Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters, 13496-13499 [2012-5604]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
13496
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by May 7, 2012.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed,
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 13, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52 [AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraphs (c)(364)(i)(B)(2) and
(379)(i)(A)(5) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(364) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) * * *
(2) Rule 1186, ‘‘PM10 Emissions from
Paved and Unpaved Roads and
Livestock Operations,’’ amended on July
11, 2008.
*
*
*
*
*
(379) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(5) Rule 1157, ‘‘PM10 Emission
Reductions from Aggregate and Related
Operations,’’ adopted on September 6,
2006.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–5385 Filed 3–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 131
[EPA–HQ–OW–2009–0596; FRL–9637–1]
RIN 2040–AF36
Effective Date for the Water Quality
Standards for the State of Florida’s
Lakes and Flowing Waters
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective
date.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is finalizing an extension
of the March 6, 2012 effective date of
the ‘‘Water Quality Standards for the
State of Florida’s Lakes and Flowing
Waters; Final Rule’’ (inland waters rule)
for four months to July 6, 2012. EPA’s
inland waters rule included an effective
date of March 6, 2012 for the entire
regulation except for the site-specific
alternative criteria provision, which
took effect on February 4, 2011. This
revision of the effective date for the
inland waters rule does not affect or
change the February 4, 2011 effective
date for the site-specific alternative
criteria provision.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
March 6, 2012. The effective date of
§ 131.43, revised on December 6, 2010
(75 FR 75805), effective March 6, 2012,
is delayed until July 6, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–OW–2011–0466. All
documents in the docket are listed on
SUMMARY:
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information of which
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center, EPA West Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20004, Attention:
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2009–
0596. The Office of Water (OW) Docket
Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The OW Docket Center
telephone number is 202–566–1744.
The Public Reading Room is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is 202–566–1744.
For
information concerning this rulemaking,
contact: Tracy Bone, U.S. EPA, Office of
Water, Mailcode 4305T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20460; telephone number 202–564–
5257; email address:
bone.tracy@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
Does this action apply to me?
Citizens concerned with water quality
in Florida may be interested in this
rulemaking. Entities discharging
nitrogen or phosphorus to lakes and
flowing waters of Florida could be
indirectly affected by this rulemaking
because water quality standards (WQS)
are used in determining National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit limits. Categories and
entities that may ultimately be affected
include:
Category
Examples of potentially affected entities
Industry ....................................................
Municipalities ...........................................
Industries discharging pollutants to lakes and flowing waters in the State of Florida.
Publicly-owned treatment works discharging pollutants to lakes and flowing waters in the State of
Florida.
Entities responsible for managing stormwater runoff in Florida.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Stormwater Management Districts ..........
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for entities that may be directly or
indirectly affected by this action. This
table lists the types of entities of which
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:19 Mar 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
EPA is now aware that potentially could
be affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in the table, such as
nonpoint source contributors to
nitrogen/phosphorus pollution in
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Florida’s waters may be indirectly
affected through implementation of
Florida’s water quality standards
program (i.e., through Basin
Management Action Plans (BMAPs)).
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Any parties or entities conducting
activities within watersheds of the
Florida waters covered by this rule, or
who rely on, depend upon, influence, or
contribute to the water quality of the
lakes and flowing waters of Florida, may
be indirectly affected by this rule. To
determine whether your facility or
activities may be affected by this action,
you should carefully examine the
language in 40 CFR 131.43, which is the
final rule. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
II. Background
On December 6, 2010, EPA’s final
inland waters rule, entitled ‘‘Water
Quality Standards for the State of
Florida’s Lakes and Flowing Waters;
Final Rule,’’ was published in the
Federal Register at 75 FR 75762, and
codified at 40 CFR 131.43. The final
inland waters rule established numeric
nutrient criteria in the form of total
nitrogen, total phosphorus,
nitrate+nitrite, and chlorophyll a for the
different types of Florida’s inland
waters to assure attainment of the
State’s applicable water quality
designated uses. More specifically, the
numeric nutrient criteria translated
Florida’s narrative nutrient provision at
Subsection 62–302–530(47)(b), Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.), into
numeric values that apply to lakes and
springs throughout Florida and flowing
waters outside of the South Florida
Region. (EPA has distinguished the
South Florida Region as those areas
south of Lake Okeechobee and the
Caloosahatchee River watershed to the
west of Lake Okeechobee and the St.
