Ocean Dumping; LA-3 Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Designation, 41167-41174 [05-14071]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Rose
Quinto, (215) 814–2182, or by e-mail at
quinto.rose@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
further information, please see the
information provided in the direct final
action, Delaware’s Ambient Air Quality
Standard for Ozone and Fine Particulate
Matter, that is located in the ‘‘Rules and
Regulations’’ section of this Federal
Register publication. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dated: July 8, 2005.
Richard J. Kampf,
Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 05–13986 Filed 7–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 228
[FRL–7938–4]
Ocean Dumping; LA–3 Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Site Designation
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA)
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposes the final
designation of an ocean dredged
material disposal site (ODMDS) located
offshore of Newport Beach, California
(known as LA–3), managed at a
maximum annual dredged material
disposal quantity of 2,500,000 cubic
yards (yd3) (1,911,000 cubic meters
[m3]), and the management of
permanently-designated LA–2 ODMDS
at an increased maximum annual
dredged material disposal quantity of
1,000,000 yd3 (765,000 m3) for the ocean
disposal of clean dredged material from
the Los Angeles County and Orange
County regions. The availability of
suitable ocean disposal sites to support
ongoing maintenance and capital
improvement projects is essential for the
continued use and economic growth of
the vital commercial and recreational
areas in the region. Dredged material
will not be allowed to be disposed of in
the ocean unless the material meets
strict environmental criteria established
by the EPA and U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE).
The action would shift the center of
the permanently-designated LA–3 site
approximately 1.3 nautical miles (nmi)
(2.4 kilometers [km]) to the southeast of
the interim LA–3 site, and encompass a
region that is already disturbed by
dredged material. The permanent site
also would be located on a flat,
depositional plain, and away from the
submarine canyons, that will be more
amenable to surveillance and
monitoring activities. The LA–2 site is
a permanently designated ODMDS that
has been historically managed at an
average annual disposal quantity of
200,000 yd3 (153,000 m3) for the
disposal of material dredged primarily
from the Los Angeles/Long Beach
Harbor complex. The proposed action
will allow an increased volume of
dredged material to be disposed
annually at this site. The annual
disposal quantity has occasionally
exceeded the historical annual average
due to capital projects from both the
ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
Thus, the new maximum volume
designation would accommodate the
projected average annual volume
requirements as well as provide for
substantial annual volume fluctuations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 17, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Allan Ota, Dredging and Sediment
Management Team, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region IX (WTR–8),
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105, telephone (415) 972–3476 or
FAX: (415) 947–3537 or E-mail:
ota.allan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
supporting document for this site
designation is the Final Environmental
Impact Statement for the Site
Designation of the LA–3 Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Site off Newport Bay,
Orange County, California. This
document is available for public
inspection at the following locations:
1. EPA Region IX, Library, 75
Hawthorne Street, 13th Floor, San
Francisco, California 94105
Category
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:10 Jul 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
2. EPA Public Information Reference
Unit, Room 2904, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460
3. U.S. EPA, Southern California Field
Office, 600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite
1460, Los Angeles, CA 90017
4. Lloyd Taber-Marina del Rey Library,
4533 Admiralty Way, Marina del Rey,
CA 90292
5. Long Beach Public Library, 101
Pacific Avenue, Long Beach, CA
90822
6. Los Angeles Public Library, Central
Library, 630 West 5th Street, Los
Angeles, CA 90071
7. Los Angeles Public Library, San
Pedro Regional Branch Library, 931
South Gaffey Street, San Pedro, CA
90731
8. Newport Beach Public Library, Balboa
Branch, 100 East Balboa Boulevard,
Balboa, CA 92661
9. Newport Beach Public Library,
Central Library, 1000 Avocado
Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92660
10. Newport Beach Public Library,
Corona del Mar Branch, 420 Marigold
Avenue, Corona del Mar, CA 92625
11. Newport Beach Public Library,
Mariners Branch, 2005 Dover Drive,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
12. U.S. EPA Web site: https://
www.epa.gov/region9/.
13. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Web
site: https://www.spl.usace.army.mil.
A. Potentially Affected Entities
Entities potentially affected by this
action are persons, organizations, or
government bodies seeking to dispose of
dredged material in ocean waters at the
LA–3 and LA–2 ODMDS, under the
Marine Protection Research and
Sanctuaries Act, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.
The Rule would be primarily of
relevance to parties in the Los Angeles
and Orange County areas seeking
permits from the USACE to transport
dredged material for the purpose of
disposal into ocean waters at the LA–3
and LA–2 ODMDS, as well as the
USACE itself (when proposing to
dispose of dredged material at the LA–
3 and LA–2 ODMDS). Potentially
affected categories and entities seeking
to use the LA–3 and LA–2 ODMDS and
thus subject to this Rule include:
Examples of potentially affected entities
Industry and General Public .....................................................................
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
•
•
•
•
Ports.
Marinas and Harbors.
Shipyards and Marine Repair Facilities.
Berth owners.
Sfmt 4702
41167
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
41168
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Category
Examples of potentially affected entities
State, local and tribal governments ..........................................................
• Governments owning and/or responsible for ports, harbors, and/or
berths.
• Government agencies requiring disposal of dredged material associated with public works projects.
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works and O & M projects.
• Other Federal agencies, including the Department of Defense.
Federal government .................................................................................
This table lists the types of entities
that EPA is now aware potentially could
be affected. EPA notes, however, that
nothing in this Rule alters in any way,
the jurisdiction of EPA, or the types of
entities regulated under the Marine
Protection Research and Sanctuaries
Act. To determine if you or your
organization is potentially affected by
this action, you should carefully
consider whether you expect to propose
ocean disposal of dredged material, in
accordance with the Purpose and Scope
provisions of 40 CFR 220.1, and if you
wish to use the LA–3 and/or LA–2
ODMDS. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the
persons listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION section.
B. Background
Ocean disposal of dredged materials
is regulated under Title I of the Marine
Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
Act (MPRSA; 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.).
The EPA and the USACE share
responsibility for the management of
ocean disposal of dredged material.
Under Section 102 of MPRSA, EPA has
the responsibility for designating an
acceptable location for the ODMDS.
With concurrence from EPA, the USACE
issues permits under MPRSA Section
103 for ocean disposal of dredged
material deemed suitable according to
EPA criteria in MPRSA Section 102 and
EPA regulations in Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations Part 227 (40 CFR
part 227).
It is EPA’s policy to publish an EIS for
all ODMDS designations (Federal
Register, Volume 63, Page 58045 [63 FR
58045], October 1998). A site
designation EIS is a formal evaluation of
alternative sites which examines the
potential environmental impacts
associated with disposal of dredged
material at various locations. The EIS
must first demonstrate the need for the
proposed ODMDS designation action
(40 CFR 6.203(a) and 40 CFR 1502.13)
by describing available or potential
aquatic and non-aquatic (i.e., landbased) alternatives and the
consequences of not designating a site—
the No Action Alternative. Once the
need for an ocean disposal site is
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:10 Jul 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
established, potential sites are screened
for feasibility through the Zone of Siting
Feasibility (ZSF) process. Remaining
alternative sites are evaluated using
EPA’s ocean disposal criteria at 40 CFR
part 228 and compared in the EIS. Of
the sites which satisfy these criteria, the
site which best complies with them is
selected as the preferred alternative for
formal designation through rulemaking
published in the Federal Register (FR).
Formal designation of an ODMDS in
the Federal Register does not constitute
approval of dredged material for ocean
disposal. Designation of an ODMDS
provides an ocean disposal alternative
for consideration in the review of each
proposed dredging project. Ocean
disposal is only allowed when EPA and
USACE determine that the proposed
activity is environmentally acceptable
according to the criteria at 40 CFR Part
227. Decisions to allow ocean disposal
are made on a case-by-case basis
through the MPRSA Section 103
permitting process or its equivalent
process for USACE’s Civil Works
projects. Material proposed for disposal
at a designated ODMDS must conform
to EPA’s permitting criteria for
acceptable quality (40 CFR Parts 225
and 227), as determined from physical,
chemical, and bioassay/
bioaccumulation testing (EPA and
USACE 1991). Only clean non-toxic
dredged material is acceptable for ocean
disposal.
The interim LA–3 disposal site is
located on the continental slope of
Newport Submarine Canyon at a depth
of about 1,475 feet (ft) (450 meters [m]),
approximately 4.3 nmi (8 km) southwest
of the entrance of Newport Harbor. This
region is characterized by a relatively
smooth continental slope
(approximately two-degree slope)
incised by a complicated pattern of
meandering broad submarine canyons
that can be up to 98 ft (30 m) deep and
656–2,625 ft (200–800 m) wide. The
circular interim site boundary is
centered at 33° 31′42″ N and 117° 54′48″
W, with a 3,000 ft (915 m) radius.
The interim LA–3 site has been used
for disposing sediment dredged from
harbors and flood channels within the
County of Orange since 1976. Prior to
1992, LA–3 was permitted by the
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
USACE as a designated ocean disposal
site for specific projects only. In 1992,
the EPA approved LA–3 as an interim
disposal site; this interim status expired
January 1, 1997 (Water Resources
Development Act [WRDA] 1992). The
expiration date was extended to January
1, 2000, through the 1996 WRDA (1996).
In 1999, this interim status was
extended for another three years and
expired December 31, 2002. The
proposed action would provide
permanent designation of LA–3 for
disposal of dredged materials from
ongoing dredging activities, such as
dredging to preserve the wetland habitat
within the Upper Newport Bay or to
maintain navigation channels at
Newport and Dana Point Harbors.
The proposed action would also shift
the center of the LA–3 site
approximately 1.3 nmi (2.4 km) to the
southeast of the interim LA–3 site. The
circular boundary of the permanently
designated LA–3 site would be centered
at 33° 31′00″ N and 117° 53′30″ W and
would have a 3,000 ft (915 m) radius.
