Ocean Dumping: Modification of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Offshore of Humboldt Bay, California, 32340-32346 [2020-11030]
Download as PDF
32340
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 104 / Friday, May 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for
residues of the fungicide, ipflufenoquin
[2-[2-(7,8-difluoro-2-methylquinolin-3yloxy)-6- fluorophenyl]propan-2-ol], in
or on almond at 0.10 ppm; almond hulls
at 3 ppm; and pome fruit (Crop Group
11–10) at 0.15 ppm; and tolerances for
residues for ipflufenoquin, QP-1-14, QP1-10, QP-1-11, and QP-1-15 (in terms of
ipflufenoquin) on cattle, fat at 0.010
ppm; cattle, meat at 0.01 ppm; cattle,
meat byproducts at 0.010 ppm; dairy
cattle milk at 0.01 ppm; goat, fat at 0.010
ppm; goat, meat at 0.01 ppm; goat, meat
byproducts at 0.010 ppm; horse, fat at
0.010 ppm; horse, meat at 0.01 ppm;
horse, meat byproducts at 0.010 ppm;
sheep, fat at 0.010 ppm; sheep, meat at
0.01 ppm; and sheep, meat byproducts
at 0.010 ppm. High Performance Liquid
Chromatography with tandem Mass
Spectrometric detection (HPLC–MS/MS)
is used to measure and evaluate the
chemical ipflufenoquin and its
metabolites. Contact: RD.
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a.
Dated: May 13, 2020.
Delores Barber,
Director, Information Technology and
Resources Management Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2020–11636 Filed 5–28–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 228
[EPA–R09–OW–2020–0188; FRL–10009–64–
Region 9]
Ocean Dumping: Modification of an
Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site
Offshore of Humboldt Bay, California
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to modify
the boundaries of the existing EPAdesignated Humboldt Open Ocean
Disposal Site (referred to hereafter as
HOODS) offshore of Humboldt Bay,
California, pursuant to Section 102 of
the Marine Protection, Research and
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
Sanctuaries Act, as amended (MPRSA).
The primary purpose for the site
modification is to enlarge the site to
serve the long-term need for disposal of
permitted, suitable material dredged
from Humboldt Harbor and vicinity, in
order to provide for continued safe
navigation in the vicinity of Humboldt
Bay. The modified site will be subject to
monitoring and management to ensure
continued protection of the marine
environment.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before June 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OW–2020–0188, by one of the following
electronic methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments and accessing the docket and
materials related to this proposed rule.
• Email: ross.brian@epa.gov.
• Mail: Note that due to the ongoing
COVID–19 pandemic EPA’s office
building in San Francisco is closed, and
physical mail may not be received for
some time. Therefore, written comments
should be submitted by one of the
electronic methods listed above. If you
are unable to access email, please
contact Brian Ross via the phone
number listed below and he will assist
you in determining how to best to
submit your comments.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OW–2020–
0188. The 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 through
www.regulations.gov or email,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov website is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means the 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 the 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, the EPA recommends that
you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your
comment. If the EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
the 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. For additional
information about the EPA’s public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: The Environmental
Assessment (EA) supporting this
proposed action, and other publicly
available docket materials, are
accessible electronically at
www.regulations.gov, and also on the
EPA Region 9 web page: https://
www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/
humboldt-open-ocean-disposal-sitehoods-documents.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Ross, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region 9, Water
Division, Dredging & Sediment
Management Team, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California 94105;
phone number (415) 972–3475; email:
ross.brian@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Potentially Affected Persons
Persons potentially affected by this
action include those who seek or might
seek permits or approval to dispose of
dredged material into ocean waters
pursuant to the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C. 1401
to 1445. The EPA’s proposed action
would be relevant to persons, including
organizations and government bodies
seeking to dispose of dredged material
in ocean waters offshore of Humboldt
Bay, California. Currently, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
would be most affected by this action.
Potentially affected categories and
persons include:
Category
Examples of potentially regulated persons
Federal Government .......................
Industry and general public ............
State, local and tribal governments
USACE Civil Works projects, and other Federal agencies.
Port authorities, marinas and harbors, shipyards and marine repair facilities, berth owners.
