NPDES Permit Fee Incentive for Clean Water Act Section 106 Grants; Allotment Formula, 293-296 [E6-22549]
Download as PDF
293
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 72, No. 2
Thursday, January 4, 2007
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 35
[EPA–HQ–OW–2006–0765; FRL–8263–1]
NPDES Permit Fee Incentive for Clean
Water Act Section 106 Grants;
Allotment Formula
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document provides
notice of a proposed rulemaking for
public comment on EPA’s National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit Fee Incentive for Clean
Water Act Section 106 Grants;
Allotment Formula. With this notice,
EPA proposes using its Clean Water Act
(CWA) Section 106 authority to provide
a financial incentive to States to utilize
an adequate fee program when
implementing an authorized NPDES
permit program. EPA proposes to amend
its existing CWA Section 106 grant
allotment regulation to provide the
Agency with the flexibility to allot
separately a permit fee incentive
amount. This action would not be
effective prior to fiscal year 2008.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before March 5, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OW–2006–0765 by one of the following
methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: ow-docket@epa.gov
Attention Docket ID No. OW–2006–
0765.
• Mail: Water Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center,
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC, Attention Docket ID No. OW–2006–
0765. Such deliveries are only accepted
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:50 Jan 03, 2007
Jkt 211001
during the Docket’s normal hours of
operation and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2006–
0765. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your
e-mail address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Unit I.1 of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the Water Docket is (202)
566–2426.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lena Ferris, Office of Water, Office of
Wastewater Management, 4201M,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number: (202) 564–8831; fax number:
(202) 501–2399; e-mail address:
ferris.lena@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
Affected Entities: State Agencies that
are eligible to receive grants under
Section 106 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA).
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information
that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information on a disk or CD–ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD–ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
• Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date, and page number).
• Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
• Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives; and substitute
language for your requested changes.
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
294
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 2 / Thursday, January 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
• Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
• If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
• Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns and suggest
alternatives.
• Explain your views as clearly as
possible.
• Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
3. Specific Questions EPA is Soliciting
for Comment. In addition to overall
general comments on any/all portions of
the rulemaking, EPA is specifically
requesting comments on the following
four questions:
(1) Is the proposed rulemaking
incentive amount sufficient to
encourage States to establish or expand
their permit fee programs? If not, what
amount should EPA consider?
(2) Are there any non-financial
incentives States may prefer that would
encourage States to establish or expand
adequate permit fee programs?
(3) Is the proposed permit fee
collection formula, to be used in
determining whether States receive a
full share of the incentive, something
that States can attain? If not, what
barriers exist to States recovering the
full 100% of NPDES program costs
through permit fees? What alternatives
would States recommend?
(4) What impact may this rule have on
the States and the NPDES permittees in
the States?
II. Background
Section 106 of the CWA authorizes
the EPA to provide grants to State and
interstate agencies to administer
programs for the prevention, reduction,
and elimination of water pollution,
including the development and
implementation of groundwater
protection strategies. Section 106(b) of
the CWA directs the EPA Administrator
to make allotments ‘‘in accordance with
regulations promulgated by him on the
basis of the extent of the pollution
problem in the respective states.’’ EPA’s
regulations implementing Section 106
can be found at 40 CFR 35.160 et seq.
EPA’s current allotment formula for
Section 106 grants establishes an
allotment ratio for each State based on
six components selected to reflect the
extent of the water pollution problem in
the respective states. These six
components are surface water area,
ground water use, water quality
impairment, potential point sources,
nonpoint sources, and the population of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:50 Jan 03, 2007
Jkt 211001
urbanized areas. 40 CFR 35.162(b)(1)(i).
By including a component related to
point sources, EPA recognizes the
important role they play in determining
the extent of pollution in a State.
