Ocean Dumping: Proposed Cancellation and Modification of Final Site Designations, 22073-22076 [2014-09008]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 228
[EPA–R06–OW–2014–0234; FRL–9909–67–
Region–6]
Ocean Dumping: Proposed
Cancellation and Modification of Final
Site Designations
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposes to cancel the
final designation of two Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Sites (ODMDSs)
located in the Gulf of Mexico near the
Houma Navigational Canal (HNC) and
near the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet
(MRGO) Canal, Louisiana. Both sites are
EPA-approved ocean dumping sites for
the disposal of suitable dredged
material. This proposed action is being
taken because there is no clear future
need for the sites. Additionally, EPA
proposes to modify the period of use,
use restriction, and name of the
Homeport Project ODMDS located in the
Gulf of Mexico offshore of Port Aransas,
Texas.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule
must be received on or before June 5,
2014.
SUMMARY:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
OW–2014–0234, by one of the following
methods: Federal e-Rulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov; follow the
online instruction for submitting
comments.
• Email: Dr. Jessica Franks at
franks.jessica@epa.gov.
• Fax: Dr. Jessica Franks, Marine and
Coastal Section (6WQ–EC) at fax
number 214–665–6689.
• Mail: Dr. Jessica Franks, Marine and
Coastal Section (6WQ–EC),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: (6WQ–EC), 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas
75202–2733.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket No. EPA–R06–OW–2014–0234.
EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
ADDRESSES:
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Marine and Coastal Section (6WQ–
EC), Environmental Protection Agency,
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas,
Texas 75202–2733. The file will be
made available by appointment for
public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA
Review Room between the hours of 8:30
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for
legal holidays. Contact the person listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT paragraph below. If possible,
please make the appointment at least
two working days in advance of your
visit. There will be a 15 cent per page
fee for making photocopies of
documents. On the day of the visit,
please check in at the EPA Region 6
reception area at 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.
Category
13:55 Apr 18, 2014
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jessica Franks, Ph.D., Marine and
Coastal Section (6WQ–EC),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,
Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone
(214) 665–8335, fax number (214) 665–
6689; email address franks.jessica@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Potentially Affected Persons
II. Background
III. Proposed Action
IV. Administrative Review
1. Executive Order 12886
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act, as Amended
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use Compliance With
Administrative Procedure Act
9. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low Income
Populations
I. 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, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. EPA’s action
would be relevant to persons, including
organizations and government bodies
seeking to dispose of dredged material
in ocean waters offshore of Terrebonne,
Louisiana, the Mississippi River Gulf
Outlet (MRGO) Canal, Louisiana, and
Corpus Christi, Texas. Currently, the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
and other persons with permits to use
designated sites offshore Terrebonne,
Louisiana, the Mississippi River Gulf
Outlet (MRGO) Canal, Louisiana, and
Corpus Christi, Texas would be most
impacted by this final action.
Potentially affected categories and
persons include:
Examples of potentially regulated persons
Federal government ........................
Industry and general public ............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22073
USACE Civil Works and O & M projects; other Federal agencies, including the Department of Defense.
Port authorities, marinas and harbors, shipyards and marine repair facilities, berth owners.
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
22074
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Category
Examples of potentially regulated persons
State, local and tribal governments
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 entity, please
refer to the contact person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
II. Background
Section 102(c) of the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act (MPRSA) of 1972, as amended, 33
U.S.C. 1401 et seq., gives the
Administrator of EPA the authority to
designate sites where ocean disposal
may be permitted. On October 1, 1986,
the Administrator delegated the
authority to designate ocean disposal
sites to the Regional Administrator of
the Region in which the sites are
located. These proposed cancellations
and modification are being made
pursuant to that authority.
The EPA Ocean Dumping Regulations
promulgated under MPRSA (40 CFR
chapter I, subchapter H, § 228.11) state
that modifications in disposal site use
which involve withdrawal of disposal
sites from use or permanent changes in
the total specified quantities or types of
wastes permitted to be discharged to a
specific disposal site will be made by
promulgation in this part 228. These site
cancellations and modification of types
of wastes permitted to be discharged to
a specific disposal site are being
published as proposed rulemaking in
accordance with § 228.11(a) of the
Ocean Dumping Regulations, which
permits the withdrawal of designated
disposal sites from use or changes in the
total specified quantities or types of
wastes permitted to be discharged to a
specific disposal site based upon
changed circumstances concerning use
of the site.
