Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Discharges From Horse, Cattle and Dairy Cows, Swine, Poultry, and Veal Calf Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) in Oklahoma (Except Indian Country), 12849-12851 [E9-6673]

Download as PDF 12849 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Notices section, if any State determines that the protection and enhancement of the quality of some or all of the waters within such State require greater environmental protection, such State may completely prohibit the discharge from all vessels of any sewage, whether treated or not, into such waters, except that no such prohibition shall apply until the Administrator determines that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for such water to which such prohibition would apply. This Notice of Determination is for the waters of Boothbay Harbor. The NDA boundaries are as follows: Waterbody/general area Longitude From the USCG navigational buoy green bell ‘‘1C’’ off the light station ‘‘The Cuckholds’’ north to ‘‘Cape Newagen’’. North to ‘‘Cameron Point’’ on the northwest end of ‘‘Townsend Gut’’ .......................... North to the southern tip of ‘‘Indiantown Island’’ ........................................................... North to the northern end of ‘‘Indiantown Island’’ ......................................................... East to the head of navigation of unnamed stream ...................................................... East to the head of navigation of unnamed stream ...................................................... East to the head of navigation of unnamed stream ...................................................... East to the northern end of ‘‘Linekin Bay’’ .................................................................... South to the western point of ‘‘Ocean Point’’ ................................................................ Southwest in a straight line to USCG navigational buoy green bell ‘‘1C’’ off the light station ‘‘The Cuckholds’’. 69°39′38.57″ W .................. 43°47′8.75″ N 69°40′5.32″ W .................... 69°40′4.75″ W .................... 69°40′3.45″ W .................... 69°38′9.31″ W .................... 69°37′24.62″ W .................. 69°36′50.93″ W .................. 69°35′26.86″ W .................. 69°36′16.39″ W .................. 69°39′0.09″ W .................... 43°51′4.21″ N 43°51′19.4″ N 43°51′57.73″ N 43°51′17.33″ N 43°51′8.04″ N 43°51′4.99″ N 43°51′42.94″ N 43°48′50.14″ N 43°46′22.55″ N The proposed NDA includes the municipal waters of Boothbay Harbor. The information submitted to EPA by the state of Maine certifies that there are six pumpout facilities located within this area. A list of the facilities, with phone numbers, locations, and hours of operation is appended at the end of this determination. Based on the examination of the petition, and its supporting documentation, EPA has determined that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of Latitude sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the area covered under this determination. This determination is made pursuant to Section 312(f)(3) of Public Law 92– 500, as amended by Public laws 95–217 and 100–4. PUMPOUT FACILITIES WITHIN PROPOSED NO DISCHARGE AREA—BOOTHBAY HARBOR Name Location Harbormaster ........................................ Carousel Marina .................................... Brown’s Wharf ....................................... Cap’n Fish’s Marina .............................. Tugboat Inn and Marina ........................ Signal Point Marina ............................... Boothbay Boothbay Boothbay Boothbay Boothbay Boothbay Dated: March 5, 2009. Ira W. Leighton, Acting Regional Administrator, New England Region. [FR Doc. E9–6665 Filed 3–24–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL–8780–6] PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Discharges From Horse, Cattle and Dairy Cows, Swine, Poultry, and Veal Calf Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) in Oklahoma (Except Indian Country) AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of proposed permit issuance. SUMMARY: EPA Region 6 Water Quality Protection Division, today is proposing VerDate Nov<24>2008 01:23 Mar 25, 2009 Jkt 217001 Harbor Harbor Harbor Harbor Harbor Harbor Contact info. .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 207–633–3671 207–633–2922 207–633–5440 207–633–3244 207–633–4434 207–633–6920 VHF 16 VHF 9 .. VHF 9 .. VHF 9 .. VHF 9 .. ............. Hours 6 a.m.–8 p.m. ............... 8 a.m.–5 p.m., 7days ... 8 a.m.–5 p.m., 7 days .. 8 a.m.–5 p.m., 7 days .. 10 a.m.–2 p.m., 7 days 24/7 Self Service .......... for public comment the issuance of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System general permit for discharges from eligible owners/ operators of existing concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), in Oklahoma, except those discharges on Indian Country. CAFOs discharging on Indian Country would be required to apply for an individual permit. All currently operating animal feeding operations that are defined as CAFOs or designated as CAFOs by the permitting authority (See Part VII Definitions, ‘‘CAFOs’’) and that are subject to 40 CFR Part 412, Subpart A (Horses), Subpart C (Dairy Cows and Cattle Other than Veal Calves), and Subpart D (Swine, Poultry, and Veal Calves) are eligible for coverage under this permit. Hereinafter, this NPDES general permit will be referred to as ‘‘permit’’ or ‘‘CAFO permit’’ or ‘‘CAFO general permit.’’ Eligible CAFOs may apply for authorization under the terms and conditions of this permit, by submitting a notice of intent (NOI) to be covered by PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Mean low water depth N/A. 10 ft . 15 ft. 15 ft. 8 ft. 8 ft. this permit. This permit covers animal feeding operations listed above which meet the definition of a CAFO and discharge or propose to discharge pollutants to waters of the United States. A CAFO proposes to discharge if it is designed, constructed, operated, or maintained such that a discharge will occur. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the definition of ‘‘concentrated animal feeding operation’’ in existing EPA regulations at 40 CFR 122.23. (also found in Part VII of the draft permit). If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed for technical information in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. This permit was originally issued in the Federal Register at 58 FR 7610 with an effective date of March 10, 1993, and an expiration date of March 10, 1998. Applicable requirements from that 1993 permit are continued in the proposed E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM 25MRN1 12850 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Notices PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES permit. The proposed permit adds additional requirements contained in revised CAFO regulations at 40 CFR 122 and 412 which were published in the Federal Register at 73 FR 70,418 (November 20, 2008). The permit adds new requirements relating to Nutrient Management Plans (NMPs) for permitted CAFOs. CAFO operators were required to develop and implement NMPs under the 2003 rule; the 2008 rule requires CAFOs to submit the NMPs along with their notice of intent (NOI). EPA Region 6 as the permitting authority will review the NMPs submitted along with the NOIs and will also establish the terms of the NMP that are enforceable elements of the permit. The region will provide the public with an opportunity for meaningful review and comment on the NMPs and the terms of the NMPs will be incorporated into the permit. DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing to EPA on or before April 24, 2009. Proposed Documents: The proposed general permit and fact sheet which sets forth principal facts and the significant factual, legal, and policy questions considered in the development of the proposed general permit, may both be obtained via the Internet at https:// www.epa.gov/region6/water/npdes/ cafo/index.htm. To obtain hard copies of these documents or any other information in the administrative record, please contact Ms. Diane Smith using the contact information provided below. How Do I Comment on This Proposal? Comment Submittals: Submit your comments, by one of the following methods: • E-mail: smith.diane@epa.gov. • Mail: Ms. Diane Smith, Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Protection Division (6WQ–NP), 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202. • Hand Delivery: EPA Region 6, 7th Floor Reception Desk, 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202. Such deliveries are only accepted during normal business hours. For Technical Information Contact: Scott Stine, NPDES Permits and TMDL Branch (6WQ–PP), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202; telephone number: (214) 665–7182; fax number: (214) 665–2191; e-mail address: stine.scott@epa.gov. Administrative Record: All documents and references used in the development of this permit are part of the Administrative Record for this permit. Although listed in the index, VerDate Nov<24>2008 01:23 Mar 25, 2009 Jkt 217001 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 materials are available either electronically or in hard copy from Ms. Diane Smith at the address above. The Administrative Record may also be viewed at the EPA Region 6 Offices from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. For more information on scheduling a time to view the Record or to obtain copies of available documents, please contact Ms. Diane Smith at 214–665–2145 or smith.diane@epa.gov. Public Hearings EPA has not scheduled any public hearings to receive public comment concerning the proposed permit. All persons will continue to have the right to provide written comments during the public comment period. However, interested persons may request a public hearing pursuant to 40 CFR 124.12 concerning the proposed permit. Requests for a public hearing must be sent or delivered in writing to the same address as provided above for public comments prior to the close of the comment period. Requests for a public hearing must state the nature of the issues proposed to be raised in the hearing. Pursuant to 40 CFR 124.12, EPA shall hold a public hearing if it finds, on the basis of requests, a significant degree of public interest in a public hearing on the proposed permit. If EPA decides to hold a public hearing, a public notice of the date, time and place of the hearing will be made at least 30 days prior to the hearing. Any person may provide written or oral statements and data pertaining to the proposed permit at the public hearing. III. Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act EPA’s Approach to Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act for General Permits The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 The legal question of whether a general permit (as opposed to an individual permit) qualifies as a ‘‘rule’’ or as an ‘‘adjudication’’ under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) has been the subject of periodic litigation. In a recent case, the court held that the CWA Section 404 Nationwide general permit before the court did qualify as a ‘‘rule’’ and therefore that the issuance of that general permit needed to comply with the applicable legal requirements for the issuance of a ‘‘rule.’’ National Ass’n of Home Builders v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 417 F.3d 1272, 1284–85 (DC Cir.2005) (Army Corps general permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act are rules under the APA and the Regulatory Flexibility Act; ‘‘Each NWP [nationwide permit] easily fits within the APA’s definition ‘rule.’ * * * As such, each NWP constitutes a rule * * *’’). As EPA stated in 1998, ‘‘the Agency recognizes that the question of the applicability of the APA, and thus the RFA, to the issuance of a general permit is a difficult one, given the fact that a large number of dischargers may choose to use the general permit.’’ 63 FR 36489, 36497 (July 6, 1998). At that time, EPA ‘‘reviewed its previous NPDES general permitting actions and related statements in the Federal Register or elsewhere,’’ and stated that ‘‘[t]his review suggests that the Agency has generally treated NPDES general permits effectively as rules, though at times it has given contrary indications as to whether these actions are rules or permits.’’ Id. at 36496. Based on EPA’s further legal analysis of the issue, the Agency ‘‘concluded, as set forth in the proposal, that NPDES general permits are permits [i.e., adjudications] under the APA and thus not subject to APA rulemaking requirements or the RFA.’’ Id. Accordingly, the Agency stated that ‘‘the APA’s rulemaking requirements are inapplicable to issuance of such permits,’’ and thus ‘‘NPDES permitting is not subject to the requirement to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking under the APA or any other law * * * [and] it is not subject to the RFA.’’ Id. at 36497. However, the Agency went on to explain that, even though EPA had concluded that it was not legally required to do so, the Agency would voluntarily perform the RFA’s smallentity impact analysis. Id. EPA explained the strong public interest in the Agency following the RFA’s requirements on a voluntary basis: ‘‘[The notice and comment] process also provides an opportunity for EPA to consider the potential impact of general E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM 25MRN1 12851 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Notices permit terms on small entities and how to craft the permit to avoid any undue burden on small entities.’’ Id. Accordingly, with respect to the NPDES permit that EPA was addressing in that Federal Register notice, EPA stated that ‘‘the Agency has considered and addressed the potential impact of the general permit on small entities in a manner that would meet the requirements of the RFA if it applied.’’ Id. Subsequent to EPA’s conclusion in 1998 that general permits are adjudications rather than rules, as noted above, the DC Circuit recently held that nationwide general permits under section 404 are ‘‘rules’’ rather than ‘‘adjudications.’’ Thus, this legal question remains ‘‘a difficult one’’ (supra). However, EPA continues to believe that there is a strong public policy interest in EPA applying the RFA’s framework and requirements to the Agency’s evaluation and consideration of the nature and extent of any economic impacts that a CWA general permit could have on small entities (e.g., small businesses). In this regard, EPA believes that the Agency’s evaluation of the potential economic impact that a general permit would have on small entities, consistent with the RFA framework discussed below, is relevant to, and an essential component of, the Agency’s assessment of whether a CWA general permit would place requirements on dischargers that are appropriate and reasonable. Furthermore, EPA believes that the RFA’s framework and requirements provide the Agency with the best approach for the Agency’s evaluation of the economic impact of general permits on small entities. While using the RFA framework to inform its assessment of whether permit requirements are appropriate and reasonable, EPA will also continue to ensure that all permits satisfy the requirements of the Clean Water Act. Accordingly, EPA has committed to operating in accordance with the RFA’s framework and requirements during the Agency’s issuance of CWA general permits (in other words, the Agency has committed that it will apply the RFA in its issuance of general permits as if those permits do qualify as ‘‘rules’’ that are subject to the RFA). I. General Information [EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0893; FRL–8404–3] This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Fomesafen; Product Cancellation Order AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA’s order for the cancellation, voluntarily requested by the registrant and accepted by the Agency, of products containing the pesticide fomesafen, pursuant to section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. This cancellation order follows a December 31, 2008 Federal Register Notice of Receipt of Request from the fomesafen registrant to voluntarily cancel all their fomesafen product registrations. Fomesafen is a pre-plant, pre-emergence and postemergence herbicide used on soybeans, snap beans, dry beans, and cotton. It is also registered for use on agricultural fallow/idleland, nonagricultural uncultivated areas/soils, pine (forest/ shelterbelt) and pine (seed orchard). These are not the last fomesafen products registered for use in the United States. In the December 31, 2008 Notice, EPA indicated that it would issue an order implementing the cancellations, unless the Agency received substantive comments within the 30–day comment period that would merit its further review of these requests, or unless the registrant withdrew their request within this period. The Agency did not receive any comments on the notice. Further, the registrant did not withdraw their request. Accordingly, EPA hereby issues in this notice a cancellation order granting the requested cancellations. Any distribution, sale, or use of the fomesafen products subject to this cancellation order is permitted only in accordance with the terms of this order, including any existing stocks provisions. Dated: March 4, 2009. Miguel I. Flores, Director, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region 6. [FR Doc. E9–6673 Filed 3–24–09; 8:45 am] DATES: The cancellations are effective March 25, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wilhelmena Livingston, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (703) 308–8025; fax number: (703) 308– 8005; e-mail address: livingston.wilhelmena@epa.gov. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY VerDate Nov<24>2008 01:23 Mar 25, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 A. Does this Action Apply to Me? B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– OPP–2008–0893. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at https:// www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305–5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. II. What Action is the Agency Taking? This notice announces the cancellation, as requested by the registrant, of products registered under section 3 of FIFRA. These registrations are listed in sequence by registration number in Table 1 of this unit. TABLE 1.—FOMESAFEN PRODUCT CANCELLATIONS EPA Registration Number Product Name 7969–82 BAS 530 04 H Herbicide 7969–83 FASTERTM Herbicide Table 2 of this unit includes the name and address of record for the registrant of the products in Table 1 of this unit, in sequence by EPA company number. E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM 25MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12849-12851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6673]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8780-6]


Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 
General Permit for Discharges From Horse, Cattle and Dairy Cows, Swine, 
Poultry, and Veal Calf Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) 
in Oklahoma (Except Indian Country)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed permit issuance.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA Region 6 Water Quality Protection Division, today is 
proposing for public comment the issuance of a National Pollutant 
Discharge Elimination System general permit for discharges from 
eligible owners/operators of existing concentrated animal feeding 
operations (CAFOs), in Oklahoma, except those discharges on Indian 
Country. CAFOs discharging on Indian Country would be required to apply 
for an individual permit.
    All currently operating animal feeding operations that are defined 
as CAFOs or designated as CAFOs by the permitting authority (See Part 
VII Definitions, ``CAFOs'') and that are subject to 40 CFR Part 412, 
Subpart A (Horses), Subpart C (Dairy Cows and Cattle Other than Veal 
Calves), and Subpart D (Swine, Poultry, and Veal Calves) are eligible 
for coverage under this permit. Hereinafter, this NPDES general permit 
will be referred to as ``permit'' or ``CAFO permit'' or ``CAFO general 
permit.'' Eligible CAFOs may apply for authorization under the terms 
and conditions of this permit, by submitting a notice of intent (NOI) 
to be covered by this permit. This permit covers animal feeding 
operations listed above which meet the definition of a CAFO and 
discharge or propose to discharge pollutants to waters of the United 
States. A CAFO proposes to discharge if it is designed, constructed, 
operated, or maintained such that a discharge will occur.
    To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action, you 
should carefully examine the definition of ``concentrated animal 
feeding operation'' in existing EPA regulations at 40 CFR 122.23. (also 
found in Part VII of the draft permit). If you have questions regarding 
the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the 
person listed for technical information in the preceding FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    This permit was originally issued in the Federal Register at 58 FR 
7610 with an effective date of March 10, 1993, and an expiration date 
of March 10, 1998. Applicable requirements from that 1993 permit are 
continued in the proposed

