent impacts on retrievable national, regional, local and cultural resources. This information is essential in preventing the loss of artifacts necessary to understand and study man's historic development. Most of the information is a summary of existing data available at State and Federal agencies. The archeological data not currently available can only be delivered through site-specific surveys.

The Act requires the regulatory authority to determine that the mining operation will minimally impact environmental resources by ensuring that reclamation is possible and that the land can be restored to its former use or approved alternative use. Without this information, an analysis of the permit, the impacts of the operation, needed reclamation and remedial measures, and operational modifications necessary to be in compliance with the Act would be impossible to discern. In addition, the Secretary would not be able to comply with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act that requires that significant historic, cultural, and archeological resources be identified in an area proposed for mining so that these resources can be dealt with appropriately.

3. See list of items with identical responses.

4. See list of items with identical responses.

5. See list of items with identical responses.

6. See list of items with identical responses.

7. See list of items with identical responses.

8. See list of items with identical responses.

9. See list of items with identical responses.

10. See list of items with identical responses.

11. See list of items with identical responses.

12. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Reviewing Burden

a. Estimate of Burden to Respondents:

Based on the Fiscal Year 2007 annual evaluation reports and ongoing contacts with permit applicants including those identified in item 8, 314 permit applications were submitted with the information. Each applicant spent 433 hours to complete this portion of the application. Therefore, the burden on applicants is 314 x 433 hours per response = 135,962 hours.

In addition, the regulatory authority needs an average of .5 hours to review the information. Since SRAs process 309 applications, 309 applications x .5 hours = 155 hours (rounded). Hence, it is estimated that the total annual burden for respondents under 30 CFR 779/783.11 & .12 is 136,117 hours (135,962 + 155).

b. Estimated Wage Cost to Respondents:

See list of items with identical responses for item 12 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Industry Wage Cost

Position	Hour Burden per Response	Cost Per Hour ($)	Total Wage Burden ($)
Clerical	30	18.40	552
Environmental Technician	358	30.21	10,815
Environmental Engineer	40	46.82	1,873
Operations Manager	5	63.72	319
Total	433		13,559

Therefore, the estimated total annual wage cost for each industry respondent for §779/783.11 and .12 is $13,559. The total wage cost to all industry respondents is $13,559 x 314 permits = $4,257,526.

In addition, the estimated total annual wage cost for State regulatory authorities to review §779/783.11 and .12 is $49.14 per hour for a State government engineer x .5 hours = $24.57. The total wage cost to all State regulatory authorities is $24.57 x 309 permit applications = $7,592.

The total costs to all respondents is $4,257,526+ $7,592 = $4,265,118.

13. Total Annual Non-Wage Cost Burden to Respondents

a. Annualized Capital and Start-Up Costs:

The information collection requirements of 30 CFR 779/783.11 and .12 do not involve any capital or start-up costs apart from expenditures associated with: (1) customary business practices concerning establishment and operation of a mining entity, or (2) general administration of a regulatory agency.

b. Operation and Maintenance Costs:

There are no distinct operation or maintenance costs associated with the information collection requirements for sections 779/783.11 and .12.

14. Estimate of Cost to the Federal Government

See list of items with identical responses for item 14 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Oversight: In keeping with the current guidance concerning oversight of State program implementation, which de-emphasizes process reviews, OSM does not anticipate conducting any significant oversight review of State compliance with the requirements of 30 CFR § 779/783.11 and .12 in the absence of any indication of programmatic problems. OSM assumes that we will conduct an oversight review of this topic in one State program per year and that each review requires an average of 10 hours at $50.76 per hour (GS 13/1 regulatory program specialist/engineer) to review the application. The annual cost to the Federal government for this oversight activity is estimated to be $508.

Federal Programs: Based upon data collected in 2007, OSM estimates that it will annually receive approximately 5 applications for new permits for lands and operations for which OSM is the regulatory authority, requiring .5 hours to review each. At an average salary of $50.76 per hour as referenced above, the annual wage cost to the Federal government to review these sections will be $127 (5 applications x .5 hours per review x $50.76 per hour).

