Ocean Dumping; Designation of Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites Offshore of the Umpqua River, Oregon, 18648-18656 [E9-9434]
Download as PDF
18648
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerances in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Public Law 104–4).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Apr 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
newly designated sites will be subject to
ongoing monitoring and management
specified in this rule and in the Site
Management and Monitoring Plan,
which is also finalized as part of this
action. The monitoring and management
requirements will help to ensure
ongoing protection of the marine
Dated: April 17, 2009.
environment.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule
Pesticide Programs.
will be effective May 26, 2009.
ADDRESSES: For more information on
■ Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
this final rule, Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
amended as follows:
OW–2008–0826 use one of the following
PART 180—[AMENDED]
methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
■ 1. The authority citation for part 180
the on-line instructions for accessing the
continues to read as follows:
docket and materials related to this final
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
rule.
• E-mail:
■ 2. Section 180.605 is amended by
Freedman.Jonathan@epa.gov
alphabetically adding the following
• Mail: Jonathan Freedman, U.S.
commodities to the table in paragraph
Environmental Protection Agency,
(a) to read as follows:
Region 10, Office of Ecosystems, Tribal
and Public Affairs (ETPA–083), Aquatic
§ 180.605 Penoxsulam; tolerances for
Resources Unit, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
residues.
Suite 900, Seattle, Washington 98101.
(a) * * *
Publicly available docket materials
are available either electronically at
Parts per
Commodity
https://www.regulations.gov, or in hard
million
copy during normal business hours at
Almond, hulls ................................
0.01 the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 10, Library, 10th Floor,
*
*
*
*
*
Grape ............................................
0.01 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle,
Nut, tree, group 14 .......................
0.01 Washington 98101. For access to the
Pistachio .......................................
0.01 documents at the Region 10 Library,
*
*
*
*
*
contact the Region 10 Library Reference
Desk at (206) 553–1289, between the
*
*
*
*
*
hours of 9 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., and
between the hours of 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.,
[FR Doc. E9–9441 Filed 4–23–09; 8:45 am]
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
holidays, for an appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Jonathan Freedman, U.S. Environmental
AGENCY
Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of
Ecosystems, Tribal and Public Affairs
40 CFR Part 228
(ETPA–083), Aquatic Resources Unit,
1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle,
[EPA–R10–OW–2008–0826; FRL–8893–1]
Washington 98101, phone number:
Ocean Dumping; Designation of Ocean (206) 553–0266, e-mail:
Dredged Material Disposal Sites
freedman.jonathan@epa.gov, or contact
Offshore of the Umpqua River, Oregon Jessica Winkler, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Ecosystems, Tribal and Public Affairs
Agency (EPA).
(ETPA–083), Aquatic Resources Unit,
ACTION: Final rule.
1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle,
Washington 98101, phone number:
SUMMARY: This action finalizes the
(206) 553–7369, e-mail:
designation of the Umpqua River ocean
winkler.jessica@epa.gov.
dredged material sites pursuant to the
Marine Protection, Research and
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
Sanctuaries Act, as amended (MPRSA).
November 25, 2008, EPA published a
The new sites are needed primarily to
proposed rule at 73 FR 71575 to
serve the long-term need for a location
designate two new ocean dredged
to dispose of material dredged from the
material disposal sites near the mouth of
Umpqua River navigation channel, and
the Umpqua River, Oregon and to
to provide a location for the disposal of
withdraw an earlier proposed rule to
dredged material for persons who have
designate a single site. EPA received one
received a permit for such disposal. The comment on the proposed rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24APR1.SGM
24APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
1. Potentially Affected Persons
Persons potentially affected by this
action include those who seek or might
seek permits or approval by EPA to
dispose of dredged material into ocean
waters pursuant to the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act, as amended (MPRSA), 33 U.S.C.
1401 to 1445. EPA’s action would be
relevant to persons, including
organizations and government bodies
18649
seeking to dispose of dredged material
in ocean waters offshore of the Umpqua
River, Oregon. Currently, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) would be
most affected by this action. Potentially
affected categories and persons include:
Category
Examples of potentially regulated persons
Federal Government ...............
Industry and General Public ...
State, local and tribal governments.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Projects, and other Federal Agencies.
Port Authorities, Marinas and Harbors, Shipyards and Marine Repair Facilities, Berth Owners.
Governments owning and/or responsible for ports, harbors, and/or berths, Government agencies requiring disposal of dredged material associated with public works projects.
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding persons likely to
be affected by this action. For any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular person, please
refer to the contact person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
2. Background
a. History of Disposal Sites Offshore of
the Umpqua River, Oregon
Two ocean dredged material disposal
sites, an Interim Site and an Adjusted
Site, were formerly used by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for the
disposal of sediments dredged from the
Umpqua River navigation project. An
‘‘Interim Site’’ was included in the list
of approved ocean disposal sites for
dredged material in the Federal Register
in 1977 (42 FR 2461), a status
superseded by later statutory changes to
the MPRSA. A realignment of the
approach channel to the Umpqua River
estuary re-routed the navigation channel
over the Interim Site so that in 1991 an
Adjusted Site was selected by the Corps
pursuant to Section 103 of the MPRSA.
That authority allows the Corps to select
a site for disposal when a site has not
been designated. Selection of the
Adjusted Site was intended to reduce
potential hazards associated with
navigational conflicts in the channel
and associated with mounding of
dredged material at the Interim Site. The
selection of the Adjusted Site was also
intended to increase long-term disposal
site capacity near the mouth of the
Umpqua River. EPA concurred on the
selection of the Adjusted Site and
approved the Corps’ request to continue
to use the site through the end of the
2008 dredging season. The Adjusted
Site is not a suitable candidate for
designation by EPA pursuant to section
102 of the MPRSA because use of the
Adjusted Site resulted in mounding that
severely limited site capacity. In 1996,
shoaling and breaking waves associated
with mounding at the Adjusted Site
were reported. Subsequently a site
utilization study was conducted by the
Corps in 1998. That study found
evidence of mounding sufficient to
warrant serious concern regarding
impact on the wave environment near
the Umpqua River entrance channel. To
address that concern the volume of
dredged material placed at the Adjusted
Site was reduced from an average
annual volume of 188,000 cubic yards
(cy) prior to 1999 to an average annual
volume of 108,000 cy from 1999 to
2007. EPA determined that alternatives
to the Adjusted Site would be needed
North Umpqua ODMD site
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
43°41′23.09″
43°41′25.86″
43°40′43.62″
43°40′46.37″
N.,
N.,
N.,
N.,
124°14′20.28″
124°12′54.61″
124°14′17.85″
124°12′52.74″
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:22 Apr 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
b. Location and Configuration of
Umpqua River Ocean Dredged Material
Disposal Sites
This action finalizes the withdrawal
of the rule the Agency proposed on
October 2, 1991, at 56 FR. 49858, to
designate an Umpqua River site, and
finalizes the designation of two Umpqua
River ocean dredged material sites to the
north and south, respectively, of the
mouth of the Umpqua River. The
coordinates for the two sites are listed
below and the figure below shows the
location of the two Umpqua River ocean
dredged material disposal sites
(Umpqua River ODMD Sites or Sites).
The configuration of the Sites is
expected to allow dredged material
disposed in shallower portions of each
Site to naturally disperse into the
littoral zone without creating mounding
conditions that could contribute to
adverse impacts to navigation. This will
allow EPA to manage the Sites to keep
as much material disposed at the Sites
as possible in the active littoral drift
area to augment shoreline building
processes.
The coordinates for the two Umpqua
River ODMD Sites are, in North
American Datum 83 (NAD 83).
South Umpqua ODMD site
W.
W.
W.
W.
43°39′32.31″
43°39′35.23″
43°38′53.08″
43°38′55.82″
The two Sites are situated in
approximately 30 to 120 feet of water
located to the north and south of the
entrance to the Umpqua River on the
southern Oregon Coast (see Figure 1).
The dimensions of each of the Sites are
for long-term disposal capacity near the
mouth of the Umpqua River.
N.,
N.,
N.,
N.,
124°14′35.60″
124°13′11.01″
124°14′32.94″
124°13′08.36″
6,300 by 4,000 feet. Each disposal Site
will contain a drop zone, defined by a
500-foot setback inscribed within all
sides of the boundary of each Site,
reducing the permissible disposal area
to a zone 5,300 feet long by 3,000 feet
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
W.
W.
W.
W.
wide. The drop zone will ensure that
dredged material initially stays within
each Site.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\24APR1.SGM
24APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C
c. Management and Monitoring of the
Sites
The final Umpqua River ODMD Sites
are expected to receive sediments
dredged by the Corps to maintain the
federally authorized navigation project
at the Umpqua River, Oregon and
dredged material from other persons
who have obtained a permit for the
disposal of dredged material at the Sites.
The ocean dumping regulations do not
require a modification of any existing
permits issued before this final action.
All persons using the Sites are required
to follow the Site Management and
Monitoring Plan (SMMP) for the
Umpqua River ODMD Sites. The SMMP
is available to the public as part of this
action. The SMMP includes
management and monitoring
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:22 Apr 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
requirements to ensure that dredged
materials disposed at the Sites are
suitable for disposal in the ocean. The
final SMMP also addresses management
of the Sites to ensure adverse mounding
does not occur and to ensure that
disposal events are timed to minimize
interference with other uses of ocean
waters in the vicinity of the Sites.
d. MPRSA Criteria
EPA assessed this action against the
criteria of the MPRSA, with particular
emphasis on the general and specific
regulatory criteria of 40 CFR part 228, to
determine that the final site
designations satisfied those criteria.
General Criteria (40 CFR 228.5)
(1) Sites must be selected to minimize
interference with other activities in the
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
marine environment, particularly
avoiding areas of existing fisheries or
shellfisheries, and regions of heavy
commercial or recreational navigation
(40 CFR 228.5(a)).