Governments owning and/or responsible for ports, harbors, and/or berths, government agencies requiring
disposal of dredged material associated with public works projects.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 May 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM
29MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 104 / Friday, May 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding persons likely to
be affected by this proposed action. For
any questions regarding the
applicability of this proposed action to
a particular entity, please refer to the
contact person listed in the preceding
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Background
a. History of Ocean Disposal Offshore
Humboldt Bay, California
HOODS is currently the only
designated ocean dredged material
disposal site (ODMDS) off the coast of
Humboldt Bay, California. The existing
HOODS is located three to four nautical
miles (nmi) offshore Humboldt Bay, and
is currently 1.0 square nautical mile
(nmi2) in size. HOODS originally
received final designation by the EPA in
1995. Since that time an average of one
million cubic yards (cy) of dredged
material has been disposed at HOODS
each year. The great majority of this
material has been sand dredged by
USACE from the Humboldt Harbor
entrance channel. The dredged sand
that has been disposed at HOODS has
mounded to the point where the
existing site is now effectively reaching
full capacity. The USACE San Francisco
District and EPA Region 9 have
identified a need to expand the capacity
of HOODS so that ongoing dredging can
continue to provide for safe navigation
in and around Humboldt Bay. The need
for modifying current ocean disposal
capacity is based on historical dredging
volumes, estimates of future dredging
needs, and limited current capacity of
alternatives to ocean disposal in the
area.
The EPA is proposing to expand the
existing HOODS boundaries rather than
designate a new ocean disposal site off
the coast of Humboldt Bay. Monitoring
studies at HOODS have confirmed that
there have been no significant adverse
environmental consequences of disposal
in this area, and that there are no unique
or limited habitats, features, or uses of
the ocean that would be affected by
expanding the site. Note that proposed
expansion of the existing HOODS
boundary does not by itself mean that
dredged material from any specific
project will necessarily be approved to
be disposed at the site. Before any
person can ocean dump dredged
material at either the existing HOODS or
at the proposed expanded HOODS in
the future, the EPA and the USACE
must evaluate the project according to
the ocean dumping regulatory criteria
(40 CFR 227) and the USACE must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 May 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
authorize the disposal under section 103
of the MPRSA. 33 U.S.C. 1413(b). The
USACE relies on the EPA’s ocean
dumping criteria when evaluating
permit requests for (and implementing
federal projects involving) the
transportation of dredged material for
the purpose of dumping it into ocean
waters. MPRSA permits and federal
projects involving ocean dumping of
dredged material are subject to the
EPA’s review and concurrence in
accordance with 33 U.S.C. 1413(c). The
EPA may concur with or without
conditions or decline to concur (i.e.,
non-concur) on the permit. If the EPA
concurs with conditions, the final
permit or authorization must include
those conditions. If the EPA declines to
concur, the USACE cannot issue the
permit for ocean dumping of dredged
material or authorize the disposal.
The Environmental Assessment (EA)
supporting this proposed action, along
with other publicly available docket
materials, are available for public
review and are accessible electronically
at www.regulations.gov, and also on the
EPA Region 9 web page: https://
www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/
humboldt-open-ocean-disposal-sitehoods-documents.
b. Location and Configuration of the
Proposed Expanded HOODS
This action proposes the modification
(by expansion) of the existing HOODS.
The proposed modified HOODS is in
approximately ¥150 to ¥200 feet of
water (¥45 to ¥61 meters). The
proposed modified boundaries would
expand the existing HOODS from a size
of 1.0 nmi2 to 4.0 nmi2 in size. The
location of the proposed modified
ODMDS is bounded by the coordinates
listed below. The proposed coordinates
for the site are in North American
Datum 83 (NAD 83):
Proposed Modified HOODS Coordinates
(NAD 83)
(A) 40°50.300′ N, 124°018.017′ W
(B) 40°49.267′ N, 124°15.767′ W
(C) 40°47.550′ N, 124°17.083′ W
(D) 40°48.567′ N, 124°19.300′ W
The proposed modification of the
existing HOODS boundary will allow
the EPA to adaptively manage the site
to maximize its capacity, manage
mounding and loss of fine sediments
outside of the site, and minimize the
potential for any long-term adverse
effects to the marine environment.
c. Management and Monitoring of the
Site
The proposed modified ODMDS is
expected to continue to receive suitable
dredged material from the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
32341
navigation project at Humboldt Harbor,
California, and suitable dredged
material from other local and regional
dredging applicants who obtain an
MPRSA permit for the disposal of
dredged material at the site. Under the
Ocean Dumping regulations (40 CFR
228.3(b)) EPA is responsible for the
management of all ocean disposal sites
designated under the MPRSA.