Lucie watershed to the east of Lake
Okeechobee.) This final inland waters
rule seeks to improve water quality,
protect public health and aquatic life,
and achieve the long-term recreational
uses of Florida’s waters, which are a
critical part of the State’s economy.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
III. Revised Effective Date
A. Rationale for Extending the March 6,
2012 Effective Date
As stated in the inland waters rule, 75
FR 75807, the rule was scheduled to
take effect on March 6, 2012, except for
the site-specific alternative criteria
(SSAC) provision at 40 CFR 131.43(e),
which took effect on February 4, 2011.
As discussed at length in the proposal
to this final rule, 76 FR 79604 and
finalized in this action, EPA is
extending the effective date of the final
inland waters rule four months to July
6, 2012.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:19 Mar 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
The State rulemaking and legislative
process is ongoing and its ultimate
resolution is uncertain. The Florida
Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) sent the Environmental Review
Commission (ERC)-approved rules and
amendments to the Florida legislature
for ratification during the 2012 regular
legislative session. The last day of
Florida’s 2012 regular legislative session
is March 9, 2012. Final State action on
Florida numeric nutrient criteria that
assure attainment of State water quality
designated uses consistent with
applicable CWA provisions could affect
the need for EPA’s criteria for
corresponding waters to take effect.
Implementation of either the State or
Federal criteria could have implications
for many interested parties and
members of the public in the State.
Extending the effective date of EPA’s
inland waters rule would avoid the
confusion and inefficiency that may
occur should Federal criteria become
effective while State criteria are being
finalized by the State, submitted to EPA,
and reviewed by EPA. To this end, EPA
proposed a 90-day extension of the
March 6, 2012 effective date on
December 22, 2012 (76 FR 79604) and
requested comment. EPA also requested
comment on whether a longer extension
should be provided. Based on public
comment, and because the State
rulemaking process has continued
toward FDEP’s adoption and submission
of new or revised water quality
standards to EPA for review pursuant to
CWA section 303(c), EPA is extending
the March 6, 2012 effective date by four
months to July 6, 2012 to allow the State
to complete its process.
B. Public Comment
EPA received six comments on the
proposed rule. One commenter does not
support any delay in the effective date.
This commenter says that an extension
is inconsistent with EPA’s
determination that numeric nutrient
criteria are necessary for Florida, the
Clean Water Act’s direction to EPA to
act promptly in establishing such
criteria following such determination,
and a consent decree obligation. EPA
disagrees with the commenter. EPA
maintains that its determination
remains in place and that numeric
nutrient criteria for Florida were
promptly proposed and promulgated by
EPA (75 FR 75762, December 10, 2010),
consistent with EPA’s determination,
the CWA, and the consent decree. This
action provides a limited time for the
State of Florida to complete its current
rulemaking process and to submit any
finally adopted water quality standards
to EPA for review under the Clean
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13497
Water Act. As mentioned above, having
EPA’s criteria take effect while State
criteria are being finalized by the State
in the near term could cause confusion
and administrative inefficiency for the
State and regulated entities, something
the EPA wants to avoid. Providing this
time to allow the State rulemaking
process to conclude will avoid such
confusion and inefficiency.