EPA reviewed the potential for the
Sites to interfere with navigation,
recreation, shellfisheries, aquatic
resources, commercial fisheries,
protected geologic features, and cultural
and/or historically significant areas and
found low potential for conflicts. The
Sites are located away from the
approach to the Umpqua River entrance
channel and are unlikely to cause
interference with navigation near the
mouth of the Umpqua River.
Commercial crab and salmon fishing
have the potential to take place in the
Sites because of overlapping disposal
and fishing seasons, but conflicts are not
E:\FR\FM\24APR1.SGM
24APR1
ER24AP09.053
18650
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
anticipated based on the past history of
fishing and disposal operations in this
area. Other recreational users, for
example, surfers, boarders, and divers,
may use the near-shore area in the
vicinity of the Sites. EPA does not
expect disposal operations at the Sites
to conflict with these recreationists.
(2) Sites must be situated such that
temporary perturbations to water quality
or other environmental conditions
during initial mixing caused by disposal
operations would be reduced to normal
ambient levels or undetectable
contaminant concentrations or effects
before reaching any beach, shoreline,
marine sanctuary, or known
geographically limited fishery or
shellfishery (40 CFR 228.5(b)).
Based on EPA’s review of modeling,
monitoring data, analysis of sediment
quality, and history of use, no detectable
contaminant concentrations or water
quality effects, e.g., suspended solids,
would be expected to reach any beach,
shoreline, or other area outside of the
Sites. The drop zones at each of the
Sites will help ensure this criterion is
satisfied. All dredged material proposed
for disposal will be evaluated according
to the ocean dumping regulations at 40
CFR 227.13 and guidance developed by
EPA and the Corps. In general, dredged
material which meets the criteria under
40 CFR 227.13(b) is deemed
environmentally acceptable for ocean
dumping without further testing.
Dredged material which does not meet
the criteria of 40 CFR 227.13(b) must be
further tested as required by 40 CFR
227.13(c). Suitable material can be
disposed at the Sites. Modeling work
performed by the Corps at the Umpqua
River demonstrates that water column
turbidity, a temporary perturbation
during disposal, would be expected to
dissipate for an anticipated 97% of the
coarser material within a few minutes of
disposal. The remaining 3% of the
material, which would be classified as
fine-grained, would be expected to
dissipate within a half hour. Over time,
some of the suitable disposed material
would be expected to migrate into the
littoral system, and potentially to
coastal shorelines. Bottom movement of
material, based on historic trends near
the mouth of the Umpqua River, is
expected to show a net movement to the
north at the depth of the disposal Sites
with rapid dispersion after movement.
(3) If Site designation studies show
that any interim disposal sites do not
meet the site selection criteria, use of
such sites shall be terminated as soon as
any alternate site can be designated (40
CFR 228.5(c)).
EPA’s recent final rule at 73 FR 74983
(December 10, 2008) repealed obsolete
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Apr 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
regulations under the MPRSA regarding
interim ocean dumping sites and
interim ocean dumping criteria. EPA
stated in the proposed rule that the use
of the Interim Site near the Umpqua
River Sites was terminated upon
selection of the 103-selected site, the
Adjusted Site, by the Corps. However,
the category of ‘‘interim site’’ has now
been removed from the ocean dumping
regulations.
(4) The sizes of disposal sites will be
limited in order to localize for
identification and control any
immediate adverse impacts, and to
permit the implementation of effective
monitoring and surveillance to prevent
adverse long-range impacts. Size,
configuration, and location are to be
determined as part of the disposal site
evaluation (40 CFR 228.5(d)).
EPA sized the final Sites to meet this
criterion. The Sites tend to be
moderately dispersive in the near-shore
area and less dispersive farther from
shore. The Sites were designed to be
large enough to minimize the potential
for adverse mounding and to allow for
a minimum twenty-year capacity.
Effective monitoring of the Sites is
necessary and annual bathymetric
surveys are required for each Site. Those
surveys are expected to be used to
document the fate of the dredged
material disposed at the Sites and to
provide information for active
management of the Sites.
(5) EPA will, wherever feasible,
designate ocean dumping sites beyond
the edge of the continental shelf and
other such sites where historical
disposal has occurred (40 CFR 228.5(e)).
The Sites are located near where
historic disposal occurred with only
minimal impact to the environment.
Locations off the continental shelf in the
Pacific Ocean as a general rule are
inhabited by stable benthic and pelagic
ecosystems on steeper gradients that are
not well adapted to the type of frequent
disturbance events that are typical of
dredged material disposal in ocean
waters. Monitoring and surveillance of
these Sites do not pose the challenges
inherent in locations beyond the edge of
the continental shelf. Material disposed
at a location beyond the continental
shelf would not be available to the
littoral system. The loss of material
would potentially have a negative
impact on the mass balance of the
system with a resulting negative impact
on erosion/accretion patterns along this
limited area of coastline near the
Umpqua River.
Specific Criteria (40 CFR 228.6)
(1) Geographical Position, Depth of
Water, Bottom Topography and
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18651
Distance from Coast (40 CFR
228.6(a)(1)).
The geographical position, including
the depth, bottom topography and
distance from the coastline in the
vicinity of the Sites will not cause
adverse effects to the marine
environment. Based on EPA’s
understanding of currents at the Sites
and the influence of those currents on
the movement of material in the area,
there is a high likelihood that much of
the material disposed at the Sites will be
transported to the littoral sediment
circulation system. Limited onshore
transport of material disposed of at the
Sites is expected because of the nature
of the prevailing currents and wave
transport in the vicinity of the Sites. Net
predicted material transport at the Sites
is southward in the summer months and
northward during the remainder of the
year. These transport mechanisms are
expected to move material into the
active littoral drift area and to
significantly decrease or eliminate
mounding as an issue for disposal of
dredged material near the mouth of the
Umpqua River. This movement is
expected to allow for long-term disposal
without creation of adverse mounding
conditions at either of the Sites.
To help avoid adverse mounding at
the Sites, the site management strategy
will include placing the majority of
dredged material within drop zones at
each Site and in shallower portions of
the Sites closer to shore where the
material can return to the regional
littoral sediment system. Disposal runs
will be managed to avoid multiple
dumps in any location to further
minimize mounding. Management may
include establishing ‘‘cells’’ along the
nearshore portions of each Site and
assigning numbers of ‘‘dumps’’ to each
cell to minimize material accumulation
and avoid excessive or persistent
mounding. Disposal will also alternate
as necessary between the two Sites to
allow for maximum dispersal of
material and minimal impact to each
Site.
(2) Location in Relation to Breeding,
Spawning, Nursery, Feeding, or Passage
Areas of Living Resources in Adult or
Juvenile Phases (40 CFR 228.6(a)(2)).
The Sites are not located in exclusive
breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding or
passage areas for adult or juvenile
phases of living resources. Near the
Sites, a variety of pelagic and demersal
fish species, as well as shellfish, are
found. Modeling of the water column
over the Sites indicates that turbidity
from a disposal event is expected to
dissipate rapidly and consequently
avoidance behavior by any species in
the Sites or in the surrounding area at
E:\FR\FM\24APR1.SGM
24APR1
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
18652
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
the time of a disposal event would be
short-term.
(3) Location in Relation to Beaches
and Other Amenity Areas (40 CFR
228.6(a)(3)).
The Sites, although located in close
proximity to the Umpqua River
navigation channel, are located a
sufficient distance offshore to avoid
adverse impacts to beaches and other
amenity areas. Transportation of
dredges or barges to and from the Sites
to dispose of dredged material will be
coordinated to avoid disturbance of
other activities near the Umpqua River
entrance channel. Dredged material
disposed of at the Sites is expected to
disperse into the littoral system, with a
possible positive effect over time of
reducing erosion of coastal beaches.
There are no rocks or pinnacles in the
vicinity of either Site. The Oregon
Dunes National Recreation Area, a part
of the Siuslaw National Forest, is
located on the beach adjacent to the
South ODMD Site, but does not extend
into the water. Use of the South ODMD
Site is not expected to interfere with any
upland uses.
The ocean area north and south of the
south jetty is utilized for wavedependent near-shore recreation, such
as surfing, diving, kayaking, boogieboarding, skim boarding, and body
surfing. While some of these uses may
overlap with the Sites, resulting in
temporary usage conflict during
disposal activities, the SMMP contains
provisions to minimize or avoid such
conflicts. The Sites are sized and
located to provide long-term capacity
for the disposal of dredged material
without causing any impacts to the
wave environment at, or near, the Sites.
Site monitoring and adaptive
management are components of the final
SMMP.
(4) Types and Quantities of Wastes
Proposed to be Disposed of, and
Proposed Methods of Release, including
Methods of Packing the Waste, if any (40
CFR 228.6(a)(4)).
Dredged material found suitable for
ocean disposal pursuant to the
regulatory criteria for dredged material
or characterized by chemical and
biological testing and found suitable for
disposal into ocean waters will be the
only material allowed to be disposed of
at the Sites. No material defined as
‘‘waste’’ under the MPRSA will be
allowed to be disposed of at the Sites.
The dredged material to be disposed of
at the Sites will be predominantly
marine sand, far removed from known
sources of contamination. With respect
to methods of releasing material at the
Sites, material will be released just
below the surface and the disposal
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Apr 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
vessel will be required to be under
power and to slowly transit the disposal
location during disposal. This method
of release is expected to spread material
at the Sites to minimize mounding and
to minimize impacts to the benthic
community and to species at the Sites
at the time of a disposal event.
(5) Feasibility of Surveillance and
Monitoring (40 CFR 228.6(a)(5)).
EPA expects monitoring and
surveillance at the Sites to be feasible
and readily performed from small
surface research vessels. The Sites are
accessible for bathymetric and side-scan
sonar surveys. At a minimum, annual
bathymetric surveys will be conducted
at each of the Sites to confirm that no
unacceptable mounding is taking place
within the Sites or in their immediate
vicinity. Routine monitoring will
concentrate on examining how the
distribution of material in the nearshore portions of the Sites is working to
minimize mounding of material and
how the distribution of material
augments littoral processes. Monitoring
will also examine the distribution of
material in the deeper portions of the
Sites to avoid or minimize mounding.
