Ocean Disposal; Designation of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site for the Southern Maine, New Hampshire, and Northern Massachusetts Coastal Region, 49075-49087 [2019-20127]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 18, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49075-49087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20127]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 228

[EPA-R01-OW-2019-0521; FRL-9999-61-Region 1]


Ocean Disposal; Designation of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal 
Site for the Southern Maine, New Hampshire, and Northern Massachusetts 
Coastal Region

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today proposes to 
designate one ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS), the Isles 
of Shoals North Disposal Site (IOSN), located approximately 10.8 
nautical miles (nmi) east of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, pursuant to the 
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, as amended (MPRSA). 
This action is necessary to serve the long-term need for an ODMDS for 
the possible future disposal of suitable dredged material from harbors 
and navigation channels in southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern 
Massachusetts.
    The proposed action is described in a Draft Environmental 
Assessment and Evaluation Study (DEA) also being released today for 
public comment. The DEA recommends designation of the proposed IOSN 
pursuant to the MPRSA as the preferred alternative from the range of 
options considered. The draft Site Management and Monitoring Plan 
(SMMP) is provided as Appendix G of the DEA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 18, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. 
EPA-R01-OW-2019-0521, through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from 
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public 
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, 
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written 
comment is considered the official comment and should include 
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not 
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary

[[Page 49076]]

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For 
additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, 
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance 
on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: Publicly available docket materials are available either 
electronically at regulations.gov or on the EPA Region 1 Ocean Dumping 
web page at https://www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/managing-ocean-dumping-epa-region-1. They are also available in hard copy during normal 
business hours at the EPA Region 1 Library, 5 Post Office Square, 
Boston, MA 02109.
    The supporting document for this site designation is the Draft 
Environmental Assessment on the Environmental Assessment and Evaluation 
Study for Designation of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site for 
the Southern Maine, New Hampshire, and Northern Massachusetts Coastal 
Region.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Olga Guza-Pabst, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 
100, Mail Code: 06-1, Boston, MA 02109-3912, telephone: (617) 918-1542; 
fax: (617) 918-0542; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Organization of this document. The following 
outline is provided to aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. Background
II. Purpose and Need
III. Potentially Affected Entities
IV. Disposal Site Description
V. Compliance With Statutory and Regulatory Authorities
    A. Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act and Clean 
Water Act
    B. National Environmental Policy Act
    C. Coastal Zone Management Act
    D. Endangered Species Act
    E. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
VI. Restrictions
VII. Proposed Action
VIII. Supporting Documents
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Section 102(c) of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries 
Act of 1972 (MPRSA), 33 U.S.C. 1412, gives EPA the authority to 
designate sites where ocean disposal may be permitted. On October 1, 
1986, the Administrator delegated the authority to designate ocean 
dredged material disposal sites (ODMDS) to the Regional Administrator 
of the Region in which the sites are located. The preferred alternative 
site, IOSN, is located within the area assigned to EPA Region 1, see 40 
CFR 1.7(b)(1); therefore, this designation is being proposed pursuant 
to the EPA Region 1 Administrator's delegated authority.
    EPA regulations (40 CFR 228.4(e)(1)) promulgated under the MPRSA 
require, among other things, that EPA designate ocean disposal sites by 
promulgation in 40 CFR part 228. Designated ocean disposal sites are 
codified at 40 CFR 228.15. EPA-designated sites require a SMMP that 
will help ensure environmentally sound monitoring and management of the 
sites. Section 103(b) of the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C. 1413(b), provides that 
any ocean disposal of dredged material should occur at EPA-designated 
sites to the maximum extent feasible. In the absence of an available 
EPA-designated ocean disposal site, however, the USACE is authorized to 
``select'' appropriate ocean disposal sites under MPRSA section 103(b). 
MPRSA section 103(b) restricts the use of USACE-selected sites to two 
separate five-year terms. There are no EPA-designated dredged material 
disposal sites off the coast of southern Maine, New Hampshire, and 
northern Massachusetts. There is one USACE-selected site in this area, 
the Cape Arundel Disposal Site (CADS), but it will no longer be 
available after December 31, 2021, when its Congressionally-authorized 
term of use expires.
    Regulations implementing MPRSA are set forth at 40 CFR parts 220 to 
229 (Ocean Dumping Regulations). With few exceptions, the MPRSA 
prohibits the transportation of material from the United States for the 
purpose of ocean dumping except as may be authorized by a permit or 
authorization issued under the MPRSA. The MPRSA divides permitting 
responsibility between EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
(USACE). Under section 102 of the MPRSA, EPA has responsibility for 
issuing permits for all materials other than dredged material (e.g., 
vessels, fish wastes, burial at sea).\1\ Under section 103 of the 
MPRSA, the Secretary of the Army has the responsibility for issuing 
permits and authorizations (in the case of USACE projects) for the 
ocean dumping of dredged material. This permitting authority has been 
delegated to the District Engineer of the USACE New England District. 
The USACE makes determinations whether to issue permits and 
authorizations for dredged material based on the application of, among 
other things, EPA's ocean dumping criteria regulations. See 40 CFR 
227.4, 227.5 and 227.6. MPRSA permits and federal projects involving 
ocean dumping of dredged material are subject to EPA review and 
concurrence in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 1413(c). EPA may concur with 
or without conditions or decline to concur on the permit, i.e., non-
concur. If EPA concurs with conditions, the final permit must include 
those conditions. If EPA declines to concur (non-concurs) on an ocean 
dumping permit for dredged material, USACE cannot issue the permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The MPRSA also bans ocean disposal of certain types of 
materials, such as, for example, chemical weapons and medical waste. 
See 33 U.S.C. 1412(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rule proposes to designate the proposed IOSN for the ocean 
disposal of suitable dredged material. EPA has conducted the disposal 
site designation process consistent with the requirements of the MPRSA, 
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Coastal Zone 
Management Act (CZMA), and other relevant statutes and regulations. The 
site designation is intended to be effective for an indefinite period 
of time.
    It is important to understand that the designation of an (ODMDS) by 
EPA does not by itself authorize the disposal at that site of dredged 
material from any particular dredging project. For example, designation 
of the proposed IOSN would only make that ocean site available to 
receive dredged material from a specific project if no environmentally 
preferable, practicable alternative for managing that dredged material 
exists, and if analysis of the dredged material indicates that it is 
suitable for ocean disposal under the MPRSA. See 40 CFR 227.1(b), 227.2 
and 227.3; 40 CFR part 227, subparts B and C.
    Thus, each proposed dredging project will be evaluated on a case-
by-case basis to determine whether there are practicable, 
environmentally preferable alternatives to ocean disposal (i.e., 
whether there is a need for ocean disposal). See 40 CFR 227.16. In 
addition, the dredged material from each proposed disposal project will 
be subject to MPRSA sediment testing requirements to determine its 
suitability for possible ocean disposal at an approved site. See 40 CFR 
227.6. Alternatives to ocean disposal that will be considered include 
upland disposal and beneficial uses such as beach nourishment. If 
environmentally preferable, practicable disposal alternatives exist, 
ocean disposal will not be allowed. EPA also will not approve dredged 
material for ocean disposal if it determines that the material has the 
potential to cause unacceptable adverse effects to the marine 
environment or human health.

[[Page 49077]]

See 40 CFR 227.4. The review process for proposed disposal projects is 
discussed in more detail below and in the draft SMMP.
    Dredged material disposal sites designated by EPA under the MPRSA 
are subject to detailed management and monitoring protocols to track 
site conditions and prevent the occurrence of unacceptable adverse 
effects. See 33 U.S.C. 1412(c)(3)-(5). The management and monitoring 
protocols for the proposed IOSN are described in the Draft SMMP. EPA is 
authorized to close or limit the use of these sites to further disposal 
activity if their use causes unacceptable adverse impacts to the marine 
environment or human health.