III. Proposed Action
The proposed cancellation of the
designations of these sites is needed as
a housekeeping measure. In essence,
these ODMDSs either are no longer a
suitable disposal option or have no
foreseeable need. The Houma ODMDS is
now partially occupied by the Houma
Navigational Canal. The U.S. Corps of
Engineers has re-aligned the Cat Island
Pass portion of the HNC several times
since the construction of this federal
navigation channel in order to retain a
channel segment that requires little
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:55 Apr 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
maintenance dredging due to the natural
hydrodynamics in the vicinity. This
particular portion of the HNC Cat Island
Pass channel is characterized by an area
of deeper water (erosional zone) that is
moving westwards. Once this deeper
water erosional zone has moved far
enough west from the Corps’s channel
alignment that area of the channel
begins to shoal (becomes a depositional
zone). To avoid increased maintenance
dredging costs, the Corps re-aligns this
portion of the channel westwards to
‘‘keep up’’ with the deeper water zone
as it continues to migrate westwards.
The Houma ODMDS is located on the
west side of this channel, and the
deeper water zone has migrated into the
ODMDS boundaries. The Houma
ODMDS has not been used for more
than twenty (20) years. Instead, dredged
material from the HNC has been used
beneficially under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act on the two (2) single
point discharge (SPD) sites located
within the ODMDS. It is the Corps’
intention to continue this practice. As
such, this type of placement is excluded
by definition from regulation by
MPRSA. De-designation of the Houma
ODMDS will allow the Corps to expand
the beneficial use of dredged material
for the creation of durable islands for
seasonal bird nesting areas regulated
under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act.
The Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet
(MRGO) ODMDS is no longer needed.
On June 5, 2008 the Assistant Secretary
of the Army for Civil Works forwarded
the Final MRGO Deep-Draft Deauthorization Report to Congress
officially de-authorizing the MRGO from
the Gulf Intercoastal Water Way (GIWW)
to the Gulf of Mexico as a federal
navigation project. The report also
authorized the construction of a rock
closure structure across MRGO which
was completed in late July 2009.
The proposed modification of the
period of use and use restriction on the
Homeport Project ODMDS is needed to
change the use of the site to include
suitable dredged material from the
greater Corpus Christi, Texas vicinity
over an indefinite period of time. The
Homeport Project ODMDS was
designated to provide a disposal area for
placement of suitable construction
dredge material from the U.S. Navy’s
Homeport Project at Corpus Christi/
Ingleside, Texas. The Homeport Project
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
never materialized and therefore, the
ODMDS was never used. Use of the
ODMDS was limited to suitable dredged
material from the Homeport Project over
a 50 year period. There is a need for
placement of construction dredged
material from the Corpus Christi
Channel Channel Improvement Project
(CIP) as described in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
for the Corpus Christi Ship Channel
Channel Improvements Project Corpus
Christi and Nueces Bays, Nueces and
San Patricio Counties, Texas published
in April 2003. Based on the FEIS,
suitable dredged material will be placed
beneficially in the location of the
Homeport Project ODMDS under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA). CWA Section 404 has
jurisdiction in the Territorial Sea or
coastal waters from the baseline to three
(3) nautical miles seaward. Because the
Homeport Project ODMDS is located
beyond the boundary of the Territorial
Sea and in the open ocean, the CWA
Section 404 does not have jurisdiction.
As a result there is a need to change the
use restriction placed on the Homeport
Project ODMDS to include suitable
dredged material from the greater
Corpus Christi, Texas vicinity. Since
dredged material placement at this
ODMDS is expected to be an on-going
process over many years, the period of
use is being changed to continuing use.
EPA also proposes to change the name
of the Homeport Project ODMDS to
Corpus Christi New Work ODMDS. The
current name is no longer applicable
since it was the name of the project at
the time the ODMDS was designated.
IV. Administrative Review
1. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) EPA must
determine whether the regulatory action
is ‘‘significant,’’ and therefore subject to
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) review and other requirements of
the Executive Order. The Order defines
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as one
that is likely to lead to a rule that may:
(a) 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 safety, or
State, local or Tribal governments or
communities;
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 / Proposed Rules
(b) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(c) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs, or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof: or
(d) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
This Proposed Rule should have
minimal impact on State, local, or Tribal
governments or communities.