(6) Dispersal, Horizontal Transport
and Vertical Mixing Characteristics of
the Area, Including Prevailing Current
Direction and Velocity, if any (40 CFR
228.6(a)(6)).
Dispersal, horizontal transport and
vertical mixing characteristics of the
area at and in the vicinity of the Sites
indicate that the marine sands and
fluvial gravels from the Umpqua River
distribute away from the river mouth
rapidly. The beaches do not show
significant accretion or loss, suggesting
the system is in equilibrium and that
littoral transport is in balance. The
bottom current records suggest a bias in
transport to the north. Fine grained
material tends to remain in suspension
and to experience rapid offshore
transport compared to other sediment
sizes. Sediment transport of sand-sized
or coarser material tends to move
directly as bedload, but is occasionally
suspended by wave action near the
seafloor. The final Sites are not expected
to change these characteristics.
(7) Existence and Effects of Current
and Previous Discharges and Dumping
in the Area (including Cumulative
Effects) (40 CFR 228.6(a)(7)).
The two Sites have not been used
before for any type of disposal activity.
Disposal of dredged material is not
expected to result in unacceptable
environmental degradation at the Sites
or in the vicinity of the Sites. The final
SMMP includes requirements, including
bathymetric surveys and preventative
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
steps, for managing the Sites to address
potential mounding issues.
(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 (40 CFR 228.6(a)(8)).
The Sites are not expected to interfere
with shipping, fishing, recreation or
other legitimate uses of the ocean.
Disposals at the new Sites will be
managed according to the final SMMP
to minimize interference with other
legitimate uses of the ocean through
careful timing and staggering of
disposals in the Sites. Commercial and
recreational fishing and commercial
navigation are the primary uses for
which such timing will be needed. No
plans for mineral extraction offshore of
the Umpqua River are planned or
proposed for this area. Wave-dependent
near shore recreation may possibly
overlap with the Sites resulting in
temporary usage conflict during
disposal activities but the Sites will be
managed to minimize such potential
conflicts. Use of the Sites is not
expected to change the wave conditions
for any recreational uses. Two wave
energy projects are in the preliminary
permitting phases near the Sites. EPA
would expect to revise the SMMP if
necessary in the event the proposed
wave energy projects moved forward
and potential conflicts seemed likely.
Fish and shellfish culture operations are
not under consideration for the area.
There are no known areas of scientific
importance in the vicinity of the Sites.
(9) The Existing Water Quality and
Ecology of the Sites as Determined by
Available Data or Trend Assessment of
Baseline Surveys (40 CFR 228.6(a)(9)).
EPA did not identify any adverse
water quality impacts from ocean
disposal of dredged material at the Sites
based on water and sediment quality
analyses conducted in the study area of
the Sites and based on experience with
past disposals near the mouth of the
Umpqua River. Fisheries and benthic
data show the ecology of the area to be
that of a mobile sand community typical
of the Oregon Coast.
(10) Potentiality for the Development
or Recruitment of Nuisance Species in
the Disposal Site (40 CFR 228.6(a)(10))
Nuisance species, considered as any
undesirable organism not previously
existing at a location, have not been
observed at, or in the vicinity of, the
Sites. Material expected to be disposed
at the Sites will be uncontaminated
marine sands similar to the sediment
present at the Sites. Some fine-grained
material, finer than natural background,
may also be disposed. While this finer-
E:\FR\FM\24APR1.SGM
24APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
grained material could have the
potential to attract nuisance species to
the Sites, no such recruitment occurred
in the past at either the Interim or the
Adjusted Site. The final SMMP includes
specific biological monitoring
requirements, which will act to identify
any nuisance species and allowing EPA
to direct special studies and/or
operational changes to address the issue
if it arises.
(11) Existence at or in Close Proximity
to the Site of any Significant Natural or
Cultural Feature of Historical
Importance (40 CFR 228.6(a)(11))
No significant cultural features have
been identified at, or in the vicinity of,
the Sites. EPA coordinated with
Oregon’s State Historic Preservation
Officer and with Tribes in the vicinity
of the Sites to identify any cultural
features but none were identified. No
shipwrecks were observed or
documented within the Sites or their
immediate vicinity.
3. Response to Comments
EPA received one indirect comment
on the proposed rule. The commenter
objected generally to any dumping in
the ocean and criticized shipping
companies for dumping rather than
recycling. EPA’s action designates sites
for the disposal of dredged material
meeting the ocean dumping criteria for
environmental acceptability in the
ocean environment. No other material is
allowed at these Sites. The Sites will not
be available to users for any purpose
other than the disposal of dredged
material meeting the regulatory criteria
for suitability.
4. Environmental Statutory Review—
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA); Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA);
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA); Coastal Zone Management
Act (CZMA); Endangered Species Act
(ESA); National Historic Preservation
Act (NHPA)
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
(1) NEPA
Section 102 of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as
amended (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 to
4370f, requires that Federal agencies
prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for major federal actions
significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment. NEPA does not
apply to EPA designations of ocean
disposal sites under the MPRSA because
the courts have exempted EPA’s actions
under the MPRSA from the procedural
requirements of NEPA through the
functional equivalence doctrine. EPA
has, by policy, determined that the
preparation of non-EIS NEPA
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Apr 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
documents for certain EPA regulatory
actions, including actions under the
MPRSA, is appropriate. EPA’s ‘‘Notice
of Policy and Procedures for Voluntary
Preparation of NEPA Documents,’’
(Voluntary NEPA Policy), 63 FR 58045,
(October 29, 1998), sets out both the
policy and procedures EPA uses when
preparing such environmental review
documents. EPA’s primary voluntary
NEPA document for designating the
Sites is the final Umpqua River, Oregon
Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites
Evaluation Study and Environmental
Assessment, April 2009 (EA), jointly
prepared by EPA and the Corps. The
final EA and its Technical Appendices,
which are part of the docket for this
action, provide the threshold
environmental review for designation of
the two Sites. The information from the
final EA is used extensively, above, in
the discussion of the ocean dumping
criteria.
(2) MSA and MMPA
In the spring of 2008, EPA initiated
consultation with the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) concerning
essential fish habitat and protected
marine mammals. EPA prepared an
essential fish habitat (EFH) assessment
pursuant to Section 305(b), 16 U.S.C.
1855(b)(2), of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, as amended (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801
to 1891d. NMFS reviewed EPA’s EFH
assessment and ESA Biological
Assessment for purposes of the Marine
Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as
amended (MMPA), 16 U.S.C. 1361 to
1389.
With respect to marine mammals,
NMFS found that all potential adverse
effects to ESA-listed marine mammals
are discountable or insignificant. Those
findings are documented in Appendix
B. Marine Mammal Determinations of
the Biological Opinion issued by NMFS
to EPA on March 20, 2009. With respect
to EFH, NMFS found that disposal of
dredge material, an indirect effect of
EPA’s action to designate the two
Umpqua River ODMD Sites, will affect
suspended sediment levels over
background and temporarily decrease
food resources within the Sites during
disposal events. However, these effects
are not expected to functionally change
or alter the habitat or habitat value of
designated EFH at or in the vicinity of
the Sites. NMFS concluded that safe
passage of the EFH managed species
will not be functionally changed by this
action or by subsequent disposal at the
Sites. These findings are documented in
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
section of the NMFS Biological Opinion.
NMFS included a ‘‘conservation
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18653
recommendation’’ to develop a plan for
monitoring fish interactions with the
disposed dredged material at the Sites.
EPA will respond in a separate written
response to NMFS’ recommendation.
(3) CZMA
EPA initiated consultation with the
State of Oregon on coastal zone
management issues in June of 2008. EPA
prepared a consistency determination
for the Oregon Ocean and Coastal
Management Program (OCMP) to meet
the requirements of the Coastal Zone
Management Act, as amended, (CZMA),
16 U.S.C. 1451 to 1465, and submitted
that determination formally to the
Oregon Department of Land
Conservation and Development (DLCD)
for review on November 12, 2008. DLCD
published an initial public notice on the
consistency determination on November
14, 2008, and in a notice on December
10, 2008, extended the public comment
period to January 2, 2009. DLCD
received one comment letter from the
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
(ODFW) expressing support for the
designation of the Umpqua River Sites
and supporting ocean disposal of
dredged material as the best alternative.
ODFW did express concern with
potential impacts to habitat near the
mouth of the Umpqua River and
expressed support for ‘‘pinpoint
dumping’’ over ‘‘uniform placement’’ of
disposal material at the Sites.
DLCD concurred on EPA’s
determination of consistency with one
condition. The condition calls for the
final SMMP to assure that monitoring
measures for the Umpqua River Sites are
reasonably likely to identify significant
unanticipated adverse affects on
renewable marine resources, biological
diversity of marine life and functional
integrity of the marine ecosystem at the
Sites, and further asks that the SMMP
include adaptive management measures
to avoid significant impairment of the
Sites and significant decreases in
abundance of commercial or
recreationally caught species from direct
or indirect effects on important or
essential habitat at the Sites. The final
SMMP for the Umpqua River Sites
provides the assurances and adaptive
management measures requested by
DLCD. DLCD responded to the ODFW
concern about impacts to habitat by
including the condition, above, in its
consistency concurrence. DLCD also
noted that ‘‘pinpoint dumping’’ has
been replaced with the disposal
technique of ‘‘uniform placement.’’
DLCD suggested that future site
designations include opportunities for
EPA and ODFW to coordinate on issues.
E:\FR\FM\24APR1.SGM
24APR1
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
18654
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
(4) ESA
EPA initiated informal consultation
with NMFS and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service on its action to
designate the Umpqua River ODMD
Sites beginning in the spring of 2008.