The depth of the center of the site
would be approximately 1,600 ft (490
m). At this location the site boundary
would be away from the submarine
canyons that run through the interim
site, thus simplifying surveillance and
monitoring activities.
The LA–2 ODMDS was designated as
a permanent disposal site on February
15, 1991. The LA–2 site is located on
the outer continental shelf, margin, and
upper southern wall of the San Pedro
Sea Valley at depths from
approximately 360–1,115 ft (110 to 340
m), about 5.9 nmi (11 km) southsouthwest of the entrance to Los
Angeles Harbor. The relatively flat
continental shelf occurs in water depths
to about 410 ft (125 m) with a regional
slope of 0.8 degree. Then the slope
becomes steep at about 7 degrees
seaward to the shelf break. The southern
wall of the San Pedro Sea Valley drops
away with slopes steeper than 9 degrees.
The site boundary is centered at
33° 37′6″ N and 118° 17′24″ W with a
radius of 3,000 ft (915 m).
The LA–2 ODMDS does not have an
annual disposal volume limit. However,
the site designation EIS evaluated
potential impacts based on a historical
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
annual average of 200,000 yd3 (153,000
m3). Since 1991, the annual disposal
quantity occasionally has exceeded the
pre-designation historical annual
average because of capital projects from
both the ports of Los Angeles and Long
Beach.
The need for ongoing ocean disposal
capacity is based on historical dredging
volumes from the local port districts,
marinas and harbors, and federal
navigational channels, as well as on
estimates of future average annual
dredging. An overall average of
approximately 390,000 yd3 (298,000 m3)
per year of dredged material requiring
ocean disposal is expected to be
generated in the area. The purpose of
the proposed action is to ensure that
adequate, environmentally-acceptable
ocean disposal site capacity, in
conjunction with other management
options including upland disposal and
beneficial reuse, is available for suitable
dredged material generated in the
greater Los Angeles County-Orange
County area.
EPA and USACE encourage the use of
dredged material for beach
replenishment in areas degraded by
erosion. The grain size distribution of
dredged material must be compatible
with the receiving beach, and biological
and water quality impacts must be
considered prior to permitting of beach
disposal. EPA and USACE evaluate the
selection of appropriate disposal
methods on a case-by-case basis for each
permit. Additionally, opportunities
arise periodically to use dredged
material for marine landfilling projects,
also referred to as the creation of
‘‘fastlands.’’ When the need arises, the
use of dredged material for the creation
of fastlands is considered a viable
alternative to ocean disposal. Other
potential beneficial uses for dredged
material include construction fill, use as
cap material in aquatic remediation
projects, wetland creation, wetland
restoration, landfill daily cover, and
recycling into commercial products
such as construction aggregate, ceramic
tiles, or other building materials. Each
of these disposal management options is
evaluated when permits are issued for
individual dredging projects.
A Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF)
analysis estimates that after
consideration of upland disposal and
other beneficial uses, an average of
approximately 390,000 yd3 (298,000 m3)
per year of dredged material will require
ocean disposal. This material would be
proposed for ocean disposal by project
proponents because it is not of an
appropriate physical quality (e.g., it is
predominantly fine-grained material) for
reuse or because a reuse opportunity
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:10 Jul 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
cannot be found that coincides with the
timing of the dredging projects.
The LA–2 ODMDS is approximately
5.9 nmi (11 km) offshore from the
entrance to the Port of Los Angeles and
approximately 8.4 nmi (15.5 km) from
the entrance to the Port of Long Beach.
The majority of suitable dredged
material from USACE and port dredging
projects in the Los Angeles County area
that could not be beneficially reused has
traditionally been disposed of at this
site. When EPA originally designated
LA–2 as a permanent disposal site in
1991, it evaluated the past history of
disposal at the site up to that time and
determined that significant adverse
environmental impacts were unlikely to
occur if similar levels of disposal
continued there in the future.
Most dredging projects from the
Orange County area have not used the
LA–2 site because of the extra costs and
increased environmental impacts (such
as increased air emissions) associated
with transporting dredged material the
longer distance to this site. Instead,
projects traditionally have used the LA–
3 interim site, located approximately 4.3
nmi (8 km) offshore from Newport Bay.
The LA–3 interim disposal site was
originally scheduled to close down on
January 1, 1997, but the interim
designation was extended by Congress
until January 1, 2000 to allow a major
Newport Bay dredging project to be
completed (the approximately 1,000,000
yd3 [765,000 m3] project to restore depth
to sediment basins located in Upper
Newport Bay). LA–3 was the only
interim site in the nation specifically
extended in this manner. Most recently,
via the WRDA of 1999, Congress
extended the status of LA–3 as an
interim ODMDS for another three years
(until December 31, 2002) to allow time
for site designation studies and
completion of the site designation EIS.
The proposed action provides for
adequate, environmentally-acceptable
ocean disposal site capacity for suitable
dredged material generated in the
greater Los Angeles County-Orange
County area by permanently designating
the LA–3 ODMDS.
C. Disposal Volume Limit
The proposed action is final
designation of the LA–3 ODMDS
managed at a maximum annual dredged
material disposal quantity of 2,500,000
yd3 (1,911,000 m3) and the management
of LA–2 at an increased maximum
annual dredged material disposal
quantity of 1,000,000 yd3 (765,000 m3)
for the ocean disposal of dredged
material from the Los Angeles and
Orange County region. The need for
ongoing ocean disposal capacity is
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
41169
based on historical dredging volumes
from the local port districts, marinas
and harbors, and federal navigational
channels, as well as estimates of future
average annual dredging.
D. Site Management and Monitoring
Plan
Verification that significant impacts
do not occur outside of the disposal site
boundaries will be demonstrated
through implementation of the Site
Management and Monitoring Plan
(SMMP) developed as part of the
proposed action. The main purpose of
the SMMP is to provide a structured
framework for resource agencies to
ensure that dredged material disposal
activities will not unreasonably degrade
or endanger human health, welfare, the
marine environment, or economic
potentialities (Section 103(a) of the
MPRSA). Three main objectives for
management of both the LA–2 and LA–
3 ODMDSs are: (1) Protection of the
marine environment; (2) beneficial use
of dredged material whenever practical;
and (3) documentation of disposal
activities at the ODMDS.
The EPA and USACE Los Angeles
District personnel will achieve these
objectives by jointly administering the
following activities: (1) Regulation and
administration of ocean disposal
permits; (2) development and
maintenance of a site monitoring
program; (3) evaluation of permit
compliance and monitoring results; and
(4) maintenance of dredged material
testing and site monitoring records to
insure compliance with annual disposal
volume targets and to facilitate future
revisions to the SMMP.
The SMMP includes periodic physical
monitoring to confirm that the material
that is deposited is landing where it is
supposed to land, as well as chemical
monitoring to confirm that the sediment
chemistry conforms to the pre-disposal
testing requirements. Other activities
implemented through the SMMP to
achieve these objectives include: (1)
Regulating quantities and types of
material to be disposed of, and the time,
rates, and methods of disposal; and (2)
recommending changes for site use,
disposal amounts, or designation for a
limited time based on periodic
evaluation of site monitoring results.
E. Ocean Dumping Site Designation
Criteria
Five general criteria and 11 specific
site selection criteria are used in the
selection and approval of ocean disposal
sites for continued use (40 CFR 228.5
and 40 CFR 228.6(a)).
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
41170
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
General Selection Criteria
1. The dumping of materials into the
ocean will be permitted only at sites or
in areas selected to minimize the
interference of disposal activities with
other activities in the marine
environment, particularly avoiding
areas of existing fisheries or
shellfisheries, and regions of heavy
commercial or recreational navigation.
Dredged material disposal activities
have occurred at the LA–2 and LA–3
sites since the late 1970s. Historical
disposal at the interim LA–3 site has not
interfered with commercial or
recreational navigation, commercial
fishing, or sportfishing activities.
Disposal at the LA–2 site, while located
within the U.S. Coast Guard Traffic
Separation Scheme, has not interfered
with these activities. The continued use
of these sites would not change these
conditions.
2. Locations and boundaries of
disposal sites will be so chosen that
temporary perturbations in water
quality or other environmental
conditions during initial mixing caused
by disposal operations anywhere within
the site can be expected to be reduced
to normal ambient seawater levels or to
undetectable contaminant
concentrations or effects before reaching
any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary,
or known geographically limited fishery
or shellfishery. The LA–2 and LA–3
sites are sufficiently removed from
shore and limited fishery resources to
allow water quality perturbations
caused by dispersion of disposal
material to be reduced to ambient
conditions before reaching
environmentally sensitive areas.
3. If at any time during or after
disposal site evaluation studies, it is
determined that existing disposal sites
presently approved on an interim basis
for ocean dumping do not meet the
criteria for site selection set forth in
Sections 228.5 through 228.6, the use of
such sites will be terminated as soon as
suitable alternate disposal sites can be
designated. Evaluation of the LA–2 and
LA–3 sites indicates that they presently
do and would continue to comply with
these criteria. Additionally, compliance
will continue to be evaluated through
implementation of the Site Monitoring
and Management Plan (SMMP).
4. The sizes of the ocean disposal sites
will be limited in order to localize for
identification and control any
immediate adverse impacts and permit
the implementation of effective
monitoring and surveillance programs
to prevent adverse long-range impacts.
The size, configuration, and location of
any disposal site will be determined as
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:10 Jul 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
a part of the disposal site evaluation or
designation study. The LA–2 and LA–3
disposal sites are circular areas with a
3,000 ft (915 m) radius. The size of the
sites has been determined by computer
modeling to limit environmental
impacts to the surrounding area and
facilitate surveillance and monitoring
operations. The designation of the size,
configuration, and location of sites was
determined as part of the evaluation
study.
