Preliminary Listing of an Additional Water to Wisconsin's 2008 List of Waters Under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, 22589-22591 [2010-9984]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 82 / Thursday, April 29, 2010 / Notices
Persons unable to file electronically
should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
This filing is accessible on-line at
https://www.ferc.gov, using the
‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for
review in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room in Washington, DC.
There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the
Web site that enables subscribers to
receive e-mail notification when a
document is added to a subscribed
docket(s). For assistance with any FERC
Online service, please e-mail
FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or call
(866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call
(202) 502–8659.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time
on April 28, 2010.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–9935 Filed 4–28–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Project No. 13328–001—Alaska Snyder
Falls Creek Project]
Cordova Electric Cooperative, Inc.;
Notice of Proposed Restricted Service
List for a Programmatic Agreement for
Managing Properties Included in or
Eligible for Inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
April 21, 2010.
Rule 2010 of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission’s (Commission)
Rules of Practice and Procedure
provides that, to eliminate unnecessary
expense or improve administrative
efficiency, the Secretary may establish a
restricted service list for a particular
phase or issue in a proceeding.1 The
restricted service list should contain the
names of persons on the service list
who, in the judgment of the decisional
authority establishing the list, are active
participants with respect to the phase or
issue in the proceeding for which the
list is established.
The Commission staff is consulting
with the Alaska State Historic
Preservation Officer (hereinafter,
‘‘Alaska SHPO’’) and the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation,
pursuant to section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act 2 and its
1 18
2 16
CFR 385.2010.
U.S.C. 470 (2006) et seq.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:19 Apr 28, 2010
implementing regulations,3 to develop
and execute a programmatic agreement
for managing properties included in, or
eligible for inclusion in, the National
Register of Historic Places at the Snyder
Falls Creek Project.
The programmatic agreement, when
executed by the Commission and the
Alaska SHPO, would satisfy the
Commission’s section 106
responsibilities for all individual
undertakings carried out in accordance
with the license until the license expires
or is terminated (36 CFR 800.13[e]). The
Commission’s responsibilities, pursuant
to section 106 for the Snyder Falls Creek
Project, would be fulfilled through the
programmatic agreement, which the
Commission staff proposes to develop in
consultation with the interested
participants listed below. The executed
programmatic agreement would be
incorporated into any order issuance.
Cordova Electric Cooperative, Inc., as
applicant for the Snyder Falls Creek
Project, is invited to participate in the
consultation to develop the
programmatic agreement. For the
purpose of commenting on the
programmatic agreement, we propose to
restrict the service list for the proposed
project as follows:
John Fowler, Executive Director,
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, The Old Post Office
Building, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Suite 803, Washington, DC
20004.
Judith Bittner, SHPO, Office of History
& Archaeology, 550 W 7th Avenue,
Suite 1310, Anchorage, AK 99501.
Clay Koplin, CEO, Cordova Electric
Cooperative, Inc., P.O. Box 20,
Cordova, AK 99574–0020.
Roy Totemoff, President, Tatitlek
Corporation, 561 E. 36 Avenue,
Anchorage, AK 99503.
Jason Borer, Eyak Corporation, P.O. Box
340, Cordova, AK 99574.
David Phillips, Chugach Alaska
Corporation, 3800 Centerpoint Drive,
Suite 601, Anchorage, AK 99503.
Bruce Cain, Native Village of Eyak, P.O.
Box 1388, Cordova, AK 99574.
Representative, U.S. Forest Service,
Chugach National Forest, 3301 C
Street, Suite 300, Anchorage, AK
99503.
Any person on the official service list
for the above-captioned proceeding may
request inclusion on the restricted
service list, or may request that a
restricted service list not be established,
by filing a motion to that effect within
15 days of this notice date. In a request
for inclusion, please identify the reason
or reasons why there is an interest to be
3 36
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
CFR part 800 (2009).
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22589
included. Also, please identify any
concerns about historic properties,
including properties of traditional
religious and cultural importance to a
federally recognized tribe or tribal
corporation that has an affiliation to the
area. If historic properties are identified
within the motion, please use a separate
page, and label it NON–PUBLIC
INFORMATION.