[[Page 12850]]

permit. The proposed permit adds additional requirements contained in 
revised CAFO regulations at 40 CFR 122 and 412 which were published in 
the Federal Register at 73 FR 70,418 (November 20, 2008).
    The permit adds new requirements relating to Nutrient Management 
Plans (NMPs) for permitted CAFOs. CAFO operators were required to 
develop and implement NMPs under the 2003 rule; the 2008 rule requires 
CAFOs to submit the NMPs along with their notice of intent (NOI). EPA 
Region 6 as the permitting authority will review the NMPs submitted 
along with the NOIs and will also establish the terms of the NMP that 
are enforceable elements of the permit. The region will provide the 
public with an opportunity for meaningful review and comment on the 
NMPs and the terms of the NMPs will be incorporated into the permit.

DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing to EPA on or before April 
24, 2009.
    Proposed Documents: The proposed general permit and fact sheet 
which sets forth principal facts and the significant factual, legal, 
and policy questions considered in the development of the proposed 
general permit, may both be obtained via the Internet at https://www.epa.gov/region6/water/npdes/cafo/index.htm. To obtain hard copies 
of these documents or any other information in the administrative 
record, please contact Ms. Diane Smith using the contact information 
provided below.

How Do I Comment on This Proposal?

    Comment Submittals: Submit your comments, by one of the following 
methods:
     E-mail: smith.diane@epa.gov.
     Mail: Ms. Diane Smith, Environmental Protection Agency, 
Water Quality Protection Division (6WQ-NP), 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200, 
Dallas, TX 75202.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Region 6, 7th Floor Reception Desk, 
1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202. Such deliveries are only 
accepted during normal business hours.
    For Technical Information Contact: Scott Stine, NPDES Permits and 
TMDL Branch (6WQ-PP), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Ave., 
Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202; telephone number: (214) 665-7182; fax 
number: (214) 665-2191; e-mail address: stine.scott@epa.gov.
    Administrative Record: All documents and references used in the 
development of this permit are part of the Administrative Record for 
this permit. 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 materials are available either electronically or in hard copy 
from Ms. Diane Smith at the address above. The Administrative Record 
may also be viewed at the EPA Region 6 Offices from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. For more 
information on scheduling a time to view the Record or to obtain copies 
of available documents, please contact Ms. Diane Smith at 214-665-2145 
or smith.diane@epa.gov.

Public Hearings

    EPA has not scheduled any public hearings to receive public comment 
concerning the proposed permit. All persons will continue to have the 
right to provide written comments during the public comment period. 
However, interested persons may request a public hearing pursuant to 40 
CFR 124.12 concerning the proposed permit. Requests for a public 
hearing must be sent or delivered in writing to the same address as 
provided above for public comments prior to the close of the comment 
period. Requests for a public hearing must state the nature of the 
issues proposed to be raised in the hearing. Pursuant to 40 CFR 124.12, 
EPA shall hold a public hearing if it finds, on the basis of requests, 
a significant degree of public interest in a public hearing on the 
proposed permit. If EPA decides to hold a public hearing, a public 
notice of the date, time and place of the hearing will be made at least 
30 days prior to the hearing. Any person may provide written or oral 
statements and data pertaining to the proposed permit at the public 
hearing.

III. Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act

EPA's Approach to Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act for 
General Permits

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    The legal question of whether a general permit (as opposed to an 
individual permit) qualifies as a ``rule'' or as an ``adjudication'' 
under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) has been the subject of 
periodic litigation. In a recent case, the court held that the CWA 
Section 404 Nationwide general permit before the court did qualify as a 
``rule'' and therefore that the issuance of that general permit needed 
to comply with the applicable legal requirements for the issuance of a 
``rule.'' National Ass'n of Home Builders v. U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers, 417 F.3d 1272, 1284-85 (DC Cir.2005) (Army Corps general 
permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act are rules under the 
APA and the Regulatory Flexibility Act; ``Each NWP [nationwide permit] 
easily fits within the APA's definition `rule.' * * * As such, each NWP 
constitutes a rule * * *'').
    As EPA stated in 1998, ``the Agency recognizes that the question of 
the applicability of the APA, and thus the RFA, to the issuance of a 
general permit is a difficult one, given the fact that a large number 
of dischargers may choose to use the general permit.'' 63 FR 36489, 
36497 (July 6, 1998). At that time, EPA ``reviewed its previous NPDES 
general permitting actions and related statements in the Federal 
Register or elsewhere,'' and stated that ``[t]his review suggests that 
the Agency has generally treated NPDES general permits effectively as 
rules, though at times it has given contrary indications as to whether 
these actions are rules or permits.'' Id. at 36496. Based on EPA's 
further legal analysis of the issue, the Agency ``concluded, as set 
forth in the proposal, that NPDES general permits are permits [i.e., 
adjudications] under the APA and thus not subject to APA rulemaking 
requirements or the RFA.'' Id. Accordingly, the Agency stated that 
``the APA's rulemaking requirements are inapplicable to issuance of 
such permits,'' and thus ``NPDES permitting is not subject to the 
requirement to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking under 
the APA or any other law * * * [and] it is not subject to the RFA.'' 
Id. at 36497.
    However, the Agency went on to explain that, even though EPA had 
concluded that it was not legally required to do so, the Agency would 
voluntarily perform the RFA's small-entity impact analysis. Id. EPA 
explained the strong public interest in the Agency following the RFA's 
requirements on a voluntary basis: ``[The notice and comment] process 
also provides an opportunity for EPA to consider the potential impact 
of general

[[Page 12851]]

permit terms on small entities and how to craft the permit to avoid any 
undue burden on small entities.'' Id. Accordingly, with respect to the 
NPDES permit that EPA was addressing in that Federal Register notice, 
EPA stated that ``the Agency has considered and addressed the potential 
impact of the general permit on small entities in a manner that would 
meet the requirements of the RFA if it applied.'' Id.
    Subsequent to EPA's conclusion in 1998 that general permits are 
adjudications rather than rules, as noted above, the DC Circuit 
recently held that nationwide general permits under section 404 are 
``rules'' rather than ``adjudications.'' Thus, this legal question 
remains ``a difficult one'' (supra). However, EPA continues to believe 
that there is a strong public policy interest in EPA applying the RFA's 
framework and requirements to the Agency's evaluation and consideration 
of the nature and extent of any economic impacts that a CWA general 
permit could have on small entities (e.g., small businesses). In this 
regard, EPA believes that the Agency's evaluation of the potential 
economic impact that a general permit would have on small entities, 
consistent with the RFA framework discussed below, is relevant to, and 
an essential component of, the Agency's assessment of whether a CWA 
general permit would place requirements on dischargers that are 
appropriate and reasonable. Furthermore, EPA believes that the RFA's 
framework and requirements provide the Agency with the best approach 
for the Agency's evaluation of the economic impact of general permits 
on small entities. While using the RFA framework to inform its 
assessment of whether permit requirements are appropriate and 
reasonable, EPA will also continue to ensure that all permits satisfy 
the requirements of the Clean Water Act. Accordingly, EPA has committed 
to operating in accordance with the RFA's framework and requirements 
during the Agency's issuance of CWA general permits (in other words, 
the Agency has committed that it will apply the RFA in its issuance of 
general permits as if those permits do qualify as ``rules'' that are 
subject to the RFA).

    Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

    Dated: March 4, 2009.
Miguel I. Flores,
Director, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region 6.
[FR Doc. E9-6673 Filed 3-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.