CHAPTER 8 HOW WILL THE NEW 3809 RULES WORK IN THE FIELD?
| Jurisdiction | United States |
(2001)
HOW WILL THE NEW 3809 RULES WORK IN THE FIELD?
Bureau of Land Management
Lewiston, Montana
Tom Leshendok
Bureau of Land Management
Reno, Nevada
Rick Deery
Bureau of Land Management
Washington, D.C.
[Page 8-1]
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Washington, D.C. 20240
www.blm.gov
January 11, 2001
In Reply Refer To:
3809 (320)P
EMS TRANSMISSION 01/16/2001
Instruction Memorandum No. 2001-068
Expires: 09/30/2002
To: All Field Officials
From: Assistant Director, Minerals, Realty and Resource Protection
Subject: Formal Establishment of a Team to Develop Implementation Policy Guidance on the Final 43 CFR 3809 Regulations DD:01/20/2001
PROGRAM AREA: Mining Law Administration, Surface Management, Regulation Policy Guidance
BACKGROUND: For the past several weeks a group of personnel from the field and the Solid Minerals Group have been working, via e-mail on issues related to the implementation of the final revised 43 CFR 3809 regulations.
The purpose of this instruction memorandum is to formalize the existence of the team and to create a mechanism for obtaining input on implementation issues.
POLICY: The final revised regulations will be effective starting on January 20, 2001. A team composed of field personnel is currently working and will continue to work, on policy guidance that addresses implementation issues identified by field offices. The members of the team are listed below. The team leader is Rick Deery, Geologist, Solid Minerals Group. Other field and center personnel may be asked for input on a task specific basis. No travel is expected, however, any travel that may be required of the team members will be paid by the Washington Office (300). The team will continue its work on an as-needed basis until the end of the fiscal year.
The 3809 Implementation Policy Guidance Team consists of the following personnel:
Rick Deery, Washington Office 320 (Team Leader)
Bob Fisk Alaska State Office
Paul McNutt, Washington Office (WO 320 detached duty in Reno)
Tom Leshendok, Nevada State Office
Ralph Costa, Arizona State Office
Terry Snyder, Utah State Office
Scott Haight, Lewistown Field Office
Alan Rabinoff, Wyoming State Office
John Kalvels, Oregon State Office.
[Page 8-2]
ACTION: Several offices have submitted questions to the Washington Office regarding implementation of the regulations. You should continue submitting questions via e-mail or phone to the members of the team and the Washington Office (300 and 320). Further questions may be submitted via the Solid Minerals Forum in Lotus Notes. The team will use the questions to develop policy guidance on implementation which will be sent out in the normal fashion. Where appropriate, State Offices and Field Offices with a current 3809 work load should consider holding public outreach meetings to inform the public about the impacts of the revised regulations and to gather additional questions or issues regarding implementation of the regulations.
BUDGETARY IMPACTS: Low.
MANUAL/HANDBOOK SECTIONS IMPACTED: Bureau Manual Section 3809.
COORDINATION: Usual channels.
CONTACTS: If you have any questions concerning these instructions, please contact Rick Deery, Geologist, Solid Minerals Group (WO 320) at 202-452-0350.
Signed by:
Carson W. Culp
Assistant Director
Minerals, Realty and Resource Protection
Authenticated by:
Barbara J. Brown
Policy & Records Group, WO-560
[Page 8-3]
January 17, 2001
In Reply Refer To:
3809 (320)P
Supersedes IM 2001-055
EMS TRANSMISSION 01/18/2001
Instruction Memorandum No. 2001-073
To: All Field Officials
From: Assistant Director, Minerals, Realty and Resource Protection
Subject: Grandfathering Plans of Operations Under the Final Revised 43 CFR 3809 Regulations
PROGRAM AREA: Mining Law Administration, Surface Management, Regulation Policy Guidance
ISSUE: How does the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) treat pending Plans of Operations under the final revised 43 CFR 3809 regulations after January 20, 2001?
BACKGROUND: The final revised surface management regulation at 43 CFR 3809.400 addresses how existing, approved plans of operations and pending plans of operations will be treated under the regulations after the effective date of January 20, 2001. The regulations explicitly allow the BLM to continue to process and revise pending plans and notices after the effective date of the final, revised regulations under the previous standards found at 43 CFR 3809.1-5(c) . Washington Office IM 2001-055 provided guidance intended to prevent submission of fatally flawed plans as devices to avoid the performance standards and plan content of the new regulations. This instruction replaces that guidance to address questions raised by field offices and the public.