The original and eight copies of any
such motion must be filed with
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, and must be
served on each person whose name
appears on the official service list.
Please put the following on the first
page: Snyder Falls Creek Project No.
13328–001. Motions may be filed
electronically via the Internet in lieu of
paper. The Commission strongly
encourages electronic filings. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission’s Web
site (https://www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘eFiling’’ link.
If no such motions are filed, the
restricted service list will be effective at
the end of the 15 day period. Otherwise,
a further notice will be issued ruling on
any motion or motions filed within the
15 day period.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–9933 Filed 4–28–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–9143–4]
Preliminary Listing of an Additional
Water to Wisconsin’s 2008 List of
Waters Under Section 303(d) of the
Clean Water Act
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
SUMMARY: This notice announces the
availability of EPA’s decision
identifying one water quality limited
waterbody and associated pollutants in
Wisconsin to be listed pursuant to the
Clean Water Act Section 303(d)(2), and
requests public comment. Section
303(d)(2) requires that States submit and
EPA approve or disapprove lists of
waters for which existing technologybased pollution controls are not
stringent enough to attain or maintain
State water quality standards and for
which total maximum daily loads
(TMDLs) must be prepared.
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
22590
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 82 / Thursday, April 29, 2010 / Notices
On January 26, 2010, EPA partially
approved and partially disapproved
Wisconsin’s submittal. Specifically,
EPA approved Wisconsin’s listing of
waters, associated pollutants, and
associated priority rankings. EPA
disapproved Wisconsin’s decision not to
list one water quality limited segment
and associated pollutant. EPA identified
this additional water body and
unidentified pollutants along with
priority rankings for inclusion on the
2008 Section 303(d) list.
EPA is providing the public the
opportunity to review its decision to
add the water and unidentified
pollutant to Wisconsin’s 2008 Section
303(d) list, as required by EPA’s Public
Participation regulations. EPA will
consider public comments in reaching
its final decision on the additional water
body and pollutants identified for
inclusion on Wisconsin’s final list.
DATES: Comments on this document
must be received in writing by June 1,
2010.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on
today’s notice may be submitted to
Tinka G. Hyde, Director, Water Division,
Attn: Illinois 303 (d) list, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. As an alternative, EPA
will accept comments electronically.
Comments should be sent to the
following Internet E-mail Address:
keclik.donna@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donna Keclik, Watersheds and
Wetlands Branch, at the EPA address
noted above or by telephone at (312)
886–6766. Some additional information
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
reg5oh2o/wshednps/notices.htm.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
requires that each State identify those
waters for which existing technologybased pollution controls are not
stringent enough to attain or maintain
State water quality standards. EPA’s
Water Quality Planning and
Management regulations include
requirements related to the
implementation of Section 303(d) of the
CWA (40 CFR 130.7). The regulations
require States to identify water quality
limited waters still requiring TMDLs
every two years. The lists of waters still
needing TMDLs must also include
priority rankings and must identify the
waters targeted for TMDL development
during the next two years (40 CFR
130.7).
Consistent with EPA’s regulations,
Wisconsin submitted to EPA its listing
decision under Section 303(d)(2) on
August 1, 2008. On January 26, 2010,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:19 Apr 28, 2010
Jkt 220001
EPA approved Wisconsin’s listing of
waters and associated priority rankings
and disapproved Wisconsin’s decisions
not to list one water quality limited
segment and associated pollutants,
along with priority rankings for
inclusion on the 2008 Section 303(d)
list. More specifically, EPA disapproved
Wisconsin’s decision not to include
Musky Bay on the 2008 list for
impairment because this water does not
meet Wisconsin’s narrative standard set
out in Wisconsin Administrative Code
NR 102.04 (1)(b), which provides that
‘‘Floating or submerged debris, oil, scum
or other material shall not be present in
such amounts as to interfere with public
rights in waters of the State.’’ As a result
of EPA’s disapproval decision, EPA is
proposing to place Musky Bay on
Wisconsin’s 303(d) list. The list of
waterbody/pollutants that EPA has
approved and EPA’s decision document
are available at https://www.epa.gov/
reg5oh2o/wshednps/notices.htm.