Consequently, EPA has determined that
this Proposed Rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order 12866.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., is intended to
minimize the reporting and
recordkeeping burden on the regulated
community, as well as to minimize the
cost of Federal information collection
and dissemination. In general, the Act
requires that information requests and
recordkeeping requirements affecting
ten or more non-Federal respondents be
approved by OMB. Since the Proposed
Rule would not establish or modify any
information or recordkeeping
requirements, but only clarifies existing
requirements, it is not subject to the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act.
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act, as
Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
This proposed rule will not impose
any requirements on small entities. The
modification of the Homeport Project
ODMDS broadens the use of the site
providing an additional option for
dredged material placement in the
Corpus Christi, Texas vicinity. The
removal of the Houma ODMDS will
allow for the beneficial use of dredged
material under CWA Section 404 for the
creation of bird islands. The closing of
the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet
Navigation Channel was mandated by
Congress and therefore the associated
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:55 Apr 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
ODMDS is no longer needed. For these
reasons, the Regional Administrator
certifies, pursuant to section 605(b) of
the RFA, that the Proposed Rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This Proposed Rule contains no
Federal mandates under the provisions
of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–4) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector that
may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more in any year. It imposes
no new enforceable duty on any State,
local or tribal governments or the
private sector nor does it contain any
regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small
government entities. Thus, the
requirements of section 203 of the
UMRA do not apply to this Proposed
Rule.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), 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’’ are 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 the
various levels of government.’’
This Proposed Rule 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.
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
Tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have Tribal
implications.’’ This Final Rule does not
have Tribal implications, as defined in
Executive Order 13175.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22075
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This Executive Order (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that:
(1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
EPA must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned
rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by EPA.
This Proposed Rule is not subject to the
Executive Order because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because
EPA does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use Compliance With
Administrative Procedure Act
This Proposed Rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001)) because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
9. National Technology Transfer
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. This Proposed Rule does
not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the
use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low
Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629)
directs Federal agencies to determine
whether the Proposed Rule would have
a disproportionate adverse impact on
minority or low-income population
groups within the project area. The
Proposed Rule would not significantly
affect any low-income or minority
population.
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
22076
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 / Proposed Rules
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
Environmental protection, Water
pollution control.
Dated: April 2, 2014.
Samuel Coleman,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 6.
In consideration of the foregoing, EPA
is proposing to amend part 228, chapter
I of title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 228—CRITERIA FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF DISPOSAL SITES
FOR OCEAN DUMPING
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 as
follows:
■ a. By removing and reserving
paragraphs (j)(1) and (4); and
■ b. By revising paragraphs (j)(16)
introductory text and (j)(16)(v) and (vi)
to read as follows:
■
§ 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a
final basis.
*
*
*
*
*
(j) * * *
(16) Corpus Christi New Work
ODMDS, Corpus Christi, Texas.
*
*
*
*
*
(v) Period of Use: Continuing use.
(vi) Restrictions: Disposal shall be
limited to suitable dredged material
from the greater Corpus Christi, Texas
vicinity. Disposal shall comply with
conditions set forth in the most recent
approved Site Management and
Monitoring Plan.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2014–09008 Filed 4–18–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2013–0117; MO
92210–0–0008 B2]
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
RIN 1018–BA27
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Threatened Status for
Lepidium papilliferum (Slickspot
Peppergrass) Throughout Its Range
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Reconsideration of final rule;
reopening of the comment period.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:55 Apr 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
reopening of the public comment period
on the reconsideration of our final rule
listing Lepidium papilliferum (slickspot
peppergrass) as a threatened species
throughout its range under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA or
Act), published February 12, 2014. We
published the reconsideration of the
final rule in response to the Idaho
District Court’s remand because the
Court asked us to reconsider the
definition of the ‘‘foreseeable future’’ in
regard to this particular species. We are
seeking input on our interpretation of
the foreseeable future as it pertains
specifically to L. papilliferum. In
addition, we also seek any new
information regarding population status,
trends, or threats that has become
available since our last review of the
status of the species in 2009. We are
reopening the comment period to allow
all interested parties an additional
opportunity to comment. Comments
previously submitted need not be
resubmitted, as they will be fully
considered in preparation of our final
determination.