This proposed rule will amend the
state allotment formula to incorporate
financial incentives for States to
implement adequate NPDES fee
programs. The Clean Water Act
generally requires that all discharges of
pollutants from a point source into
waters of the United States obtain a
permit under the NPDES program. A
NPDES permit establishes pollutant
discharge limits based on treatment
technology performance, the quality of
the water into which pollutants are
discharged, and the potential impact of
the discharge on public health and the
environment. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) oversees the
NPDES program and also approves
applications from States to administer
and enforce the NPDES program in that
State. Currently, 45 States are
authorized by EPA to administer all or
some parts of the NPDES program.
State water quality programs are
funded with a mixture of State and
Federal dollars. Grants awarded under
CWA Section 106 are States’ primary
source of Federal funding. The growing
complexity of water quality issues has
prompted more States to implement
NPDES permit fee programs. An
estimated 41 States currently have
permit fee programs in place, with such
fees paying for all or a portion of the
cost of the State’s permit program.
A number of States still operate their
permit programs with little or no
reliance on permit fees. States can
address permit program budget
shortfalls through the implementation of
permit fee programs that collect funds to
cover the cost of issuing and
administering permits. Funding permit
programs with the support of permit
fees allows States to use CWA Section
106 funds for other critical water quality
programs.
EPA is committed to making our State
surface water protection programs more
sustainable through better resource
management. As State Agencies carry
out most of the day-to-day aspects of
water quality functions, their
responsibilities are expanding while
they are simultaneously facing
increasingly severe funding constraints.
As a nation, billions of federal funds
under the Water Pollution Control
grants, together with State resources,
have been spent to establish and
maintain adequate measures for the
prevention and control of surface and
groundwater protection. Federal and
State governments cannot carry out this
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
responsibility alone. EPA is committed
to finding effective and efficient
solutions to maintaining sustainable
State water pollution control programs
that continue to provide this nation
with clean and protected water. All
levels of government and the private
sector must share in this commitment.
This rulemaking is designed to provide
an incentive to States to move toward
greater sustainability in the way they
manage and budget for environmental
programs and to shift part of the
financial burden to those who benefit
from NPDES permits.
Under this proposal, EPA would allot
funds for the permit fee incentive if
there is an increase in the state
allotment above the FY 2006 level. The
amount of any allotment would be
limited to three percent of the funds
allotted under 40 CFR 35.162(b) in FY
2006. Total funds allotted under 40 CFR
35.162(b) in FY 2006 amounts to
approximately $169.3 million. Any
funds above this amount would be
allotted to States under 40 CFR
35.162(b). As a result of this change,
EPA would allot the State and Interstate
CWA 106 grant funds in the following
order: 2.6 percent will be set-aside for
allotment to the Interstates in
accordance with the existing Interstate
allotment formula in 40 CFR 35.162(c);
next, funds may be allotted under 40
CFR 35.162(d); and finally, EPA may
allot funds to States in accordance with
this proposed permit fee incentive
allotment formula, with the balance
allotted to the States in accordance with
the existing allotment formula under 40
CFR 35.162(b).
The only States which would be
eligible for this set-aside are those States
which have been authorized by EPA to
implement the NPDES program by the
first day of the fiscal year, October 1, for
which funds are appropriated by
Congress. These states must also submit
annually, by October 1, a certification to
EPA which meets two additional
requirements. First, the certification
must include the total percentage of
NPDES program costs recovered by the
State through permit fee collections
during the most recently completed
State fiscal year, and a statement that
the amount of permit fees collected is
used by the State to defray NPDES
program costs. This proposal defines
NPDES program costs as all activities
relating to permitting, enforcement, and
compliance. Second, the certification
must include a statement that State
recurrent expenditures for water quality
programs have not decreased from the
previous State fiscal year, or indicate
that a decrease in such expenditures is
attributable to a non-selective reduction
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 2 / Thursday, January 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules
of the programs of all executive branch
agencies of the State government. The
concept of non-selective reduction is
taken from the statutory requirements
related to maintenance of effort from the
Clean Air Act Section 105(c) and EPA’s
implementing regulations found at 40
CFR 35.146. Under the Clean Air Act,
EPA is prohibited from awarding grants
to air pollution control agencies if state
recurrent expenditures are not at least
equal to such expenditures during the
preceding state fiscal year. EPA can still
award a grant even if there are decreases
in such expenditures if EPA determines
that the reduction is attributable to a
non-selective reduction of all state
programs. For example, a state
legislature enacts budget cuts across all
state agencies and does not target the air
program. EPA is proposing to adopt a
similar approach in this rulemaking.