Total Federal Cost

$508 Oversight

+ $127 Federal Programs

$635 Total Federal Cost

15. This information collection request will increase the previously approved burden estimate due combining the collections for Parts 779 and 783, as well as an increase in applicant burden as an adjustment as demonstrated below:

11,905 hours currently approved

3,128 hours from Part 783 as a program change

+ 121,084 hours due to an adjustment

136,117 hours requested

16. See list of items with identical responses.

16. See list of items with identical responses.

16. See list of items with identical responses.

Supporting Statement for Reporting Requirements of

Section 779/783.18:

Climatological Information

A. JUSTIFICATION

1. Section 507(b)(12) of the Act, requires the permit application to contain a statement of climatological factors peculiar to the locality of the land to be affected, including the average seasonal precipitation, the average direction and velocity of prevailing winds, and the seasonal temperature ranges, if requested, by the regulatory authority.

2. Sections 779/783.18, when requested by the SRA, requires that the application contain a statement of the climatological factors that are representative of the proposed permit area including: average seasonal precipitation, average direction and velocity of prevailing winds, and seasonal temperature ranges. The regulatory authority may also request additional data as deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the requirement of Subchapter G. Although this information is not explicitly required by Federal regulations, SRAs routinely request this climatological information.

This information may be needed by the regulatory authority to determine whether the applicant will be able to comply with the performance standards of topsoil, roads, hydrologic balance, sedimentation ponds, disposal of excess spoil, coal waste, backfilling and grading, revegetation and postmining land use. The operator's plan for controlling wind and water erosion, revegetation potential, sedimentation pond design, etc., is evaluated on the collected information. In some cases the information may be obtained from the weather bureau. If so, it would not be required of the permit applicant. Failure to include this information would make it difficult for the regulatory authority to determine whether the operation could meet the performance standards of Subchapter K.

3. See list of items with identical responses.

4. See list of items with identical responses.

5. See list of items with identical responses.

6. See list of items with identical responses.

7. See list of items with identical responses.

8. See list of items with identical responses.

9. See list of items with identical responses

9. See list of items with identical responses.

9. See list of items with identical responses.

12. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Reviewing Burden

a. Estimate of Burden to Respondents:

Based on the Fiscal Year 2007 annual evaluation reports and ongoing contacts with permit applicants and those identified in item 8, there are 314 permit applicants submitting the information, each applicant requiring 3 hours to complete the application requirements for this section. Therefore, 314 applicants x 3 hours per application = 942 hours.

Based on experience as a regulatory authority, OSM estimates that the regulatory authority will need an average of 1 hour to review the information of the 309 applications they receive, or 309 hours to review this section of all applications. Hence, the annual burden hours for respondents under 30 CFR 779/783.18 will be 1,251 hours (942 + 309).

b. Estimated Wage Cost to Respondents:

See list of items with identical responses for item 12 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Industry Wage Cost

Position	Hour Burden per Response	Cost Per Hour ($)	Total Wage Burden ($)
Clerical	.5	18.40	9.20
Environmental Technician	2	30.21	60.42
Environmental Engineer	.5	46.82	23.41
Total	3		93.03

Therefore, the estimated total annual wage cost for each industry respondent for §779/783.18 is $93 (rounded). The total wage cost to all industry respondents is $93 x 314 permits = $29,202.

In addition, the estimated total annual wage cost for State regulatory authorities to review §779/783.18 of each permit application is $49.14 per hour for a State government engineer x 1 hour = $49 (rounded). The total wage cost to all State regulatory authorities is $49 x 309 permit applications = $15,141.

The total costs to all respondents is $29,202 + $15,141 = $44,343.

13. Total Annual Non-Wage Cost Burden to Respondents

a. Annualized Capital and Start-Up Costs:

There are no capital or start-up costs to complete this information collection beyond that incurred by normal business activities.

b. Operation and Maintenance Costs:

There is no distinct operation or maintenance costs associated with the information collection requirements for this section.