DATES: We are reopening the comment
period on the revised proposed rule
published in the Federal Register on
February 12, 2014 (79 FR 8416). In order
to fully consider and incorporate public
comment in the final determination, we
request submission of comments by
June 5, 2014. Comments submitted
electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES,
below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on that date.
ADDRESSES: Document availability: You
may obtain copies of the reconsideration
of final rule on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS–R1–ES–2013–0117, or by mail
from the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Comment submission: You may
submit written comments by one of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS–
R1–ES–2013–0117, which is the docket
number for this rulemaking. You may
submit a comment by clicking on
‘‘Comment Now!’’
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–R1–ES–2013–
0117; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS
2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send comments
only by the methods described above.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see the
Public Comments section below for
more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mike Carrier, State Supervisor, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and
Wildlife Office, 1387 S. Vinnell Way,
Room 368, Boise, ID 83709; telephone
208–378–5243; facsimile 208–378–5262.
If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We will accept written comments and
information during this reopened
comment period on our reconsideration
of the final rule listing Lepidium
papilliferum (slickspot peppergrass) as a
threatened species throughout its range
that was published in the Federal
Register on February 12, 2014 (79 FR
8416). Any final action regarding the
listing of L. papilliferum will be based
on the best scientific and commercial
data available and be as accurate and as
effective as possible. Therefore, we
request comments or information from
other concerned governmental agencies,
Native American tribes, the scientific
community, industry, general public,
and other interested parties concerning
the reconsideration of the final listing
rule and our interpretation of the
foreseeable future as it applies
specifically to L. papilliferum. We
particularly seek comments regarding:
(1) Our interpretation of the term
‘‘foreseeable future’’ and its application
to our evaluation of the status of
Lepidium papilliferum;
(2) Our evaluation of new scientific
information concerning the range,
distribution, population size and trends,
and threats to the species that has
become available since publication of
the 2009 final listing rule;
(3) Our choice of the threshold of 80
to 90 percent loss of remaining
unburned habitat as the point at which
the species will be in danger of
extinction;
(4) Any additional scientific
information concerning the range,
distribution, population size and trends,
or threats to the species that has become
available since publication of the 2009
final listing rule that we have not
already presented and considered; and
(5) Current or planned activities in the
subject area that were not analyzed in
the 2009 final listing rule and their
possible effect on this species.
We will consider all comments and
information received during the
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 76 (Monday, April 21, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22073-22076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09008]
[[Page 22073]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 228
[EPA-R06-OW-2014-0234; FRL-9909-67-Region-6]
Ocean Dumping: Proposed Cancellation and Modification of Final
Site Designations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to cancel
the final designation of two Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites
(ODMDSs) located in the Gulf of Mexico near the Houma Navigational
Canal (HNC) and near the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO) Canal,
Louisiana. Both sites are EPA-approved ocean dumping sites for the
disposal of suitable dredged material. This proposed action is being
taken because there is no clear future need for the sites.
Additionally, EPA proposes to modify the period of use, use
restriction, and name of the Homeport Project ODMDS located in the Gulf
of Mexico offshore of Port Aransas, Texas.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before
June 5, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OW-
2014-0234, by one of the following methods: Federal e-Rulemaking
Portal: https://www.regulations.gov; follow the online instruction for
submitting comments.
Email: Dr. Jessica Franks at franks.jessica@epa.gov.
Fax: Dr. Jessica Franks, Marine and Coastal Section (6WQ-
EC) at fax number 214-665-6689.
Mail: Dr. Jessica Franks, Marine and Coastal Section (6WQ-
EC), Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: (6WQ-EC), 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket No. EPA-R06-OW-2014-
0234. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Marine and Coastal
Section (6WQ-EC), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file will be made available
by appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review Room
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal
holidays. Contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT paragraph below. If possible, please make the appointment at
least two working days in advance of your visit. There will be a 15
cent per page fee for making photocopies of documents. On the day of
the visit, please check in at the EPA Region 6 reception area at 1445
Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessica Franks, Ph.D., Marine and
Coastal Section (6WQ-EC), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6,
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214)
665-8335, fax number (214) 665-6689; email address
franks.jessica@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Potentially Affected Persons
II. Background
III. Proposed Action
IV. Administrative Review
1. Executive Order 12886
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act, as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Compliance With Administrative
Procedure Act
9. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income
Populations
I. 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, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. EPA's action would be relevant
to persons, including organizations and government bodies seeking to
dispose of dredged material in ocean waters offshore of Terrebonne,
Louisiana, the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO) Canal, Louisiana,
and Corpus Christi, Texas. Currently, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) and other persons with permits to use designated sites offshore
Terrebonne, Louisiana, the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO) Canal,
Louisiana, and Corpus Christi, Texas would be most impacted by this
final action. Potentially affected categories and persons include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially regulated
Category persons
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal government................ USACE Civil Works and O & M
projects; other Federal agencies,
including the Department of
Defense.