II. Purpose and Need

    The purpose of the proposed action is to designate an ocean 
disposal site that will provide a long-term dredged material disposal 
option for dredged material from harbors and navigation channels in 
southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts. This is 
necessary to ensure the viability of dredging projects needed to 
maintain international commerce and navigation through authorized 
federal navigation projects and to ensure safe vessel passage for 
public and private entities. The appropriateness of ocean disposal for 
any specific, individual dredging project will be determined on a case-
by-case basis under the permit and authorization (in the case of Corps 
projects) process under MPRSA.
    The need for this effort derives from the following facts: (1) The 
availability of an ODMDS in the vicinity of southern Maine, New 
Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts is necessary to help maintain 
safe navigation of authorized federal channels and permitted actions; 
(2) projected dredging needs for the area were calculated to be 
approximately 1.5 million cubic yards (mcy) of material over the next 
20 years, which significantly exceeds the capacity of available 
practicable alternatives to ocean disposal; (3) the states of Maine and 
New Hampshire have expressed concern that available, practicable 
dredged material disposal capacity is insufficient to meet projected 
dredging needs and they requested this designation from EPA; (4) the 
historically used, in the 1960s and early 1970s, former Isles of Shoals 
Disposal Site (IOSH) was examined for potential designation, however, 
this former site is located in an area that contains a diversity of 
habitats that are not compatible with the ocean disposal of dredged 
material; and (5) the possibility of expanding the existing CADS to 
accommodate the region's dredging needs is infeasible, as studies 
revealed that suitable areas with the capacity for an ODMDS are limited 
at that site. The existing CADS is a USACE short-term selected site 
under MPRSA section 103(b) and is scheduled to close on December 31, 
2021.
    In addition, the closest EPA-designated ODMDSs outside the ``Zone 
of Siting Feasibility,'' (or ZSF, which is discussed in Section 4 of 
the DEA), are the Portland Dredged Material Disposal Site (PDS) and the 
Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site (MBDS). The draw area (i.e., the area 
from which dredged material would come) for the proposed IOSN disposal 
site would encompass any projects closer to that site than to either 
the PDS or MBDS. The center of the ZSF is located about 42 miles from 
the MBDS and 43 miles from the PDS.
    While PDS and MBDS are environmentally sound sites for receiving 
suitable dredged material, EPA does not consider them to be truly 
viable options for the southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern 
Massachusetts region given their distance from the ZSF, which would 
significantly increase the transport distance for, and duration of, 
ocean disposal for dredging projects from that region. This, in turn, 
would greatly increase the cost of such projects and would likely 
render many dredging projects too expensive to conduct, thus 
threatening safe navigation and interfering with marine recreation and 
commerce. Furthermore, the greater transport distance would also be 
environmentally detrimental because it would entail greater energy use, 
increased air emissions, and increased risk of spills or disposal 
outside of the prescribed ocean dumping zone (``short dumps'') (DEA, 
Section 7.0). Regarding air emissions, increased hauling distances may 
require using larger scows with more powerful tug boats, which would 
use more fuel and cause more emission of air pollutants.
    Congress has directed that the disposal of dredged material should 
take place at EPA-designated sites, rather than USACE-selected sites, 
when EPA-designated sites are available (see MPRSA 103(b)). With the 
CADS (a USACE-selected site under MPRSA section 103 for short-term use) 
nearing capacity and expiring on December 31, 2021, EPA's ocean 
disposal site designation studies were designed to determine whether 
this site or any other sites should be designated for continued long-
term use.
    MPRSA criteria for selecting and designating sites require EPA to 
consider previously used disposal sites or areas, with active or 
historically used sites given preference in the evaluation assuming all 
other things equal (40 CFR 228.5(e)). This preference is intended to 
concentrate the effects, if any, of disposal practices to relatively 
smaller, discrete areas that have already received dredged material, 
and avoid distributing any effects over a larger geographic area.
    Periodic dredging of harbors and channels and, therefore, dredged 
material management, are essential for ensuring safe navigation and 
facilitating marine commerce. This is because the natural processes of 
erosion and siltation result in sediment accumulation in federal 
navigation channels, harbors, port facilities, marinas, and other 
important areas of our water bodies. Unsafe navigational conditions not 
only threaten public health and safety, but also pose an environmental 
threat from an increased risk of spills from vessels involved in 
accidents.
    Economic considerations also contribute to the need for dredging 
(and the environmentally sound management of dredged material). There 
are many important navigation-dependent businesses and industries in 
the southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts region, 
ranging from shipping (especially the transportation of petroleum fuels 
and bulk materials), to recreational boating-related businesses, marine 
transportation, commercial and recreational fishing, interstate ferry 
operations, and U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard facilities. These 
businesses and industries contribute substantially to the region's 
economic output, the gross state product (GSP) of the bordering states, 
and tax revenue. Continued access to harbors, berths, and mooring areas 
in the ZSF is vital to ensuring the continued economic health of these 
industries, and to preserving the ability of the region to import 
fuels, bulk supplies, and other commodities at competitive prices and 
to preserve ocean access for the commercial fishing fleet that exists 
within the ZSF. In addition, preserving navigation channels, marinas, 
harbors, berthing areas, and other marine resources, improves the 
quality of life for residents and visitors to the southern Maine, New 
Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts region by facilitating 
recreational boating and associated activities, such as fishing and 
sightseeing.

III. Potentially Affected Entities

    Entities potentially affected by this proposed action are persons, 
organizations, or government bodies seeking to dispose of dredged 
material

[[Page 49078]]

in ocean waters off the coast of southern Maine, New Hampshire, and 
northern Massachusetts, subject to the requirements of the MPRSA and 
their implementing regulations. This proposed rule is expected to be 
primarily of relevance to:
    (a) Parties seeking MPRSA permits from to transport dredged 
material for disposal into the ocean waters off the coast of southern 
Maine, New Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts, and (b) to the USACE 
itself for its own dredged material projects involving ocean disposal.
    Potentially affected entities and categories of entities that may 
seek to use the proposed ocean dredged material disposal site and would 
be subject to the proposed rule include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Examples of potentially
                Category                        affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal government.....................  USACE (Civil Works Projects),
                                          U.S. Navy, U.S. Coast Guard,
                                          and other federal agencies.
State, local, and tribal governments...  Governments owning and/or
                                          responsible for ports,
                                          harbors, and/or berths,
                                          government agencies requiring
                                          ocean disposal of dredged
                                          material associated with
                                          public works projects.
Industry and general public............  Port authorities, shipyards and
                                          marine repair facilities,
                                          marinas and boatyards, and
                                          berth owners.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather provides 
a guide for readers regarding the types of entities that could 
potentially be affected should the proposed rule become a final rule. 
EPA notes that nothing in this proposed rule alters the jurisdiction or 
authority of EPA, the USACE, or the types of entities regulated under 
the MPRSA. Questions regarding the applicability of this proposed rule 
to a particular entity should be directed to the contact person listed 
in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

IV. Disposal Site Description

    Today's proposed rule is to designate the IOSN for ocean disposal 
of suitable dredged material. A DEA and draft SMMP have been prepared 
for the proposed IOSN and are available for review and comment by the 
public. Copies may be obtained by request from the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT listed in the introductory section to this proposed 
rule. Use of the proposed IOSN would be subject to any restrictions 
included in the site designation and the approved SMMP. These 
restrictions will be based on a thorough evaluation of the proposed 
site pursuant to the Ocean Dumping Regulations, potential disposal 
activity expected at the site, and consideration of public review and 
comment. Additional restrictions may be placed on any permit or 
authorization to use the site.
    The proposed IOSN is located off the coast southern Maine, New 
Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts, approximately 10.8 nmi east of 
Portsmouth, New Hampshire and 5.25 nmi east-northeast of the former 
IOSH site. This new potential disposal site is currently defined as an 
8,500-foot (2590-meter) diameter circle on the seafloor with its center 
located at 70[deg] 26.995' W and 43[deg] 1.142' N. The sediments at the 
site are predominately soft, fine-grained silts and clays. Water depths 
at proposed IOSN vary from 255 feet to 340 feet and gradually slope 
from approximately 295 feet on the western boundary to 328 feet in the 
southeastern portion of the site. The area is generally flat soft-
bottom.

V. Compliance With Statutory and Regulatory Authorities

    In proposing to designate the IOSN for the ocean disposal of 
dredged material from harbors and navigation channels in southern 
Maine, New Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts, EPA has conducted the 
dredged material disposal site designation process consistent with the 
requirements of the MPRSA, NEPA, CZMA, the Endangered Species Act 
(ESA), the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
(MSFCMA), and all other applicable legal requirements.

A. Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act

    Section 102(c) of the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C. 1412(c), gives the 
Administrator of EPA authority to designate sites where ocean disposal 
of dredged material may be permitted. See also 33 U.S.C. 1413(b) and 40 
CFR 228.4(e). The statute places no specific time limit on the term for 
use of an EPA-designated ocean disposal site. EPA may, however, place 
various restrictions or limits on the use of a site based on the site's 
capacity to accommodate dredged material or other environmental 
concerns. See 33 U.S.C. 1412(c). In addition, EPA may, if appropriate, 
close a previously designated dredged material disposal site. See 33 
U.S.C. 1412(c)(3)(E). See also 40 CFR 228.3(a).
    The Ocean Dumping Regulations, see generally 40 CFR Subchapter H, 
prescribe general and specific criteria at 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6, 
respectively, to guide EPA's choice of disposal sites for final 
designation. EPA regulations at 40 CFR 228.4(e)(1) provide, among other 
things, that EPA will designate any disposal sites by promulgation in 
40 CFR part 228. Ocean dumping sites designated on a final basis are 
promulgated at 40 CFR 228.15. Section 102(c) of the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C. 
1412(c), and 40 CFR 228.3 also establish requirements for EPA's ongoing 
management and monitoring, in conjunction with the USACE, of dredged 
material disposal sites designated by EPA to ensure that unacceptable, 
adverse environmental impacts do not occur. Examples of such management 
and monitoring include the following: Regulating the times, rates, and 
methods of disposal, as well as the quantities and types of material 
that may be disposed; conducting pre- and post-disposal monitoring of 
sites; conducting disposal site evaluation and designation studies; 
and, if warranted, recommending modification of site use and/or 
designation conditions and restrictions. See also 40 CFR 228.7, 228.8, 
228.9.
    Finally, a disposal site designation by EPA does not actually 
authorize any dredged material to be disposed of at that site. It only 
makes that site available as a possible management option if various 
other conditions are met first. Use of the site for dredged material 
disposal must be authorized by the USACE under MPRSA section 103(b), 
subject to EPA review and concurrence, and such disposal at the site 
can only be authorized if: (1) It is determined that there is a need 
for ocean disposal for that project (i.e., that there are no 
practicable alternatives to such disposal that would cause less harm to 
the environment); and (2) the dredged material satisfies the applicable 
environmental impact criteria specified in ocean dumping regulations at 
40 CFR part 227. See 40 CFR 227.1(b), 227.2, 227.4, 227.5, 227.6 and 
227.16. Furthermore, the authorization for disposal also is subject to 
review for compliance with other applicable legal requirements, which 
may include the ESA, the MSFCMA, the CWA (including any applicable 
state water quality standards), NEPA, and the CZMA. The following 
describes EPA's evaluation of the proposed IOSN alternatives pursuant 
to the applicable site evaluation criteria, and its compliance with 
site management and monitoring requirements.

[[Page 49079]]

    EPA undertook its evaluation of whether to designate any dredged 
material disposal sites in the southern Maine, New Hampshire, and 
northern Massachusetts region pursuant to its authority under MPRSA 
section 102(c) in response to several factors. These factors include 
the following:
     The determination by EPA, based on the evaluation of 
projected dredging needs over the 20-year planning horizon and 
alternatives to open-water disposal conducted for the DEA, that the 
potential alternatives to open-water disposal do not provide sufficient 
capacity to accept the quantity of dredged material expected to be 
generated over the next 20 years in the region;
     Recognition that use of the CADS will cease after December 
31, 2021, pursuant to the USACE site selection authority under MPRSA 
section 103(b) and the closure date for the site as established by 
Congress under Public Law 115-270, Title I, Sec 1312;
     The understanding that in the absence of an EPA-designated 
disposal site or sites, any necessary ocean disposal would either be 
stymied, despite the importance of dredging for ensuring navigational 
safety and facilitating marine commercial and recreational activities, 
or the USACE would have to undertake additional short-term ocean 
disposal site selections under MPRSA section 103 in the future;
     The clear Congressional preference expressed in MPRSA 
section 103(b) that any ocean disposal of dredged material take place 
at EPA-designated sites, if feasible; and
     The fact that the two closest EPA-designated ocean 
disposal sites to this region, the PDS and MBDS, are 42 nmi and 43 nmi 
respectively from the ZSF dredging center, which would significantly 
increase transportation costs and project durations, which would likely 
render some dredging projects infeasible, while also projects that went 
forward would involve increased energy use, air emissions, and the risk 
of spills or short-dumps.
    EPA's evaluation considered whether there was a need to designate 
one or more ocean disposal sites for long-term dredged material 
disposal, including an assessment of whether other dredged material 
management methods could reasonably be judged to obviate the need for 
such designations. Having concluded that there was a need for ocean 
disposal sites, EPA then assessed whether there were sites that would 
satisfy the applicable environmental criteria to support a site 
designation under MPRSA section 102(c). The MPRSA and EPA regulations 
promulgated thereunder address the designation of dredged material 
disposal sites. The law and regulations specify criteria for use in 
site evaluations and indicate that a SMMP must be developed for all 
designated sites. As discussed below, EPA complied with all of these 
provisions of the statute and regulations in proposing to designate the 
IOSN.
1. Procedural Requirements
    MPRSA sections 102(c) and 103(b) indicate that EPA may designate 
ocean disposal sites for dredged material. EPA regulations at 40 CFR 
228.4(e) specify that dredged material disposal sites will be 
``designated by EPA promulgation in this [40 CFR] part 228 . . . .'' 
EPA regulations at 40 CFR 228.6(b) direct that if an environmental 
assessment and evaluation is prepared by EPA to assess the proposed 
designation of one or more disposal sites, it should include the 
results of an environmental evaluation of the proposed disposal 
site(s), the environmental assessment should be presented to the public 
along with a proposed rule for the proposed disposal site 
designation(s), and that a Final Environmental Assessment should be 
provided at the time of final rulemaking for the site designation. EPA 
has complied with all procedural requirements related to the 
publication of this proposed rule and associated DEA. The Agency has 
prepared a thorough environmental evaluation of the recommended 
alternative site being proposed for designation, other alternatives 
sites, and other courses of action (including the option of not 
designating open-water disposal sites). This evaluation is presented in 
the DEA (and related documents) and this proposed rule.
2. Disposal Site Selection Criteria
    EPA regulations under the MPRSA identify four general criteria and 
11 specific criteria for evaluating locations for the potential 
designation of dredged material disposal sites. See 40 CFR 228.4(e), 
228.5 and 228.6. The evaluation of the proposed IOSN with respect to 
the four general and 11 specific criteria is discussed in detail in the 
DEA and supporting documents and is summarized below.
General Criteria (40 CFR 228.5)
    As described in the DEA, and summarized below, EPA has determined 
that the proposed IOSN satisfies the four general criteria specified in 
40 CFR 228.5. This is discussed in more detail in Chapter 4 of the DEA.
    i. Sites must be selected to minimize interference with other 
activities in the marine environment, particularly avoiding areas of 
existing fisheries or shellfisheries, and regions of heavy commercial 
or recreational navigation (40 CFR 228.5(a)).
    EPA's evaluation determined that use of the proposed IOSN would 
cause minimal interference with the activities identified in the 
criterion. EPA and USACE used information from a variety of sources to 
determine what activities might be interfered with by the disposal of 
dredged material at the proposed IOSN. EPA considered recreational 
activities, commercial fishing areas, cultural or historically 
significant areas, commercial and recreational navigation, and existing 
scientific research activities. EPA and USACE used mapped Geographic 
Information System (GIS) data to overlay the locations of various uses 
and natural resources of the marine environment on the disposal site 
location and surrounding areas (including their bathymetry). Analysis 
of this data indicated that use of the site would have minimal 
potential for interfering with other existing or ongoing uses of the 
marine environment in and around the proposed IOSN, including lobster 
harvesting or fishing activities. While the site is located in an area 
where periodic fishing activity occurs, it is not considered a unique 
fishing ground or highly significant fishery harvest area. Finally, the 
site is not located in shipping lanes or any other region of heavy 
commercial or recreational navigation. Furthermore, the site is located 
in an area where any other vessels could easily navigate around any 
disposal vessels at or near the site, and the significant water depths 
at the site mean that material placed there will not interfere with 
navigation by extending up too high into the water column.
    ii. Sites must be situated such that temporary perturbations to 
water quality or other environmental conditions during initial mixing 
caused by disposal operations would be reduced to normal ambient levels 
or to undetectable contaminant concentrations or effects before 
reaching any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known 
geographically limited fishery or shellfishery (40 CFR 228.5(b)).
    EPA's analysis concludes that the proposed IOSN satisfies this 
criterion. First, the site will be used only for the disposal of 
dredged material determined to be suitable for ocean disposal by 
application of the MPRSA's ocean dumping criteria. See 40 CFR part 227. 
These criteria include provisions related to water quality and account 
for initial mixing. See 40 CFR 227.4, 227.5(d), 227.6(b) and (c), 
227.13(c), 227.27, and

[[Page 49080]]