The other five commenters support
the proposal to extend the effective date,
arguing that the additional time would
avoid the confusion and inefficiency
that may occur should Federal criteria
become effective while State criteria are
being finalized by the State, and
possibly being reviewed by EPA. These
commenters supported the proposed
extension of the effective date by 90
days. In addition to extending the
effective date by 90 days, some of these
commenters also proposed that EPA
extend the comment period for longer
than 90 days; a six-month extension and
a seven-month extension were
mentioned specifically. EPA agrees that
a slightly longer extension is warranted,
but that four months is appropriate in
order to provide sufficient time to allow
the State rulemaking process to come to
completion.
Therefore, based on public comment
as well as the continued progress by
Florida in their water quality standards
process, EPA believes that a four-month
extension is warranted.
EPA received a comment urging
actions related to an EPA rulemaking
under development (i.e., not the inland
waters rule). These comments are
outside the scope of this action and
therefore EPA is not addressing them.
C. Good Cause Exemption
Section 553(d)(3) of the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), provides that ‘‘[t]he required
publication or service of a substantive
rule shall be made not less than 30 days
before its effective date, except * * *
(3) as otherwise provided by the agency
for good cause found and published
with the rule.’’ Today’s final rule is a
rule that relieves a restriction, i.e., that
delays the effective date of a Federal
rule. Today’s rule does not establish any
requirements but rather merely extends
the effective date of alreadypromulgated requirements. On this
basis, EPA has determined that there is
‘‘good cause’’ for having this rule take
effect upon March 6, 2012. EPA thus
finds that this constitutes ‘‘good cause’’
under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
13498
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), since it merely
extends the effective date of an already
promulgated rule, and is therefore not
subject to review under Executive Order
12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January
21, 2011).
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This action
does not impose any information
collection burden, reporting or record
keeping requirements on anyone.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have 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 action on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A
small business as defined by the Small
Business Administration’s (SBA)
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.
This final rule does not establish any
requirements that are applicable to
small entities, but rather merely extends
the date of already promulgated
requirements. Thus, I certify that this
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:19 Mar 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
and Tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any one year.
Before promulgating an EPA rule for
which a written statement is needed,
section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires EPA to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives, and adopt the least costly,
most cost-effective or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule. The provisions of section
205 do not apply when they are
inconsistent with applicable law.
Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to
adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least
burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA
establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, including Tribal
governments, it must have developed
under section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
This final rule contains no Federal
mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for
State, local, or Tribal governments or
the private sector. This final rule does
not regulate or affect any entity and,
therefore, is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of
UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This action does not have Federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132. This action
merely extends the effective date of an
already promulgated regulation.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
F. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments)
Subject to the Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) EPA
may not issue a regulation that has
Tribal implications, that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs, and
that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the
funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by Tribal
governments, or EPA consults with
Tribal officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation and
develops a Tribal summary impact
statement. However, the rule will
neither impose substantial direct
compliance costs on Tribal
governments, nor preempt Tribal law.
In the State of Florida, there are two
Indian Tribes, the Seminole Tribe of
Florida and the Miccosukee Tribe of
Indians of Florida, with lakes and
flowing waters. Both Tribes have been
approved for treatment in the same
manner as a State (TAS) status for CWA
sections 303 and 401 and have
federally-approved WQS in their
respective jurisdictions. These Tribes
are not subject to this final rule. This
rule will not impact the Tribes because
it merely extends the date of already
promulgated requirements.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to EO 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because
it is not economically significant as
defined in EO 12866 and because the
Agency does not believe this action
includes environmental health risks or
safety risks that would present a risk to
children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22,
2001)), because it is not likely to have
a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards. Therefore, EPA did
not consider the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 (59 FR
7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
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. This
action is not subject to E.O. 12898
because this action merely extends the
effective date for already promulgated
requirements.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 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. Section 808 allows
the issuing agency to make a rule
effective sooner than otherwise
provided by the CRA if the agency
makes a good cause finding that notice
and public procedure is impracticable,
unnecessary or contrary to the public
interest. This determination must be
supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C.