Management of the ocean disposal sites
consists of regulating the times, quantity
and characteristics of the material
dumped at the site; establishing
disposal controls, conditions and
requirements to avoid and minimize
potential impacts to the marine
environment; and monitoring the site
and surrounding environment to verify
that unanticipated or significant adverse
effects are not occurring from past or
continued use of the ocean disposal site
and that terms of the MPRSA permit are
met. All persons using HOODS would
be required to follow any projectspecific permit conditions, as well as
provisions of the Site Management and
Monitoring Plan (SMMP) for the
modified site as identified or
incorporated into a permit or Federal
project. The draft SMMP is currently
available for review as an appendix to
the EA, and separately at https://
www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/
humboldt-open-ocean-disposal-sitehoods-documents. It includes
management and monitoring
considerations to ensure that disposal
activities will not unreasonably degrade
or endanger the marine environment,
human health, welfare, or economic
potentialities. The draft SMMP for the
proposed modified ODMDS also
includes management conditions to
ensure adverse mounding does not
occur at the site. The SMMP will be
finalized by the EPA Region 9 and the
USACE San Francisco District following
finalization of the site modification rule
and consideration of any comments
received on this proposed rule and the
draft SMMP.
d. MPRSA Criteria
In evaluating the proposed modified
HOODS, the EPA assessed the site
according to the criteria of the MPRSA,
with emphasis on the general and
specific regulatory criteria of 40 CFR
part 228, to determine whether the
proposed site designation satisfies those
criteria. The EA provides a detailed
evaluation of the criteria and other
related factors for the modification of
the existing ODMDS.
General Criteria (40 CFR 228.5)
(a) Sites must be selected to minimize
interference with other activities in the
E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM
29MYP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
32342
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 104 / Friday, May 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
marine environment, particularly
avoiding areas of existing fisheries or
shellfisheries, and regions of heavy
commercial or recreational navigation.
(40 CFR 228.5(a)).
The original 1995 site designation
identified the HOODS location as
having the least potential for adverse
impacts to important fish and shellfish
resources (particularly including smelt,
flatfish, and decapods which are all
most abundant in waters shallower than
50 m in the area, closer to shore). In
addition, as part of development of the
EA supporting this proposed rule, the
EPA completed informal consultation
with the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), and
confirmed that ongoing use of the
proposed modified HOODS would
continue to avoid adverse effects on
existing fisheries, shellfisheries, or
habitats of concern. In addition,
expansion of HOODS will ensure that
mounding of disposed sand does not
occur to the extent that the wave climate
near the Humboldt entrance channel is
altered and adversely affects navigation
conditions. The proposed action
therefore satisfies this MPRSA criterion.
(b) Sites must be situated such that
temporary perturbations to water quality
or other environmental conditions
during initial mixing caused by disposal
operations would be reduced to normal
ambient levels or undetectable
contaminant concentrations or effects
before reaching any beach, shoreline,
marine sanctuary, or known
geographically limited fishery or
shellfishery. (40 CFR 228.5(b)).
The proposed HOODS modification
area will be used for disposal of suitable
dredged material as determined by
Section 102 of the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C.
1412, and the Ocean Dumping Criteria
published at 40 CFR 220–228. Based on
the USACE and EPA dredged material
testing and evaluation procedures,
disposal of dredged maintenance
material and proposed new work
material is not expected to have any
significant impact on water quality. The
existing and proposed modified HOODS
boundaries are located sufficiently far
from shore and fisheries resources to
allow temporary water quality
disturbances caused by disposal of
dredged material to be reduced to
ambient conditions before reaching any
environmentally sensitive areas.
(c) 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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 May 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
configuration, and location are to be
determined as part of the disposal site
evaluation. (40 CFR 228.5(d)).
The location, size, and configuration
of the proposed modified HOODS
boundaries provide long-term capacity,
while also permitting effective site
management, site monitoring, and
limiting environmental impacts to the
surrounding area to the greatest extent
practicable.