During its review of WDNR’s
proposed 303(d) list, EPA reviewed data
available to the State that indicated the
impairment of Musky Bay due to
excessive nutrients. After reviewing the
existing and readily available data, U.S.
EPA has determined, for reasons
discussed below, that Musky Bay
should be included in Category 5A of
Wisconsin’s 2008 list of impaired
waters.
During the 2008 public notice and
comment period, WDNR received
comments suggesting that the State
should list Musky Bay for impairment
due to the presence of excessive
nutrients, including phosphorus,
elevated pH values, as well as the
degradation of the Bay due to large
floating algal mats and the presence of
an invasive plant species known as
Curly Leaf Pondweed (Potomogeton
cripsus).
The State determined that it would
not list the Bay because Wisconsin does
not have numeric criterian for
phosphorus and WDNR did not believe
that the available data provided a
compelling rationale for listing. These
data included water samples taken at
four locations in the Bay. These
locations are (1) MB–1, a deep hole in
the Bay; (2) MB–2, the east outlet from
the cranberry bog operation (an inlet to
the lake); (3) MB–2a, the west outlet
from the cranberry bog operation (an
inlet to the lake); and (4) MB–4, the
north shore line of the Bay.
After reviewing these data, WDNR
determined that samples taken only
from MB–1, the deep hole, were
representative of the Bay because this
location was centrally located and
arguably provided a natural average of
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the various influences on the Bay’s
water quality, as represented by the
other sample locations. After isolating
the data for MB–4, WDNR concluded
that sampling here showed lower
phosphorous levels than at any other
site, and that the Bay was not impaired
due to phosphorus. WDNR stated that it
will continue to monitor phosphorous
levels in the Bay and will reconsider an
impairment determination on the basis
of phosphorus in 2010. Further, WDNR
noted that the presence of curly leaf
pondweed as an invasive aquatic
species was not a sufficient basis for
making an impairment determination.
While U.S. EPA agrees with the State
that additional sampling is needed to
make an impairment decision with
regard to phosphorus, after reviewing
available data, U.S. EPA determined
that the Bay is impaired based on
Wisconsin’s narrative standard Wisc.
Admin. Code NR 102.04 (1)(b), which
provides that ‘‘Floating or submerged
debris, oil, scum or other material shall
not be present in such amounts as to
interfere with public rights in waters of
the State’’ and thus the Bay should be
listed as a Category 5A water.
In making its listing proposal, U.S.
EPA reviewed the information
submitted during the State’s public
comment period and held subsequent
discussions with WDNR staff. WDNR
supplied a copy of a letter dated
November 8, 2007, from WDNR to Lac
Courte Oreilles Lake Association stating
that ‘‘there are very significant water
quality concerns for Musky Bay and that
the cranberry bogs’ discharge of
nutrients is a major source of the
problems.’’ WDNR further stated in the
letter that there are two suggestions that
could be considered to help partially
address the water quality/water use
concerns:
1. Navigational corridors through the dense
beds of aquatic plants could be maintained
by mechanical harvesting or possibly
herbicide application. This would improve
access to the main lake by Musky Bay
property owners and improve access to the
bay by other lake users. Implementing this
activity would be likely to enhance your
argument that the public use of the bay is
currently limited and costs are being
incurred to address the limitation. * * *
2. Sources of nutrient loading other than
the cranberry bogs could be assessed for
application of nutrient loading reductions
practices. Other agricultural areas and
residential areas in Musky Bay watershed
have been estimated to be the source of about
12% of the annual phosphorus load to the
bay (Lac Courte Oreilles Conservation
Department). * * * 1
1 See Letter from Tom Aartila, Upper Chippewa
Basin Watershed Supervisor, WDNR, to Messrs.