5. EPA will, wherever feasible,
designate ocean dumping sites beyond
the edge of the continental shelf and
other such sites that have been
historically used. The LA–3 site is
located beyond the continental shelf,
near a canyon on the continental slope,
in an area that has been used
historically for the disposal of dredged
material. LA–3 is the only site in the
vicinity that fully meets the above
criteria. The LA–2 site, which has been
permanently designated and has been
used for the ocean disposal of dredged
material since 1977, is located near the
edge of the continental shelf at the 600
ft (183 m) contour.
Specific Selection Criteria
1. Geographical position, depth of
water, bottom topography, and distance
from the coast. Centered at 33°31′00″ N,
117°53′30″ W, the LA–3 site bottom
topography is gently sloping from
approximately 1,500 to 1,675 ft (460 to
510 m). Situated near the slope of a
submarine canyon, the site center is
approximately 4.5 nmi (8.5 km) from the
mouth of Newport Harbor. The LA–2
site is at the top edge of the continental
slope in approximately 360 ft to 1,115
ft (110 to 340 m) of water. Centered at
33°37′06″ N and 118°17′24″ W, the LA–
2 site is located just south of the San
Pedro Valley submarine canyon,
approximately 5.9 nmi (11 km) from the
entrance to Los Angeles Harbor.
2. Location in relation to breeding,
spawning, nursery, feeding, or passage
areas of living resources in adult or
juvenile phases. The LA–2 and LA–3
sites are located in areas that are
utilized for feeding and breeding of
resident species. The LA–3 site is
located in the gray whale migration
route area, while the LA–2 site is
located near the migration route. The
California gray whale population was
severely reduced in the 1800s and 1900s
due to international whaling. However,
protection from commercial whaling
initiated in the 1940s has allowed the
population to recover. There is no
indication that disposal activities at LA–
2 or LA–3 have adversely affected the
gray whale. There are no known special
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
breeding or nursery areas in the vicinity
of the two disposal sites.
3. Location in relation to beaches and
other amenity areas. The LA–3 site
boundary is located over 3.5 nmi (6.5
km) offshore of the nearest coast in the
Newport Beach and Harbor area. The
LA–2 site boundary is located over 4.6
nmi (8.5 km) offshore from the nearest
coast in the Palos Verdes area. Other
beach areas are more distant. No adverse
impacts from dredged material disposal
operations are expected on these
amenity areas.
4. Types and quantities of wastes
proposed to be disposed of, and
proposed methods of release, including
methods of packaging the waste, if any.
Dredged material to be disposed of will
be predominantly clays and silts
primarily originating from the Los
Angeles/Long Beach Harbor area and
from Newport Bay and Harbor. Average
annual disposal volumes at LA–3 range
from 0 to approximately 337,000 yd3 (0
to 258,000 m3). Average annual disposal
volumes at LA–2 range from 68,000 yd3
to approximately 405,000 yd3 (52,000 to
310,000 m3).
Dredged material is expected to be
released from split hull barges. No
dumping of toxic materials or industrial
or municipal waste would be allowed.
Dredged material proposed for ocean
disposal is subject to strict testing
requirements established by the EPA
and USACE, and only clean (non-toxic)
dredged materials are allowed to be
disposed at the LA–3 and LA–2 sites.
5. Feasibility of surveillance and
monitoring. The EPA (and USACE for
federal projects in consultation with
EPA) is responsible for site and
compliance monitoring. USCG is
responsible for vessel traffic-related
monitoring. Monitoring the disposal
sites is feasible but somewhat
complicated by topography. At LA–3,
this complication is reduced by
relocation of the permanent LA–3 site
away from submarine canyons.
6. Dispersal, horizontal transport, and
vertical mixing characteristics of the
area, including prevailing current
direction and velocity, if any. Currents
and vertical mixing will disperse
unconsolidated fine grained dredged
sediments in the upper water column in
the vicinity of ODMDS boundaries.
Prevailing currents are primarily
parallel to shore and flow along
constant depth contours. Situated near
the slope of a submarine canyon, the
LA–3 area would be expected to receive
sedimentation from erosion and
nearshore transport into the canyon. At
LA–2, some sediment transport offshore
occurs due to slumping. Overall, the
seabed at both sites are considered to be
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
non-dispersive, and sediments at both
sites are expected to settle and remain
offshore (as opposed to onshore).
7. Existence and effects of current and
previous discharges and dumping in the
area (including cumulative effects).
Localized physical impacts have
occurred to sediments and benthic biota
within the disposal sites due to past
disposal operations. However, these
activities have not resulted in long-term
significant adverse impacts on the local
environment. No interactions with other
discharges are anticipated due to the
distances from the discharge points.
8. Interference with shipping, fishing,
recreation, mineral extraction,
desalination, fish and shellfish culture,
areas of special scientific importance,
and other legitimate uses of the ocean.
Continued use of the LA–2 and LA–3
sites would result in minor interferences
with commercial shipping and fishing
vessels due to disposal barge traffic.
Sites are not located within active oil or
natural gas tracts. Continued disposal
operations are not anticipated to
adversely impact existing nearby oil and
gas development facilities or tracts, or
other socioeconomic resources. Overall,
no significant interferences associated
with this criterion are expected to result
from continued use of the LA–2 and
LA–3 sites.
9. Existing water quality and ecology
of the site as determined by available
data or by trend assessment or baseline
surveys. Water quality at the two
disposal areas is good, but temporary,
localized physical impacts have
occurred to sediments and benthic
ecology due to past disposal operations.
Additionally, dredged material
deposited in the past at the two disposal
areas was chemically screened prior to
disposal, and no known dredged
material was disposed of for which
chemical concentrations exceeded the
range of chemical concentrations
approved for ocean disposal.
10. Potentiality for the development or
recruitment of nuisance species in the
disposal site. The potential is low due
to depth differences between the
disposal sites and the likely sources of
dredged material.
11. Existence at or in close proximity
to the site of any significant natural or
cultural features of historical
importance. No known shipwrecks or
other cultural resources occur within
2.7 nmi (5 km) of either the LA–2 or
proposed LA–3 disposal sites.
F. Responses to Comments
The draft EIS was published in the
Federal Register on January 21, 2005. A
45-day public review and comment
period extended from the publication
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:10 Jul 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
date through March 7, 2005. Six
comment letters from various
individuals, organizations, and agencies
were received during the public review
and comment period. In addition to the
six comment letters, two public
meetings were held on Wednesday,
February 9, 2005, to solicit comments
from interested parties. The comments,
and associated responses, are
summarized topically below.
Preferred Alternative
Two commenters concurred with the
preferred alternative selected in the EIS.
Site Boundaries for the LA–3 ODMDS
One commenter questioned the
boundary of the LA–3 site relative to the
expected deposition pattern for dredged
materials on the seafloor. The
boundaries of the disposal site were
chosen based on historical usage and to
ensure that the majority of dredged
material falls within the site boundaries
given the 1,000 ft (305 m) radius
disposal target for the disposal barges.
Instantaneous sediment accumulation
rates in excess of 1 ft (30 cm) per
disposal event were assumed to result in
the loss of the existing infaunal
community. However, for assessing
impacts, the EIS conservatively assumed
that the infaunal community would be
lost if the deposition rate exceeded 1 ft
(30 cm) over a one-year period (this is
conservative because the infaunal
community is expected to rapidly
recover for instantaneous deposition
rates of less than 30 cm [1 ft] per
disposal event). For all modeled
scenarios, the worst-case 1 ft (30 cm)
annual deposition contour lies well
within the proposed 3,000 ft (915 m)
radius site boundary. While a certain
quantity of material is expected to settle
outside of the site boundary, it is
impractical and undesirable to extend
the site boundary beyond this distance
in an attempt to encompass all of the
dredge material that will settle on the
ocean bottom. Extending the site
boundaries to encompass all of the
material expected to settle on the ocean
bottom would not alter the conclusion
of significance (or lack thereof)
concerning adverse impacts on the
benthic community determined in the
EIS. The 3,000 ft (915 m) radius is
considered appropriate for site
management purposes.
Estimates of Future Disposal Volumes
Relative to Site Capacity
Two commenters asked for
clarification of projected disposal
volumes at the LA–2 and LA–3 sites.
For both management and
environmental impact considerations,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
41171
the dredged material volume capacities
specified for LA–2 and LA–3 were based
on conservative estimates of the worstcase maximum amount of dredged
material requiring ocean disposal in any
given year. These estimates account for
all known and reasonably anticipated
capital and maintenance dredging
projects in the Los Angeles and Orange
County regions. It is unlikely that all
potential projects would occur
simultaneously in any given year.
Therefore, the environmental impact
analysis considered both the potential
worst-case conditions and a more
reasonable annual average condition.
For each potential dredging project,
the Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF)
Study evaluated whether disposal at the
LA–2 or LA–3 ODMDSs would be
economically feasible. For the purposes
of establishing the maximum analyzed
annual dredged material quantities that
could be placed at LA–2 or LA–3, it was
assumed that the Los Angeles County
projects identified in the ZSF Study
(USACE 2003a) would utilize LA–2, and
that the Orange County projects would
utilize LA–3.
Accordingly, based on the projected
dredging volumes from the ZSF study,
as well as site management
considerations, the LA–2 site would be
designated for an annual maximum of
1,000,000 yd3 (765,000 m3) and the LA–
3 site would be designated for an annual
maximum of 2,500,000 yd3 (1,911,000
m3). These maximum volume
designations would accommodate the
projected average annual volume
requirements as well as provide for
substantial annual volume fluctuations.