808(2). As stated previously, EPA has
made such a good cause finding,
including the reasons therefore, and
established an effective date of March 6,
2012. 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. This action is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:19 Mar 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 131
Environmental protection, Water
quality standards, Nitrogen/phosphorus
pollution, Nutrients, Florida.
Dated: February 16, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012–5604 Filed 3–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0702; FRL–9339–7]
Fenamiphos; Data Call-in Order for
Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final order.
AGENCY:
This order requires the
submission of various data to support
the continuation of the tolerances for
the pesticide fenamiphos. Pesticide
tolerances are established under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA). Following publication of this
order, persons who are interested in the
continuation of the fenamiphos
tolerances must notify the Agency by
completing and submitting the required
section 408(f) Order Response Form
(available in the docket) within 90 days.
If the Agency does not receive within 90
days after publication of the final order
a section 408(f) Response Form
identifying a person who agrees to
submit the required data, EPA will
revoke the fenamiphos tolerances.
DATES: This final order is effective
March 7, 2012. A section 408(f) Order
Response Form must be received on or
before June 5, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2011–0702. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13499
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
Submit your section 408(f) Order
Response Form, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2011–0702, by one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001.
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket
Facility’s normal hours of operation
(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is
(703) 305–5805.
• Instructions: Direct your section
408(f) Order Response Form to docket
ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0702.
EPA’s policy is that all information and
comments received will be included in
the docket without change and may be
made available on-line at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the information or comment includes
information claimed to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected through
regulations.gov or email. The
regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send information or comments
via an email directly to EPA without
going through regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
information or comment that is placed
in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit information or a
comment electronically, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your information or
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
information or comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 7, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13496-13499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5604]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 131
[EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596; FRL-9637-1]
RIN 2040-AF36
Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of
Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective date.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing an
extension of the March 6, 2012 effective date of the ``Water Quality
Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters; Final
Rule'' (inland waters rule) for four months to July 6, 2012. EPA's
inland waters rule included an effective date of March 6, 2012 for the
entire regulation except for the site-specific alternative criteria
provision, which took effect on February 4, 2011. This revision of the
effective date for the inland waters rule does not affect or change the
February 4, 2011 effective date for the site-specific alternative
criteria provision.
DATES: This final rule is effective on March 6, 2012. The effective
date of Sec. 131.43, revised on December 6, 2010 (75 FR 75805),
effective March 6, 2012, is delayed until July 6, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-OW-2011-0466. All documents in the docket are listed on the
www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
of which disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material,
such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004,
Attention: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596. The Office of Water (OW)
Docket Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The OW Docket Center telephone number
is 202-566-1744. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is 202-566-1744.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning this
rulemaking, contact: Tracy Bone, U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Mailcode
4305T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number 202-564-5257; email address: bone.tracy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
Does this action apply to me?
Citizens concerned with water quality in Florida may be interested
in this rulemaking. Entities discharging nitrogen or phosphorus to
lakes and flowing waters of Florida could be indirectly affected by
this rulemaking because water quality standards (WQS) are used in
determining National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit limits. Categories and entities that may ultimately be affected
include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially affected
Category entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry............................. Industries discharging pollutants
to lakes and flowing waters in
the State of Florida.
Municipalities....................... Publicly-owned treatment works
discharging pollutants to lakes
and flowing waters in the State
of Florida.
Stormwater Management Districts...... Entities responsible for managing
stormwater runoff in Florida.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for entities that may be directly or indirectly affected by this
action. This table lists the types of entities of which EPA is now
aware that potentially could be affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in the table, such as nonpoint source contributors
to nitrogen/phosphorus pollution in Florida's waters may be indirectly
affected through implementation of Florida's water quality standards
program (i.e., through Basin Management Action Plans (BMAPs)).