Siverton and Umland, November 8, 2007, attached
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 82 / Thursday, April 29, 2010 / Notices
Based on the information submitted,
including the documented impaired use
of the Bay for boating, as evidenced by
WDNR’s acknowledgement of the need
to cut navigational corridors through the
heavy algal mats, U.S. EPA is proposing
to list Musky Bay on the 2008
Wisconsin’s 303(d) list in Category 5A.
EPA solicits public comment on its
identification of one additional water
and associated pollutant Musky Bay,
pollutant unidentified for inclusion on
Wisconsin’s 2008 Section 303(d) list.
Dated: April 15, 2010.
Timothy C. Henry,
Acting Director, Water Division,
EPA Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2010–9984 Filed 4–28–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Submission for OMB Review
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission.
ACTION: Final notice of submission for
OMB review.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Commission announces that it is
submitting to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) a request for an
extension without change of the existing
information collection request described
below.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before June 1, 2010.
ADDRESSES: A copy of this ICR and
applicable supporting documentation
submitted to OMB for review may be
obtained from: Erin N. Norris, Senior
Attorney, (202) 663–4876, Office of
Legal Counsel, 131 M Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20507. Comments on
this final notice must be submitted to
Chad Lallemand in the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, 725
17th Street, NW., Room 10235, New
Executive Office Building, Washington,
DC 20503 or electronically mailed to
Chad_A._Lallemand@omb.eop.gov.
Comments should also be sent to
Stephen Llewellyn, Executive Officer,
Executive Secretariat, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission,
131 M Street, NE., Suite 6NE03F,
Washington, DC 20507. Written
comments of six or fewer pages may be
to e-mail message from Craig P. Roesler, WDNR to
Donna Keclik, U.S. EPA, April 7, 2009.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:19 Apr 28, 2010
Jkt 220001
faxed to the Executive Secretariat at
(202) 663–4114. (There is no toll free
FAX number.) Receipt of facsimile
transmittals will not be acknowledged,
except that the sender may request
confirmation of receipt by calling the
Executive Secretariat staff at (202) 663–
4070 (voice) or (202) 663–4074 (TTY).
(These are not toll free numbers.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas J. Schlageter, Assistant Legal
Counsel, (202) 663–4668, or Erin N.
Norris, Senior Attorney, (202) 663–4876,
Office of Legal Counsel, 131 M Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20507. Copies of
this notice are available in the following
alternate formats: Large print, braille,
electronic computer disk, and audiotape. Requests for this notice in an
alternative format should be made to the
Publications Center at 1–800–699–3362
(voice), 1–800–800–3302 (TTY), or 703–
821–2098 (FAX—this is not a toll free
number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice
that EEOC would be submitting this
request was published in the Federal
Register on February 22, 2010, allowing
for a 60-day public comment period. No
comments were received.
Overview of This Information
Collection
Type of Review: Extension—No
change.
Collection title: Recordkeeping under
Title VII and the ADA.
OMB number: 3046–0040.
Agency Form No.: None.
Frequency of Report: Other.
Type of Respondent: Employers with
15 or more employees.
Description of affected public:
Employers with 15 or more employees
are subject to Title VII and the ADA.
Number of responses: 899,580.
Reporting hours: One.
Federal cost: None.
Abstract: Section 709(c) of Title VII,
42 U.S.C. 2000e–8(c) and section 107(a)
of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. 12117(a) require
the Commission to establish regulations
pursuant to which employers subject to
those Acts shall make and preserve
certain records to assist the EEOC in
assuring compliance with the Acts’
nondiscrimination in employment
requirements. This is a recordkeeping
requirement. Any of the records
maintained which are subsequently
disclosed to the EEOC during an
investigation are protected from public
disclosure by the confidentiality
provisions of section 706(b) and 709(e)
of Title VII which are also incorporated
by reference into the ADA at section
107(a).
Burden statement: The estimated
number of respondents is approximately
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22591
899,580 employers. The recordkeeping
requirement does not require reports or
the creation of new documents, but
merely requires retention of documents
that the employer has made or kept.
Thus, the burden imposed by these
regulations is minimal. The burden is
estimated to be less than one hour per
employer.
OMB is particularly interested in
comments which:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
Commission’s functions, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
Commission’s estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
Dated: April 26, 2010.