Thus, the proposed rule will amend use
of the existing LA–2 site for a higher
maximum annual quantity to manage
disposal of dredged material generated
primarily from the Los Angeles County
region, and it would permanently
designate the LA–3 ODMDS with an
annual quantity adequate to manage
disposal of dredged material generated
locally from projects to preserve the
wetland habitat within the Upper
Newport Bay and/or to maintain
navigation channels at Newport and
Dana Point Harbors.
However, it is acknowledged that
designation of the sites does not
preclude material generated in Orange
County from being disposed of at LA–
2 and vice versa. The choice of which
site to use for the disposal of dredged
material for individual dredging projects
will be based on both economic and
environmental factors. Decisions to
allow ocean disposal for individual
dredging projects are made on a case-bycase basis through the Marine
Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
41172
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Act (MPRSA) Section 103 permitting
process or its equivalent process for
USACE’s Civil Works projects and are
subject to subsequent environmental
review and documentation.
Site Monitoring and Management Plan
One commenter expressed support for
the SMMP, but requested clarification
on opportunities for public input to the
SMMP. A SMMP has been developed
that contains approaches for monitoring
impacts to marine organisms, as well as
verification of model predictions.
Development of this SMMP was based
on a review of other SMMPs prepared
for similar ocean disposal sites.
The site monitoring reports described
in the SMMP will be public documents
that will be made available either
through posting on the EPA website or
direct mailing upon request. EPA will
accept public comments regarding those
reports, although there will not be a
formal comment period. Additionally,
the public will get an opportunity to
comment on any SMMP implementation
manual that is prepared by EPA
subsequent to this action. No revisions
to the SMMP as written are necessary to
allow for this level of public input.
Relocation of the LA–3 ODMDS
One commenter indicated that
relocating LA–3 was inconsistent with
EPA site selection criteria. Although the
permanent LA–3 site lies outside of the
boundaries of the interim LA–3 site, the
permanent site has been disturbed by
historical dredged material disposal
events. During reviews performed by the
U.S. Geological Survey in 1998, a
substantial amount of dredged material
was noted outside of the interim site
boundaries, particularly to the north,
northeast, and southeast of the site. This
was primarily attributed to disposal
short of the targeted disposal area and
errors in disposal generally resulting
from inaccurate navigation.
Locating the permanent site boundary
at the proposed location (away from the
interim site) would redirect future
dredged material disposal to an area
historically used for disposal (and thus
already undisturbed). Additionally, due
to the nature of the local topography,
the permanent site would be more
amenable to monitoring via precision
bathymetry. Further, as described in the
SMMP, enhanced vessel tracking and
monitoring will ensure that future
disposal activities occur accurately
within the designated target area of the
permanent site.
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:10 Jul 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
Extension of the Interim Designation of
LA–3
consistent with the Coastal Zone
Management Act.
One commenter recommended
extending the interim designation of
LA–3. Congressional authorization for
the interim site designation expired
December 31, 2002. Requests for another
extension would have to be made to
Congress. In any event, the proposed
action obviates the need for an
extension. Thus, an extension of LA–3’s
interim site designation is not
necessary.
2. Endangered Species Act Consultation
Impacts to Areas of Special Biological
Significance
One commenter noted potentials for
impacts to Crystal Cove State Park and
Area of Special Biological Significance
(ASBS) if dredged materials placed at
LA–3 were transported shoreward by
currents. Dispersion and transport of
dredged material disposed at LA–3 was
modeled using measured current data
collected in the disposal site and
nearshore area. Results from the
sediment fate model indicated that the
dredged material disposed at LA–3
would settle within and immediately
adjacent to the disposal site and no
appreciable sediment transport toward
the nearshore areas is anticipated,
particularly given the depth of the LA–
3 site. Water quality impacts during
dredged material disposal operations at
the LA–3 site will be temporary and
localized and are not expected to extend
to the shallower, nearshore area.
Further, the location of the permanent
LA–3 site relocates the site away from
the Newport submarine canyon. Thus,
any potential influences of currents
within the canyon would be reduced at
the permanent site.
G. Regulatory Requirements
1. Consistency With the Coastal Zone
Management Act
Consistent with the Coastal Zone
Management Act, EPA prepared a
Coastal Zone Consistency Determination
(CCD) document based on information
presented in the site designation EIS.
The CCD evaluated whether the
proposed action—permanent
designation of LA–3 and management of
LA–2 at a higher annual disposal
volume—would be consistent with the
provisions of the Coastal Zone
Management Act. The CCD was formally
presented to the California Coastal
Commission (Commission) at their
public hearing June 9, 2005. The
Commission staff report recommended
that the Commission concur with EPA’s
CCD, which the Commission did by a
unanimous vote. The proposed rule is
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
During development of the site
designation EIS, EPA consulted with the
National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) pursuant to the
provisions of the Endangered Species
Act (ESA), regarding the potential for
designation and use of the ocean
disposal sites to jeopardize the
continued existence of any federally
listed species. This consultation process
is fully documented in the site
designation EIS. NMFS and FWS
concluded that use of the disposal sites
for disposal of dredged material meeting
the criteria for ocean disposal would not
jeopardize the continued existence of
any federally listed species.
H. Administrative Review
1. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), EPA must
determine whether the regulatory action
is ‘‘significant’’, and therefore subject to
OMB review and other requirements of
the Executive Order. The Order defines
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as one
that is likely to lead to a rule that may:
(a) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more, or
adversely affect in a material way, the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local or tribal governments or
communities;
(b) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(c) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs, or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(d) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
This proposed Rule should have
minimal impact on State, local or tribal
governments or communities.
Consequently, EPA has determined that
this proposed Rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order 12866.
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., is intended to
minimize the reporting and recordkeeping burden on the regulated
community, as well as to minimize the
cost of Federal information collection
and dissemination. In general, the Act
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
requires that information requests and
record-keeping requirements affecting
ten or more non-Federal respondents be
approved by OMB. Since the proposed
Rule would not establish or modify any
information or record-keeping
requirements, but only clarifies existing
requirements, it is not subject to the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act.
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act, as
Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
provides that whenever an agency
promulgates a final rule under 5 U.S.C.
553, the agency must prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA)
unless the head of the agency certifies
that the proposed Rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities (5
U.S.C. 604 and 605). The site
designation and management actions
would only have the effect of setting
maximum annual disposal volume and
providing a continuing disposal option
for dredged material. Consequently,
EPA’s proposed action will not impose
any additional economic burden on
small entities. For this reason, the
Regional Administrator certifies,
pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA,
that the proposed Rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub. L.
104–4) establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
to the private sector, of $100 million or
more in any year.
This proposed Rule contains no
Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for
State, local or tribal governments or the
private sector. The proposed Rule
would only provide a continuing
disposal option for dredged material.
Consequently, it imposes no new
enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector.
Similarly, EPA has also determined that
this Rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small government
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:10 Jul 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
entities. Thus, the requirements of
section 203 of the UMRA do not apply
to this proposed Rule.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires EPA to develop an
accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
federalism implications’’ is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.’’
This proposed Rule does not have
federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132. The proposed
Rule would only have the effect of
setting maximum annual disposal
volumes and providing a continuing
disposal option for dredged material.
Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this proposed Rule.
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ This proposed Rule does
not have tribal implications, as specified
in Executive Order 13175. The proposed
Rule would only have the effect of
setting maximum annual disposal
volumes and providing a continuing
disposal option for dredged material.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this proposed Rule.
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This Executive Order (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that:
(1) is determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
41173
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
EPA must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned
rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by EPA.
This proposed Rule is not subject to the
Executive Order because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because
EPA does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use Compliance With
Administrative Procedure Act
This proposed Rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001)) because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866. The proposed Rule would only
have the effect of setting maximum
annual disposal volumes and providing
a continuing disposal option for
dredged material. Thus, EPA concluded
that this proposed Rule is not likely to
have any adverse energy effects.
9. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law No.
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards. This
proposed Rule does not involve
technical standards. Therefore, EPA is
not considering the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
Environmental protection, Water
pollution control.
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
41174
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Dated: July 5, 2005.
Jane Diamond,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region
IX.
In consideration of the foregoing, EPA
is amending part 228, chapter I of title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 228—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 228
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
2. Section 228.15 is amended by
adding paragraph (l)(11) to read as
follows:
§ 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a
final basis.
*
*
*
*
*
(1) * * *
(11) Newport Beach , CA, (LA–3)
Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site—
Region IX.
(i) Location: Center coordinates of the
circle-shaped site are: 33°31′00″ North
Latitude by 117°53′30″ West Longitude
(North American Datum from 1983),
with a radius of 3,000 feet (915 meters).
(ii) Size: 0.77 square nautical miles.
(iii) Depth: 1,500 to 1,675 feet (460 to
510 meters).
(iv) Use Restricted to Disposal of:
Dredged materials.
(v) Period of Use: Continuing use.
(vi) Restrictions: Disposal shall be
limited to dredged materials that
comply with EPA’s Ocean Dumping
Regulations.
[FR Doc. 05–14071 Filed 7–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 192, 193, and 195
[Docket No. PHMSA–05–21253]
RIN 2137–AD68
Pipeline Safety: Update of Regulatory
References to Technical Standards
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice proposes to
update the pipeline safety regulations to
incorporate by reference all or parts of
new editions of voluntary consensus
technical standards to enable pipeline
operators to utilize current technology,
materials, and practices.
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:10 Jul 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
Comments on the subject of this
proposed rule must be received on or
before September 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments should reference
Docket No. PHMSA–05–21253 and may
be submitted in the following ways:
• DOT Web site: https://dms.dot.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments on the DOT electronic docket
site.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management System:
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–
001.