EPA prepared a Biological Assessment
to assess the potential effects of
designating the two Umpqua River Sites
on aquatic and wildlife species to
determine whether or not its action
might adversely affect species listed as
endangered or threatened and/or
adversely modify or destroy their
designated critical habitat. EPA found
that its action would not be likely to
adversely affect aquatic or wildlife
species listed pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act, as amended
(ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531 to 1544, or the
critical habitat of such species. EPA
found that site designation does not
have a direct impact on any of the
identified ESA species but also found
that indirect impacts associated with
reasonably foreseeable future disposal
activities had to be considered. These
indirect impacts included a short-term
increase in suspended solids and
turbidity in the water column when
dredged material was disposed at the
new Sites and an accumulation of
material on the ocean floor when
material was disposed at the Sites. EPA
concluded that while its action may
affect ESA-listed species, the action
would not be likely to adversely affect
ESA-listed species or critical habitat.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) concurred with EPA’s finding
that EPA’s action to designate the
Umpqua River ODMD Sites would not
likely adversely affect listed species or
critical habitat. Consultation with the
USFWS for this action was completed
on July 25, 2008.
The National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) did not concur with EPA’s
NLAA finding and subsequently
prepared a Biological Opinion (BO),
issued March 20, 2009. NMFS
concluded that EPA’s site designations
are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of Oregon Coast
(OC) coho salmon or Southern Distinct
Population Segment (DPS) green
sturgeon and are not likely to destroy or
adversely modify designated or
proposed critical habitat. However,
NMFS found that the indirect effects of
designating the Umpqua River Sites
related to the exposure fish could
experience from the disposal of dredged
material could have consequences for
listed fish. Based on NMFS’ estimate of
ensuing indirect effects of designating
the Sites, NMFS estimated that injury
and death of as many as 990 yearling OC
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Apr 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
coho salmon and a smaller number of
small sub-adult southern DPS green
sturgeon could occur. For Steller sea
lions, blue whales, fin whales,
humpback whales, Southern Resident
killer whales, as described in Appendix
B to the BO, NMFS concurred with
EPA’s determination of NLAA. For
Southern Oregon/Northern California
Coasts (SONNC) coho salmon, as
described in Appendix A to the BO,
NMFS also concurred with EPA’s
determination of NLAA. NMFS found
no effect for four species of marine
turtles, sperm whales, and sei whales
because NMFS did not anticipate the
species would be present in the action
area.
NMFS acknowledged in the BO that
EPA’s action, designation of the
Umpqua River Sites, does not authorize
and will not itself result in disposal of
dredged material. NMFS stated that it
does not anticipate any take will be
caused by the designation of the Sites
and the adoption of the SMMP.
Consequently, NMFS did not include an
incidental take statement in the BO.
Rather, NMFS stated that any further
analysis of the effect of disposal of
dredged material at the disposal sites
and issuance of an incidental take
statement with reasonable and prudent
measures and non-discretionary terms
and conditions to minimize take would
be prepared when a disposal permit is
requested by the action agency. NMFS
did include a discretionary conservation
recommendation in the BO seeking a
study of fish interactions with disposed
material. Such recommendations are
purely advisory in nature. EPA
appreciates that such a study could
contribute to the scientific knowledge
base but believes that NMFS, the expert
Federal agency on fish behavior, would
be better suited than EPA to carry out
such a study.
(5) NHPA
EPA initiated consultation with the
State of Oregon’s Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO) to address National
Historic Preservation Act, as amended
(NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470 to 470a–2, which
requires Federal agencies to take into
account the effect of their actions on
districts, sites, buildings, structures, or
objects, included in, or eligible for
inclusion in the National Register. EPA
determined that no historic properties
were affected, or would be affected, by
designation of the Sites. EPA did not
find any historic properties within the
geographic area of the Sites. This
determination was based on an
extensive review of the National
Register of Historic Districts in Oregon,
the Oregon National Register list and an
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
assessment of cultural resources near
the Sites. Side scan sonar of the Sites
did not reveal the presence of any
shipwrecks or other cultural or historic
properties. The SHPO responded to
EPA’s determination on September 11,
2008, without objection. The SHPO
clarified on October 13, 2008, that the
designation of the Sites did not require
further archeological investigation.
5. Action
EPA designates the Umpqua River
Sites as EPA-approved dredged material
ocean disposal sites in this action. The
monitoring and management
requirements that will apply to these
Sites are described in the final SMMP.
EPA received one comment on the
proposed rule from a commenter who
objected to disposing of harmful
material in the ocean. The Sites
designated in this action are only
available for the disposal of material
deemed suitable for ocean disposal. The
designation of ocean disposal sites for
dredged material does not constitute or
imply Corps or EPA approval of open
water disposal of dredged material from
any specific project. Before disposal of
dredged material at either of the
Umpqua River Sites may commence by
any person, EPA and the Corps must
evaluate the proposal according to the
ocean dumping regulatory criteria (40
CFR part 227) and authorize disposal.
EPA independently evaluates proposed
dumping in accordance with those
criteria pursuant to 40 CFR part 225.
EPA has the right to disapprove of the
actual disposal of dredged material if
EPA determines that environmental
requirements under the MPRSA have
not been met.
6. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This rule designates two ocean
dredged material disposal sites pursuant
to Section 102 of the MPRSA. This rule
complies with applicable executive
orders and statutory provisions as
follows:
(1) Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735), the Agency must determine
whether the regulatory action is
‘‘significant,’’ and therefore subject to
OMB review and the requirements of
the Executive Order. The Executive
Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as one that is likely to result in
a rule that may: (1) 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
E:\FR\FM\24APR1.SGM
24APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) create
a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3)
materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs, or the rights and obligations
of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order. EPA determined that this final
rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under the terms of Executive
Order 12866 and is therefore not subject
to OMB review.
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
(2) Paperwork Reduction Act
This final action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., because this
rule does not establish or modify any
information or recordkeeping
requirements for the regulated
community.
Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
or provide information to or for a
Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology
and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing, and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and
requirements; train personnel to be able
to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for EPA’s regulations in Title
40 of the CFR are listed in 40 CFR Part
9.
(3) Regulatory Flexibility
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires Federal agencies 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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Apr 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
governmental jurisdictions. For
purposes of assessing the impacts of this
rule on small entities, small entity is
defined as: (1) A small business defined
by the Small Business Administration’s
size regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2)
a small governmental jurisdiction that is
a government of a city, county, town,
school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3)
a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. EPA determined
that this final action will not have a
significant economic impact on small
entities because the final rule will only
have the effect of regulating the location
of sites to be used for the disposal of
dredged material in ocean waters. After
considering the economic impacts of
this rule, I certify that this action will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.
(4) Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal
mandates under the provisions of Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (UMRA) of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531 to
1538, for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. This
action imposes no new enforceable duty
on any State, local or tribal governments
or the private sector. Therefore, this
action is not subject to the requirements
of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA.
This action is also not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of the
UMRA because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small government
entities. Those entities are already
subject to existing permitting
requirements for the disposal of dredged
material in ocean waters.
(5) Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255), 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 various levels of
government.’’ This rule does not have
federalism implications. It does not
have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
18655
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among various levels of
government, as specified in Executive
Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order
13132 does not apply to this rule.
(6) Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 because the designation of
the two ocean dredged material disposal
Sites will not have a direct effect on
Indian Tribes, on the relationship
between the federal government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
federal government and Indian tribes.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule. Although Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this final
rule, EPA consulted with tribal officials
in the development of this rule,
particularly as the rule relates to
potential impacts to historic or cultural
resources.
(7) Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885) as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis
required under section 5–501 of the
Executive Order has the potential to
influence the regulation. This action is
not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it does not establish an
environmental standard intended to
mitigate health or safety risks. The
action concerns the designation of two
ocean dredged material disposal Sites
and only has the effect of providing
designated locations to use for ocean
disposal of dredged material pursuant to
Section 102(c) of the MPRSA.
(8) Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355) because it is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as
defined under Executive Order 12866.
(9) National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law
104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272),
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
E:\FR\FM\24APR1.SGM
24APR1
18656
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
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 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 final action
includes environmental monitoring and
measurement as described in EPA’s
final SMMP. EPA will not require the
use of specific, prescribed analytic
methods for monitoring and managing
the designated Sites. The Agency plans
to allow the use of any method, whether
it constitutes a voluntary consensus
standard or not, that meets the
monitoring and measurement criteria
discussed in the final SMMP.
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
(10) Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low
Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629)
establishes federal executive policy on
environmental justice. Its main
provision directs federal agencies, to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make
environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States. EPA
determined that this final rule will not
have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income
populations because it does not affect
the level of protection provided to
human health or the environment. EPA
has assessed the overall protectiveness
of designating the disposal Sites against
the criteria established pursuant to the
MPRSA to ensure that any adverse
impact to the environment will be
mitigated to the greatest extent
practicable.
(11) Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (CRA),
5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Apr 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule
will be effective thirty days from the
date of publication in the Federal
Register.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
Environmental protection, Water
pollution control.
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of Section 102 of the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, as
amended, 33 U.S.C. 1401, 1411, 1412.
Dated: April 9, 2009.
Michelle L. Pirzadeh,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended 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 (n)(7) to read as
follows:
■
§ 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a
final basis.
*
*
*
*
(n) * * *
(7) Umpqua River, OR—North and
South Dredged Material Disposal Sites.
(i) North Umpqua River Site.
(A) Location: 43°41′23.09″ N,
124°14′20.28″ W; 43°41′25.86″ N,
124°12′54.61″ W; 43°40′43.62″ N,
124°14′17.85″ W; 43°40′46.37″ N,
124°12′52.74″ W.
(B) Size: Approximately 1.92
kilometers long and 1.22 kilometers
wide, with a drop zone which is defined
as a 500-foot setback inscribed within
all sides of the site boundary, reducing
the permissible disposal area to a zone
5,300 feet long by 3,000 feet wide.
(C) Depth: Ranges from approximately
9 to 37 meters.
(D) Primary Use: Dredged material.
(E) Period of Use: Continuing Use.