POLICY: This instruction replaces Washington Office Instruction Memorandum 2001-055.
An "approved" plan is one that we have approved prior to the effective date (January 20, 2001), of the final revised regulations and we have determined that it is adequate to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation and includes all the mitigation that has come out of the NEPA process. As such, an approved plan will usually be different than the complete plan from which it is derived. The approved plan will include all those changes that were developed as a result of the BLM's review. These approved operations are subject to the terms of 43 CFR 3809.400(a)
[Page 8-4]
For purposes of 43 CFR 3809.400(b), a plan pending on January 20, 2001, will be treated as a "complete" plan if the operator has provided sufficient information to enable us to evaluate what the operator is proposing to do. Thus, a complete plan generally constitutes the proposed action that the BLM will use at the start of the NEPA process. Further, it is one where the operator has adequately described any proposed operations in enough detail that the BLM can conduct its review and NEPA analysis to consider alternatives and mitigation measures that might be appropriate. As allowed by the final revised regulations, these plans will continue to be reviewed under the plan content and performance standards of the previous surface management regulations.
Plans of Operations and pending Plans of Operations under review will continue to be analyzed and reviewed by the BLM under the provisions of the regulations in force prior to January 20, 2001. Operator initiated modifications to a pending plan may be submitted to the BLM and will not prevent continuation of the review under the prior regulations. "Complete" plans with the BLM-identified deficiencies that can be mitigated or corrected though the approval process may be processed after the effective date of the final revised regulations. So long as the plan of operations will prevent unnecessary or undue degradation as the term was defined in the regulations in force prior to January 20, 2001 the plan may be approved after the effective date of the final, revised regulations.
If you find a deficiency in a submitted plan that requires an operator to submit corrective materials and the BLM cannot remedy the deficiency through the approval process, then the operator must submit the corrective materials within a reasonable period of time. If the operator fails to submit the information by the specified date, the plan will be rejected and any resubmitted plans will be subject to all parts of the final revised regulations.
You may not approve any pending plan where you have identified uncorrectable deficiencies that create a fatal flaw that would prevent you from approving a plan of operations under the standards found in regulations in force prior to January 20, 2001. By fatal flaw we mean that the deficiency you have identified is such that no operator-initiated or the BLM-required amendment or mitigating measures would prevent unnecessary or undue degradation. Any fatally flawed plan will be rejected and you may inform the operator in writing that a resubmitted plan of operations will be subject to all provisions of the final, revised regulations.
BUDGETARY IMPACTS: Not estimated at this time.
MANUAL/HANDBOOK SECTIONS IMPACTED: Bureau Manual Section 3809. Supersedes Washington Office Instruction Memorandum 2001-055.
[Page 8-5]
COORDINATION: Usual channels.
CONTACTS: If you have any questions concerning this instruction please contact Group Rick Deery, Geologist, Solid Minerals Group (WO 320) at 202-452-0350.
Signed by:
Robert Anderson
Acting Assistant Director
Minerals, Realty and Resource Protection
Authenticated by:
Barbara J. Brown
Policy & Records Group, WO-560
[Page 8-7]
January 18, 2001
Memorandum
To: Secretary
Director, Bureau of Land Management
From: Solicitor
Subject: Use of Mining Claims for Purposes Ancillary to Mineral Extraction
1. INTRODUCTION
The Mining Law of 1872, 30 U.S.C. §§ 22 et seq. (Mining Law), authorizes the location of mining claims on federal lands that contain valuable mineral deposits. It also authorizes the location of mill sites on nonmineral federal land that is not contiguous to the mineral deposits for use in supporting the development of the mineral deposits on the mining claims. See 30 U.S.C. § 42. In Limitations on Patenting Millsites under the Mining Law of 1872. M-36988 (Nov. 7, 1997) (Mill Site Opinion), we concluded that the Secretary may not patent, or approve plans of operations that involve, more than five acres of mill sites in association with a single valid mining claim.
In March 1999, the Acting State Director of the Arizona State Office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) requested our legal opinion concerning a proposal by the Yarnell Mining Company (Yarnell) to develop a gold mine near Wickenburg. Arizona, that would use some of Yarnell's thirty-two unpatented mining claims as sites for heap leach pads, waste rock dumps, and other...
To continue reading
Request your trial