• Hand Delivery: DOT Docket
Management System; Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
• E–Gov Web site: https://
www.Regulations.gov. This site allows
the public to enter comments on any
Federal Register notice issued by any
agency.
Instructions: You should identify the
docket number PHMSA–05–21253 at
the beginning of your comments. You
should submit two copies of your
comments, if you submit them by mail.
If you wish to receive confirmation that
PHMSA received your comments, you
should include a self-addressed
stamped postcard. Internet users may
submit comments at https://
www.regulations.gov and may access all
comments received by DOT at https://
dms.dot.gov.
DATES:
Note: All comments will be posted without
changes or edits to https://dms.dot.gov
including any personal information
provided. Please see below for Privacy Act
Statement.
Privacy Act Statement: Anyone may
search the electronic form of all
comments received for any of our
dockets. You may review DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477–78) or you may visit https://
dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard D. Huriaux, Director, Technical
Standards at (202) 366–4565, by fax at
(202) 366–4566, by e-mail at
richard.huriaux@.dot.gov, or by mail at
U.S. Department of Transportation,
PHMSA/Office of Pipeline Safety, PHP–
40, Room 2103, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20590–0001.
Copies of this document or other
material in the docket can be reviewed
by accessing the Docket Management
System’s home page at https://
dms.dot.gov. General information on the
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
pipeline safety program is available at
the Office of Pipeline Safety Web site at
https://ops.dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This notice proposes to update the
Federal pipeline safety regulations to all
or parts of recent editions of the
voluntary consensus technical standards
that are currently incorporated by
reference in the Federal pipeline safety
regulations. It updates standards in 49
CFR part 192, ‘‘Transportation of
Natural and Other Gas by Pipeline:
Minimum Federal Safety Standards,’’ 49
CFR part 193, ‘‘Liquefied Natural Gas
Facilities: Federal Safety Standards,’’
and 49 CFR part 195, ‘‘Transportation of
Hazardous Liquids by Pipeline.’’ This
update enables pipeline operators to
utilize current technology, materials,
and practices. The incorporation of the
most recent editions of standards
improves clarity, consistency and
accuracy, and reduces unnecessary
burdens on the regulated community.
Previous updates of the regulations to
incorporate revised standards were
issued on May 24, 1996 (61 FR 26121),
June 6, 1996 (61 FR 2877), February 17,
1998 (63 FR 7721), and June 14, 2004
(69 FR 32886). PHMSA intends to issue
periodic updates to ensure that the
pipeline safety regulations reflect
current practice and to improve
compliance by the pipeline industry
with safety standards.
Standards Incorporated by Reference
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104–113) directs Federal agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in lieu of
government-written standards whenever
possible. Voluntary consensus standards
are standards developed or adopted by
voluntary bodies that develop, establish,
or coordinate technical standards using
agreed-upon procedures.
PHMSA participates in more than 25
national voluntary consensus standards
committees. PHMSA’s policy is to adopt
voluntary consensus standards when
they are applicable to pipeline design,
construction, maintenance, inspection,
and repair. In recent years, PHMSA has
adopted dozens of voluntary consensus
standards into its gas pipeline,
hazardous liquid pipeline, and liquefied
natural gas (LNG) regulations.
PHMSA has reviewed the voluntary
consensus standards proposed for
incorporation in whole or in part in 49
CFR parts 192, 193, and 195. The
organizations responsible for producing
these standards often update or revise
them to incorporate the most current
technology.
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 136 (Monday, July 18, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41167-41174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-14071]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 228
[FRL-7938-4]
Ocean Dumping; LA-3 Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site
Designation
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes the final
designation of an ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS) located
offshore of Newport Beach, California (known as LA-3), managed at a
maximum annual dredged material disposal quantity of 2,500,000 cubic
yards (yd3) (1,911,000 cubic meters [m3]), and
the management of permanently-designated LA-2 ODMDS at an increased
maximum annual dredged material disposal quantity of 1,000,000
yd3 (765,000 m3) for the ocean disposal of clean
dredged material from the Los Angeles County and Orange County regions.
The availability of suitable ocean disposal sites to support ongoing
maintenance and capital improvement projects is essential for the
continued use and economic growth of the vital commercial and
recreational areas in the region. Dredged material will not be allowed
to be disposed of in the ocean unless the material meets strict
environmental criteria established by the EPA and U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE).
The action would shift the center of the permanently-designated LA-
3 site approximately 1.3 nautical miles (nmi) (2.4 kilometers [km]) to
the southeast of the interim LA-3 site, and encompass a region that is
already disturbed by dredged material. The permanent site also would be
located on a flat, depositional plain, and away from the submarine
canyons, that will be more amenable to surveillance and monitoring
activities. The LA-2 site is a permanently designated ODMDS that has
been historically managed at an average annual disposal quantity of
200,000 yd3 (153,000 m3) for the disposal of
material dredged primarily from the Los Angeles/Long Beach Harbor
complex. The proposed action will allow an increased volume of dredged
material to be disposed annually at this site. The annual disposal
quantity has occasionally exceeded the historical annual average due to
capital projects from both the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
Thus, the new maximum volume designation would accommodate the
projected average annual volume requirements as well as provide for
substantial annual volume fluctuations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 17, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Allan Ota, Dredging and Sediment
Management Team, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX (WTR-
8), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, telephone (415) 972-
3476 or FAX: (415) 947-3537 or E-mail: ota.allan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The supporting document for this site
designation is the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Site
Designation of the LA-3 Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site off
Newport Bay, Orange County, California. This document is available for
public inspection at the following locations:
1. EPA Region IX, Library, 75 Hawthorne Street, 13th Floor, San
Francisco, California 94105
2. EPA Public Information Reference Unit, Room 2904, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460
3. U.S. EPA, Southern California Field Office, 600 Wilshire Boulevard,
Suite 1460, Los Angeles, CA 90017
4. Lloyd Taber-Marina del Rey Library, 4533 Admiralty Way, Marina del
Rey, CA 90292
5. Long Beach Public Library, 101 Pacific Avenue, Long Beach, CA 90822
6. Los Angeles Public Library, Central Library, 630 West 5th Street,
Los Angeles, CA 90071
7. Los Angeles Public Library, San Pedro Regional Branch Library, 931
South Gaffey Street, San Pedro, CA 90731
8. Newport Beach Public Library, Balboa Branch, 100 East Balboa
Boulevard, Balboa, CA 92661
9. Newport Beach Public Library, Central Library, 1000 Avocado Avenue,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
10. Newport Beach Public Library, Corona del Mar Branch, 420 Marigold
Avenue, Corona del Mar, CA 92625
11. Newport Beach Public Library, Mariners Branch, 2005 Dover Drive,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
12. U.S. EPA Web site: https://www.epa.gov/region9/.
13. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Web site: https://
www.spl.usace.army.mil.
A. Potentially Affected Entities
Entities potentially affected by this action are persons,
organizations, or government bodies seeking to dispose of dredged
material in ocean waters at the LA-3 and LA-2 ODMDS, under the Marine
Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. The
Rule would be primarily of relevance to parties in the Los Angeles and
Orange County areas seeking permits from the USACE to transport dredged
material for the purpose of disposal into ocean waters at the LA-3 and
LA-2 ODMDS, as well as the USACE itself (when proposing to dispose of
dredged material at the LA-3 and LA-2 ODMDS). Potentially affected
categories and entities seeking to use the LA-3 and LA-2 ODMDS and thus
subject to this Rule include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially
Category affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry and General Public............ Ports.
Marinas and Harbors.
Shipyards and Marine
Repair Facilities.
Berth owners.
[[Page 41168]]
State, local and tribal governments.... Governments owning and/
or responsible for ports,
harbors, and/or berths.
Government agencies
requiring disposal of dredged
material associated with
public works projects.
Federal government..................... U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Civil Works and O &
M projects.
Other Federal
agencies, including the
Department of Defense.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
potentially could be affected. EPA notes, however, that nothing in this
Rule alters in any way, the jurisdiction of EPA, or the types of
entities regulated under the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries
Act. To determine if you or your organization is potentially affected
by this action, you should carefully consider whether you expect to
propose ocean disposal of dredged material, in accordance with the
Purpose and Scope provisions of 40 CFR 220.1, and if you wish to use
the LA-3 and/or LA-2 ODMDS. If you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
persons listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION section.
B. Background
Ocean disposal of dredged materials is regulated under Title I of
the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA; 33 U.S.C.
1401 et seq.). The EPA and the USACE share responsibility for the
management of ocean disposal of dredged material. Under Section 102 of
MPRSA, EPA has the responsibility for designating an acceptable
location for the ODMDS. With concurrence from EPA, the USACE issues
permits under MPRSA Section 103 for ocean disposal of dredged material
deemed suitable according to EPA criteria in MPRSA Section 102 and EPA
regulations in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 227 (40
CFR part 227).
It is EPA's policy to publish an EIS for all ODMDS designations
(Federal Register, Volume 63, Page 58045 [63 FR 58045], October 1998).
A site designation EIS is a formal evaluation of alternative sites
which examines the potential environmental impacts associated with
disposal of dredged material at various locations. The EIS must first
demonstrate the need for the proposed ODMDS designation action (40 CFR
6.203(a) and 40 CFR 1502.13) by describing available or potential
aquatic and non-aquatic (i.e., land-based) alternatives and the
consequences of not designating a site--the No Action Alternative. Once
the need for an ocean disposal site is established, potential sites are
screened for feasibility through the Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF)
process. Remaining alternative sites are evaluated using EPA's ocean
disposal criteria at 40 CFR part 228 and compared in the EIS. Of the
sites which satisfy these criteria, the site which best complies with
them is selected as the preferred alternative for formal designation
through rulemaking published in the Federal Register (FR).