227.29. Data evaluated during development of the DEA, indicates that 
any temporary perturbations in water quality or other environmental 
conditions at the site during initial mixing from disposal operations 
will be limited to the immediate area of the site and will neither 
cause any significant environmental degradation at the site nor reach 
any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or other important natural 
resource area. Second, the site is a significant distance from any 
beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known geographically limited 
fishery or shellfishery.
    iii. The sizes of disposal sites will be limited in order to 
localize for identification and control any immediate adverse impacts, 
and to permit the implementation of effective monitoring and 
surveillance to prevent adverse long-range impacts. Size, 
configuration, and location are to be determined as part of the 
disposal site evaluation (40 CFR 228.5(d)).
    EPA has determined, based on the information presented in the DEA, 
that the proposed IOSN alternative is sufficiently limited in size to 
allow for the identification and control of any immediate adverse 
impacts, and to permit the implementation of effective monitoring and 
surveillance to prevent adverse long-range impacts. The proposed IOSN 
covers approximately 2.4 nmi\2\ of bottom, which is approximately 
0.007% of the bottom surface area of the Gulf of Maine. The long 
history of dredged material disposal site monitoring in New England, 
and specifically at active and historic dredged material disposal sites 
elsewhere in the Gulf of Maine, provides ample evidence that these 
surveillance and monitoring programs are effective at determining 
physical, chemical, and biological impacts at sites of the size of the 
options considered in this case.
    The proposed IOSN is identified by specific coordinates spelled out 
in the DEA, and the use of precision navigation equipment in both 
dredged material disposal operations and monitoring efforts will enable 
accurate disposal operations and contribute to effective management and 
monitoring of the sites. Detailed plans for the management and 
monitoring of the proposed IOSN are described in the draft SMMP 
(Appendix G of the DEA). Finally, as discussed herein and in the DEA, 
EPA has tailored the size of the proposed IOSN based on site 
characteristics, such as bottom sediment type and bottom features, so 
that the area and boundaries of the sites are optimized for 
environmentally sound dredged material disposal operations.
    iv. EPA will, wherever feasible, designate ocean dumping sites 
beyond the edge of the continental shelf and other such sites that have 
been historically used (40 CFR 228.5(e)).
    EPA has determined that designation of the proposed IOSN is 
consistent with this criterion. EPA evaluated sites beyond the edge of 
the continental shelf and historical disposal sites in the Gulf of 
Maine as part of the alternatives analysis conducted for the DEA. 
Potential disposal areas located off the continental shelf would be a 
significant distance offshore, and impracticable for dredging projects 
from the area under evaluation. The nearest point on the continental 
shelf/slope boundary to Portsmouth Harbor is more than 230 miles south, 
about 96 miles southeast of Nantucket. The distance to the slope due 
east is even greater at about 270 miles. The haul distance to an off-
shelf disposal site is therefore much greater than the average 
operational limit of the southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern 
Massachusetts projects, making an off-shelf site infeasible for all 
projects. Additionally, the cost for evaluation and monitoring and the 
uncertainty of the environmental effects of off-shelf placement makes 
that option undesirable. Environmental concerns include increased risk 
of encountering endangered species during transit, increased fuel 
consumption and air emissions, and greater potential for accidents in 
transit that could lead to dredged material being dumped in unintended 
areas.
    USACE dredging and disposal records do not show evidence of dredged 
material ever having been placed at the area that encompasses the 
proposed IOSN. The only sites within the ZSF that have been used 
historically are the former IOSH which, according to USACE files, was 
used in the 1960s and early 1970s, or at the CADS, a USACE-selected 
MPRSA Section 103 site located off of Cape Arundel, Maine. However, 
both the IOSH and the CADS are limited in their capacity to accept new 
material if they were to be designated and have remaining seafloor 
areas that are incompatible with dredged material disposal.
Specific Criteria (40 CFR 228.6)
    In addition to the four general criteria discussed above, 40 CFR 
228.6(a) lists eleven specific factors to be used in evaluating the 
impact of using the site(s) for dredged material disposal under the 
MPRSA. Consistency with the eleven specific criteria is discussed 
below. This is also discussed in more detail in Chapter 4 of the DEA.
    i. Geographical Position, Depth of Water, Bottom Topography and 
Distance From Coast (40 CFR 228.6(a)(1)).
    Based on analyses in the DEA, EPA has concluded that the 
geographical position (i.e., location), water depth, bottom topography 
(i.e., bathymetry), and distance from coastlines of the proposed IOSN 
will facilitate containment of dredged material within site boundaries 
and reduce the likelihood of material being transported away from the 
site to adjacent seafloor areas. As described in the preceding Disposal 
Sites Description section and in the above discussion of compliance 
with general criteria iii and iv (40 CFR 228.5(c) and (d)), the 
proposed IOSN is located far enough from shore and in deep enough water 
to avoid adverse impacts to the coastline.
    The proposed IOSN is a containment area, so dredged material placed 
there is expected to stay in the site and not cause adverse effects to 
adjacent seafloor areas. The closest point of land to the proposed IOSN 
is Portsmouth, New Hampshire, which is located approximately 10.8 nmi 
(20 km) to the west. The shoreward edge of the site is approximately 
nine nmi from the nearest beaches in Rye, NH, and the site is located 
in waters ranging from 255 to 340 feet deep. As discussed in the DEA, 
the proposed IOSN is of a sufficient depth to allow the disposal of the 
amount of material that is projected over the 20-year planning horizon 
without exceeding any depth threshold. As a result, any short-term 
impacts from dredged material disposal will be localized and this, 
together with other regulatory requirements described elsewhere in this 
document, will facilitate prevention of any adverse impacts at and 
around the proposed IOSN.
    ii. Location in Relation to Breeding, Spawning, Nursery, Feeding, 
or Passage Areas of Living Resources in Adult or Juvenile Phases (40 
CFR 228.6(a)(2)).
    EPA considered the proposed IOSN in relation to breeding, spawning, 
nursery, feeding, and passage areas for adult and juvenile phases 
(i.e., life stages) of living resources in the Gulf of Maine. From this 
analysis, EPA concluded that, while disposal of suitable dredged 
material at the proposed IOSN would cause some short-term, localized 
effects, overall it would not cause adverse effects to the habitat 
functions and living resources specified in the above criterion. As 
previously noted, the proposed IOSN covers approximately 2.4 nmi\2\ of 
bottom, which is approximately 0.007%

[[Page 49081]]

of the bottom surface area of the Gulf of Maine.
    Generally, there are three primary ways that dredged material 
disposal could potentially adversely affect marine resources. First, 
disposal can cause physical impacts by injuring or burying less mobile 
fish, shellfish, and benthic organisms, as well as their eggs and 
larvae. Second, tug and barge traffic transporting the dredged material 
to a disposal site could possibly collide or otherwise interfere with 
marine mammals and reptiles. Third, contaminants in the dredged 
material could potentially bioaccumulate through the food chain. 
However, EPA and the other federal and state agencies that regulate 
dredging and dredged material disposal have responsibilities and 
authorities to impose requirements that prevent or greatly limit the 
potential for these types of impacts to occur.
    Dredged material disposal will have some localized impacts to fish, 
shellfish, and benthic organisms, such as clams and worms, that are 
present at an ocean disposal site (or in the water column directly 
above the site) during a disposal event. The sediment plume may entrain 
and smother some fish in the water column, and may bury some fish, 
shellfish, and other marine organisms on the sea floor. It also may 
result in a short-term loss of forage habitat in the immediate disposal 
area, but recolonization of disposal mounds by benthic infauna within 
1-3 years after disposal is expected at the proposed IOSN. As discussed 
in the DEA (section 7.5.2), over time, disposal mounds recover and 
develop abundant and diverse biological communities that are healthy 
and able to support species typically found in the ambient 
surroundings. Some organisms may burrow deeply into sediments, often up 
to 20 inches, and are more likely to survive a burial event.
    To further reduce potential environmental impacts associated with 
dredged material disposal, the dredged material from each proposed 
dredging project will be subjected to the MPRSA sediment testing 
requirements set forth at 40 CFR part 227 to determine its suitability 
for ocean disposal. Suitability for ocean disposal is determined by 
testing the proposed dredged material for toxicity and bioaccumulation 
and by quantifying the risk to human health that would result from 
consuming marine organisms that are exposed to the dredged material and 
its associated contaminants using a risk assessment model. If it is 
determined that the sediment is unsuitable for ocean disposal--that is, 
that it may unreasonably degrade or endanger human health or the marine 
environment--it cannot be disposed at disposal sites designated under 
the MPRSA. See 40 CFR 227.6. Therefore, EPA does not anticipate 
significant effects on marine organisms from dredged material disposal 
at the sites under evaluation.
    Regarding the potential for impacts to endangered species, EPA is 
complying with the ESA by consulting with the National Marine Fisheries 
Service (NMFS) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) concerning 
EPA's determination that the designation of the proposed IOSN would not 
likely adversely affect federally-listed species under their respective 
jurisdictions or any habitat designated as critical for such species. 
EPA also is coordinating with NMFS under the MSFCMA on potential 
impacts to essential fish habitat (EFH). Further details on these 
consultations are provided in the DEA and the sections below describing 
compliance with the ESA and MSFCMA.
    EPA recognizes that dredged material disposal causes some short-
term, localized adverse effects to marine organisms in the immediate 
vicinity of each disposal event. But because dredged material disposal 
would be limited to suitable material (see above regarding compliance 
with the general criterion at 40 CFR 228.5(d), EPA concludes that 
designating proposed IOSN would not cause unacceptable or unreasonable 
adverse impacts to breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding, or passage 
areas of living resources in adult or juvenile phases. There is no 
evidence of long-term effects on benthic processes or habitat 
conditions.
    iii. Location in Relation to Beaches and Other Amenity Areas (40 
CFR 228.6(a)(3)).
    EPA's analysis concludes that the proposed IOSN satisfies this 
criterion. The proposed IOSN is located approximately 10.8 nmi (20 km) 
east of Portsmouth, New Hampshire. The shoreward edge of the site is 
approximately nine nautical miles off the nearest beaches in Rye, NH, 
and is located in waters ranging in depth from 255 to 340 feet. The 
proposed IOSN is far enough away from beaches, parks, wildlife refuges, 
and other areas of special concern to prevent adverse impacts to these 
amenities. Based on information presented in section 6.3 of the DEA, 
and past monitoring of actual disposal activities, this distance is 
beyond any expected movement of dredged material due to tidal motion or 
currents. As noted above, any temporary perturbations in water quality 
or other environmental conditions at the sites during initial mixing 
from disposal operations will be limited to the immediate area of the 
sites and will not reach any beaches, parks, wildlife refuges, or other 
areas of special concern.
    Thus, EPA does not anticipate that the use of the proposed IOSN 
would cause any adverse impacts to beaches or other amenity areas.
    iv. Types and Quantities of Wastes Proposed To Be Disposed of, and 
Proposed Methods of Release, Including Methods of Packing the Waste, if 
Any (40 CFR 228.6(a)(4)).
    Dredged material subject to the MPRSA is not classified as a waste, 
and the proposed IOSN is only being considered for the disposal of 
dredged material; disposal of other types of material will not be 
allowed. It also should be noted that the disposal of certain other 
types of material is expressly prohibited by the MPRSA and EPA 
regulations (e.g., industrial waste, sewage sludge, chemical warfare 
agents, insufficiently characterized materials) (33 U.S.C. 1414b; 40 
CFR 227.5).
    Sites that are designated will receive dredged material transported 
by either government or private contractor hopper dredges or scows. 
Current hopper dredges or scows available for use have hopper 
capacities ranging from 800 to 6,000 cubic yards (cy). This would be 
the likely volume range of dredged material deposited in any one 
dredging placement cycle.
    The volume of dredged material to be removed from federal projects 
in the southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts region 
varies greatly from year to year depending upon need and funding. The 
majority of the dredged material to be disposed of in the ocean would 
come from shoals in the channels, anchorages, and turning basins in 
projects within the study area and would consist primarily of fine-
grained marine sediments that have been transported into the projects 
by tidal currents, riverine deposition, and upland erosion. The fine-
grained material undergoes rigorous testing to confirm that the 
material is suitable for unconfined ocean placement. The proposed site 
has been sized to accommodate the quantity of material expected to be 
placed there over the 20-year planning horizon. As previously 
discussed, dredging in southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern 
Massachusetts is projected to generate approximately 1.5 million mcy of 
dredged material over the next 20 years.
    For all these reasons, no significant adverse impacts are expected 
to be associated with the types and quantities