[[Page 13497]]
Any parties or entities conducting activities within watersheds of the
Florida waters covered by this rule, or who rely on, depend upon,
influence, or contribute to the water quality of the lakes and flowing
waters of Florida, may be indirectly affected by this rule. To
determine whether your facility or activities may be affected by this
action, you should carefully examine the language in 40 CFR 131.43,
which is the final rule. If you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
II. Background
On December 6, 2010, EPA's final inland waters rule, entitled
``Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing
Waters; Final Rule,'' was published in the Federal Register at 75 FR
75762, and codified at 40 CFR 131.43. The final inland waters rule
established numeric nutrient criteria in the form of total nitrogen,
total phosphorus, nitrate+nitrite, and chlorophyll a for the different
types of Florida's inland waters to assure attainment of the State's
applicable water quality designated uses. More specifically, the
numeric nutrient criteria translated Florida's narrative nutrient
provision at Subsection 62-302-530(47)(b), Florida Administrative Code
(F.A.C.), into numeric values that apply to lakes and springs
throughout Florida and flowing waters outside of the South Florida
Region. (EPA has distinguished the South Florida Region as those areas
south of Lake Okeechobee and the Caloosahatchee River watershed to the
west of Lake Okeechobee and the St. Lucie watershed to the east of Lake
Okeechobee.) This final inland waters rule seeks to improve water
quality, protect public health and aquatic life, and achieve the long-
term recreational uses of Florida's waters, which are a critical part
of the State's economy.
III. Revised Effective Date
A. Rationale for Extending the March 6, 2012 Effective Date
As stated in the inland waters rule, 75 FR 75807, the rule was
scheduled to take effect on March 6, 2012, except for the site-specific
alternative criteria (SSAC) provision at 40 CFR 131.43(e), which took
effect on February 4, 2011. As discussed at length in the proposal to
this final rule, 76 FR 79604 and finalized in this action, EPA is
extending the effective date of the final inland waters rule four
months to July 6, 2012.
The State rulemaking and legislative process is ongoing and its
ultimate resolution is uncertain. The Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) sent the Environmental Review
Commission (ERC)-approved rules and amendments to the Florida
legislature for ratification during the 2012 regular legislative
session. The last day of Florida's 2012 regular legislative session is
March 9, 2012. Final State action on Florida numeric nutrient criteria
that assure attainment of State water quality designated uses
consistent with applicable CWA provisions could affect the need for
EPA's criteria for corresponding waters to take effect. Implementation
of either the State or Federal criteria could have implications for
many interested parties and members of the public in the State.
Extending the effective date of EPA's inland waters rule would
avoid the confusion and inefficiency that may occur should Federal
criteria become effective while State criteria are being finalized by
the State, submitted to EPA, and reviewed by EPA. To this end, EPA
proposed a 90-day extension of the March 6, 2012 effective date on
December 22, 2012 (76 FR 79604) and requested comment. EPA also
requested comment on whether a longer extension should be provided.
Based on public comment, and because the State rulemaking process has
continued toward FDEP's adoption and submission of new or revised water
quality standards to EPA for review pursuant to CWA section 303(c), EPA
is extending the March 6, 2012 effective date by four months to July 6,
2012 to allow the State to complete its process.
B. Public Comment
EPA received six comments on the proposed rule. One commenter does
not support any delay in the effective date. This commenter says that
an extension is inconsistent with EPA's determination that numeric
nutrient criteria are necessary for Florida, the Clean Water Act's
direction to EPA to act promptly in establishing such criteria
following such determination, and a consent decree obligation. EPA
disagrees with the commenter. EPA maintains that its determination
remains in place and that numeric nutrient criteria for Florida were
promptly proposed and promulgated by EPA (75 FR 75762, December 10,
2010), consistent with EPA's determination, the CWA, and the consent
decree. This action provides a limited time for the State of Florida to
complete its current rulemaking process and to submit any finally
adopted water quality standards to EPA for review under the Clean Water
Act. As mentioned above, having EPA's criteria take effect while State
criteria are being finalized by the State in the near term could cause
confusion and administrative inefficiency for the State and regulated
entities, something the EPA wants to avoid. Providing this time to
allow the State rulemaking process to conclude will avoid such
confusion and inefficiency.