Formal designation of an ODMDS in the Federal Register does not
constitute approval of dredged material for ocean disposal. Designation
of an ODMDS provides an ocean disposal alternative for consideration in
the review of each proposed dredging project. Ocean disposal is only
allowed when EPA and USACE determine that the proposed activity is
environmentally acceptable according to the criteria at 40 CFR Part
227. Decisions to allow ocean disposal are made on a case-by-case basis
through the MPRSA Section 103 permitting process or its equivalent
process for USACE's Civil Works projects. Material proposed for
disposal at a designated ODMDS must conform to EPA's permitting
criteria for acceptable quality (40 CFR Parts 225 and 227), as
determined from physical, chemical, and bioassay/bioaccumulation
testing (EPA and USACE 1991). Only clean non-toxic dredged material is
acceptable for ocean disposal.
The interim LA-3 disposal site is located on the continental slope
of Newport Submarine Canyon at a depth of about 1,475 feet (ft) (450
meters [m]), approximately 4.3 nmi (8 km) southwest of the entrance of
Newport Harbor. This region is characterized by a relatively smooth
continental slope (approximately two-degree slope) incised by a
complicated pattern of meandering broad submarine canyons that can be
up to 98 ft (30 m) deep and 656-2,625 ft (200-800 m) wide. The circular
interim site boundary is centered at 33[deg] 31'42'' N and 117[deg]
54'48'' W, with a 3,000 ft (915 m) radius.
The interim LA-3 site has been used for disposing sediment dredged
from harbors and flood channels within the County of Orange since 1976.
Prior to 1992, LA-3 was permitted by the USACE as a designated ocean
disposal site for specific projects only. In 1992, the EPA approved LA-
3 as an interim disposal site; this interim status expired January 1,
1997 (Water Resources Development Act [WRDA] 1992). The expiration date
was extended to January 1, 2000, through the 1996 WRDA (1996). In 1999,
this interim status was extended for another three years and expired
December 31, 2002. The proposed action would provide permanent
designation of LA-3 for disposal of dredged materials from ongoing
dredging activities, such as dredging to preserve the wetland habitat
within the Upper Newport Bay or to maintain navigation channels at
Newport and Dana Point Harbors.
The proposed action would also shift the center of the LA-3 site
approximately 1.3 nmi (2.4 km) to the southeast of the interim LA-3
site. The circular boundary of the permanently designated LA-3 site
would be centered at 33[deg] 31'00'' N and 117[deg] 53'30'' W and would
have a 3,000 ft (915 m) radius. The depth of the center of the site
would be approximately 1,600 ft (490 m). At this location the site
boundary would be away from the submarine canyons that run through the
interim site, thus simplifying surveillance and monitoring activities.
The LA-2 ODMDS was designated as a permanent disposal site on
February 15, 1991. The LA-2 site is located on the outer continental
shelf, margin, and upper southern wall of the San Pedro Sea Valley at
depths from approximately 360-1,115 ft (110 to 340 m), about 5.9 nmi
(11 km) south-southwest of the entrance to Los Angeles Harbor. The
relatively flat continental shelf occurs in water depths to about 410
ft (125 m) with a regional slope of 0.8 degree. Then the slope becomes
steep at about 7 degrees seaward to the shelf break. The southern wall
of the San Pedro Sea Valley drops away with slopes steeper than 9
degrees. The site boundary is centered at 33[deg] 37'6'' N and 118[deg]
17'24'' W with a radius of 3,000 ft (915 m).
The LA-2 ODMDS does not have an annual disposal volume limit.
However, the site designation EIS evaluated potential impacts based on
a historical
[[Page 41169]]
annual average of 200,000 yd\3\ (153,000 m\3\). Since 1991, the annual
disposal quantity occasionally has exceeded the pre-designation
historical annual average because of capital projects from both the
ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
The need for ongoing ocean disposal capacity is based on historical
dredging volumes from the local port districts, marinas and harbors,
and federal navigational channels, as well as on estimates of future
average annual dredging. An overall average of approximately 390,000
yd\3\ (298,000 m\3\) per year of dredged material requiring ocean
disposal is expected to be generated in the area. The purpose of the
proposed action is to ensure that adequate, environmentally-acceptable
ocean disposal site capacity, in conjunction with other management
options including upland disposal and beneficial reuse, is available
for suitable dredged material generated in the greater Los Angeles
County-Orange County area.
EPA and USACE encourage the use of dredged material for beach
replenishment in areas degraded by erosion. The grain size distribution
of dredged material must be compatible with the receiving beach, and
biological and water quality impacts must be considered prior to
permitting of beach disposal. EPA and USACE evaluate the selection of
appropriate disposal methods on a case-by-case basis for each permit.
Additionally, opportunities arise periodically to use dredged material
for marine landfilling projects, also referred to as the creation of
``fastlands.'' When the need arises, the use of dredged material for
the creation of fastlands is considered a viable alternative to ocean
disposal. Other potential beneficial uses for dredged material include
construction fill, use as cap material in aquatic remediation projects,
wetland creation, wetland restoration, landfill daily cover, and
recycling into commercial products such as construction aggregate,
ceramic tiles, or other building materials. Each of these disposal
management options is evaluated when permits are issued for individual
dredging projects.
A Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF) analysis estimates that after
consideration of upland disposal and other beneficial uses, an average
of approximately 390,000 yd\3\ (298,000 m\3\) per year of dredged
material will require ocean disposal. This material would be proposed
for ocean disposal by project proponents because it is not of an
appropriate physical quality (e.g., it is predominantly fine-grained
material) for reuse or because a reuse opportunity cannot be found that
coincides with the timing of the dredging projects.
The LA-2 ODMDS is approximately 5.9 nmi (11 km) offshore from the
entrance to the Port of Los Angeles and approximately 8.4 nmi (15.5 km)
from the entrance to the Port of Long Beach. The majority of suitable
dredged material from USACE and port dredging projects in the Los
Angeles County area that could not be beneficially reused has
traditionally been disposed of at this site. When EPA originally
designated LA-2 as a permanent disposal site in 1991, it evaluated the
past history of disposal at the site up to that time and determined
that significant adverse environmental impacts were unlikely to occur
if similar levels of disposal continued there in the future.
Most dredging projects from the Orange County area have not used
the LA-2 site because of the extra costs and increased environmental
impacts (such as increased air emissions) associated with transporting
dredged material the longer distance to this site. Instead, projects
traditionally have used the LA-3 interim site, located approximately
4.3 nmi (8 km) offshore from Newport Bay. The LA-3 interim disposal
site was originally scheduled to close down on January 1, 1997, but the
interim designation was extended by Congress until January 1, 2000 to
allow a major Newport Bay dredging project to be completed (the
approximately 1,000,000 yd\3\ [765,000 m\3\] project to restore depth
to sediment basins located in Upper Newport Bay). LA-3 was the only
interim site in the nation specifically extended in this manner. Most
recently, via the WRDA of 1999, Congress extended the status of LA-3 as
an interim ODMDS for another three years (until December 31, 2002) to
allow time for site designation studies and completion of the site
designation EIS.
The proposed action provides for adequate, environmentally-
acceptable ocean disposal site capacity for suitable dredged material
generated in the greater Los Angeles County-Orange County area by
permanently designating the LA-3 ODMDS.
C. Disposal Volume Limit
The proposed action is final designation of the LA-3 ODMDS managed
at a maximum annual dredged material disposal quantity of 2,500,000
yd\3\ (1,911,000 m\3\) and the management of LA-2 at an increased
maximum annual dredged material disposal quantity of 1,000,000 yd\3\
(765,000 m\3\) for the ocean disposal of dredged material from the Los
Angeles and Orange County region. The need for ongoing ocean disposal
capacity is based on historical dredging volumes from the local port
districts, marinas and harbors, and federal navigational channels, as
well as estimates of future average annual dredging.
D. Site Management and Monitoring Plan
Verification that significant impacts do not occur outside of the
disposal site boundaries will be demonstrated through implementation of
the Site Management and Monitoring Plan (SMMP) developed as part of the
proposed action. The main purpose of the SMMP is to provide a
structured framework for resource agencies to ensure that dredged
material disposal activities will not unreasonably degrade or endanger
human health, welfare, the marine environment, or economic
potentialities (Section 103(a) of the MPRSA). Three main objectives for
management of both the LA-2 and LA-3 ODMDSs are: (1) Protection of the
marine environment; (2) beneficial use of dredged material whenever
practical; and (3) documentation of disposal activities at the ODMDS.
The EPA and USACE Los Angeles District personnel will achieve these
objectives by jointly administering the following activities: (1)
Regulation and administration of ocean disposal permits; (2)
development and maintenance of a site monitoring program; (3)
evaluation of permit compliance and monitoring results; and (4)
maintenance of dredged material testing and site monitoring records to
insure compliance with annual disposal volume targets and to facilitate
future revisions to the SMMP.
The SMMP includes periodic physical monitoring to confirm that the
material that is deposited is landing where it is supposed to land, as
well as chemical monitoring to confirm that the sediment chemistry
conforms to the pre-disposal testing requirements. Other activities
implemented through the SMMP to achieve these objectives include: (1)
Regulating quantities and types of material to be disposed of, and the
time, rates, and methods of disposal; and (2) recommending changes for
site use, disposal amounts, or designation for a limited time based on
periodic evaluation of site monitoring results.
E. Ocean Dumping Site Designation Criteria
Five general criteria and 11 specific site selection criteria are
used in the selection and approval of ocean disposal sites for
continued use (40 CFR 228.5 and 40 CFR 228.6(a)).