[[Page 49082]]

of dredged material that may be disposed at the sites.
    v. Feasibility of Surveillance and Monitoring (40 CFR 228.6(a)(5)).
    Monitoring and surveillance are expected to be feasible at the 
proposed IOSN. Upon designation of a site, monitoring would be 
conducted according to the most current approved SMMP. As a containment 
site, the proposed IOSN is conducive to the type of monitoring most 
commonly conducted at dredged material disposal sites, including side-
scan sonar, sediment profile imaging, and sediment grab sampling. The 
draft SMMP for the proposed IOSN is included as Appendix G of the DEA.
    vi. Dispersal, Horizontal Transport and Vertical Mixing 
Characteristics of the Area, Including Prevailing Current Direction and 
Velocity, if Any (40 CFR 228.6(a)(6)).
    The proposed IOSN site meets this criterion. The proposed IOSN is 
located in federal waters in water depths ranging from approximately 
255 to 340 feet. Water circulation in the vicinity of the proposed IOSN 
is strongly influenced by the counterclockwise flow, or gyre, normally 
occurring in the Gulf of Maine. The circulation of the Gulf consists of 
two circular gyres, one counterclockwise within the interior of the 
Gulf, and the second, clockwise over Georges Bank. Maine coastal waters 
are included as the western portion of the counterclockwise gyre within 
the Gulf. Current patterns in the vicinity of the proposed IOSN are 
typified by coastal-parallel, non-tidal southerly drift currents 
generated by the overall circulation of the Gulf of Maine.
    The fine-grained sediments that dominate the area of the proposed 
IOSN indicate that the site is in a depositional area. Consequently, 
any material placed at the proposed site would likely remain within the 
site and not be significantly affected or transported away from the 
site by currents.
    vii. Existence and Effects of Current and Previous Discharges and 
Dumping in the Area (Including Cumulative Effects) (40 CFR 
228.6(a)(7)).
    USACE dredging and disposal records do not show evidence of dredged 
material ever having been disposed of in the area that encompasses the 
proposed IOSN. Dredged material from within the ZSF was historically 
disposed of at either the CADS or the former, historically used IOSH, 
which was used in the 1960s and early 1970s.
    In general, results from decades of monitoring of current and 
historically used ocean disposal sites in the New England region 
indicate that the disposal of dredged material found suitable for ocean 
disposal do not significantly alter the long-term functions and values 
of seafloor bottom as potential habitat for biological communities or 
contribute to long-term changes in water quality or water circulation 
at the disposal sites. EPA would expect this also to be the case for 
the proposed IOSN.
    viii. Interference with Shipping, Fishing, Recreation, Mineral 
Extraction, Desalination, Fish and Shellfish Culture, Areas of Special 
Scientific Importance and Other Legitimate Uses of the Ocean (40 CFR 
228.6(a)(8)).
    In evaluating whether disposal activity at the sites could 
interfere with shipping, fishing, recreation, mineral extraction, 
desalination, fish or shellfish culture, areas of scientific 
importance, and other legitimate uses of the ocean, EPA considered both 
the effects of placing dredged material on the bottom at the proposed 
IOSN, and any effects from vessel traffic associated with transporting 
the dredged material to the disposal site. From this evaluation, EPA 
concluded there would be no unacceptable or unreasonable adverse 
effects on the considerations noted in this criterion. Some of the 
factors listed in this criterion have already been discussed above due 
to the overlap of this criterion with aspects of certain other 
criteria. Nevertheless, EPA will address each point below.
    EPA does not anticipate conflicts with commercial navigation at the 
proposed IOSN. The Portsmouth Pilots and the USACE discussed the 
proposed IOSN disposal site location and its anticipated use with 
respect to navigation transit impacts (as discussed in more detail in 
section 4.4.1 of the DEA). Vessels transiting to and from Portsmouth 
Harbor from the south and southeast follow a route inshore of the Isles 
of Shoals which will avoid proposed IOSN Vessels approaching or 
departing to and from the east and northeast (toward Maine and Canada) 
do cross the general area of the proposed IOSN disposal site. The 
pilots stated that conflicts between dredge disposal operations and 
shipping for large and small projects can be avoided, however, by 
adequate notice to mariners of disposal activities and frequent marine 
communication between the disposal tugs and the Portsmouth Pilots. 
Given the open-water conditions around the site and the relatively 
infrequency of dredged material disposal operations, EPA concludes that 
any conflicts with vessels traveling in the area of the proposed IOSN 
should be easily managed in a safe, efficient manner.
    EPA also carefully evaluated the potential effects of designating 
the proposed IOSN on commercial and recreational fishing for both 
finfish and shellfish (including lobster) and concluded that there 
would be no unreasonable or unacceptable adverse effects. As discussed 
above in relation to other site evaluation criteria, dredged material 
disposal will only have short-term, incidental, and insignificant 
effects on organisms in the disposal sites and no appreciable effects 
beyond the sites. Indeed, since past dredged material disposal has been 
determined to have no significant adverse effects on fishing, the 
similar projected levels of future disposal activities at the 
designated site are not expected to have any significant adverse 
effects.
    The four main reasons that EPA concluded that no unacceptable 
adverse effects would occur from disposal of dredged material at the 
proposed site are discussed below. First, EPA has concluded that any 
contaminants in material permitted for ocean disposal--having satisfied 
the dredged material criteria in the regulations that restrict any 
toxicity and bioaccumulation--will not cause any significant adverse 
effects to fish, shellfish, or other aquatic organisms. Because the 
proposed IOSN is a containment area, dredged material disposed at the 
site is expected to remain there.
    Second, the disposal sites do not encompass any especially 
important, sensitive, or limited habitat for the Gulf of Maine's fish 
and shellfish, such as key spawning or nursery habitat for species of 
finfish. Numerous studies and data reviewed by EPA and the USACE 
indicate that there is low potential for any future incremental risk 
from the ocean disposal of dredged sediments at the proposed IOSN, 
either in the long- or short-term.
    Third, while EPA found that a small number of demersal fish (e.g., 
winter flounder), shellfish (e.g., clams and lobsters), benthic 
organisms (e.g., worms), and zooplankton and phytoplankton could be 
lost due to the physical effects of disposal (e.g., burial of organisms 
on the seafloor by dredged material and entrainment of plankton in the 
water column by dredged material upon its release from a disposal 
barge), EPA also determined that these minor, temporary adverse effects 
would be neither unreasonable nor unacceptable. This determination was 
based on EPA's conclusion that the numbers of organisms potentially 
affected represent only a minuscule percentage of those in the Gulf of 
Maine, and findings from past monitoring in the region consistently 
show the rapid recovery of the benthic community in an area that has 
received dredged material.