The EA supporting this proposed
action considered two alternatives for
expanding HOODS: Expansion by 0.5
nmi to the north and west; and
expansion by 1.0 nmi to the north and
west (the proposed action). Under the
proposed action, the effective total
capacity of the site would increase from
the original 25 million cy to over 100
million cy (i.e., allowing for 75 million
cy of additional disposal to occur),
before mounding to ¥130 feet could
again occur across the entire site. If
today’s disposal practices were to
continue unchanged (i.e., if an average
of 1 million cy of entrance channel sand
per year were to continue being
disposed of at HOODS indefinitely), the
site would reach capacity again in about
75 years. In contrast, the smaller
expansion alternative would provide
effective capacity for about 30 years of
disposal. This smaller footprint would
also limit on-site management options
compared to the proposed action.
When determining the size of the
proposed modified site, the ability to
implement effective monitoring and
surveillance programs was considered
to ensure that the environment of the
site could be protected, and that
navigational safety would not be
compromised by the mounding of
dredged material. The EPA and USACE
have demonstrated that the proposed
modified HOODS area is feasible to
manage and monitor, as shown by
successful surveys in 2008 and 2014.
The draft SMMP (Appendix D of the
EA) describes the future monitoring and
management activities that the EPA and
USACE will implement to confirm that
disposal at the site is not significantly
affecting adjacent areas.
(d) EPA will, wherever feasible,
designate ocean dumping sites beyond
the edge of the continental shelf and
other such sites where historical
disposal has occurred. (40 CFR
228.5(e)).
The continental shelf break is
approximately 10 nmi offshore at
Eureka, California. The Zone of Siting
Feasibility (ZSF) analysis prepared by
USACE in support of the original (1995)
HOODS designation determined that an
economically practicable ocean disposal
site serving Humboldt Harbor could not
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
be located off the continental shelf, but
rather would have to be within
approximately 4 nmi from the ends of
the entrance channel jetties. The
existing HOODS boundary is 2.5 to 3.7
nmi from these jetties. The proposed
modified HOODS boundary will extend
from 3 nmi to 5 nmi from the jetties.
While portions of the proposed
modified site will be slightly beyond the
original ZSF threshold of 4 nmi, the
expansion area remains as close to the
entrance channel as practicable while
allowing capacity for future disposal
needs without creating potentially
unsafe mounding. Also, the proposed
modified HOODS will occur
immediately adjacent to where disposal
of virtually identical dredged material
has occurred for the past 25 years. This
allows the least area to be disturbed
overall from ongoing and future
disposal activity.
Specific Criteria (40 CFR 228.6)
(1) Geographical Position, Depth of
Water, Bottom Topography and
Distance from Coast. (40 CFR
228.6(a)(1)).
The proposed modified HOODS is on
the continental shelf three to five nmi
offshore of Eureka, California, in water
depths of approximately 150 to 200 feet
(45 to 61 m). The seafloor in this area
is comprised of a gently sloping,
essentially featureless sedimentary plain
that grades evenly from fine sand in
shallower depths to silts in deeper
areas. The EA contains a map of the
proposed modified HOODS boundaries.
(2) Location in Relation to Breeding,
Spawning, Nursery, Feeding, or Passage
Areas of Living Resources in Adult or
Juvenile Phases. (40 CFR 228.6(a)(2)).
The HOODS area provides feeding
and breeding areas for common resident
benthic organisms, fish, marine
mammal, turtle, and seabird species.
However, the proposed modified
HOODS boundaries have been selected
to avoid the presence of any unique or
limited breeding, spawning, nursery,
feeding, or passage areas for adult or
juvenile phases of living resources and
designation of the site is not expected to
affect any geographically limited (i.e.,
unique) resources or habitats. Informal
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
consultation with USFWS, and both
ESA and Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)
consultations with NMFS, confirmed
that ongoing disposal operations in an
expanded HOODS will not have
significant impacts to sensitive living
resources or their habitats.
(3) Location in Relation to Beaches
and Other Amenity Areas. (40 CFR
228.6(a)(3)).
E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM
29MYP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 104 / Friday, May 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
The proposed modified HOODS
boundaries begin at approximately three
nmi offshore and the square site extends
two nmi further offshore. The proposed
site is therefore well removed from
beaches or amenity areas, and currents
in the area are not expected to transport
material disposed at HOODS toward
shore. No significant impacts to beaches
or amenity areas associated with use of
the existing HOODS have been detected.