(F) Restrictions: (1) Disposal shall be
limited to dredged material determined
to be suitable for ocean disposal
according to 40 CFR 227.13, from the
Umpqua River navigation channel and
adjacent areas;
(2) Disposal shall be managed by the
restrictions and requirements contained
in the currently-approved Site
Management and Monitoring Plan
(SMMP);
(3) Monitoring, as specified in the
SMMP, is required.
(ii) South Umpqua River Site.
(A) Location: 43°39′32.31″ N,
124°14′35.60″ W; 43°39′35.23″ N,
124°13′11.01″ W; 43°38′53.08″ N,
124°14′32.94″ W; 43°38′55.82″ N,
124°13′08.36″ W.
(B) Size: Approximately 1.92
kilometers long and 1.22 kilometers
wide, with a drop zone which is defined
as a 500-foot setback inscribed within
all sides of the site boundary, reducing
the permissible disposal area to a zone
5,300 feet long by 3,000 feet wide.
(C) Depth: Ranges from approximately
9 to 37 meters.
(D) Primary Use: Dredged material.
(E) Period of Use: Continuing Use.
(F) Restrictions: (1) Disposal shall be
limited to dredged material determined
to be suitable for ocean disposal
according to 40 CFR 227.13, from the
Umpqua River navigation channel and
adjacent areas;
(2) Disposal shall be managed by the
restrictions and requirements contained
in the currently-approved Site
Management and Monitoring Plan
(SMMP);
(3) Monitoring, as specified in the
SMMP, is required.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–9434 Filed 4–23–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
*
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
42 CFR Parts 447 and 455
[CMS–2198–F2]
RIN–0938–AN09
Medicaid Program; Disproportionate
Share Hospital Payments; Correcting
Amendment
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule; correcting
amendment.
SUMMARY: This correcting amendment
corrects a technical error in the
regulations text in the final rule
published in the Federal Register on
December 19, 2008 (73 FR 77904)
entitled, ‘‘Disproportionate Share
Hospital Payments.’’ In that final rule,
we set forth data elements necessary to
E:\FR\FM\24APR1.SGM
24APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 78 (Friday, April 24, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18648-18656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9434]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 228
[EPA-R10-OW-2008-0826; FRL-8893-1]
Ocean Dumping; Designation of Ocean Dredged Material Disposal
Sites Offshore of the Umpqua River, Oregon
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action finalizes the designation of the Umpqua River
ocean dredged material sites pursuant to the Marine Protection,
Research and Sanctuaries Act, as amended (MPRSA). The new sites are
needed primarily to serve the long-term need for a location to dispose
of material dredged from the Umpqua River navigation channel, and to
provide a location for the disposal of dredged material for persons who
have received a permit for such disposal. The newly designated sites
will be subject to ongoing monitoring and management specified in this
rule and in the Site Management and Monitoring Plan, which is also
finalized as part of this action. The monitoring and management
requirements will help to ensure ongoing protection of the marine
environment.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule will be effective May 26, 2009.
ADDRESSES: For more information on this final rule, Docket ID No. EPA-
R10-OW-2008-0826 use one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for accessing the docket and materials related to this
final rule.
E-mail: Freedman.Jonathan@epa.gov
Mail: Jonathan Freedman, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 10, Office of Ecosystems, Tribal and Public Affairs
(ETPA-083), Aquatic Resources Unit, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900,
Seattle, Washington 98101.
Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically at https://www.regulations.gov, or in hard copy during
normal business hours at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 10, Library, 10th Floor, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle,
Washington 98101. For access to the documents at the Region 10 Library,
contact the Region 10 Library Reference Desk at (206) 553-1289, between
the hours of 9 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., and between the hours of 1 p.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays, for an
appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan Freedman, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of Ecosystems, Tribal and Public
Affairs (ETPA-083), Aquatic Resources Unit, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite
900, Seattle, Washington 98101, phone number: (206) 553-0266, e-mail:
freedman.jonathan@epa.gov, or contact Jessica Winkler, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of Ecosystems,
Tribal and Public Affairs (ETPA-083), Aquatic Resources Unit, 1200
Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, Washington 98101, phone number: (206)
553-7369, e-mail: winkler.jessica@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 25, 2008, EPA published a
proposed rule at 73 FR 71575 to designate two new ocean dredged
material disposal sites near the mouth of the Umpqua River, Oregon and
to withdraw an earlier proposed rule to designate a single site. EPA
received one comment on the proposed rule.
[[Page 18649]]
1. Potentially Affected Persons
Persons potentially affected by this action include those who seek
or might seek permits or approval by EPA to dispose of dredged material
into ocean waters pursuant to the Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act, as amended (MPRSA), 33 U.S.C. 1401 to 1445. EPA's
action would be relevant to persons, including organizations and
government bodies seeking to dispose of dredged material in ocean
waters offshore of the Umpqua River, Oregon. Currently, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) would be most affected by this action.
Potentially affected categories and persons include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially regulated
Category persons
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Government................ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil
Works Projects, and other Federal
Agencies.
Industry and General Public....... Port Authorities, Marinas and
Harbors, Shipyards and Marine
Repair Facilities, Berth Owners.
State, local and tribal Governments owning and/or
governments. responsible for ports, harbors, and/
or berths, Government agencies
requiring disposal of dredged
material associated with public
works projects.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding persons likely to be affected by this
action. For any questions regarding the applicability of this action to
a particular person, please refer to the contact person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
2. Background
a. History of Disposal Sites Offshore of the Umpqua River, Oregon
Two ocean dredged material disposal sites, an Interim Site and an
Adjusted Site, were formerly used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) for the disposal of sediments dredged from the Umpqua River
navigation project. An ``Interim Site'' was included in the list of
approved ocean disposal sites for dredged material in the Federal
Register in 1977 (42 FR 2461), a status superseded by later statutory
changes to the MPRSA. A realignment of the approach channel to the
Umpqua River estuary re-routed the navigation channel over the Interim
Site so that in 1991 an Adjusted Site was selected by the Corps
pursuant to Section 103 of the MPRSA. That authority allows the Corps
to select a site for disposal when a site has not been designated.
Selection of the Adjusted Site was intended to reduce potential hazards
associated with navigational conflicts in the channel and associated
with mounding of dredged material at the Interim Site. The selection of
the Adjusted Site was also intended to increase long-term disposal site
capacity near the mouth of the Umpqua River. EPA concurred on the
selection of the Adjusted Site and approved the Corps' request to
continue to use the site through the end of the 2008 dredging season.
The Adjusted Site is not a suitable candidate for designation by EPA
pursuant to section 102 of the MPRSA because use of the Adjusted Site
resulted in mounding that severely limited site capacity. In 1996,
shoaling and breaking waves associated with mounding at the Adjusted
Site were reported. Subsequently a site utilization study was conducted
by the Corps in 1998. That study found evidence of mounding sufficient
to warrant serious concern regarding impact on the wave environment
near the Umpqua River entrance channel. To address that concern the
volume of dredged material placed at the Adjusted Site was reduced from
an average annual volume of 188,000 cubic yards (cy) prior to 1999 to
an average annual volume of 108,000 cy from 1999 to 2007. EPA
determined that alternatives to the Adjusted Site would be needed for
long-term disposal capacity near the mouth of the Umpqua River.
b. Location and Configuration of Umpqua River Ocean Dredged Material
Disposal Sites
This action finalizes the withdrawal of the rule the Agency
proposed on October 2, 1991, at 56 FR. 49858, to designate an Umpqua
River site, and finalizes the designation of two Umpqua River ocean
dredged material sites to the north and south, respectively, of the
mouth of the Umpqua River. The coordinates for the two sites are listed
below and the figure below shows the location of the two Umpqua River
ocean dredged material disposal sites (Umpqua River ODMD Sites or
Sites). The configuration of the Sites is expected to allow dredged
material disposed in shallower portions of each Site to naturally
disperse into the littoral zone without creating mounding conditions
that could contribute to adverse impacts to navigation. This will allow
EPA to manage the Sites to keep as much material disposed at the Sites
as possible in the active littoral drift area to augment shoreline
building processes.
The coordinates for the two Umpqua River ODMD Sites are, in North
American Datum 83 (NAD 83).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Umpqua ODMD site South Umpqua ODMD site
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
43[deg]41[min]23.09[sec] N., 124[deg]14[min]20.28[sec] 43[deg]39[min]32.31[sec] N., 124[deg]14[min]35.60[sec]
W. W.
43[deg]41[min]25.86[sec] N., 124[deg]12[min]54.61[sec] 43[deg]39[min]35.23[sec] N., 124[deg]13[min]11.01[sec]
W. W.
43[deg]40[min]43.62[sec] N., 124[deg]14[min]17.85[sec] 43[deg]38[min]53.08[sec] N., 124[deg]14[min]32.94[sec]
W. W.
43[deg]40[min]46.37[sec] N., 124[deg]12[min]52.74[sec] 43[deg]38[min]55.82[sec] N., 124[deg]13[min]08.36[sec]
W. W.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The two Sites are situated in approximately 30 to 120 feet of water
located to the north and south of the entrance to the Umpqua River on
the southern Oregon Coast (see Figure 1). The dimensions of each of the
Sites are 6,300 by 4,000 feet. Each disposal Site will contain a drop
zone, defined by a 500-foot setback inscribed within all sides of the
boundary of each Site, reducing the permissible disposal area to a zone
5,300 feet long by 3,000 feet wide. The drop zone will ensure that
dredged material initially stays within each Site.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[[Page 18650]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24AP09.053
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
c. Management and Monitoring of the Sites
The final Umpqua River ODMD Sites are expected to receive sediments
dredged by the Corps to maintain the federally authorized navigation
project at the Umpqua River, Oregon and dredged material from other
persons who have obtained a permit for the disposal of dredged material
at the Sites. The ocean dumping regulations do not require a
modification of any existing permits issued before this final action.