After EPA determines the number of
eligible states, each state will be eligible
to receive up to a full share of the setaside amount. EPA will determine the
amount of a full share by dividing the
set-aside amount by the number of
eligible states. A full share will be the
same amount for each eligible state. The
percent of a full share that each eligible
state will receive, however, will be
determined by the following formula,
based on the certification information
described above.
(A) A State will receive 25 percent of
a full share if that State has collected
permit fees which equal or exceed 75
percent of total State NPDES program
costs; or
(B) A State will receive 50 percent of
a full share if that State has collected
permit fees which equal or exceed 90
percent of total NPDES program costs;
or
(C) A State will receive a full share if
that State has collected permit fees
which equal 100 percent of total NPDES
program costs.
In other words, in its certification, a
State must inform EPA of its total
NPDES program costs and the
percentage of which are recovered
through permit fees. EPA would use the
information from this certification to
determine any additional amount a
State would receive in its Section 106
grant based on this financial incentive
allotment formula. If, for example, a
State’s total NPDES program costs are $1
million, and the State collected
$750,000 in NPDES permit fees, a state
would receive 25% of a full share in
addition to the grant amount allotted to
it under the current CWA Section 106
allotment formula.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:50 Jan 03, 2007
Jkt 211001
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
is therefore not subject to OMB review.
Because this grant action is not subject
to notice and comment requirements
under the Administrative Procedures
Act or any other statute, it is not subject
to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et.) or Sections 202 and 205
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1999 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). In
addition, this action does not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Although this action
proposes to create new binding legal
requirements, such requirements do not
substantially and directly affect Indian
Tribes under Executive Order 13175 (63
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action will not have federalism
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). This action 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. This action does not involve
technical standards; thus, the
requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
Section 272 note) do not apply. This
action does not impose an additional
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Section 3501 et
seq.). The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. Section 801 et seq., generally
provides that before certain actions may
take effect, the agency promulgating the
action must submit a report, which
includes a copy of the action, to each
House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. Since this grant action, when
finalized, will contain legally binding
requirements, it is subject to the
Congressional Review Act, and EPA will
submit its final action in its report to
Congress under the Act.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 35
Environmental protection,
Administrative practices and
procedures, Environmental program
grants, Water pollution control.
Dated: December 21, 2006.
Benjamin H. Grumbles,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part
35 as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
295
1. The authority for citation for part
35, subpart A continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.; 33 U.S.C.
1251 et seq; 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq; 42 U.S.C.
6901 et seq; 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq; 15 U.S.C.
2601 et seq; 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq; Pub. L.
104–134, 110 Stat. 1321, 1321–299 (1966);
Pub. L. 105–65, 111 Stat. 1344, 1373 (1997).
2. Section 35.162 is amended by
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
§ 35.162
Basis for allotment.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Permit fee incentive allotment
formula. If there is an increase above the
FY 2006 level in the total amount of
funds allotted to States under paragraph
(b) of this section, EPA may award this
increase as the permit fee incentive
allotment to eligible States in
accordance with this section. The
amount of this annual allotment shall
not be greater than three percent of the
funds allotted under paragraph (b) of
this section in FY 2006, and any funds
above this amount shall be allotted to
States under paragraph (b) of this
section.
(1) Each eligible State may receive up
to a full share of this allotment, as
determined by the following formula. A
full share is the allotment amount
divided by the number of eligible States:
(i) A State will receive 25 percent of
a full share if that State has collected
permit fees which equal or exceed 75
percent of total State NPDES program
costs; or
(ii) A State will receive 50 percent of
a full share if that State has collected
permit fees which equal or exceed 90
percent of total NPDES program costs;
or
(iii) A State will receive a full share
if that State has collected permit fees
which equal 100 percent of total NPDES
program costs.