For the Commission.
Jacqueline A. Berrien,
Chair.
[FR Doc. 2010–9964 Filed 4–28–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6570–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
Notice of Public Information Collection
Being Reviewed by the Federal
Communications Commission for
Extension Under Delegated Authority,
Comments Requested
April 23, 2010.
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications
Commission, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork burden
invites the general public and other
Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on the
following information collection, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 –
3520. Comments are requested
concerning: (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Commission, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
Commission’s burden estimate; (c) ways
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 82 (Thursday, April 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22589-22591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-9984]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-9143-4]
Preliminary Listing of an Additional Water to Wisconsin's 2008
List of Waters Under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's decision
identifying one water quality limited waterbody and associated
pollutants in Wisconsin to be listed pursuant to the Clean Water Act
Section 303(d)(2), and requests public comment. Section 303(d)(2)
requires that States submit and EPA approve or disapprove lists of
waters for which existing technology-based pollution controls are not
stringent enough to attain or maintain State water quality standards
and for which total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) must be prepared.
[[Page 22590]]
On January 26, 2010, EPA partially approved and partially
disapproved Wisconsin's submittal. Specifically, EPA approved
Wisconsin's listing of waters, associated pollutants, and associated
priority rankings. EPA disapproved Wisconsin's decision not to list one
water quality limited segment and associated pollutant. EPA identified
this additional water body and unidentified pollutants along with
priority rankings for inclusion on the 2008 Section 303(d) list.
EPA is providing the public the opportunity to review its decision
to add the water and unidentified pollutant to Wisconsin's 2008 Section
303(d) list, as required by EPA's Public Participation regulations. EPA
will consider public comments in reaching its final decision on the
additional water body and pollutants identified for inclusion on
Wisconsin's final list.
DATES: Comments on this document must be received in writing by June 1,
2010.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on today's notice may be submitted to Tinka
G. Hyde, Director, Water Division, Attn: Illinois 303 (d) list, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. As an alternative, EPA will accept comments
electronically. Comments should be sent to the following Internet E-
mail Address: keclik.donna@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Keclik, Watersheds and Wetlands
Branch, at the EPA address noted above or by telephone at (312) 886-
6766. Some additional information can be found at https://www.epa.gov/reg5oh2o/wshednps/notices.htm.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
requires that each State identify those waters for which existing
technology-based pollution controls are not stringent enough to attain
or maintain State water quality standards. EPA's Water Quality Planning
and Management regulations include requirements related to the
implementation of Section 303(d) of the CWA (40 CFR 130.7). The
regulations require States to identify water quality limited waters
still requiring TMDLs every two years. The lists of waters still
needing TMDLs must also include priority rankings and must identify the
waters targeted for TMDL development during the next two years (40 CFR
130.7).
Consistent with EPA's regulations, Wisconsin submitted to EPA its
listing decision under Section 303(d)(2) on August 1, 2008. On January
26, 2010, EPA approved Wisconsin's listing of waters and associated
priority rankings and disapproved Wisconsin's decisions not to list one
water quality limited segment and associated pollutants, along with
priority rankings for inclusion on the 2008 Section 303(d) list. More
specifically, EPA disapproved Wisconsin's decision not to include Musky
Bay on the 2008 list for impairment because this water does not meet
Wisconsin's narrative standard set out in Wisconsin Administrative Code
NR 102.04 (1)(b), which provides that ``Floating or submerged debris,
oil, scum or other material shall not be present in such amounts as to
interfere with public rights in waters of the State.'' As a result of
EPA's disapproval decision, EPA is proposing to place Musky Bay on
Wisconsin's 303(d) list. The list of waterbody/pollutants that EPA has
approved and EPA's decision document are available at https://www.epa.gov/reg5oh2o/wshednps/notices.htm.
During its review of WDNR's proposed 303(d) list, EPA reviewed data
available to the State that indicated the impairment of Musky Bay due
to excessive nutrients. After reviewing the existing and readily
available data, U.S. EPA has determined, for reasons discussed below,
that Musky Bay should be included in Category 5A of Wisconsin's 2008
list of impaired waters.