14. Estimate of Cost to the Federal Government

See list of items with identical responses for item 14 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Oversight: In keeping with the current guidance concerning oversight of State program implementation, which de-emphasizes process reviews, OSM does not anticipate conducting any significant oversight review of State compliance with the requirements of 30 CFR § 779/783.18 in the absence of any indication of programmatic problems. OSM assumes that we will conduct an oversight review of this topic in one State program per year and that the review requires an average of 1 hour at $50.76 per hour (GS 13/1 regulatory program specialist/engineer) to conduct the oversight review of this portion of the application. The annual cost to the Federal government for this oversight activity is estimated to be $51 (rounded).

Federal Programs: Based upon data collected in 2007, OSM estimates that it will annually receive approximately 5 applications for new permits for lands and operations for which OSM is the regulatory authority, requiring 1 hour to review each. At an average salary of $50.76 per hour as referenced above, the annual wage cost to the Federal government to review this section of the applications will be $255 (5 applications x 1 hour per review x $51 per hour).

Total Federal Cost

$ 51 Oversight

+ $255 Federal Programs

$306 Total Federal Cost

15. This information collection request will increase the previously approved burden estimate due combining the collections for Parts 779 and 783, as well as an increase in applicant burden as an adjustment as demonstrated below:

507 hours currently approved

78 hours from Part 783 as a program change

+ 666 hours due to an adjustment

1,251 hours requested

16. See list of items with identical responses.

17. See list of items with identical responses.

18. See list of items with identical responses.

Supporting Statement for Reporting Requirements of

Section 779/783.19:

Vegetation Information

A. JUSTIFICATION

1. 30 CFR 779/783.19, as required by sections 507(b) and 508(a)(2)(B) of the Act, states that, if required by the regulatory authority, the permit application shall contain a map depicting existing vegetative types and a description of the plant communities within the proposed permit area and any reference areas if requested by the regulatory authority.

2. The use of the information or records required by each of the specific paragraphs of this section is as follows:

Paragraph (a) ‑‑ This section requires a map that delineates existing vegetative types and a description of plant communities. The information is necessary to determine whether there exists endangered or threatened species, as well as long and short-term reduction of productivity and capability of the land involved. Such data analysis and baseline information requirements may be necessary in developing a revegetation plan that meets the Act's requirements for reestablishment of a diverse, permanent, self-reproducing plant cover natural to the area, the restoration of normal plant succession, season and geographic diversity of permanent vegetation associated with the mine area or affected area. The data establishes a means of documenting bond release standards and identifying critical habitats of other dependent biota.

Paragraph (b) ‑‑ Requires that the area adjacent to the permit area be included in the mapping with descriptions to allow evaluation of the vegetation community's importance to fish, wildlife and related resource values. This information is needed to determine the significance of the vegetation community to the biota, dependent on it for its critical life cycle requirements. The removal of critical vegetation community for a period equal to a normal coal mining operation could result in the loss of a regional, local, or national protected species. The information collected is used by the regulatory authority in determining if the reclamation and mining operations are of such a nature as to protect, minimize, restore, and enhance fish, wildlife, and related resources, held in public trust by the state or federal government.

3. See list of items with identical responses.

4. See list of items with identical responses.

5. See list of items with identical responses.

6. See list of items with identical responses.

7. See list of items with identical responses.

8. See list of items with identical responses.

9. See list of items with identical responses.

10. See list of items with identical responses.

11. See list of items with identical responses.

12. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Reviewing Burden

a. Estimate of Burden to Respondents:

Based on the Fiscal Year 2007 annual evaluation reports and ongoing contacts with permit applicants, there are 314 permit applications that provide vegetative data. Therefore, 314 respondents x 16 hours per response = 5,024 hours. In addition, OSM estimates that the State regulatory authority will need an average of .25 hours to review the information. The SRA burden to review this section of all applications is 77.25 hours (309 applications x .25 hours to review this section for each application). Hence, the annual burden for respondents under 30 CFR 779/783.19 is 5,101 hours (rounded)(5,024 + 77.25).