[[Page 41170]]
General Selection Criteria
1. The dumping of materials into the ocean will be permitted only
at sites or in areas selected to minimize the interference of disposal
activities with other activities in the marine environment,
particularly avoiding areas of existing fisheries or shellfisheries,
and regions of heavy commercial or recreational navigation. Dredged
material disposal activities have occurred at the LA-2 and LA-3 sites
since the late 1970s. Historical disposal at the interim LA-3 site has
not interfered with commercial or recreational navigation, commercial
fishing, or sportfishing activities. Disposal at the LA-2 site, while
located within the U.S. Coast Guard Traffic Separation Scheme, has not
interfered with these activities. The continued use of these sites
would not change these conditions.
2. Locations and boundaries of disposal sites will be so chosen
that temporary perturbations in water quality or other environmental
conditions during initial mixing caused by disposal operations anywhere
within the site can be expected to be reduced to normal ambient
seawater levels or to undetectable contaminant concentrations or
effects before reaching any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or
known geographically limited fishery or shellfishery. The LA-2 and LA-3
sites are sufficiently removed from shore and limited fishery resources
to allow water quality perturbations caused by dispersion of disposal
material to be reduced to ambient conditions before reaching
environmentally sensitive areas.
3. If at any time during or after disposal site evaluation studies,
it is determined that existing disposal sites presently approved on an
interim basis for ocean dumping do not meet the criteria for site
selection set forth in Sections 228.5 through 228.6, the use of such
sites will be terminated as soon as suitable alternate disposal sites
can be designated. Evaluation of the LA-2 and LA-3 sites indicates that
they presently do and would continue to comply with these criteria.
Additionally, compliance will continue to be evaluated through
implementation of the Site Monitoring and Management Plan (SMMP).
4. The sizes of the ocean disposal sites will be limited in order
to localize for identification and control any immediate adverse
impacts and permit the implementation of effective monitoring and
surveillance programs to prevent adverse long-range impacts. The size,
configuration, and location of any disposal site will be determined as
a part of the disposal site evaluation or designation study. The LA-2
and LA-3 disposal sites are circular areas with a 3,000 ft (915 m)
radius. The size of the sites has been determined by computer modeling
to limit environmental impacts to the surrounding area and facilitate
surveillance and monitoring operations. The designation of the size,
configuration, and location of sites was determined as part of the
evaluation study.
5. EPA will, wherever feasible, designate ocean dumping sites
beyond the edge of the continental shelf and other such sites that have
been historically used. The LA-3 site is located beyond the continental
shelf, near a canyon on the continental slope, in an area that has been
used historically for the disposal of dredged material. LA-3 is the
only site in the vicinity that fully meets the above criteria. The LA-2
site, which has been permanently designated and has been used for the
ocean disposal of dredged material since 1977, is located near the edge
of the continental shelf at the 600 ft (183 m) contour.
Specific Selection Criteria
1. Geographical position, depth of water, bottom topography, and
distance from the coast. Centered at 33[deg]31'00'' N, 117[deg]53'30''
W, the LA-3 site bottom topography is gently sloping from approximately
1,500 to 1,675 ft (460 to 510 m). Situated near the slope of a
submarine canyon, the site center is approximately 4.5 nmi (8.5 km)
from the mouth of Newport Harbor. The LA-2 site is at the top edge of
the continental slope in approximately 360 ft to 1,115 ft (110 to 340
m) of water. Centered at 33[deg]37'06'' N and 118[deg]17'24'' W, the
LA-2 site is located just south of the San Pedro Valley submarine
canyon, approximately 5.9 nmi (11 km) from the entrance to Los Angeles
Harbor.
2. Location in relation to breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding, or
passage areas of living resources in adult or juvenile phases. The LA-2
and LA-3 sites are located in areas that are utilized for feeding and
breeding of resident species. The LA-3 site is located in the gray
whale migration route area, while the LA-2 site is located near the
migration route. The California gray whale population was severely
reduced in the 1800s and 1900s due to international whaling. However,
protection from commercial whaling initiated in the 1940s has allowed
the population to recover. There is no indication that disposal
activities at LA-2 or LA-3 have adversely affected the gray whale.
There are no known special breeding or nursery areas in the vicinity of
the two disposal sites.
3. Location in relation to beaches and other amenity areas. The LA-
3 site boundary is located over 3.5 nmi (6.5 km) offshore of the
nearest coast in the Newport Beach and Harbor area. The LA-2 site
boundary is located over 4.6 nmi (8.5 km) offshore from the nearest
coast in the Palos Verdes area. Other beach areas are more distant. No
adverse impacts from dredged material disposal operations are expected
on these amenity areas.
4. Types and quantities of wastes proposed to be disposed of, and
proposed methods of release, including methods of packaging the waste,
if any. Dredged material to be disposed of will be predominantly clays
and silts primarily originating from the Los Angeles/Long Beach Harbor
area and from Newport Bay and Harbor. Average annual disposal volumes
at LA-3 range from 0 to approximately 337,000 yd3 (0 to
258,000 m3). Average annual disposal volumes at LA-2 range
from 68,000 yd3 to approximately 405,000 yd3
(52,000 to 310,000 m3).
Dredged material is expected to be released from split hull barges.
No dumping of toxic materials or industrial or municipal waste would be
allowed. Dredged material proposed for ocean disposal is subject to
strict testing requirements established by the EPA and USACE, and only
clean (non-toxic) dredged materials are allowed to be disposed at the
LA-3 and LA-2 sites.
5. Feasibility of surveillance and monitoring. The EPA (and USACE
for federal projects in consultation with EPA) is responsible for site
and compliance monitoring. USCG is responsible for vessel traffic-
related monitoring. Monitoring the disposal sites is feasible but
somewhat complicated by topography. At LA-3, this complication is
reduced by relocation of the permanent LA-3 site away from submarine
canyons.
6. Dispersal, horizontal transport, and vertical mixing
characteristics of the area, including prevailing current direction and
velocity, if any. Currents and vertical mixing will disperse
unconsolidated fine grained dredged sediments in the upper water column
in the vicinity of ODMDS boundaries. Prevailing currents are primarily
parallel to shore and flow along constant depth contours. Situated near
the slope of a submarine canyon, the LA-3 area would be expected to
receive sedimentation from erosion and nearshore transport into the
canyon. At LA-2, some sediment transport offshore occurs due to
slumping. Overall, the seabed at both sites are considered to be
[[Page 41171]]
non-dispersive, and sediments at both sites are expected to settle and
remain offshore (as opposed to onshore).
7. Existence and effects of current and previous discharges and
dumping in the area (including cumulative effects). Localized physical
impacts have occurred to sediments and benthic biota within the
disposal sites due to past disposal operations. However, these
activities have not resulted in long-term significant adverse impacts
on the local environment. No interactions with other discharges are
anticipated due to the distances from the discharge points.
8. Interference with shipping, fishing, recreation, mineral
extraction, desalination, fish and shellfish culture, areas of special
scientific importance, and other legitimate uses of the ocean.
Continued use of the LA-2 and LA-3 sites would result in minor
interferences with commercial shipping and fishing vessels due to
disposal barge traffic. Sites are not located within active oil or
natural gas tracts. Continued disposal operations are not anticipated
to adversely impact existing nearby oil and gas development facilities
or tracts, or other socioeconomic resources. Overall, no significant
interferences associated with this criterion are expected to result
from continued use of the LA-2 and LA-3 sites.
9. Existing water quality and ecology of the site as determined by
available data or by trend assessment or baseline surveys. Water
quality at the two disposal areas is good, but temporary, localized
physical impacts have occurred to sediments and benthic ecology due to
past disposal operations. Additionally, dredged material deposited in
the past at the two disposal areas was chemically screened prior to
disposal, and no known dredged material was disposed of for which
chemical concentrations exceeded the range of chemical concentrations
approved for ocean disposal.
10. Potentiality for the development or recruitment of nuisance
species in the disposal site. The potential is low due to depth
differences between the disposal sites and the likely sources of
dredged material.
11. Existence at or in close proximity to the site of any
significant natural or cultural features of historical importance. No
known shipwrecks or other cultural resources occur within 2.7 nmi (5
km) of either the LA-2 or proposed LA-3 disposal sites.
F. Responses to Comments
The draft EIS was published in the Federal Register on January 21,
2005. A 45-day public review and comment period extended from the
publication date through March 7, 2005. Six comment letters from
various individuals, organizations, and agencies were received during
the public review and comment period. In addition to the six comment
letters, two public meetings were held on Wednesday, February 9, 2005,
to solicit comments from interested parties. The comments, and
associated responses, are summarized topically below.
Preferred Alternative
Two commenters concurred with the preferred alternative selected in
the EIS.
Site Boundaries for the LA-3 ODMDS
One commenter questioned the boundary of the LA-3 site relative to
the expected deposition pattern for dredged materials on the seafloor.
The boundaries of the disposal site were chosen based on historical
usage and to ensure that the majority of dredged material falls within
the site boundaries given the 1,000 ft (305 m) radius disposal target
for the disposal barges. Instantaneous sediment accumulation rates in
excess of 1 ft (30 cm) per disposal event were assumed to result in the
loss of the existing infaunal community. However, for assessing
impacts, the EIS conservatively assumed that the infaunal community
would be lost if the deposition rate exceeded 1 ft (30 cm) over a one-
year period (this is conservative because the infaunal community is
expected to rapidly recover for instantaneous deposition rates of less
than 30 cm [1 ft] per disposal event). For all modeled scenarios, the
worst-case 1 ft (30 cm) annual deposition contour lies well within the
proposed 3,000 ft (915 m) radius site boundary. While a certain
quantity of material is expected to settle outside of the site
boundary, it is impractical and undesirable to extend the site boundary
beyond this distance in an attempt to encompass all of the dredge
material that will settle on the ocean bottom. Extending the site
boundaries to encompass all of the material expected to settle on the
ocean bottom would not alter the conclusion of significance (or lack
thereof) concerning adverse impacts on the benthic community determined
in the EIS. The 3,000 ft (915 m) radius is considered appropriate for
site management purposes.