All persons using the Sites are required to follow the Site Management
and Monitoring Plan (SMMP) for the Umpqua River ODMD Sites. The SMMP is
available to the public as part of this action. The SMMP includes
management and monitoring requirements to ensure that dredged materials
disposed at the Sites are suitable for disposal in the ocean. The final
SMMP also addresses management of the Sites to ensure adverse mounding
does not occur and to ensure that disposal events are timed to minimize
interference with other uses of ocean waters in the vicinity of the
Sites.
d. MPRSA Criteria
EPA assessed this action against the criteria of the MPRSA, with
particular emphasis on the general and specific regulatory criteria of
40 CFR part 228, to determine that the final site designations
satisfied those criteria.
General Criteria (40 CFR 228.5)
(1) Sites must be selected to minimize interference with other
activities in the marine environment, particularly avoiding areas of
existing fisheries or shellfisheries, and regions of heavy commercial
or recreational navigation (40 CFR 228.5(a)).
EPA reviewed the potential for the Sites to interfere with
navigation, recreation, shellfisheries, aquatic resources, commercial
fisheries, protected geologic features, and cultural and/or
historically significant areas and found low potential for conflicts.
The Sites are located away from the approach to the Umpqua River
entrance channel and are unlikely to cause interference with navigation
near the mouth of the Umpqua River. Commercial crab and salmon fishing
have the potential to take place in the Sites because of overlapping
disposal and fishing seasons, but conflicts are not
[[Page 18651]]
anticipated based on the past history of fishing and disposal
operations in this area. Other recreational users, for example,
surfers, boarders, and divers, may use the near-shore area in the
vicinity of the Sites. EPA does not expect disposal operations at the
Sites to conflict with these recreationists.
(2) Sites must be situated such that temporary perturbations to
water quality or other environmental conditions during initial mixing
caused by disposal operations would be reduced to normal ambient levels
or undetectable contaminant concentrations or effects before reaching
any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known geographically limited
fishery or shellfishery (40 CFR 228.5(b)).
Based on EPA's review of modeling, monitoring data, analysis of
sediment quality, and history of use, no detectable contaminant
concentrations or water quality effects, e.g., suspended solids, would
be expected to reach any beach, shoreline, or other area outside of the
Sites. The drop zones at each of the Sites will help ensure this
criterion is satisfied. All dredged material proposed for disposal will
be evaluated according to the ocean dumping regulations at 40 CFR
227.13 and guidance developed by EPA and the Corps. In general, dredged
material which meets the criteria under 40 CFR 227.13(b) is deemed
environmentally acceptable for ocean dumping without further testing.
Dredged material which does not meet the criteria of 40 CFR 227.13(b)
must be further tested as required by 40 CFR 227.13(c). Suitable
material can be disposed at the Sites. Modeling work performed by the
Corps at the Umpqua River demonstrates that water column turbidity, a
temporary perturbation during disposal, would be expected to dissipate
for an anticipated 97% of the coarser material within a few minutes of
disposal. The remaining 3% of the material, which would be classified
as fine-grained, would be expected to dissipate within a half hour.
Over time, some of the suitable disposed material would be expected to
migrate into the littoral system, and potentially to coastal
shorelines. Bottom movement of material, based on historic trends near
the mouth of the Umpqua River, is expected to show a net movement to
the north at the depth of the disposal Sites with rapid dispersion
after movement.
(3) If Site designation studies show that any interim disposal
sites do not meet the site selection criteria, use of such sites shall
be terminated as soon as any alternate site can be designated (40 CFR
228.5(c)).
EPA's recent final rule at 73 FR 74983 (December 10, 2008) repealed
obsolete regulations under the MPRSA regarding interim ocean dumping
sites and interim ocean dumping criteria. EPA stated in the proposed
rule that the use of the Interim Site near the Umpqua River Sites was
terminated upon selection of the 103-selected site, the Adjusted Site,
by the Corps. However, the category of ``interim site'' has now been
removed from the ocean dumping regulations.
(4) The sizes of disposal sites will be limited in order to
localize for identification and control any immediate adverse impacts,
and to permit the implementation of effective monitoring and
surveillance to prevent adverse long-range impacts. Size,
configuration, and location are to be determined as part of the
disposal site evaluation (40 CFR 228.5(d)).
EPA sized the final Sites to meet this criterion. The Sites tend to
be moderately dispersive in the near-shore area and less dispersive
farther from shore. The Sites were designed to be large enough to
minimize the potential for adverse mounding and to allow for a minimum
twenty-year capacity. Effective monitoring of the Sites is necessary
and annual bathymetric surveys are required for each Site. Those
surveys are expected to be used to document the fate of the dredged
material disposed at the Sites and to provide information for active
management of the Sites.
(5) EPA will, wherever feasible, designate ocean dumping sites
beyond the edge of the continental shelf and other such sites where
historical disposal has occurred (40 CFR 228.5(e)).
The Sites are located near where historic disposal occurred with
only minimal impact to the environment. Locations off the continental
shelf in the Pacific Ocean as a general rule are inhabited by stable
benthic and pelagic ecosystems on steeper gradients that are not well
adapted to the type of frequent disturbance events that are typical of
dredged material disposal in ocean waters. Monitoring and surveillance
of these Sites do not pose the challenges inherent in locations beyond
the edge of the continental shelf. Material disposed at a location
beyond the continental shelf would not be available to the littoral
system. The loss of material would potentially have a negative impact
on the mass balance of the system with a resulting negative impact on
erosion/accretion patterns along this limited area of coastline near
the Umpqua River.
Specific Criteria (40 CFR 228.6)
(1) Geographical Position, Depth of Water, Bottom Topography and
Distance from Coast (40 CFR 228.6(a)(1)).
The geographical position, including the depth, bottom topography
and distance from the coastline in the vicinity of the Sites will not
cause adverse effects to the marine environment. Based on EPA's
understanding of currents at the Sites and the influence of those
currents on the movement of material in the area, there is a high
likelihood that much of the material disposed at the Sites will be
transported to the littoral sediment circulation system. Limited
onshore transport of material disposed of at the Sites is expected
because of the nature of the prevailing currents and wave transport in
the vicinity of the Sites. Net predicted material transport at the
Sites is southward in the summer months and northward during the
remainder of the year. These transport mechanisms are expected to move
material into the active littoral drift area and to significantly
decrease or eliminate mounding as an issue for disposal of dredged
material near the mouth of the Umpqua River. This movement is expected
to allow for long-term disposal without creation of adverse mounding
conditions at either of the Sites.
To help avoid adverse mounding at the Sites, the site management
strategy will include placing the majority of dredged material within
drop zones at each Site and in shallower portions of the Sites closer
to shore where the material can return to the regional littoral
sediment system. Disposal runs will be managed to avoid multiple dumps
in any location to further minimize mounding. Management may include
establishing ``cells'' along the nearshore portions of each Site and
assigning numbers of ``dumps'' to each cell to minimize material
accumulation and avoid excessive or persistent mounding. Disposal will
also alternate as necessary between the two Sites to allow for maximum
dispersal of material and minimal impact to each Site.
(2) Location in Relation to Breeding, Spawning, Nursery, Feeding,
or Passage Areas of Living Resources in Adult or Juvenile Phases (40
CFR 228.6(a)(2)).
The Sites are not located in exclusive breeding, spawning, nursery,
feeding or passage areas for adult or juvenile phases of living
resources. Near the Sites, a variety of pelagic and demersal fish
species, as well as shellfish, are found. Modeling of the water column
over the Sites indicates that turbidity from a disposal event is
expected to dissipate rapidly and consequently avoidance behavior by
any species in the Sites or in the surrounding area at
[[Page 18652]]
the time of a disposal event would be short-term.
(3) Location in Relation to Beaches and Other Amenity Areas (40 CFR
228.6(a)(3)).
The Sites, although located in close proximity to the Umpqua River
navigation channel, are located a sufficient distance offshore to avoid
adverse impacts to beaches and other amenity areas. Transportation of
dredges or barges to and from the Sites to dispose of dredged material
will be coordinated to avoid disturbance of other activities near the
Umpqua River entrance channel. Dredged material disposed of at the
Sites is expected to disperse into the littoral system, with a possible
positive effect over time of reducing erosion of coastal beaches. There
are no rocks or pinnacles in the vicinity of either Site. The Oregon
Dunes National Recreation Area, a part of the Siuslaw National Forest,
is located on the beach adjacent to the South ODMD Site, but does not
extend into the water. Use of the South ODMD Site is not expected to
interfere with any upland uses.
The ocean area north and south of the south jetty is utilized for
wave-dependent near-shore recreation, such as surfing, diving,
kayaking, boogie-boarding, skim boarding, and body surfing. While some
of these uses may overlap with the Sites, resulting in temporary usage
conflict during disposal activities, the SMMP contains provisions to
minimize or avoid such conflicts. The Sites are sized and located to
provide long-term capacity for the disposal of dredged material without
causing any impacts to the wave environment at, or near, the Sites.
Site monitoring and adaptive management are components of the final
SMMP.
(4) Types and Quantities of Wastes Proposed to be Disposed of, and
Proposed Methods of Release, including Methods of Packing the Waste, if
any (40 CFR 228.6(a)(4)).
Dredged material found suitable for ocean disposal pursuant to the
regulatory criteria for dredged material or characterized by chemical
and biological testing and found suitable for disposal into ocean
waters will be the only material allowed to be disposed of at the
Sites. No material defined as ``waste'' under the MPRSA will be allowed
to be disposed of at the Sites. The dredged material to be disposed of
at the Sites will be predominantly marine sand, far removed from known
sources of contamination. With respect to methods of releasing material
at the Sites, material will be released just below the surface and the
disposal vessel will be required to be under power and to slowly
transit the disposal location during disposal. This method of release
is expected to spread material at the Sites to minimize mounding and to
minimize impacts to the benthic community and to species at the Sites
at the time of a disposal event.
(5) Feasibility of Surveillance and Monitoring (40 CFR
228.6(a)(5)).