b. Estimated Wage Cost to Respondents:

See list of items with identical responses for item 12 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Industry Wage Cost

Position	Hour Burden per Response	Cost Per Hour ($)	Total Wage Burden ($)
Clerical	3	18.40	55.20
Environmental Technician	12	30.21	362.52
Environmental Engineer	1	46.82	46.82
Total	16		464.54

Therefore, the estimated total annual wage cost for each industry respondent for §779/783.19 is $465 (rounded). The total wage cost to all industry respondents is $465 x 314 permits = $146,010.

In addition, the estimated total annual wage cost for State regulatory authorities to review §779/783.19 of each permit application is $49.14 per hour for a State government engineer x .25 hours = $12 (rounded). The total wage cost to all State regulatory authorities is $12 x 309 permit applications = $3,708.

The total costs to all respondents is $146,010 + $3,708 = $149,718.

13. Total Annual Non-Wage Cost Burden to Respondents

a. Annualized Capital and Start-Up Costs:

There are no capital or start-up costs to complete this information collection beyond that incurred by normal business activities.

b. Operation and Maintenance Costs:

There is no distinct operation or maintenance costs associated with the information collection requirements for this section.

14. Estimate of Cost to the Federal Government

See list of items with identical responses for item 14 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Oversight: In keeping with the current guidance concerning oversight of State program implementation, which de-emphasizes process reviews, OSM does not anticipate conducting any significant oversight review of State compliance with the requirements of 30 CFR § 779/783.19 in the absence of any indication of programmatic problems. OSM assumes that we will conduct an oversight review of this topic in one State program per year and that the review requires an average of 1 hour at $50.76 per hour (GS 13/1 regulatory program specialist/engineer) to conduct the oversight review of this portion of the application. The annual cost to the Federal government for this oversight activity is estimated to be $51 (rounded).

Federal Programs: Based upon data collected in 2007, OSM estimates that it will annually receive approximately 5 applications for new permits for lands and operations for which OSM is the regulatory authority, requiring 1 hour to review each. At an average salary of $50.76 per hour as referenced above, the annual wage cost to the Federal government to review this section of the applications will be $64 (5 applications x .25 hours per review x $51 per hour).

Total Federal Cost

$ 51 Oversight

+ $ 64 Federal Programs

$115 Total Federal Cost

15. This information collection request will reduce the approved burden for this section due to a decrease in applicant burden and a decrease in SRA burden as demonstrated below:

6,143 hours currently approved

+ 2,050 hours from Part 783 as a program change

- 3,092 hours due to adjustments

5,101 hours requested

16. See list of items with identical responses.

17. See list of items with identical responses.

18. See list of items with identical responses.

Supporting Statement for Reporting Requirements for

Section 779/783.21:

Soil Resources Information

The requirements under section 779/783.21 are collected solely by applicants for Prime Farmland. The burden associated with this section may be found under 30 CFR Part 785 – Requirements for Permits for Special Categories of Mining; section 785.17(c) - Prime Farmland, Application Contents. This collection has been approved separately by OMB and assigned clearance number 1029-0040.

Supporting Statement for Reporting Requirements of

Section 779/783.24:

Maps: General Requirements

A. JUSTIFICATION

1. Section 507(b) of the Act, requires that the permit application include maps locating all boundaries, structures, roads, parks, historical sites, cemeteries, or Indian burial grounds in the permit area and the affected area.

2. The use of the information in Section 779/783.24 is as follows:

(a) Maps to show all boundaries of lands and names of present owners of record, both surface and subsurface included in or contiguous to the permit area. This information should be readily available to the applicant, since the information would be a normal part of the database associated with any mine operation. Such information is typically required as part of complying with legal requirements regarding proper title to the resources and lands in question. Because of the site-specific nature of the information, it is generally reported for individual mines, or particular operations.