(2) The maximum share to any State
under this subsection shall not exceed
50 percent of the State’s previous year’s
total Section 106 allotment determined
under paragraph (b) of this section.
(3) Any funds left remaining after all
shares have been allotted under this
subsection will be re-allotted to the
States under paragraph (b) of this
section.
(4) In order for a State to be eligible
for this incentive, a State must: Be
authorized by EPA to implement the
NPDES program by the first day of the
Federal fiscal year, October 1, for which
the funds have been appropriated; and
submit to EPA a certification meeting
the requirements of paragraph (e)(5) of
this section.
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
296
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 2 / Thursday, January 4, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(5) The certification required under
paragraph (e)(4) of this section must
meet the following requirements:
(i) The certification must be submitted
annually to EPA by October 1; and
(ii) The certification must include the
total percentage of NPDES program
costs, as defined in paragraph (e)(6) of
this section, recovered by the State
through permit fee collections during
the most recently completed State fiscal
year, and a statement that the amount of
permit fees collected is used by the
State to defray NPDES program costs;
and
(iii) The certification must include a
statement that State recurrent
expenditures for water quality programs
have not decreased from the previous
State fiscal year or indicate that a
decrease in such expenditures is
attributable to a non-selective reduction
of the programs of all executive branch
agencies of the State government.
(6) NPDES program costs are defined
as all permitting, enforcement, and
compliance costs.
[FR Doc. E6–22549 Filed 1–3–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2006–0577–200620(b);
FRL–8265–3]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Tennessee:
Approval of Revisions to the Knox
County Portion of the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by
the State of Tennessee, through
Tennessee Department of Environment
and Conservation, on January 20, 2006.
The revisions pertain to the Knox
County portion of the Tennessee SIP
and include changes to the Knox County
Air Quality Regulations Section 46.0—
‘‘Regulation of Volatile Organic
Compounds.’’ The changes were made
in response to changes made by EPA to
corresponding federal law. The change
involves the addition of four
compounds to the list of compounds
excluded from the definition of volatile
organic compounds on the basis that
they make a negligible contribution to
ozone formation. This action is being
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:47 Jan 03, 2007
Jkt 211001
taken pursuant to section 110 of the
Clean Air Act.
In the Final Rules Section of this
Federal Register, the EPA is approving
the State’s SIP revisions as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no significant, material, and
adverse comments are received in
response to this rule, no further activity
is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse
comments, the direct final rule will be
withdrawn and all public comments
received will be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period on this
document. Any parties interested in
commenting on this document should
do so at this time.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before February 5, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2006–0577 by one of the following
methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: louis.egide@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562–9019.
4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2006–
0577,’’ Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Dr. Egide
Louis, Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal
holidays.
Please see the direct final rule which
is located in the Rules section of this
Federal Register for detailed
instructions on how to submit
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Egide Louis, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street,
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is (404) 562–9240.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Dr. Louis can also be reached via
electronic mail at louis.egide@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
additional information see the direct
final rule which is published in the
Rules Section of this Federal Register.
Dated: December 20, 2006.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. E6–22477 Filed 1–3–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2006–0876; FRL–8258–9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Imperial County
Air Pollution Control District and South
Coast Air Quality Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District and South
Coast Air Quality Management District
portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions from
architectural coatings and organic liquid
storage tanks. We are proposing to
approve local rules to regulate these
emission sources under the Clean Air
Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the
Act).