The other five commenters support the proposal to extend the
effective date, arguing that the additional time would avoid the
confusion and inefficiency that may occur should Federal criteria
become effective while State criteria are being finalized by the State,
and possibly being reviewed by EPA. These commenters supported the
proposed extension of the effective date by 90 days. In addition to
extending the effective date by 90 days, some of these commenters also
proposed that EPA extend the comment period for longer than 90 days; a
six-month extension and a seven-month extension were mentioned
specifically. EPA agrees that a slightly longer extension is warranted,
but that four months is appropriate in order to provide sufficient time
to allow the State rulemaking process to come to completion.
Therefore, based on public comment as well as the continued
progress by Florida in their water quality standards process, EPA
believes that a four-month extension is warranted.
EPA received a comment urging actions related to an EPA rulemaking
under development (i.e., not the inland waters rule). These comments
are outside the scope of this action and therefore EPA is not
addressing them.
C. Good Cause Exemption
Section 553(d)(3) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), provides that ``[t]he required publication or service of a
substantive rule shall be made not less than 30 days before its
effective date, except * * * (3) as otherwise provided by the agency
for good cause found and published with the rule.'' Today's final rule
is a rule that relieves a restriction, i.e., that delays the effective
date of a Federal rule. Today's rule does not establish any
requirements but rather merely extends the effective date of already-
promulgated requirements. On this basis, EPA has determined that there
is ``good cause'' for having this rule take effect upon March 6, 2012.
EPA thus finds that this constitutes ``good cause'' under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3).
[[Page 13498]]
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), since it
merely extends the effective date of an already promulgated rule, and
is therefore not subject to review under Executive Order 12866 and
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This action does not impose any
information collection burden, reporting or record keeping requirements
on anyone.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have 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 action on small entities, small entity is
defined as: (1) A small business as defined by the Small Business
Administration's (SBA) 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.
This final rule does not establish any requirements that are
applicable to small entities, but rather merely extends the date of
already promulgated requirements. Thus, I certify that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives, and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including Tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
This final rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or Tribal
governments or the private sector. This final rule does not regulate or
affect any entity and, therefore, is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 and 205 of UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This action does not have Federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action merely extends the
effective date of an already promulgated regulation.
F. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments)
Subject to the Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000) EPA may not issue a regulation that has Tribal implications, that
imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required
by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary
to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by Tribal governments, or
EPA consults with Tribal officials early in the process of developing
the proposed regulation and develops a Tribal summary impact statement.
However, the rule will neither impose substantial direct compliance
costs on Tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law.
In the State of Florida, there are two Indian Tribes, the Seminole
Tribe of Florida and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, with
lakes and flowing waters. Both Tribes have been approved for treatment
in the same manner as a State (TAS) status for CWA sections 303 and 401
and have federally-approved WQS in their respective jurisdictions.
These Tribes are not subject to this final rule. This rule will not
impact the Tribes because it merely extends the date of already
promulgated requirements.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) because it is not economically significant as defined in EO 12866
and because the Agency does not believe this action includes
environmental health risks or safety risks that would present a risk to
children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g.,
[[Page 13499]]
materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available
and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore,
EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994))
establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main
provision directs 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. This action is not subject to E.O.
12898 because this action merely extends the effective date for already
promulgated requirements.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 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. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a rule
effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes
a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable,
unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. This determination must
be supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As stated
previously, EPA has made such a good cause finding, including the
reasons therefore, and established an effective date of March 6, 2012.
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. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 131
Environmental protection, Water quality standards, Nitrogen/
phosphorus pollution, Nutrients, Florida.
Dated: February 16, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-5604 Filed 3-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