(b) Requires the maps to show the boundaries of land and wetlands within the proposed permit area upon which the applicant has the legal right to enter and begin mining activities. This information is part of the existing information associated with any coal mining operation, and is used to comply with the requirements of local land and resource managing agencies, as well as in other activities associated with coal mining operations.

(c) Requires maps to show the boundaries of all areas including wetlands proposed to be affected over the estimated life of the proposed surface mining activities with a description of the size, sequence and timing of the mining of sub-areas for which it is anticipated that additional permits will be sought. The information requested is part of the general plan of operations that is developed by a mine operator to manage the progress of mining activity. The information can be used by regulatory authorities to pre-plan for the processing of additional permits, thereby reducing administrative costs of the operator and to the regulatory authority.

(d) Location of all buildings in and within 1,000 feet of the proposed permit area, with identification of the current use of the buildings. The information is used by the regulatory authority to assure that, where appropriate, such structures will not be disturbed or destroyed by the proposed mining activity. The information is site specific to the permit area and should be easily available. The costs of assembling it should be minor.

(e) Location of surface and sub-surface man-made features within, passing through, or passing over the proposed permit area, including, but not limited to major electric transmission lines, pipelines, and agricultural drainage tile fields. The information requested is used by the regulatory authority to assure that where appropriate, such structures will not be disturbed or destroyed by the proposed mining activity. Existing maps and other descriptive material would normally be used by the applicant to comply with this information requirement.

(f) Identification on a map of the location and boundaries of any proposed reference areas for determining the success of revegetation. The information is used to assess the progress of revegetation and associated reclamation efforts during the reclamation phase of the operation. Because of the site-specific nature of the information, it must be developed for specific permits, rather than on a higher level of aggregation. However, such information should normally be found in existing data bases, and easily abstracted from them.

(g) Location of water supply intakes for current users of surface water flowing into, out of, and within a hydrologic area defined by the regulatory authority and those surface waters which will receive discharges from affected areas in the proposed permit area. This information is used by the regulatory authority to assure compliance with the Act's provisions mandating protection of water quality, of wetlands and the overall hydrologic balance and integrity of the mine permit area and areas which may be affected by activities on the permit area. Normally, the information would be developed through site-specific surveys that would allow information concerning hydrology to be developed. In larger areas, existing aquifers would be known, and their general hydrologic characteristics described in records maintained by such agencies as state water resources agencies. This information should be readily available to applicants, but site-specific data may have to be developed to supplement this information for submission to the regulatory authority.

(h) Identification on a map of each public road located within 100 feet of the proposed permit area. The information is used by the regulatory authority to assure that mining activity does not occur within 100 feet of these roads, since such activity is prohibited by section 522(e)(4) of the Act. The information should be readily available, and part of the required database for conducting any mining activity.

(i) Identification of the boundaries of any public park and locations of any cultural or historical resources listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic places as well as any known archeological sites within the permit and adjacent areas. The information is used to assure that the planned operation does not conflict with the requirement of Section 522(e)(3) of the Act that prohibits such activities. As a rule, the information should be available from local or State agencies, such as the State Historic Preservation Office. Such maps may be submitted as overlays to other maps, thus reducing the cost of submitting the information.

(j) Location of a cemetery in or within 100 feet of the proposed permit area. This information is used by the regulatory authority to assure that mining activities do not knowingly disturb such sites without proper considerations.

(k) Identification on a map of any land within the proposed permit area which is within the boundaries of any units of the National Trails System or the Wild and Scenic Rivers system. The information is used by the regulatory authority to assure compliance with Section 507(b)(13) of the Act. Normally, much of the information would be readily available to the applicant through county, State, or Federal records systems. The incidence of submittal should be relatively low, since mining activities adjacent to the Trails or the Wild and Scenic Rivers system is not a typical occurrence.