Any comments on this proposal
must arrive by February 5, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number [EPA–R09–
OAR–2006–0876], by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 2 (Thursday, January 4, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 293-296]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-22549]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 2 / Thursday, January 4, 2007 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 293]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 35
[EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0765; FRL-8263-1]
NPDES Permit Fee Incentive for Clean Water Act Section 106
Grants; Allotment Formula
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document provides notice of a proposed rulemaking for
public comment on EPA's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit Fee Incentive for Clean Water Act Section 106 Grants;
Allotment Formula. With this notice, EPA proposes using its Clean Water
Act (CWA) Section 106 authority to provide a financial incentive to
States to utilize an adequate fee program when implementing an
authorized NPDES permit program. EPA proposes to amend its existing CWA
Section 106 grant allotment regulation to provide the Agency with the
flexibility to allot separately a permit fee incentive amount. This
action would not be effective prior to fiscal year 2008.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 5, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2006-0765 by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: ow-docket@epa.gov Attention Docket ID No. OW-2006-
0765.
Mail: Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No.
OW-2006-0765. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's
normal hours of operation and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-
0765. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. For additional
instructions on submitting comments, go to Unit I.1 of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Water
Docket is (202) 566-2426.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lena Ferris, Office of Water, Office
of Wastewater Management, 4201M, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
564-8831; fax number: (202) 501-2399; e-mail address:
ferris.lena@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
Affected Entities: State Agencies that are eligible to receive
grants under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and
page number).
Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives;
and substitute language for your requested changes.
[[Page 294]]
Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
Explain your views as clearly as possible.
Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
3. Specific Questions EPA is Soliciting for Comment. In addition to
overall general comments on any/all portions of the rulemaking, EPA is
specifically requesting comments on the following four questions:
(1) Is the proposed rulemaking incentive amount sufficient to
encourage States to establish or expand their permit fee programs? If
not, what amount should EPA consider?
(2) Are there any non-financial incentives States may prefer that
would encourage States to establish or expand adequate permit fee
programs?
(3) Is the proposed permit fee collection formula, to be used in
determining whether States receive a full share of the incentive,
something that States can attain? If not, what barriers exist to States
recovering the full 100% of NPDES program costs through permit fees?
What alternatives would States recommend?
(4) What impact may this rule have on the States and the NPDES
permittees in the States?
II. Background
Section 106 of the CWA authorizes the EPA to provide grants to
State and interstate agencies to administer programs for the
prevention, reduction, and elimination of water pollution, including
the development and implementation of groundwater protection
strategies. Section 106(b) of the CWA directs the EPA Administrator to
make allotments ``in accordance with regulations promulgated by him on
the basis of the extent of the pollution problem in the respective
states.'' EPA's regulations implementing Section 106 can be found at 40
CFR 35.160 et seq. EPA's current allotment formula for Section 106
grants establishes an allotment ratio for each State based on six
components selected to reflect the extent of the water pollution
problem in the respective states. These six components are surface
water area, ground water use, water quality impairment, potential point
sources, nonpoint sources, and the population of urbanized areas. 40
CFR 35.162(b)(1)(i). By including a component related to point sources,
EPA recognizes the important role they play in determining the extent
of pollution in a State.
This proposed rule will amend the state allotment formula to
incorporate financial incentives for States to implement adequate NPDES
fee programs. The Clean Water Act generally requires that all
discharges of pollutants from a point source into waters of the United
States obtain a permit under the NPDES program. A NPDES permit
establishes pollutant discharge limits based on treatment technology
performance, the quality of the water into which pollutants are
discharged, and the potential impact of the discharge on public health
and the environment. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
oversees the NPDES program and also approves applications from States
to administer and enforce the NPDES program in that State. Currently,
45 States are authorized by EPA to administer all or some parts of the
NPDES program.
State water quality programs are funded with a mixture of State and
Federal dollars. Grants awarded under CWA Section 106 are States'
primary source of Federal funding. The growing complexity of water
quality issues has prompted more States to implement NPDES permit fee
programs. An estimated 41 States currently have permit fee programs in
place, with such fees paying for all or a portion of the cost of the
State's permit program.
A number of States still operate their permit programs with little
or no reliance on permit fees. States can address permit program budget
shortfalls through the implementation of permit fee programs that
collect funds to cover the cost of issuing and administering permits.
Funding permit programs with the support of permit fees allows States
to use CWA Section 106 funds for other critical water quality programs.