(4) Types and Quantities of Wastes
Proposed to be Disposed of, and
Proposed Methods of Release, including
Methods of Packing the Waste, if any.
(40 CFR 228.6(a)(4)).
Only suitable dredged material that
meets the Ocean Dumping Criteria in 40
CFR 220–228 and receives a permit or
is otherwise authorized for dumping by
the USACE, and concurred with by
EPA, will be disposed in the proposed
modified HOODS. Dredged materials
dumped in this area will be primarily
sand with some fines, and most will
originate from Humboldt Harbor.
Average yearly disposal of dredged
material is expected to continue to be
approximately 1,000,000 cubic yards,
primarily by government owned or
contracted hopper dredges. None of the
material is packaged in any manner. If
a Nearshore Sand Placement Site
(NSPS) is established nearby in the
future, the volume of sand disposed at
HOODS could substantially decrease.
(5) Feasibility of Surveillance and
Monitoring. (40 CFR 228.6(a)(5)).
The EPA expects monitoring and
surveillance at the proposed modified
HOODS to continue to be feasible and
readily performed from ocean or
regional class research vessels. The area
of the proposed modified HOODS has
been successfully surveyed and sampled
in 2008 and 2014. The EPA and USACE
will continue to periodically monitor
the site for physical, biological and
chemical attributes, as described in the
draft SMMP for the proposed modified
site.
(6) Dispersal, Horizontal Transport
and Vertical Mixing Characteristics of
the Area, including Prevailing Current
Direction and Velocity, if any. (40 CFR
228.6(a)(6)).
Ocean current monitoring in the
vicinity of HOODS has confirmed both
up- and down-coast current directions
(depending on the season), with nearsurface current velocities on the order of
25 cm/sec (0.5 knot), and deeper-water
current velocities of 20 cm/sec (0.4
knot) at 45 meters deep and 15 cm/sec
(0.3 knot) at the bottom. These current
conditions have not adversely affected
the ability to successfully and precisely
dispose of dredged material permitted
or authorized for disposal at HOODS in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 May 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
the past nor are they expected to affect
disposal in the future.
(7) Existence and Effects of Current
and Previous Discharges and Dumping
in the Area (including Cumulative
Effects). (40 CFR 228.6(a)(7)).
Previous disposal of dredged material
at the existing HOODS has resulted in
mounding of sand and burial of benthic
organisms within the site but no
discernable physical, chemical, or
biological effects outside the site. Water
quality effects from active disposal are
temporary, spatially limited, and return
to background levels prior to the next
disposal event. Short-term, long-term,
and cumulative effects of dredged
material disposal in the proposed
modified ODMDS would be negligible,
and similar to those for the existing
HOODS.
The only discharge in the vicinity of
HOODS is from DG Fairhaven Power
LLC’s Fairhaven Power Facility on the
Samoa Peninsula. Fairhaven Power is
permitted to discharge a maximum of
0.35 million gallons per day of
powerplant-related process water,
cooling tower water, and other
wastewater under terms of their current
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit No.
CA0024571, issued by the State of
California’s North Coast Water Board.
The company discharges through an
existing outfall into ocean waters
adjacent to the Samoa Peninsula. The
NPDES permit prohibits discharging
wastewater in violation of effluent
standards or prohibitions established
under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water
Act, and it also prohibits discharging
sewage sludge. The outfall is located
approximately 3.5 nautical miles (6.5
kilometers) east of the HOODS.
Prevailing nearshore currents would
direct discharge plumes from this
outfall up or down the coast, depending
of the seasonal current regime, not
offshore towards the HOODS. The EPA
believes that there will be no adverse
cumulative or synergistic impacts from
the use of HOODS and discharges from
the outfall described.
(8) Interference with Shipping,
Fishing, Recreation, Mineral Extraction,
Desalination, Fish and Shellfish
Culture, Areas of Special Scientific
Importance and Other Legitimate Uses
of the Ocean. (40 CFR 228.6(a)(8)).
Minor, short-term interferences with
commercial and recreational boat traffic
may occur within Humboldt Harbor
during dredging operations. However,
interference as a result of the transport
and disposal of dredged material to
HOODS would be even less because
disposal vessels move slowly, remain in
established navigation channels, and
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
32343
operations are announced via U.S. Coast
Guard Notice to Mariners. There may be
minor, temporary interferences with
recreational fishing in the area during
disposal operations, but HOODS is not
closed to fishing or other uses. HOODS
has not been identified as an area of
special scientific importance. There are
no aquaculture areas near the site. The
likelihood of direct interference with
these activities is therefore negligible.