3. See list of items with identical responses.

4. See list of items with identical responses.

5. See list of items with identical responses.

6. See list of items with identical responses.

7. See list of items with identical responses.

8. See list of items with identical responses.

9. See list of items with identical responses.

10. See list of items with identical responses.

11. See list of items with identical responses.

12. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Reviewing Burden

a. Estimate of Burden to Respondents:

Based on the Fiscal Year 2007 annual evaluation reports and ongoing contacts with permit applicants including those identified in item 8, there are 314 permit applications with 100% of the applications submitting the information, each applicant requiring 112 hours to complete this portion of the application. Therefore, burden required by the 314 applicants to complete this section is 314 applications x 112 hours per response per applicant = 35,168 hours. In addition, the regulatory authority needs an average of 7 hours to review the information, or 2,163 hours (309 applications x 7 hours). Hence, it is estimated that the annual burden hours for respondents under 30 CFR 779/783.24 will total 37,331 hours (35,168 hours + 2,163 hours).

b. Estimated Wage Cost to Respondents:

See list of items with identical responses for item 12 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Industry Wage Cost

Position	Hour Burden per Response	Cost Per Hour ($)	Total Wage Burden ($)
Clerical	8	18.40	147
Engineering Technician	60	30.21	1,813
Mining Engineer	40	46.82	1,873
Operation Manager	4	63.72	255
Total	112		4,088

Therefore, the estimated total annual wage cost for each industry respondent for §779/783.24 is $4,088. The total wage cost to all industry respondents is $4,088 x 314 permits = $1,283,632.

In addition, the estimated total annual wage cost for State regulatory authorities to review §779/783.24 of each permit application is $49.14 per hour for a State government engineer x 7 hours = $344 (rounded). The total wage cost to all State regulatory authorities is $344 x 309 permit applications = $106,296.

The total costs to all respondents is $1,283,632 + $106,296 = $1,389,928.

13. Total Annual Non-Wage Cost Burden to Respondents

a. Annualized Capital and Start-Up Costs:

There are no capital or start-up costs to complete this information collection beyond that incurred by normal business activities.

b. Operation and Maintenance Costs:

There is no distinct operation or maintenance costs associated with the information collection requirements for this section.

14. Estimate of Cost to the Federal Government

See list of items with identical responses for item 14 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Oversight: In keeping with the current guidance concerning oversight of State program implementation, which de-emphasizes process reviews, OSM does not anticipate conducting any significant oversight review of State compliance with the requirements of 30 CFR § 779/783.24 in the absence of any indication of programmatic problems. OSM assumes that we will conduct an oversight review of this topic in one State program per year and that the review requires an average of 4 hours at $50.76 per hour (GS 13/1 regulatory program specialist/engineer) to conduct the oversight review of this portion of the application. The annual cost to the Federal government for this oversight activity is estimated to be 4 hours x $51 (rounded) = $204.

Federal Programs: Based upon data collected in 2007, OSM estimates that it will annually receive approximately 5 applications for new permits for lands and operations for which OSM is the regulatory authority, requiring 7 hours to review each. At an average salary of $50.76 per hour as referenced above, the annual wage cost to the Federal government to review this section of the applications will be $1,785 (5 applications x 7 hours per review x $51 per hour, rounded).

Total Federal Cost

$ 204 Oversight

+ $1,785 Federal Programs

$1,989 Total Federal Cost

15. This information collection request will increase the previously approved burden estimate due to a combination of 779 and 783, as well as an increase in applicant burden as demonstrated in the following table:

9,130 hours currently approved

+ 9,720 hours from Part 783 as a program change

+ 18,481 hours due to adjustments

37,331 hours requested

16. There are no plans for publications of this information.

17. We are not seeking approval to not display the expiration date.

18. There is no exception to the certification.

Supporting Statement for Reporting Requirements of

Section 779/783.25:

Cross Sections, Maps, and Plans

A. JUSTIFICATION

1. Section 779/783.25, in accordance with section 507(b) of the Act, requires cross sections, maps, and plans for water quality and quantity, coal seam analysis, underground mine workings, and the location of oil and gas wells.