During the 2008 public notice and comment period, WDNR received
comments suggesting that the State should list Musky Bay for impairment
due to the presence of excessive nutrients, including phosphorus,
elevated pH values, as well as the degradation of the Bay due to large
floating algal mats and the presence of an invasive plant species known
as Curly Leaf Pondweed (Potomogeton cripsus).
The State determined that it would not list the Bay because
Wisconsin does not have numeric criterian for phosphorus and WDNR did
not believe that the available data provided a compelling rationale for
listing. These data included water samples taken at four locations in
the Bay. These locations are (1) MB-1, a deep hole in the Bay; (2) MB-
2, the east outlet from the cranberry bog operation (an inlet to the
lake); (3) MB-2a, the west outlet from the cranberry bog operation (an
inlet to the lake); and (4) MB-4, the north shore line of the Bay.
After reviewing these data, WDNR determined that samples taken only
from MB-1, the deep hole, were representative of the Bay because this
location was centrally located and arguably provided a natural average
of the various influences on the Bay's water quality, as represented by
the other sample locations. After isolating the data for MB-4, WDNR
concluded that sampling here showed lower phosphorous levels than at
any other site, and that the Bay was not impaired due to phosphorus.
WDNR stated that it will continue to monitor phosphorous levels in the
Bay and will reconsider an impairment determination on the basis of
phosphorus in 2010. Further, WDNR noted that the presence of curly leaf
pondweed as an invasive aquatic species was not a sufficient basis for
making an impairment determination.
While U.S. EPA agrees with the State that additional sampling is
needed to make an impairment decision with regard to phosphorus, after
reviewing available data, U.S. EPA determined that the Bay is impaired
based on Wisconsin's narrative standard Wisc. Admin. Code NR 102.04
(1)(b), which provides that ``Floating or submerged debris, oil, scum
or other material shall not be present in such amounts as to interfere
with public rights in waters of the State'' and thus the Bay should be
listed as a Category 5A water.
In making its listing proposal, U.S. EPA reviewed the information
submitted during the State's public comment period and held subsequent
discussions with WDNR staff. WDNR supplied a copy of a letter dated
November 8, 2007, from WDNR to Lac Courte Oreilles Lake Association
stating that ``there are very significant water quality concerns for
Musky Bay and that the cranberry bogs' discharge of nutrients is a
major source of the problems.'' WDNR further stated in the letter that
there are two suggestions that could be considered to help partially
address the water quality/water use concerns:
1. Navigational corridors through the dense beds of aquatic
plants could be maintained by mechanical harvesting or possibly
herbicide application. This would improve access to the main lake by
Musky Bay property owners and improve access to the bay by other
lake users. Implementing this activity would be likely to enhance
your argument that the public use of the bay is currently limited
and costs are being incurred to address the limitation. * * *
2. Sources of nutrient loading other than the cranberry bogs
could be assessed for application of nutrient loading reductions
practices. Other agricultural areas and residential areas in Musky
Bay watershed have been estimated to be the source of about 12% of
the annual phosphorus load to the bay (Lac Courte Oreilles
Conservation Department). * * * \1\
\1\ See Letter from Tom Aartila, Upper Chippewa Basin Watershed
Supervisor, WDNR, to Messrs. Siverton and Umland, November 8, 2007,
attached to e-mail message from Craig P. Roesler, WDNR to Donna
Keclik, U.S. EPA, April 7, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 22591]]
Based on the information submitted, including the documented impaired
use of the Bay for boating, as evidenced by WDNR's acknowledgement of
the need to cut navigational corridors through the heavy algal mats,
U.S. EPA is proposing to list Musky Bay on the 2008 Wisconsin's 303(d)
list in Category 5A.
EPA solicits public comment on its identification of one additional
water and associated pollutant Musky Bay, pollutant unidentified for
inclusion on Wisconsin's 2008 Section 303(d) list.
Dated: April 15, 2010.
Timothy C. Henry,
Acting Director, Water Division, EPA Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2010-9984 Filed 4-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P