EPA expects monitoring and surveillance at the Sites to be feasible
and readily performed from small surface research vessels. The Sites
are accessible for bathymetric and side-scan sonar surveys. At a
minimum, annual bathymetric surveys will be conducted at each of the
Sites to confirm that no unacceptable mounding is taking place within
the Sites or in their immediate vicinity. Routine monitoring will
concentrate on examining how the distribution of material in the near-
shore portions of the Sites is working to minimize mounding of material
and how the distribution of material augments littoral processes.
Monitoring will also examine the distribution of material in the deeper
portions of the Sites to avoid or minimize mounding.
(6) Dispersal, Horizontal Transport and Vertical Mixing
Characteristics of the Area, Including Prevailing Current Direction and
Velocity, if any (40 CFR 228.6(a)(6)).
Dispersal, horizontal transport and vertical mixing characteristics
of the area at and in the vicinity of the Sites indicate that the
marine sands and fluvial gravels from the Umpqua River distribute away
from the river mouth rapidly. The beaches do not show significant
accretion or loss, suggesting the system is in equilibrium and that
littoral transport is in balance. The bottom current records suggest a
bias in transport to the north. Fine grained material tends to remain
in suspension and to experience rapid offshore transport compared to
other sediment sizes. Sediment transport of sand-sized or coarser
material tends to move directly as bedload, but is occasionally
suspended by wave action near the seafloor. The final Sites are not
expected to change these characteristics.
(7) Existence and Effects of Current and Previous Discharges and
Dumping in the Area (including Cumulative Effects) (40 CFR
228.6(a)(7)).
The two Sites have not been used before for any type of disposal
activity. Disposal of dredged material is not expected to result in
unacceptable environmental degradation at the Sites or in the vicinity
of the Sites. The final SMMP includes requirements, including
bathymetric surveys and preventative steps, for managing the Sites to
address potential mounding issues.
(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 (40 CFR
228.6(a)(8)).
The Sites are not expected to interfere with shipping, fishing,
recreation or other legitimate uses of the ocean. Disposals at the new
Sites will be managed according to the final SMMP to minimize
interference with other legitimate uses of the ocean through careful
timing and staggering of disposals in the Sites. Commercial and
recreational fishing and commercial navigation are the primary uses for
which such timing will be needed. No plans for mineral extraction
offshore of the Umpqua River are planned or proposed for this area.
Wave-dependent near shore recreation may possibly overlap with the
Sites resulting in temporary usage conflict during disposal activities
but the Sites will be managed to minimize such potential conflicts. Use
of the Sites is not expected to change the wave conditions for any
recreational uses. Two wave energy projects are in the preliminary
permitting phases near the Sites. EPA would expect to revise the SMMP
if necessary in the event the proposed wave energy projects moved
forward and potential conflicts seemed likely. Fish and shellfish
culture operations are not under consideration for the area. There are
no known areas of scientific importance in the vicinity of the Sites.
(9) The Existing Water Quality and Ecology of the Sites as
Determined by Available Data or Trend Assessment of Baseline Surveys
(40 CFR 228.6(a)(9)).
EPA did not identify any adverse water quality impacts from ocean
disposal of dredged material at the Sites based on water and sediment
quality analyses conducted in the study area of the Sites and based on
experience with past disposals near the mouth of the Umpqua River.
Fisheries and benthic data show the ecology of the area to be that of a
mobile sand community typical of the Oregon Coast.
(10) Potentiality for the Development or Recruitment of Nuisance
Species in the Disposal Site (40 CFR 228.6(a)(10))
Nuisance species, considered as any undesirable organism not
previously existing at a location, have not been observed at, or in the
vicinity of, the Sites. Material expected to be disposed at the Sites
will be uncontaminated marine sands similar to the sediment present at
the Sites. Some fine-grained material, finer than natural background,
may also be disposed. While this finer-
[[Page 18653]]
grained material could have the potential to attract nuisance species
to the Sites, no such recruitment occurred in the past at either the
Interim or the Adjusted Site. The final SMMP includes specific
biological monitoring requirements, which will act to identify any
nuisance species and allowing EPA to direct special studies and/or
operational changes to address the issue if it arises.
(11) Existence at or in Close Proximity to the Site of any
Significant Natural or Cultural Feature of Historical Importance (40
CFR 228.6(a)(11))
No significant cultural features have been identified at, or in the
vicinity of, the Sites. EPA coordinated with Oregon's State Historic
Preservation Officer and with Tribes in the vicinity of the Sites to
identify any cultural features but none were identified. No shipwrecks
were observed or documented within the Sites or their immediate
vicinity.
3. Response to Comments
EPA received one indirect comment on the proposed rule. The
commenter objected generally to any dumping in the ocean and criticized
shipping companies for dumping rather than recycling. EPA's action
designates sites for the disposal of dredged material meeting the ocean
dumping criteria for environmental acceptability in the ocean
environment. No other material is allowed at these Sites. The Sites
will not be available to users for any purpose other than the disposal
of dredged material meeting the regulatory criteria for suitability.
4. Environmental Statutory Review--National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA); Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA); Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA); Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA); Endangered Species Act
(ESA); National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
(1) NEPA
Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as
amended (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 to 4370f, requires that Federal agencies
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for major federal
actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
NEPA does not apply to EPA designations of ocean disposal sites under
the MPRSA because the courts have exempted EPA's actions under the
MPRSA from the procedural requirements of NEPA through the functional
equivalence doctrine. EPA has, by policy, determined that the
preparation of non-EIS NEPA documents for certain EPA regulatory
actions, including actions under the MPRSA, is appropriate. EPA's
``Notice of Policy and Procedures for Voluntary Preparation of NEPA
Documents,'' (Voluntary NEPA Policy), 63 FR 58045, (October 29, 1998),
sets out both the policy and procedures EPA uses when preparing such
environmental review documents. EPA's primary voluntary NEPA document
for designating the Sites is the final Umpqua River, Oregon Ocean
Dredged Material Disposal Sites Evaluation Study and Environmental
Assessment, April 2009 (EA), jointly prepared by EPA and the Corps. The
final EA and its Technical Appendices, which are part of the docket for
this action, provide the threshold environmental review for designation
of the two Sites. The information from the final EA is used
extensively, above, in the discussion of the ocean dumping criteria.
(2) MSA and MMPA
In the spring of 2008, EPA initiated consultation with the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) concerning essential fish habitat and
protected marine mammals. EPA prepared an essential fish habitat (EFH)
assessment pursuant to Section 305(b), 16 U.S.C. 1855(b)(2), of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, as amended (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801 to 1891d. NMFS
reviewed EPA's EFH assessment and ESA Biological Assessment for
purposes of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended
(MMPA), 16 U.S.C. 1361 to 1389.
With respect to marine mammals, NMFS found that all potential
adverse effects to ESA-listed marine mammals are discountable or
insignificant. Those findings are documented in Appendix B. Marine
Mammal Determinations of the Biological Opinion issued by NMFS to EPA
on March 20, 2009. With respect to EFH, NMFS found that disposal of
dredge material, an indirect effect of EPA's action to designate the
two Umpqua River ODMD Sites, will affect suspended sediment levels over
background and temporarily decrease food resources within the Sites
during disposal events. However, these effects are not expected to
functionally change or alter the habitat or habitat value of designated
EFH at or in the vicinity of the Sites. NMFS concluded that safe
passage of the EFH managed species will not be functionally changed by
this action or by subsequent disposal at the Sites. These findings are
documented in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act section of the NMFS Biological Opinion. NMFS included a
``conservation recommendation'' to develop a plan for monitoring fish
interactions with the disposed dredged material at the Sites. EPA will
respond in a separate written response to NMFS' recommendation.
(3) CZMA
EPA initiated consultation with the State of Oregon on coastal zone
management issues in June of 2008. EPA prepared a consistency
determination for the Oregon Ocean and Coastal Management Program
(OCMP) to meet the requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act, as
amended, (CZMA), 16 U.S.C. 1451 to 1465, and submitted that
determination formally to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation
and Development (DLCD) for review on November 12, 2008. DLCD published
an initial public notice on the consistency determination on November
14, 2008, and in a notice on December 10, 2008, extended the public
comment period to January 2, 2009. DLCD received one comment letter
from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) expressing
support for the designation of the Umpqua River Sites and supporting
ocean disposal of dredged material as the best alternative. ODFW did
express concern with potential impacts to habitat near the mouth of the
Umpqua River and expressed support for ``pinpoint dumping'' over
``uniform placement'' of disposal material at the Sites.
DLCD concurred on EPA's determination of consistency with one
condition. The condition calls for the final SMMP to assure that
monitoring measures for the Umpqua River Sites are reasonably likely to
identify significant unanticipated adverse affects on renewable marine
resources, biological diversity of marine life and functional integrity
of the marine ecosystem at the Sites, and further asks that the SMMP
include adaptive management measures to avoid significant impairment of
the Sites and significant decreases in abundance of commercial or
recreationally caught species from direct or indirect effects on
important or essential habitat at the Sites. The final SMMP for the
Umpqua River Sites provides the assurances and adaptive management
measures requested by DLCD. DLCD responded to the ODFW concern about
impacts to habitat by including the condition, above, in its
consistency concurrence. DLCD also noted that ``pinpoint dumping'' has
been replaced with the disposal technique of ``uniform placement.''
DLCD suggested that future site designations include opportunities for
EPA and ODFW to coordinate on issues.
[[Page 18654]]
(4) ESA
EPA initiated informal consultation with NMFS and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service on its action to designate the Umpqua River ODMD Sites
beginning in the spring of 2008. EPA prepared a Biological Assessment
to assess the potential effects of designating the two Umpqua River
Sites on aquatic and wildlife species to determine whether or not its
action might adversely affect species listed as endangered or
threatened and/or adversely modify or destroy their designated critical
habitat. EPA found that its action would not be likely to adversely
affect aquatic or wildlife species listed pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act, as amended (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531 to 1544, or the critical
habitat of such species. EPA found that site designation does not have
a direct impact on any of the identified ESA species but also found
that indirect impacts associated with reasonably foreseeable future
disposal activities had to be considered. These indirect impacts
included a short-term increase in suspended solids and turbidity in the
water column when dredged material was disposed at the new Sites and an
accumulation of material on the ocean floor when material was disposed
at the Sites. EPA concluded that while its action may affect ESA-listed
species, the action would not be likely to adversely affect ESA-listed
species or critical habitat.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) concurred with EPA's
finding that EPA's action to designate the Umpqua River ODMD Sites
would not likely adversely affect listed species or critical habitat.