[[Page 49083]]

    Fourth, EPA has determined that vessel traffic associated with 
dredged material disposal will not have any unreasonable or 
unacceptable adverse effects on fishing. There currently are no mineral 
extraction activities or desalinization facilities in the Gulf of Maine 
region with which disposal activity could potentially interfere. No 
finfish aquaculture currently takes place in the southeastern Gulf of 
Maine. Finally, the proposed IOSN is not in an area of special 
scientific importance; in fact, areas with such characteristics were 
screened out very early in the alternatives screening process. 
Accordingly, disposing of dredged material at the proposed IOSN will 
not interfere with any of the activities described in this criterion or 
other legitimate uses of this part of the Gulf of Maine.
    In addition, the designation and use of the proposed IOSN site has 
been determined by the EPA to be consistent with the Maine, New 
Hampshire, and Massachusetts coastal zone management programs (Appendix 
A of the DEA). The Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusetts coastal zone 
management programs will review this consistency determination and EPA 
has requested that they provide written notification of their findings.
    ix. The Existing Water Quality and Ecology of the Sites as 
Determined by Available Data or by Trend Assessment or Baseline Surveys 
(40 CFR 228.6(a)(9)).
    EPA's analysis of existing water quality and ecological conditions 
at the site, which was based on available data, trend assessments, and 
baseline surveys, indicates that use of the proposed IOSN will cause no 
unacceptable or unreasonable adverse environmental effects. 
Considerations related to water quality and various ecological factors 
(e.g., sediment quality, benthic organisms, fish and shellfish) have 
already been discussed above in relation to other site selection 
criteria and are discussed in detail in the DEA and supporting 
documents. In considering this criterion, EPA considered existing water 
quality and sediment quality data collected in the Gulf of Maine, 
including from the USACE's Disposal Area Monitoring System (DAMOS), as 
well as water quality data from EPA's coastal nutrient criteria and 
trend monitoring efforts. As discussed herein, EPA has determined that 
disposal of suitable dredged material at the proposed IOSN should not 
cause any significant adverse environmental effects to water quality or 
to ecological conditions at the site. EPA and the USACE have prepared a 
draft SMMP for the proposed IOSN to guide future monitoring of site 
conditions (Appendix G of the DEA).
    x. Potentiality for the Development or Recruitment of Nuisance 
Species in the Disposal Sites (40 CFR 228.6(a)(10)).
    Monitoring at disposal sites elsewhere in the Gulf of Maine over 
the past 35 years has shown no recruitment of nuisance (invasive, non-
native) species and no such adverse effects are expected to occur at 
the proposed IOSN in the future. EPA and the USACE will continue to 
monitor EPA-designated sites in the Gulf of Maine under their 
respective SMMPs, which include a ``management focus'' on ``changes in 
composition and numbers of pelagic, demersal, or benthic biota at or 
near the disposal sites'' (SMMP, Appendix G of the DEA).
    In addition, source materials from projects in southern Maine, New 
Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts to be dredged and transported to 
the disposal site historically have been classified as marine silts and 
clays, which are similar to the sediments found at the proposed IOSN 
site. Any material proposed for ocean disposal at the proposed IOSN 
site would be subject to sediment quality evaluation. Therefore, it is 
highly unlikely that any nuisance species could be established at the 
proposed disposal site since habitat (i.e., sediment type) or 
contaminant levels are unlikely to change over the long-term use of the 
site.
    xi. Existence at or in Close Proximity to the Sites of Any 
Significant Natural or Cultural Feature of Historical Importance (40 
CFR 228.6(a)(11)).
    There are no natural features of historical importance in the 
proposed IOSN, and the cultural resources that have the greatest 
potential for being impacted in this area are shipwrecks. Jeffery's 
Ledge, located to the east of the proposed IOSN, is an important 
feeding ground for humpback whales and right whales in the summer and 
fall months and serves as a prime recreational whale watching area. No 
impacts to this area are expected based on disposal of suitable dredged 
material at the proposed IOSN. Procedures outlined in the draft SMMP 
(Appendix G of the DEA) will be followed to further protect this 
feature.
    As discussed in section 6.7 of the DEA, sidescan sonar of the 
proposed IOSN was conducted and no potential shipwrecks or other 
cultural feature were noted. The cultural resource literature search 
conducted for the proposed IOSN area did not identify any shipwrecks in 
the vicinity. While undiscovered shipwrecks could occur in the area, it 
is unlikely based on the results of the sidescan survey of the area. 
Based on this information, it is unlikely that any significant cultural 
resources will be affected from the designation and use of the disposal 
site.
3. Disposal Site Management (40 CFR 228.3, 228.7, 228.8 and 228.9)
    The proposed IOSN would be subject to specific management 
requirements to ensure that unacceptable adverse environmental impacts 
do not occur. Examples of these requirements include: (1) Restricting 
use of the sites to the disposal of dredged material that has been 
determined to be suitable for ocean disposal under the requirements of 
the MPRSA; (2) monitoring the disposal site and associated reference 
site, the latter of which is not used for dredged material disposal, to 
assess potential impacts to the marine environment by providing a point 
of comparison to an area unaffected by dredged material disposal; and 
(3) retaining the right to limit or close these sites to further 
disposal activity if monitoring or other information reveals evidence 
of unacceptable adverse impacts to the marine environment. As mentioned 
above, dredged material disposal will not be allowed when weather and 
sea conditions could interfere with safe, effective placement of any 
dredged material at a designated site.
    In accordance with the requirements of MPRSA section 102(c) and 40 
CFR 228.3, EPA and the USACE have developed a draft SMMP for the 
proposed IOSN.

B. National Environmental Policy Act

    The NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., requires the public analysis of 
the potential environmental effects of proposed federal agency actions 
and reasonable alternative courses of action to ensure that these 
effects, and the differences in effects among the different 
alternatives, are understood. The goal of this analysis is to ensure 
high quality, informed, and transparent decision-making, to facilitate 
avoiding or minimizing any adverse effects of proposed actions, and to 
help restore and enhance environmental quality. See 40 CFR 6.100(a) and 
1500.1(c) and 1500.2(d) through (f). NEPA requires public involvement 
throughout the decision-making process. See 40 CFR 6.400(a) and 40 CFR 
1503 and 1501.7, 1506.6.
    EPA disposal site designation evaluations conducted under the MPRSA 
have been determined to be ``functionally equivalent'' to NEPA reviews, 
so that they are not subject to NEPA analysis requirements as a matter 
of law. Nevertheless, as a matter of

[[Page 49084]]