2. Since the issuance of this rule in 1979, significant technological improvements have been made available to the regulatory authorities. Most relevant is OSM's Technical Innovation and Professional Services (TIPS) software and data analysis capabilities which have been provided to each regulatory authority and which allow premining slopes to be computed.

3. See list of items with identical responses.

4. See list of items with identical responses.

5. See list of items with identical responses.

6. See list of items with identical responses.

7. See list of items with identical responses.

8. See list of items with identical responses.

9. See list of items with identical responses.

10. See list of items with identical responses.

11. See list of items with identical responses.

12. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Reviewing Burden

a. Estimate of Burden to Respondents:

Based on the Fiscal Year 2007 annual evaluation reports and ongoing contacts with permit applicants, 314 permit applications were submitted with the information. Each applicant spent 186 hours to complete this portion of the application. Therefore, burden hours required by the 314 applicants = 314 x 186 hours per response = 58,404 hours. In addition, the regulatory authority needs an average of 7.25 hours to review the information, or 2,240.25 hours (309 applications x 7.25 hours to review). Therefore, it is estimated that the annual burden hours for respondents under 30 CFR 779/783.25 will total 60,644 hours (58,404 hours + 2,240 hours, rounded).

b. Estimated Wage Cost to Respondents:

See list of items with identical responses for item 12 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Industry Wage Cost (rounded)

Position	Hour Burden per Response	Cost Per Hour ($)	Total Wage Burden ($)
Clerical	8	18.40	147
Engineering Technician	74	30.21	2,236
Mining Engineer	100	46.82	4,682
Operation Manager	4	63.72	255
Total	186		7,320

Therefore, the estimated total annual wage cost for each industry respondent for §779/783.25 is $7,320. The total wage cost to all industry respondents is $7,320 x 314 permits = $2,298,480.

In addition, the estimated total annual wage cost for State regulatory authorities to review §779/783.25 of each permit application is $49.14 per hour for a State government engineer x 7.25 hours = $356 (rounded). The total wage cost to all State regulatory authorities is $356 x 309 permit applications = $110,004.

The total costs to all respondents is $2,298,480 + $110,004 = $2,408,484.

13. Total Annual Non-Wage Cost Burden to Respondents

a. Annualized Capital and Start-Up Costs:

There are no capital or start-up costs to complete this information collection beyond that incurred by normal business activities.

b. Operation and Maintenance Costs:

There is no distinct operation or maintenance costs associated with the information collection requirements for this section.

14. Estimate of Cost to the Federal Government

See list of items with identical responses for item 14 for a discussion of how the following wage costs were developed, including benefits.

Oversight: In keeping with the current guidance concerning oversight of State program implementation, which de-emphasizes process reviews, OSM does not anticipate conducting any significant oversight review of State compliance with the requirements of 30 CFR § 779/783.25 in the absence of any indication of programmatic problems. OSM assumes that we will conduct an oversight review of this topic in one State program per year and that the review requires an average of 4 hours at $50.76 per hour (GS 13/1 regulatory program specialist/engineer) to conduct the oversight review of this portion of the application. The annual cost to the Federal government for this oversight activity is estimated to be 4 hours x $51 (rounded) = $204.

Federal Programs: Based upon data collected in 2007, OSM estimates that it will annually receive approximately 5 applications for new permits for lands and operations for which OSM is the regulatory authority, requiring 7 hours to review each. At an average salary of $50.76 per hour as referenced above, the annual wage cost to the Federal government to review this section of the applications will be $1,849 (5 applications x 7.25 hours per review x $51 per hour, rounded).

Total Federal Cost

$ 204 Oversight

+ $1,849 Federal Programs

$2,053 Total Federal Cost

15. This information collection request will increase the previously approved burden estimate due to a combination of 779 and 783, as well as an increase in applicant burden as demonstrated in the following table:

27,182 hours currently approved

+ 13,880 hours from Part 783 as a program change

+ 19,582 hours due to adjustments

60,644 hours requested

16. There are no plans for publication of this information.

17. We are not seeking approval to not display the expiration date.

18. There is no exception to the certification.

35