EPA is committed to making our State surface water protection
programs more sustainable through better resource management. As State
Agencies carry out most of the day-to-day aspects of water quality
functions, their responsibilities are expanding while they are
simultaneously facing increasingly severe funding constraints. As a
nation, billions of federal funds under the Water Pollution Control
grants, together with State resources, have been spent to establish and
maintain adequate measures for the prevention and control of surface
and groundwater protection. Federal and State governments cannot carry
out this responsibility alone. EPA is committed to finding effective
and efficient solutions to maintaining sustainable State water
pollution control programs that continue to provide this nation with
clean and protected water. All levels of government and the private
sector must share in this commitment. This rulemaking is designed to
provide an incentive to States to move toward greater sustainability in
the way they manage and budget for environmental programs and to shift
part of the financial burden to those who benefit from NPDES permits.
Under this proposal, EPA would allot funds for the permit fee
incentive if there is an increase in the state allotment above the FY
2006 level. The amount of any allotment would be limited to three
percent of the funds allotted under 40 CFR 35.162(b) in FY 2006. Total
funds allotted under 40 CFR 35.162(b) in FY 2006 amounts to
approximately $169.3 million. Any funds above this amount would be
allotted to States under 40 CFR 35.162(b). As a result of this change,
EPA would allot the State and Interstate CWA 106 grant funds in the
following order: 2.6 percent will be set-aside for allotment to the
Interstates in accordance with the existing Interstate allotment
formula in 40 CFR 35.162(c); next, funds may be allotted under 40 CFR
35.162(d); and finally, EPA may allot funds to States in accordance
with this proposed permit fee incentive allotment formula, with the
balance allotted to the States in accordance with the existing
allotment formula under 40 CFR 35.162(b).
The only States which would be eligible for this set-aside are
those States which have been authorized by EPA to implement the NPDES
program by the first day of the fiscal year, October 1, for which funds
are appropriated by Congress. These states must also submit annually,
by October 1, a certification to EPA which meets two additional
requirements. First, the certification must include the total
percentage of NPDES program costs recovered by the State through permit
fee collections during the most recently completed State fiscal year,
and a statement that the amount of permit fees collected is used by the
State to defray NPDES program costs. This proposal defines NPDES
program costs as all activities relating to permitting, enforcement,
and compliance. Second, the certification must include a statement that
State recurrent expenditures for water quality programs have not
decreased from the previous State fiscal year, or indicate that a
decrease in such expenditures is attributable to a non-selective
reduction
[[Page 295]]
of the programs of all executive branch agencies of the State
government. The concept of non-selective reduction is taken from the
statutory requirements related to maintenance of effort from the Clean
Air Act Section 105(c) and EPA's implementing regulations found at 40
CFR 35.146. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is prohibited from awarding
grants to air pollution control agencies if state recurrent
expenditures are not at least equal to such expenditures during the
preceding state fiscal year. EPA can still award a grant even if there
are decreases in such expenditures if EPA determines that the reduction
is attributable to a non-selective reduction of all state programs. For
example, a state legislature enacts budget cuts across all state
agencies and does not target the air program. EPA is proposing to adopt
a similar approach in this rulemaking.
After EPA determines the number of eligible states, each state will
be eligible to receive up to a full share of the set-aside amount. EPA
will determine the amount of a full share by dividing the set-aside
amount by the number of eligible states. A full share will be the same
amount for each eligible state. The percent of a full share that each
eligible state will receive, however, will be determined by the
following formula, based on the certification information described
above.
(A) A State will receive 25 percent of a full share if that State
has collected permit fees which equal or exceed 75 percent of total
State NPDES program costs; or
(B) A State will receive 50 percent of a full share if that State
has collected permit fees which equal or exceed 90 percent of total
NPDES program costs; or
(C) A State will receive a full share if that State has collected
permit fees which equal 100 percent of total NPDES program costs.