policy, EPA voluntarily uses NEPA procedures when evaluating the 
potential designation of ocean dumping sites. See 63 FR 58045 (Notice 
of Policy and Procedures for Voluntary Preparation of National 
Environmental Policy Act Documents, October 29, 1998). While EPA 
voluntarily uses NEPA review procedures in conducting MPRSA disposal 
site designation evaluations, EPA also has explained that ``[t]he 
voluntary preparation of these documents in no way legally subjects the 
Agency to NEPA's requirements'' (63 FR 58046).
    In this case, EPA and the USACE prepared a ``Draft Environmental 
Assessment and Evaluation Study for Designation of an Ocean Dredged 
Material Disposal Site to serve the Southern Maine, New Hampshire, and 
Northern Massachusetts Region'' (DEA). If EPA decides to proceed with 
this proposed action after full consideration of public comments, the 
Agency will publish a final rule for the site designation. In addition, 
EPA will also publish a Responses to Comments document in conjunction 
with publication of a Final Environmental Assessment (FEA). The 
Responses to Comments will identify and respond to comments received on 
the DEA and proposed rule. If, after full consideration of public 
comments, EPA and the USACE determine that the designation of the 
proposed IOSN will not have significant environmental impacts, the EPA 
and the USACE will issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). A 
FONSI is a document that presents the reasons why the agency has 
concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts projected 
to occur upon implementation of the action.
    If the FEA determines that the environmental impacts of the 
proposed IOSN designation will be significant, an Environmental Impact 
Statement will be prepared.
1. Cooperating Agencies
    The USACE was a ``cooperating agency'' in the development of the 
DEA because of its knowledge concerning the region's dredging needs, 
its technical expertise in monitoring dredged material disposal sites 
and assessing the environmental effects of dredging and dredged 
material disposal, its history in the regulation of dredged material 
disposal in the Gulf of Maine and elsewhere, and its ongoing legal role 
in regulating dredging, dredged material disposal, and the management 
and monitoring of disposal sites. To take advantage of expertise held 
by other entities, and to promote strong inter-agency communications, 
EPA also consulted and/or coordinated with the USFWS; the NMFS; the 
Maine Department of Environmental Protection; the Maine Department of 
Marine Resources; the Maine Geological Service; the Maine SHPO; the New 
Hampshire Department of Environmental Services; the New Hampshire 
Department of Fish and Game; and the Massachusetts Office of Coastal 
Zone Management.
    Throughout the DEA development process, EPA communicated with the 
cooperating federal and state agencies to keep them apprised of 
progress on the project and to solicit input. EPA conducted two 
interagency meetings between May 2016 and December 2018 to solicit data 
sources and concerns, to review progress, and to receive feedback on 
the proposed action. EPA also was in regular contact with 
representatives of these agencies throughout the DEA development 
process via multiple state and regional dredging taskforce team 
meetings.
2. Public Participation
    Consistent with the public participation provisions of the NEPA 
regulations, EPA is conducting a public review process by the release 
of this proposed rule and the DEA for public comment. Comments received 
as a result of the public review process will be considered, addressed, 
and documented in detail in an appendix of the Final Environmental 
Assessment.
3. Zone of Siting Feasibility
    As one of the first steps in the DEA process, EPA, in cooperation 
with other federal and state agencies, delineated a ZSF. The ZSF is the 
geographic area from which reasonable and practicable open-water 
dredged material disposal site alternatives should be selected for 
evaluation. EPA's 1986 site designation guidance manual describes the 
factors that should be considered in delineating the ZSF and recommends 
locating open-water disposal sites within an economically and 
operationally feasible radius from areas where dredging occurs. Other 
factors to be considered include navigational restrictions, political 
or other jurisdictional boundaries, the distance to the edge of the 
continental shelf, the feasibility of surveillance and monitoring, and 
operation and transportation costs. The ZSF analyzed in this DEA 
includes the coastal waters of the southern Maine, New Hampshire, and 
northern Massachusetts region between Cape Porpoise, Maine and Cape 
Ann, Massachusetts. These boundaries were chosen as they are the limits 
of equidistant points on the coast to either the PDS to the north off 
Cape Elizabeth, Maine, or the MBDS to the south off Boston Harbor, 
Massachusetts. The PDS and the MBDS are the nearest EPA-designated 
ocean disposal sites in the region and are located about 85.5 miles 
apart.
4. Draft Environmental Assessment and Evaluation Study
    The DEA evaluates whether an ODMDS should be designated to serve 
the southern Maine, New Hampshire, and southern Maine coastal region. 
The DEA describes the purpose and need for any such designation, and 
evaluates several alternatives to this action, including the option of 
``no action'' (i.e., no designation). Based on this evaluation, EPA 
concludes that designation of the proposed IOSN under the MPRSA is the 
preferred alternative.
    As stated in the Purpose and Need section, the purpose of this 
designation is to provide a long-term, open-water dredged material 
disposal site as a potential option for the future disposal of such 
material. The action is necessary because periodic dredging and dredged 
material disposal is unavoidably necessary to maintain safe navigation 
and marine commerce in ports and harbors in the southern Maine, New 
Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts coastal region. As previously 
noted, dredging in southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern 
Massachusetts is projected to generate approximately 1.5 mcy of dredged 
material over the next 20 years.
    EPA evaluated potential alternatives to open-water disposal in the 
southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts coastal 
region but determined that none were sufficient to meet the projected 
regional dredging needs. In accordance with EPA regulations, use of 
alternatives to ocean disposal will be required for dredged material 
management when they provide a practicable, environmentally preferable 
option for the dredged material from any particular disposal project. 
See 40 CFR 227.16. When no such practicable alternatives exist, 
however, EPA's designation of the proposed IOSN will provide an ocean 
disposal site as a potential management option for dredged material 
regulated under the MPRSA that has been tested and determined to be 
environmentally suitable for ocean disposal. Sediments found to be 
unsuitable for ocean disposal will not be authorized for placement at a 
disposal site designated by EPA under the MPRSA and will have to be 
managed in other ways.

[[Page 49085]]

    EPA's initial screening of alternatives, which involved input from 
other federal and state agencies led to the determination that the 
ocean disposal sites were the most environmentally sound, cost-
effective, and operationally feasible options for the full quantity of 
dredged material expected to be found suitable for ocean disposal over 
the 20-year planning horizon. Regardless of this conclusion, in 
practice, each individual dredging project will be analyzed on a case-
specific basis and ocean disposal of dredged material at a designated 
site would only be authorized when there is a need for such disposal 
(i.e., there are no practicable, environmentally preferable 
alternatives). See 40 CFR 227.2(a)(1), 227.16(b). EPA analyzed 
alternatives for the management of dredged material from navigation 
channels and harbors in the southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern 
Massachusetts coastal region. This analysis evaluated several different 
potential alternatives, including ocean disposal sites, upland 
disposal, beneficial uses, sediment treatment, and the no-action 
alternative. From this analysis, EPA determined that at least one ocean 
disposal site, such as the proposed IOSN, was necessary to provide 
sufficient capacity to meet the long-term dredged material disposal 
needs of the region in the event that practicable alternatives to ocean 
disposal are not available for all the material.

C. Coastal Zone Management Act

    The CZMA, 16 U.S.C. 1451, et seq., authorizes states to establish 
coastal zone management programs to develop and enforce policies to 
protect their coastal resources and promote uses of those resources 
that are desired by the state. These coastal zone management programs 
must be approved by the Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is responsible for 
administering the CZMA. Sections 307(c)(1)(A) and (C) of the CZMA 
require federal agencies to provide relevant states with a 
determination that each federal agency activity, whether taking place 
within or outside the coastal zone, that affects any land or water use 
or natural resource of the state's coastal zone, will be carried out in 
a manner consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the 
enforceable policies of the state's approved coastal zone management 
program. EPA's compliance with the CZMA is described below.
    Based on the evaluations presented in the DEA and supporting 
documents, and a review of the federally approved Maine, Massachusetts, 
and New Hampshire coastal zone programs and policies, EPA has 
determined that designation of the proposed IOSN for ocean dredged 
material disposal under the MPRSA would be fully consistent or 
consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable 
policies of the coastal zone management programs of Maine, 
Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. EPA will provide a written 
determination to that effect to each of the three states within the 
statutory and regulatory mandated timeframes.
    In EPA's view, there are several broad reasons why the proposed 
designation of the IOSN would be consistent with the applicable, 
enforceable policies of the states' coastal zone programs. First, the 
designation is not expected to cause any significant adverse impacts to 
the marine environment, coastal resources, or uses of the coastal zone. 
Indeed, EPA expects the designation to benefit uses involving 
navigation and berthing of vessels by facilitating needed dredging, and 
to benefit the environment by concentrating any open-water dredged 
material disposal at a single, environmentally appropriate site 
designated by EPA and subject to the previously described SMMP, rather 
than at a potential proliferation of USACE-selected disposal sites. 
Second, designation of the site does not actually authorize the 
disposal of any dredged material at the site, since any proposal to 
dispose dredged material from a particular project at a designated site 
will be subject to case-specific evaluation and be allowed only if: (a) 
The material satisfies the requirements of the MPRSA and Ocean Dumping 
Regulations; and (b) no practicable alternative method of management 
with less adverse environmental impact can be identified. Third, the 
designated disposal site will be managed and monitored pursuant to a 
SMMP and if adverse impacts are identified, use of the site will be 
modified to reduce or eliminate those impacts. Such modification could 
further restrict, or even terminate, use of the site, if appropriate. 
See 40 CFR 228.3, 228.11.

D. Endangered Species Act

    Under section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2), federal 
agencies are required to ensure that their actions are ``not likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or result 
in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat of such species, 
which is determined to be critical.'' Depending on the species 
involved, a federal agency is required to consult with the NMFS and/or 
USFWS if the agency's action ``may affect'' an endangered or threatened 
species or its critical habitat (50 CFR 402.14(a)). Thus, the ESA 
requires consultation with NMFS and/or USFWS to adequately address 
potential impacts to threatened and endangered species that may occur 
at the proposed dredged material disposal site from any proposal to 
dispose of dredged material.
    To comply with the ESA, EPA has coordinated with NMFS and USFWS and 
will request consultation concurrent with the release of the DEA. EPA 
has determined that the designation of a disposal site will not result 
in adverse impacts to threatened or endangered species, species of 
concern, marine protected areas, or essential fish habitat. In 
addition, the USACE would coordinate with the NMFS and USFWS for 
individual permitted projects to further ensure that impacts would not 
adversely impact any threatened or endangered species.

E. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act

    The MSFCMA, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., requires the designation of 
essential fish habitat (EFH) for federally managed species of fish and 
shellfish. The goal of these provisions is to ensure that EFH is not 
adversely impacted by fishing or other human activities, including 
dredged material disposal, and to further the enhancement of these 
habitats, thereby protecting both ecosystem health and the fisheries 
industries. Pursuant to section 305(b)(2) of the MSFCMA, federal 
agencies are required to consult with NMFS regarding any action they 
authorize, fund, or undertake that may adversely affect EFH. An adverse 
effect has been defined by the Act as, ``[a]ny impact which reduces the 
quality and/or quantity of EFH [and] may include direct (e.g., 
contamination or physical disruption), indirect (e.g., loss of prey, 
reduction in species' fecundity), site-specific or habitat-wide 
impacts, including individual, cumulative, or synergistic consequences 
of actions'' (50 CFR 600.810(a)).
    EPA is coordinating with NMFS to ensure compliance with the EFH 
provisions of the MSFCMA and has prepared an essential fish habitat 
assessment in compliance with the Act. EPA will incorporate any 
conservation recommendations from NMFS or explain why it has not done 
so in its final action.

VI. Restrictions

    Disposal shall be limited to dredged material suitable for ocean 
disposal.

[[Page 49086]]

VII. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing this rule to designate the IOSN for the purpose of 
providing an environmentally sound, ocean disposal option for possible 
use in managing dredged material from harbors and navigation channels 
in the southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts 
coastal region. Without this ocean dredged material disposal site 
designation, there will not be a cost-effective ocean disposal site 
available to serve this region after December 31, 2021, when the 
current Congressionally-authorized term of use for the CADS expires. In 
developing the DEA, described previously in several sections, the USACE 
and EPA conducted a ``dredging needs'' assessment that estimated that a 
total volume of 1.5 mcy of dredged material that would come from 
southern Maine, New Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts over the 20-
year planning horizon.
    The site designation process has been conducted consistent with the 
requirements of the MPRSA, NEPA, CZMA, and other applicable federal and 
state statutes and regulations. The basis for this federal action is 
further described in the DEA that identifies EPA designation of the 
proposed IOSN as the preferred alternative. The DEA also is being 
released for public comment in conjunction with the publication of this 
proposed rule. Upon completion of the public comment period and EPA's 
consideration of all comments received, EPA will publish a Responses to 
Comments document in conjunction with publication of a FEA and final 
rule. The Responses to Comments will identify and respond to comments 
received on the DEA and proposed rule. If, after full consideration of 
public comments, EPA and the USACE determine that the designation of 
the proposed IOSN will not have significant environmental impacts, the 
EPA and the USACE will issue a FONSI with the FEA. A FONSI is a 
document that presents the reasons why the agency has concluded that 
there are no significant environmental impacts projected to occur upon 
implementation of the action.
    If the FEA determines that the environmental impacts of the 
proposed IOSN designation will be significant, an Environmental Impact 
Statement will be prepared.
    If designated, the proposed IOSN is subject to management and 
monitoring protocols to prevent the occurrence of unacceptable adverse 
environmental impacts. These protocols are spelled out in a draft SMMP 
for the site. The SMMP is included as Appendix G to the DEA. Under 40 
CFR 228.3(b), the Regional Administrator of EPA Region 1 is responsible 
for the overall management of this site. As previously explained, the 
designation of a disposal site does not constitute or imply EPA's 
approval of ocean disposal at that site of dredged material from any 
specific project. Disposal of dredged material will not be allowed at 
the proposed IOSN until the proposed disposal operation first receives 
proper authorization from the USACE under MPRSA section 103. All MPRSA 
permits and federal projects involving ocean disposal of dredged 
material are subject to EPA review and concurrence under MPRSA section 
103(c). EPA may concur (with or without conditions) or decline to 
concur on the MPRSA permit/authorization) in accordance with MPRSA 
section 103(c). If EPA concurs with conditions, the final permit/
authorization must include those conditions. If EPA declines to concur 
(i.e., non-concurs), the USACE cannot issue the permit/authorize itself 
to implement the MPRSA directly in USACE project involving ocean 
dumping. In order to properly obtain authorization to dispose of 
dredged material at the proposed IOSN disposal site under the MPRSA, 
the dredged material proposed for disposal must first satisfy the 
applicable criteria for testing and evaluating dredged material 
specified in EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 227, and it must be 
determined in accordance with EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 227, 
subpart C, that there is a need for ocean disposal (i.e., that there is 
no practicable dredged material management alternative to ocean 
disposal with less adverse environmental impact).

VIII. Supporting Documents

1. EPA Region 1/USACE NAE. 2019. Draft Environmental Assessment and 
Evaluation Study for Designation of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal 
Site for the Southern Maine, New Hampshire, and Northern Massachusetts 
Coastal Region. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Boston, 
MA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA. 
August 2019.
2. EPA Region 1/USACE NAE. 2004. Regional Implementation Manual for the 
Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Disposal in New England 
Waters. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Boston, MA, and 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA. April 
2004. EPA/USACE. 1991.
3. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal-Testing 
Manual. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, and U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC. EPA--503/8-91/001. February 
1991.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action, as defined in 
the Executive Order, and was therefore not submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for review.

2. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA because it would not require persons to obtain, maintain, 
retain, report, or publicly disclose information to or for a federal 
agency.

3. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (RFA). Rather, this action would provide a cost-effective, 
environmentally acceptable alternative for the disposal of dredged 
material for many small marina and boat yard operators in the region.

4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, 
local, or tribal governments or the private sector.

5. 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 federal government and the states, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175 because the proposed restrictions will not have 
substantial direct effects on Indian tribes, on the relationship 
between the federal

[[Page 49087]]

government and Indian Tribes, or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the federal government and Indian Tribes. EPA 
consulted with the potentially affected Indian tribes in making this 
determination.

7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is 
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this 
action do not present a disproportionate risk to children.

8. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

9. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

10. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed 
by this action will not have a disproportionately high and adverse 
human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income, or 
indigenous populations.

11. Executive Order 13158: Marine Protected Areas

    Executive Order 13158 (65 FR 34909, May 31, 2000) requires EPA to 
``expeditiously propose new science-based regulations, as necessary, to 
ensure appropriate levels of protection for the marine environment.'' 
EPA may take action to enhance or expand protection of existing marine 
protected areas and to establish or recommend, as appropriate, new 
marine protected areas. The purpose of the Executive Order is to 
protect the significant natural and cultural resources within the 
marine environment, which means, ``those areas of coastal and ocean 
waters, the Great Lakes and their connecting waters, and submerged 
lands thereunder, over which the United States exercises jurisdiction, 
consistent with international law.''
    The EPA expects that this proposed rule will have no significant 
adverse impacts on the ocean and coastal waters off southern Maine, New 
Hampshire, and northern Massachusetts or the organisms that inhabit 
them.

12. Executive Order 13840: Regarding the Ocean Policy To Advance the 
Economic, Security, and Environmental Interests of the United States

    The policies in section 2 of Executive Order 13840 (83 FR 29341, 
June 19, 2019) include, among others, the following: ``It shall be the 
policy of the United States to: (a) Coordinate the activities of 
executive departments and agencies (agencies) regarding ocean-related 
matters to ensure effective management of ocean, coastal, and Great 
Lakes waters and to provide economic, security, and environmental 
benefits for present and future generations; [. . . and] (d) facilitate 
the economic growth of coastal communities and promote ocean 
industries, which employ millions of Americans, advance ocean science 
and technology, feed the American people, transport American goods, 
expand recreational opportunities, and enhance America's energy 
security. . . .'' EPA, in developing this proposed rule, coordinated 
extensively with other federal and state agencies, and potentially 
affected stakeholders, to ensure effective management of dredging and 
dredged material by providing a cost-effective, environmentally 
acceptable alternative for the disposal of such material. The 
availability of such an ocean disposal site supports the economic 
growth of coastal communities and ocean industries, which will be able 
to maintain safe and efficient navigation through the ports and 
channels in a cost-effective manner.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228

    Environmental protection, Water pollution control.

    Dated: August 29, 2019.
Deborah A. Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, Chapter I, of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as set forth 
below.

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. In Sec.  228.15 add paragraph (b)(7) to read as follows:


Sec.  228.15  Dumping sites designated on a final basis.

    (b) * * *
    (7) Isles of Shoals North Dredged Material Disposal Site (IOSN).
    (i) Location: A 8,500-foot (2590-meter) diameter circle on the 
seafloor with its center located at 70[deg] 26.995' W and 43[deg] 
1.142' N.
    (ii) Size: 1,311 acres (57,142,000 square feet).
    (iii) Depth: Ranges from 255 to 340 feet (78 to 104 m).
    (iv) Primary use: Dredged material disposal.
    (v) Period of use: Continuing use.
    (vi) Restrictions: Limited to disposal of dredged material suitable 
for ocean disposal.
[FR Doc. 2019-20127 Filed 9-17-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P