(9) The Existing Water Quality and
Ecology of the Sites as Determined by
Available Data or Trend Assessment of
Baseline Surveys. (40 CFR 228.6(a)(9)).
Water quality at the existing HOODS
is typical of waters offshore of the
northern California coast. Monitoring
conducted in the vicinity of the
proposed modified HOODS and
experience with past disposals in the
existing HOODS have not identified any
adverse water quality impacts from
ocean disposal of dredged material.
Water column plumes associated with
disposal events rapidly return to
background, before subsequent disposal
events occur. The seafloor in this area
is comprised of a gently sloping,
essentially featureless sedimentary plain
that grades evenly from fine sand in
shallower depths to silts in deeper
areas. The existing HOODS supports
benthic and epibenthic fauna
characteristic of the region, but there are
no unique or limited habitats in the
vicinity. No adverse impacts to benthos
outside the disposal site have been
identified based on comprehensive
monitoring.
(10) Potentiality for the Development
or Recruitment of Nuisance Species in
the Disposal Site. (40 CFR 228.6(a) (10)).
Nuisance species, considered as any
undesirable organism not previously
existing at a location, have not been
observed at, or in the vicinity of, the
proposed modified HOODS. Disposal of
dredged material, as well as monitoring,
has been ongoing for the past 25 years.
The dredged material to be disposed at
the proposed modified ODMDS is
expected to be from similar locations to
those dredged previously and disposed
of at the existing site; therefore, it
expected that any benthic organisms
transported to the site would be
relatively similar in nature to those
already present.
(11) Existence at or in Close Proximity
to the Site of any Significant Natural or
Cultural Feature of Historical
Importance. (40 CFR 228.6(a) (11)).
EPA evaluated state records and
coordinated with the California State
Lands Commission concerning historic
shipwrecks near HOODS. The EA
documents that the nearest recorded
shipwreck sites are close to shore and
E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM
29MYP1
32344
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 104 / Friday, May 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
would not be affected by ongoing
disposal at HOODS. In addition, USACE
conducted a survey for potential
shipwrecks near the existing HOODS in
1991 (prior to designation of the existing
HOODS). The USACE survey identified
three magnetic anomalies that could
potentially be associated with
unrecorded shipwrecks. None of these
anomalies has been buried by the
existing HOODS disposal mound. The
EPA collected high-resolution
multibeam echo sounder data in 2014 at
the locations of each magnetic anomaly,
and confirmed that no debris,
structures, or other material extended
above the sediment surface at any of
these locations. Because these
anomalies do not extend above the
surface now, and apparently have not
since at least 1991, their exact character
remains unknown. Ongoing disposal
operations may effectively bury these
features further but will not otherwise
directly affect them.
III. Environmental Statutory Review
No Action Alternative
Alternative 1: Expansion of HOODS by
1 nmi (Preferred Alternative)
Alternative 1, the Proposed Action, is
to slightly reorient and expand the
existing HOODS boundary by 1 nmi to
the north (upcoast) and 1 nmi to the
west (offshore). Alternative 1 is the
Proposed Action because it would
provide environmentally acceptable
disposal capacity for many years, while
also affording the most operational
flexibility for managing the dredged
material in a manner that would further
minimize even physical impacts over
time. This configuration would result in
the total area of the site increasing from
1 square nmi to 4 square nmi. The
effective total capacity of the site would
increase from the original 25 million cy
to over 100 million cy (i.e., allowing for
75 million cy of additional disposal to
occur), before mounding to ¥130 feet
could again occur across the entire site.
If current disposal practices were to
continue unchanged (i.e., if 1 million cy
of entrance channel sand per year were
to continue to be disposed of at HOODS
indefinitely), the modified site would
reach capacity in about 75 years.