Consultation with the USFWS for this action was completed on July 25,
2008.
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) did not concur with
EPA's NLAA finding and subsequently prepared a Biological Opinion (BO),
issued March 20, 2009. NMFS concluded that EPA's site designations are
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of Oregon Coast (OC)
coho salmon or Southern Distinct Population Segment (DPS) green
sturgeon and are not likely to destroy or adversely modify designated
or proposed critical habitat. However, NMFS found that the indirect
effects of designating the Umpqua River Sites related to the exposure
fish could experience from the disposal of dredged material could have
consequences for listed fish. Based on NMFS' estimate of ensuing
indirect effects of designating the Sites, NMFS estimated that injury
and death of as many as 990 yearling OC coho salmon and a smaller
number of small sub-adult southern DPS green sturgeon could occur. For
Steller sea lions, blue whales, fin whales, humpback whales, Southern
Resident killer whales, as described in Appendix B to the BO, NMFS
concurred with EPA's determination of NLAA. For Southern Oregon/
Northern California Coasts (SONNC) coho salmon, as described in
Appendix A to the BO, NMFS also concurred with EPA's determination of
NLAA. NMFS found no effect for four species of marine turtles, sperm
whales, and sei whales because NMFS did not anticipate the species
would be present in the action area.
NMFS acknowledged in the BO that EPA's action, designation of the
Umpqua River Sites, does not authorize and will not itself result in
disposal of dredged material. NMFS stated that it does not anticipate
any take will be caused by the designation of the Sites and the
adoption of the SMMP. Consequently, NMFS did not include an incidental
take statement in the BO. Rather, NMFS stated that any further analysis
of the effect of disposal of dredged material at the disposal sites and
issuance of an incidental take statement with reasonable and prudent
measures and non-discretionary terms and conditions to minimize take
would be prepared when a disposal permit is requested by the action
agency. NMFS did include a discretionary conservation recommendation in
the BO seeking a study of fish interactions with disposed material.
Such recommendations are purely advisory in nature. EPA appreciates
that such a study could contribute to the scientific knowledge base but
believes that NMFS, the expert Federal agency on fish behavior, would
be better suited than EPA to carry out such a study.
(5) NHPA
EPA initiated consultation with the State of Oregon's Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) to address National Historic Preservation
Act, as amended (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470 to 470a-2, which requires Federal
agencies to take into account the effect of their actions on districts,
sites, buildings, structures, or objects, included in, or eligible for
inclusion in the National Register. EPA determined that no historic
properties were affected, or would be affected, by designation of the
Sites. EPA did not find any historic properties within the geographic
area of the Sites. This determination was based on an extensive review
of the National Register of Historic Districts in Oregon, the Oregon
National Register list and an assessment of cultural resources near the
Sites. Side scan sonar of the Sites did not reveal the presence of any
shipwrecks or other cultural or historic properties. The SHPO responded
to EPA's determination on September 11, 2008, without objection. The
SHPO clarified on October 13, 2008, that the designation of the Sites
did not require further archeological investigation.
5. Action
EPA designates the Umpqua River Sites as EPA-approved dredged
material ocean disposal sites in this action. The monitoring and
management requirements that will apply to these Sites are described in
the final SMMP. EPA received one comment on the proposed rule from a
commenter who objected to disposing of harmful material in the ocean.
The Sites designated in this action are only available for the disposal
of material deemed suitable for ocean disposal. The designation of
ocean disposal sites for dredged material does not constitute or imply
Corps or EPA approval of open water disposal of dredged material from
any specific project. Before disposal of dredged material at either of
the Umpqua River Sites may commence by any person, EPA and the Corps
must evaluate the proposal according to the ocean dumping regulatory
criteria (40 CFR part 227) and authorize disposal. EPA independently
evaluates proposed dumping in accordance with those criteria pursuant
to 40 CFR part 225. EPA has the right to disapprove of the actual
disposal of dredged material if EPA determines that environmental
requirements under the MPRSA have not been met.
6. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This rule designates two ocean dredged material disposal sites
pursuant to Section 102 of the MPRSA. This rule complies with
applicable executive orders and statutory provisions as follows:
(1) Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735), the Agency must
determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant,'' and
therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive
Order. The Executive Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) 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
[[Page 18655]]
safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2)
create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action
taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the
rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal
or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's
priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. EPA
determined that this final rule is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not
subject to OMB review.
(2) Paperwork Reduction Act
This final action does not impose an information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et
seq., because this rule does not establish or modify any information or
recordkeeping requirements for the regulated community.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing, and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in Title 40 of the CFR are listed in 40 CFR Part 9.
(3) Regulatory Flexibility
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires Federal
agencies 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.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small entities,
small entity is defined as: (1) A small business defined by the Small
Business Administration's size regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a
small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county,
town, school district, or special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. EPA determined that this final action will not
have a significant economic impact on small entities because the final
rule will only have the effect of regulating the location of sites to
be used for the disposal of dredged material in ocean waters. After
considering the economic impacts of this rule, I certify that this
action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
(4) Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, 2 U.S.C.
1531 to 1538, for State, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. This action imposes no new enforceable duty on any State, local
or tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is
not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA.
This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
the UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small government entities. Those
entities are already subject to existing permitting requirements for
the disposal of dredged material in ocean waters.
(5) Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255),
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
various levels of government.'' This rule does not have federalism
implications. It does 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
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132.
Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
(6) Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 because the designation of the two ocean dredged
material disposal Sites will not have a direct effect on Indian Tribes,
on the relationship between the federal government and Indian Tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
federal government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this rule. Although Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this final rule, EPA consulted with tribal officials in the
development of this rule, particularly as the rule relates to potential
impacts to historic or cultural resources.
(7) Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885) as applying only
to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks, such
that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order
has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks. The
action concerns the designation of two ocean dredged material disposal
Sites and only has the effect of providing designated locations to use
for ocean disposal of dredged material pursuant to Section 102(c) of
the MPRSA.
(8) Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355) because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' as defined under Executive Order 12866.
(9) National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C.
272), directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent
[[Page 18656]]
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 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 final action includes environmental monitoring and
measurement as described in EPA's final SMMP. EPA will not require the
use of specific, prescribed analytic methods for monitoring and
managing the designated Sites. The Agency plans to allow the use of any
method, whether it constitutes a voluntary consensus standard or not,
that meets the monitoring and measurement criteria discussed in the
final SMMP.
(10) Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629) establishes federal executive
policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal
agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States. EPA determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. EPA has assessed the overall protectiveness of designating
the disposal Sites against the criteria established pursuant to the
MPRSA to ensure that any adverse impact to the environment will be
mitigated to the greatest extent practicable.
(11) Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (CRA), 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added
by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this
rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House
of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States
prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective thirty days from the date of
publication in the Federal Register.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
Environmental protection, Water pollution control.
Authority: This action is issued under the authority of Section
102 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, as
amended, 33 U.S.C. 1401, 1411, 1412.
Dated: April 9, 2009.
Michelle L. Pirzadeh,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, chapter I, title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 228--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 228 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
0
2. Section 228.15 is amended by adding paragraph (n)(7) to read as
follows:
Sec. 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a final basis.
* * * * *
(n) * * *
(7) Umpqua River, OR--North and South Dredged Material Disposal
Sites.
(i) North Umpqua River Site.
(A) Location: 43[deg]41'23.09'' N, 124[deg]14'20.28'' W;
43[deg]41'25.86'' N, 124[deg]12'54.61'' W; 43[deg]40'43.62'' N,
124[deg]14'17.85'' W; 43[deg]40'46.37'' N, 124[deg]12'52.74'' W.
(B) Size: Approximately 1.92 kilometers long and 1.22 kilometers
wide, with a drop zone which is defined as a 500-foot setback inscribed
within all sides of the site boundary, reducing the permissible
disposal area to a zone 5,300 feet long by 3,000 feet wide.
(C) Depth: Ranges from approximately 9 to 37 meters.
(D) Primary Use: Dredged material.
(E) Period of Use: Continuing Use.
(F) Restrictions: (1) Disposal shall be limited to dredged material
determined to be suitable for ocean disposal according to 40 CFR
227.13, from the Umpqua River navigation channel and adjacent areas;
(2) Disposal shall be managed by the restrictions and requirements
contained in the currently-approved Site Management and Monitoring Plan
(SMMP);
(3) Monitoring, as specified in the SMMP, is required.
(ii) South Umpqua River Site.
(A) Location: 43[deg]39'32.31'' N, 124[deg]14'35.60'' W;
43[deg]39'35.23'' N, 124[deg]13'11.01'' W; 43[deg]38'53.08'' N,
124[deg]14'32.94'' W; 43[deg]38'55.82'' N, 124[deg]13'08.36'' W.
(B) Size: Approximately 1.92 kilometers long and 1.22 kilometers
wide, with a drop zone which is defined as a 500-foot setback inscribed
within all sides of the site boundary, reducing the permissible
disposal area to a zone 5,300 feet long by 3,000 feet wide.
(C) Depth: Ranges from approximately 9 to 37 meters.
(D) Primary Use: Dredged material.
(E) Period of Use: Continuing Use.
(F) Restrictions: (1) Disposal shall be limited to dredged material
determined to be suitable for ocean disposal according to 40 CFR
227.13, from the Umpqua River navigation channel and adjacent areas;
(2) Disposal shall be managed by the restrictions and requirements
contained in the currently-approved Site Management and Monitoring Plan
(SMMP);
(3) Monitoring, as specified in the SMMP, is required.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-9434 Filed 4-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P