In other words, in its certification, a State must inform EPA of
its total NPDES program costs and the percentage of which are recovered
through permit fees. EPA would use the information from this
certification to determine any additional amount a State would receive
in its Section 106 grant based on this financial incentive allotment
formula. If, for example, a State's total NPDES program costs are $1
million, and the State collected $750,000 in NPDES permit fees, a state
would receive 25% of a full share in addition to the grant amount
allotted to it under the current CWA Section 106 allotment formula.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not
subject to OMB review. Because this grant action is not subject to
notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act
or any other statute, it is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et.) or Sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1999 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this action
does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Although
this action proposes to create new binding legal requirements, such
requirements do not substantially and directly affect Indian Tribes
under Executive Order 13175 (63 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action will not have federalism implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action 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. This action does not involve technical
standards; thus, the requirements of Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Section 272
note) do not apply. This action does not impose an additional
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Section 3501 et seq.). The
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. Section 801 et seq., generally
provides that before certain actions may take effect, the agency
promulgating the action must submit a report, which includes a copy of
the action, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. Since this grant action, when finalized,
will contain legally binding requirements, it is subject to the
Congressional Review Act, and EPA will submit its final action in its
report to Congress under the Act.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 35
Environmental protection, Administrative practices and procedures,
Environmental program grants, Water pollution control.
Dated: December 21, 2006.
Benjamin H. Grumbles,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part 35 as follows:
1. The authority for citation for part 35, subpart A continues to
read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq; 42
U.S.C. 300f et seq; 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq; 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq; 15
U.S.C. 2601 et seq; 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq; Pub. L. 104-134, 110
Stat. 1321, 1321-299 (1966); Pub. L. 105-65, 111 Stat. 1344, 1373
(1997).
2. Section 35.162 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 35.162 Basis for allotment.
* * * * *
(e) Permit fee incentive allotment formula. If there is an increase
above the FY 2006 level in the total amount of funds allotted to States
under paragraph (b) of this section, EPA may award this increase as the
permit fee incentive allotment to eligible States in accordance with
this section. The amount of this annual allotment shall not be greater
than three percent of the funds allotted under paragraph (b) of this
section in FY 2006, and any funds above this amount shall be allotted
to States under paragraph (b) of this section.
(1) Each eligible State may receive up to a full share of this
allotment, as determined by the following formula. A full share is the
allotment amount divided by the number of eligible States:
(i) A State will receive 25 percent of a full share if that State
has collected permit fees which equal or exceed 75 percent of total
State NPDES program costs; or
(ii) A State will receive 50 percent of a full share if that State
has collected permit fees which equal or exceed 90 percent of total
NPDES program costs; or
(iii) A State will receive a full share if that State has collected
permit fees which equal 100 percent of total NPDES program costs.
(2) The maximum share to any State under this subsection shall not
exceed 50 percent of the State's previous year's total Section 106
allotment determined under paragraph (b) of this section.
(3) Any funds left remaining after all shares have been allotted
under this subsection will be re-allotted to the States under paragraph
(b) of this section.
(4) In order for a State to be eligible for this incentive, a State
must: Be authorized by EPA to implement the NPDES program by the first
day of the Federal fiscal year, October 1, for which the funds have
been appropriated; and submit to EPA a certification meeting the
requirements of paragraph (e)(5) of this section.
[[Page 296]]
(5) The certification required under paragraph (e)(4) of this
section must meet the following requirements:
(i) The certification must be submitted annually to EPA by October
1; and
(ii) The certification must include the total percentage of NPDES
program costs, as defined in paragraph (e)(6) of this section,
recovered by the State through permit fee collections during the most
recently completed State fiscal year, and a statement that the amount
of permit fees collected is used by the State to defray NPDES program
costs; and
(iii) The certification must include a statement that State
recurrent expenditures for water quality programs have not decreased
from the previous State fiscal year or indicate that a decrease in such
expenditures is attributable to a non-selective reduction of the
programs of all executive branch agencies of the State government.
(6) NPDES program costs are defined as all permitting, enforcement,
and compliance costs.
[FR Doc. E6-22549 Filed 1-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P