The No Action Alternative is defined
as not modifying the size of the existing
HOODS boundaries. This alternative
would not address the need for an
adequately sized ocean disposal site to
accommodate an annual average of
1,000,000 cy of ongoing and future
dredging. Because there is no other
currently available disposal site for this
material, rapid shoaling of the entrance
channel would quickly render
navigation unsafe, significantly affecting
Alternative 2: Expansion of HOODS by
⁄ nmi
Alternative 2 is the expansion of the
existing HOODS boundary by 1⁄2 nmi to
the north (upcoast) and 1⁄2 nmi to the
west (offshore). This configuration
would result in the total area of the site
increasing from 1 square nmi to 2.25
square nmi. The effective total capacity
of the site would increase from the
original 25 million cy to approximately
56 million cy (i.e., allowing for
a. National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
The EPA’s primary voluntary NEPA
document for expanding the existing
HOODS is the EA, prepared by the EPA
in cooperation with the USACE and
issued for public review simultaneously
with this proposed rule. Anyone
desiring to review the EA may access it
at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
No. EPA–R09–OW–2020–0188, or at
https://www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/
humboldt-open-ocean-disposal-sitehoods-documents. The EA and its
Appendices provide the threshold
environmental review for modification
of HOODS. The EA discusses in detail
the purpose and need for the proposed
action and examines alternatives. The
EPA determined that there would be no
significant adverse impacts of
implementing either of the action
alternatives evaluated for expanding the
existing HOODS.
The following three ocean disposal
alternatives were considered in detail in
the EA.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
the economy of the greater Eureka area.
Increased wave action in the Harbor
entrance would endanger commercial
ships as well as fishing and recreational
vessels. This situation would discourage
shippers from using Humboldt Bay for
commerce, because it requires
additional vessel trips to accommodate
‘‘light-loaded’’ vessels, resulting in
increased transportation costs,
decreased vessel safety, and
maneuvering problems. This would
have a long-term adverse impact on the
local economy. In addition, use of the
Humboldt Harbor as a port of refuge
could be affected. Finally, ship
groundings caused by improperly
maintained deep-draft channels could
result in adverse ecological
repercussions (i.e., oil and fuel spills).
Although the No Action Alternative
would not address the purpose and
need for the proposed action, it was
evaluated in the EA as a basis to
compare the effects of the other
alternatives considered.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 May 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
12
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
approximately 31 million cy of
additional disposal to occur), before
mounding to ¥130 feet could again
occur across the entire site. If current
disposal practices were to continue
unchanged (i.e., if 1 million cy per year
of entrance channel sand were to
continue to be disposed of at HOODS
indefinitely), the modified site would
reach capacity in about 31 years.
b. Magnuson-Stevens Act
The EPA submitted an EFH
assessment to the NMFS, pursuant to
Section 305(b), 16 U.S.C. 1855(b)(2), of
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, as
amended, 16 U.S.C. 1801 to 1891. The
EPA determined that the expansion of
HOODS by one nmi (the proposed
action) will not significantly affect
managed species or EFH. NMFS
concurred with the EPA’s
determination, but included one
Conservation Recommendation to
further minimize potential impacts.
Specifically, NMFS recommended
continuing to manage future disposal at
HOODS by expanding the mound while
leaving other areas of the site
undisturbed as long as possible, rather
than purposely spreading disposal
events throughout the site each year.
The draft SMMP (available along with
this proposed rule for public comment)
discusses a proposed approach for
implementing this NMFS Conservation
Recommendation; the SMMP will be
finalized after considering any
comments on it and on this proposed
rule.
c. Coastal Zone Management Act
The EPA will submit a Consistency
Determination (CD) package to the
California Coastal Commission (CCC)
following the close of the public
comment period on the Environmental
Assessment and the proposed rule. The
CD package will specifically address
how the proposed action to expand
HOODS is consistent to the maximum
extent practicable with the California
Coastal Act Chapter 3 policies. EPA will
not take final action on the proposed
HOODS expansion until CCC review of
EPA’s consistency determination is
complete and any comments have been
addressed to the maximum extent
practicable.
d. Endangered Species Act
The ESA, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531
to 1544, requires federal agencies to
consult with NMFS and the USFWS to
ensure that any action authorized,
funded, or carried out by the federal
agency is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any endangered
E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM
29MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 104 / Friday, May 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
species or threatened species or result in
the destruction or adverse modification
of any critical habitat. The EPA
completed informal ESA consultations
with USFWS and NMFS, and the
consultations are included as an
Appendix to the EA.