Estimates of Future Disposal Volumes Relative to Site Capacity
Two commenters asked for clarification of projected disposal
volumes at the LA-2 and LA-3 sites. For both management and
environmental impact considerations, the dredged material volume
capacities specified for LA-2 and LA-3 were based on conservative
estimates of the worst-case maximum amount of dredged material
requiring ocean disposal in any given year. These estimates account for
all known and reasonably anticipated capital and maintenance dredging
projects in the Los Angeles and Orange County regions. It is unlikely
that all potential projects would occur simultaneously in any given
year. Therefore, the environmental impact analysis considered both the
potential worst-case conditions and a more reasonable annual average
condition.
For each potential dredging project, the Zone of Siting Feasibility
(ZSF) Study evaluated whether disposal at the LA-2 or LA-3 ODMDSs would
be economically feasible. For the purposes of establishing the maximum
analyzed annual dredged material quantities that could be placed at LA-
2 or LA-3, it was assumed that the Los Angeles County projects
identified in the ZSF Study (USACE 2003a) would utilize LA-2, and that
the Orange County projects would utilize LA-3.
Accordingly, based on the projected dredging volumes from the ZSF
study, as well as site management considerations, the LA-2 site would
be designated for an annual maximum of 1,000,000 yd3
(765,000 m3) and the LA-3 site would be designated for an
annual maximum of 2,500,000 yd3 (1,911,000 m3).
These maximum volume designations would accommodate the projected
average annual volume requirements as well as provide for substantial
annual volume fluctuations. Thus, the proposed rule will amend use of
the existing LA-2 site for a higher maximum annual quantity to manage
disposal of dredged material generated primarily from the Los Angeles
County region, and it would permanently designate the LA-3 ODMDS with
an annual quantity adequate to manage disposal of dredged material
generated locally from projects to preserve the wetland habitat within
the Upper Newport Bay and/or to maintain navigation channels at Newport
and Dana Point Harbors.
However, it is acknowledged that designation of the sites does not
preclude material generated in Orange County from being disposed of at
LA-2 and vice versa. The choice of which site to use for the disposal
of dredged material for individual dredging projects will be based on
both economic and environmental factors. Decisions to allow ocean
disposal for individual dredging projects are made on a case-by-case
basis through the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
[[Page 41172]]
Act (MPRSA) Section 103 permitting process or its equivalent process
for USACE's Civil Works projects and are subject to subsequent
environmental review and documentation.
Site Monitoring and Management Plan
One commenter expressed support for the SMMP, but requested
clarification on opportunities for public input to the SMMP. A SMMP has
been developed that contains approaches for monitoring impacts to
marine organisms, as well as verification of model predictions.
Development of this SMMP was based on a review of other SMMPs prepared
for similar ocean disposal sites.
The site monitoring reports described in the SMMP will be public
documents that will be made available either through posting on the EPA
website or direct mailing upon request. EPA will accept public comments
regarding those reports, although there will not be a formal comment
period. Additionally, the public will get an opportunity to comment on
any SMMP implementation manual that is prepared by EPA subsequent to
this action. No revisions to the SMMP as written are necessary to allow
for this level of public input.
Relocation of the LA-3 ODMDS
One commenter indicated that relocating LA-3 was inconsistent with
EPA site selection criteria. Although the permanent LA-3 site lies
outside of the boundaries of the interim LA-3 site, the permanent site
has been disturbed by historical dredged material disposal events.
During reviews performed by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1998, a
substantial amount of dredged material was noted outside of the interim
site boundaries, particularly to the north, northeast, and southeast of
the site. This was primarily attributed to disposal short of the
targeted disposal area and errors in disposal generally resulting from
inaccurate navigation.
Locating the permanent site boundary at the proposed location (away
from the interim site) would redirect future dredged material disposal
to an area historically used for disposal (and thus already
undisturbed). Additionally, due to the nature of the local topography,
the permanent site would be more amenable to monitoring via precision
bathymetry. Further, as described in the SMMP, enhanced vessel tracking
and monitoring will ensure that future disposal activities occur
accurately within the designated target area of the permanent site.
Extension of the Interim Designation of LA-3
One commenter recommended extending the interim designation of LA-
3. Congressional authorization for the interim site designation expired
December 31, 2002. Requests for another extension would have to be made
to Congress. In any event, the proposed action obviates the need for an
extension. Thus, an extension of LA-3's interim site designation is not
necessary.
Impacts to Areas of Special Biological Significance
One commenter noted potentials for impacts to Crystal Cove State
Park and Area of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) if dredged
materials placed at LA-3 were transported shoreward by currents.
Dispersion and transport of dredged material disposed at LA-3 was
modeled using measured current data collected in the disposal site and
nearshore area. Results from the sediment fate model indicated that the
dredged material disposed at LA-3 would settle within and immediately
adjacent to the disposal site and no appreciable sediment transport
toward the nearshore areas is anticipated, particularly given the depth
of the LA-3 site. Water quality impacts during dredged material
disposal operations at the LA-3 site will be temporary and localized
and are not expected to extend to the shallower, nearshore area.
Further, the location of the permanent LA-3 site relocates the site
away from the Newport submarine canyon. Thus, any potential influences
of currents within the canyon would be reduced at the permanent site.
G. Regulatory Requirements
1. Consistency With the Coastal Zone Management Act
Consistent with the Coastal Zone Management Act, EPA prepared a
Coastal Zone Consistency Determination (CCD) document based on
information presented in the site designation EIS. The CCD evaluated
whether the proposed action--permanent designation of LA-3 and
management of LA-2 at a higher annual disposal volume--would be
consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Zone Management Act. The
CCD was formally presented to the California Coastal Commission
(Commission) at their public hearing June 9, 2005. The Commission staff
report recommended that the Commission concur with EPA's CCD, which the
Commission did by a unanimous vote. The proposed rule is consistent
with the Coastal Zone Management Act.
2. Endangered Species Act Consultation
During development of the site designation EIS, EPA consulted with
the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) pursuant to the provisions of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), regarding the potential for designation and use of
the ocean disposal sites to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally listed species. This consultation process is fully documented
in the site designation EIS. NMFS and FWS concluded that use of the
disposal sites for disposal of dredged material meeting the criteria
for ocean disposal would not jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally listed species.
H. Administrative Review
1. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'', and
therefore subject to OMB review and other requirements of the Executive
Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that
is likely to lead to a rule that may:
(a) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way, the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities;
(b) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(c) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or
(d) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
This proposed Rule should have minimal impact on State, local or
tribal governments or communities. Consequently, EPA has determined
that this proposed Rule is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under the terms of Executive Order 12866.
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., is intended to
minimize the reporting and record-keeping burden on the regulated
community, as well as to minimize the cost of Federal information
collection and dissemination. In general, the Act
[[Page 41173]]
requires that information requests and record-keeping requirements
affecting ten or more non-Federal respondents be approved by OMB. Since
the proposed Rule would not establish or modify any information or
record-keeping requirements, but only clarifies existing requirements,
it is not subject to the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act, as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) provides that whenever an
agency promulgates a final rule under 5 U.S.C. 553, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) unless the head of the
agency certifies that the proposed Rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 604
and 605). The site designation and management actions would only have
the effect of setting maximum annual disposal volume and providing a
continuing disposal option for dredged material. Consequently, EPA's
proposed action will not impose any additional economic burden on small
entities. For this reason, the Regional Administrator certifies,
pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, that the proposed Rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104-4) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
year.
This proposed Rule contains no Federal mandates (under the
regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. The proposed Rule would only
provide a continuing disposal option for dredged material.
Consequently, it imposes no new enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. Similarly, EPA has also
determined that this Rule contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect small government entities. Thus,
the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA do not apply to this
proposed Rule.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This proposed Rule does not have federalism implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. The proposed Rule would only
have the effect of setting maximum annual disposal volumes and
providing a continuing disposal option for dredged material. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this proposed Rule.
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed Rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The
proposed Rule would only have the effect of setting maximum annual
disposal volumes and providing a continuing disposal option for dredged
material. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed
Rule.
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
This Executive Order (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by EPA. This proposed Rule is not
subject to the Executive Order because it is not economically
significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because EPA does
not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use Compliance With Administrative Procedure
Act
This proposed Rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. The
proposed Rule would only have the effect of setting maximum annual
disposal volumes and providing a continuing disposal option for dredged
material. Thus, EPA concluded that this proposed Rule is not likely to
have any adverse energy effects.
9. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This
proposed Rule does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA is
not considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
Environmental protection, Water pollution control.
[[Page 41174]]
Dated: July 5, 2005.
Jane Diamond,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
In consideration of the foregoing, EPA is amending part 228,
chapter I of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 228--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 228 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
2. Section 228.15 is amended by adding paragraph (l)(11) to read as
follows:
Sec. 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a final basis.
* * * * *
(1) * * *
(11) Newport Beach , CA, (LA-3) Ocean Dredged Material Disposal
Site--Region IX.
(i) Location: Center coordinates of the circle-shaped site are:
33[deg]31'00'' North Latitude by 117[deg]53'30'' West Longitude (North
American Datum from 1983), with a radius of 3,000 feet (915 meters).
(ii) Size: 0.77 square nautical miles.
(iii) Depth: 1,500 to 1,675 feet (460 to 510 meters).
(iv) Use Restricted to Disposal of: Dredged materials.
(v) Period of Use: Continuing use.
(vi) Restrictions: Disposal shall be limited to dredged materials
that comply with EPA's Ocean Dumping Regulations.
[FR Doc. 05-14071 Filed 7-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P