Industry and general public....... Port authorities, marinas and
harbors, shipyards and marine
repair facilities, berth owners.
[[Page 22074]]
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 entity, please refer to the contact person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
II. Background
Section 102(c) of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act (MPRSA) of 1972, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq., gives the
Administrator of EPA the authority to designate sites where ocean
disposal may be permitted. On October 1, 1986, the Administrator
delegated the authority to designate ocean disposal sites to the
Regional Administrator of the Region in which the sites are located.
These proposed cancellations and modification are being made pursuant
to that authority.
The EPA Ocean Dumping Regulations promulgated under MPRSA (40 CFR
chapter I, subchapter H, Sec. 228.11) state that modifications in
disposal site use which involve withdrawal of disposal sites from use
or permanent changes in the total specified quantities or types of
wastes permitted to be discharged to a specific disposal site will be
made by promulgation in this part 228. These site cancellations and
modification of types of wastes permitted to be discharged to a
specific disposal site are being published as proposed rulemaking in
accordance with Sec. 228.11(a) of the Ocean Dumping Regulations, which
permits the withdrawal of designated disposal sites from use or changes
in the total specified quantities or types of wastes permitted to be
discharged to a specific disposal site based upon changed circumstances
concerning use of the site.
III. Proposed Action
The proposed cancellation of the designations of these sites is
needed as a housekeeping measure. In essence, these ODMDSs either are
no longer a suitable disposal option or have no foreseeable need. The
Houma ODMDS is now partially occupied by the Houma Navigational Canal.
The U.S. Corps of Engineers has re-aligned the Cat Island Pass portion
of the HNC several times since the construction of this federal
navigation channel in order to retain a channel segment that requires
little maintenance dredging due to the natural hydrodynamics in the
vicinity. This particular portion of the HNC Cat Island Pass channel is
characterized by an area of deeper water (erosional zone) that is
moving westwards. Once this deeper water erosional zone has moved far
enough west from the Corps's channel alignment that area of the channel
begins to shoal (becomes a depositional zone). To avoid increased
maintenance dredging costs, the Corps re-aligns this portion of the
channel westwards to ``keep up'' with the deeper water zone as it
continues to migrate westwards. The Houma ODMDS is located on the west
side of this channel, and the deeper water zone has migrated into the
ODMDS boundaries. The Houma ODMDS has not been used for more than
twenty (20) years. Instead, dredged material from the HNC has been used
beneficially under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act on the two (2)
single point discharge (SPD) sites located within the ODMDS. It is the
Corps' intention to continue this practice. As such, this type of
placement is excluded by definition from regulation by MPRSA. De-
designation of the Houma ODMDS will allow the Corps to expand the
beneficial use of dredged material for the creation of durable islands
for seasonal bird nesting areas regulated under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act.
The Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet (MRGO) ODMDS is no longer needed.
On June 5, 2008 the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works
forwarded the Final MRGO Deep-Draft De-authorization Report to Congress
officially de-authorizing the MRGO from the Gulf Intercoastal Water Way
(GIWW) to the Gulf of Mexico as a federal navigation project. The
report also authorized the construction of a rock closure structure
across MRGO which was completed in late July 2009.
The proposed modification of the period of use and use restriction
on the Homeport Project ODMDS is needed to change the use of the site
to include suitable dredged material from the greater Corpus Christi,
Texas vicinity over an indefinite period of time. The Homeport Project
ODMDS was designated to provide a disposal area for placement of
suitable construction dredge material from the U.S. Navy's Homeport
Project at Corpus Christi/Ingleside, Texas. The Homeport Project never
materialized and therefore, the ODMDS was never used. Use of the ODMDS
was limited to suitable dredged material from the Homeport Project over
a 50 year period. There is a need for placement of construction dredged
material from the Corpus Christi Channel Channel Improvement Project
(CIP) as described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
for the Corpus Christi Ship Channel Channel Improvements Project Corpus
Christi and Nueces Bays, Nueces and San Patricio Counties, Texas
published in April 2003. Based on the FEIS, suitable dredged material
will be placed beneficially in the location of the Homeport Project
ODMDS under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). CWA Section 404
has jurisdiction in the Territorial Sea or coastal waters from the
baseline to three (3) nautical miles seaward. Because the Homeport
Project ODMDS is located beyond the boundary of the Territorial Sea and
in the open ocean, the CWA Section 404 does not have jurisdiction. As a
result there is a need to change the use restriction placed on the
Homeport Project ODMDS to include suitable dredged material from the
greater Corpus Christi, Texas vicinity. Since dredged material
placement at this ODMDS is expected to be an on-going process over many
years, the period of use is being changed to continuing use. EPA also
proposes to change the name of the Homeport Project ODMDS to Corpus
Christi New Work ODMDS. The current name is no longer applicable since
it was the name of the project at the time the ODMDS was designated.
IV. Administrative Review
1. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) EPA must
determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant,'' and
therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and
other requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to lead to a
rule that may:
(a) 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 safety, or State, local or Tribal governments or communities;
[[Page 22075]]
(b) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(c) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof: or
(d) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
This Proposed Rule should have minimal impact on State, local, or
Tribal governments or communities. Consequently, EPA has determined
that this Proposed Rule is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under the terms of Executive Order 12866.
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., is intended to
minimize the reporting and recordkeeping burden on the regulated
community, as well as to minimize the cost of Federal information
collection and dissemination. In general, the Act requires that
information requests and recordkeeping requirements affecting ten or
more non-Federal respondents be approved by OMB. Since the Proposed
Rule would not establish or modify any information or recordkeeping
requirements, but only clarifies existing requirements, it is not
subject to the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act, as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
This proposed rule will not impose any requirements on small
entities. The modification of the Homeport Project ODMDS broadens the
use of the site providing an additional option for dredged material
placement in the Corpus Christi, Texas vicinity. The removal of the
Houma ODMDS will allow for the beneficial use of dredged material under
CWA Section 404 for the creation of bird islands. The closing of the
Mississippi River Gulf Outlet Navigation Channel was mandated by
Congress and therefore the associated ODMDS is no longer needed. For
these reasons, the Regional Administrator certifies, pursuant to
section 605(b) of the RFA, that the Proposed Rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This Proposed Rule contains no Federal mandates under the
provisions of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) for State, local, or tribal governments
or the private sector that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more in any year. It imposes no new enforceable duty on any
State, local or tribal governments or the private sector nor does it
contain any regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small government entities. Thus, the requirements of
section 203 of the UMRA do not apply to this Proposed Rule.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), 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'' are 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 the various levels of government.''
This Proposed Rule 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.
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have Tribal implications.'' This Final Rule does not have
Tribal implications, as defined in Executive Order 13175.
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
This Executive Order (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by EPA. This Proposed Rule is not
subject to the Executive Order because it is not economically
significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because EPA does
not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use Compliance With Administrative Procedure
Act
This Proposed Rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
9. National Technology Transfer 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. This Proposed Rule does not involve technical
standards. Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629) directs Federal agencies to
determine whether the Proposed Rule would have a disproportionate
adverse impact on minority or low-income population groups within the
project area. The Proposed Rule would not significantly affect any low-
income or minority population.
[[Page 22076]]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
Environmental protection, Water pollution control.
Dated: April 2, 2014.
Samuel Coleman,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 6.
In consideration of the foregoing, EPA is proposing to amend part
228, chapter I of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 228--CRITERIA FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF DISPOSAL SITES FOR OCEAN
DUMPING
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 as follows:
0
a. By removing and reserving paragraphs (j)(1) and (4); and
0
b. By revising paragraphs (j)(16) introductory text and (j)(16)(v) and
(vi) to read as follows:
Sec. 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a final basis.
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(16) Corpus Christi New Work ODMDS, Corpus Christi, Texas.
* * * * *
(v) Period of Use: Continuing use.
(vi) Restrictions: Disposal shall be limited to suitable dredged
material from the greater Corpus Christi, Texas vicinity. Disposal
shall comply with conditions set forth in the most recent approved Site
Management and Monitoring Plan.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-09008 Filed 4-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