Based on those consultations, the EPA
determined that the proposed action
will have ‘‘no effect’’ on marine
mammals, sea turtles and certain
seabird species. The EPA further
determined that the proposed action
‘‘may affect but is not likely to adversely
affect’’ anadromous fish (including the
SONCC Coho ESU, the CC Chinook
Salmon ESU, the NC Steelhead DPS,
Eulachon, and sDPS Green Sturgeon),
marbled murrelet, and short-tailed
albatross. The Services concurred with
these findings and no additional
mitigation measures were recommended
beyond the avoidance and minimization
aspects of the EPA mandatory disposal
site use conditions which would apply
to every project using HOODS (these
conditions are included with the draft
SMMP, and relevant provisions of the
SMMP would be identified or
incorporated into subsequently issued
permits and Federal projects).
e. National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation
Act (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470 to 470a–2,
requires federal agencies to consider the
effect of their actions on districts, sites,
buildings, structures, or objects,
included in, or eligible for inclusion in
the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP). The depths of the proposed
HOODS (approximately 150–200 feet)
generally excludes potential habitation
or resources related to human
settlements in this area. Historic
shipwreck remnants do exist in the
general vicinity, but none would be
affected by ongoing disposal activities
within the expanded HOODS
boundaries.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This rule proposes to modify the
HOODS by expanding the boundaries of
the existing site pursuant to Section 102
of the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C 1412. This
proposed action complies with
applicable executive orders and
statutory provisions as follows:
a. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This proposed action is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 May 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
therefore not subject to review under
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76
FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
b. Executive Order 13089: Coral Reef
Protection
Executive Order 13089 on Coral Reef
Protection directs agencies ‘‘to preserve
and protect the biodiversity, health,
heritage, and social and economic value
of U.S. coral reef ecosystems and the
marine environment.’’ This E.O. does
not apply to this action because there
are no coral reef ecosystems in the
HOODS area.
c. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed action does not impose
an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
This proposed site modification does
not require persons to obtain, maintain,
retain, report, or publicly disclose
information to or for a federal agency.
d. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
generally requires federal agencies to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis
of any rule subject to notice and
comment rulemaking requirements
under the Administrative Procedure Act
or any other statute unless the agency
certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. For
purposes of assessing the impacts of this
rule on small entities, small entity is
defined as: (1) A small business defined
by the Small Business Administration’s
size regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2)
a small governmental jurisdiction that is
a government of a city, county, town,
school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3)
a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. The EPA
determined that this proposed action
will not have a significant economic
impact on small entities because the
proposed rule will only have the effect
of expanding an existing site in order to
allow ongoing disposal of dredged
material in ocean waters. After
considering the economic impacts of
this proposed rule, the EPA certifies that
this proposed action will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
32345
e. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This proposed action contains no
federal mandates under the provisions
of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, 2 U.S.C.
1531 to 1538, for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. This
proposed action imposes no new
enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector.
Therefore, this proposed action is not
subject to the requirements of sections
202 or 205 of the UMRA. This proposed
action is also not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of the
UMRA because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small government
entities. Those entities are already
subject to existing permitting
requirements for the disposal of dredged
material in ocean waters.
f. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This proposed action does not have
federalism implications. It does not
have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among various levels of
government, as specified in Executive
Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order
13132 does not apply to this proposed
action. In the spirit of Executive Order
13132, and consistent with the EPA
policy to promote communications
between the EPA and State and local
governments, the EPA specifically
solicited comments on this proposed
action from State and local officials.
g. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This proposed action does not have
tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 because the
modification of the existing HOODS
will not have a direct effect on Indian
Tribes, on the relationship between the
federal government and Indian Tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian Tribes. In
addition, the depths of the proposed
HOODS (approximately 150 to 200 feet)
generally excludes potential habitation
or resources related to human
settlements. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action.
Nevertheless, the EPA specifically
solicited input from officials of 10
potentially interested tribal
governments during the scoping phase
of this action. The EPA is now actively
soliciting comments from these tribes on
this proposed action, as well as any
E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM
29MYP1
32346
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 104 / Friday, May 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
comments related to this Executive
Order.
h. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis
required under section 5–501 of the
Executive Order has the potential to
influence the regulation. This proposed
action is not subject to Executive Order
13045 because it does not establish an
environmental standard intended to
mitigate health or safety risks. However,
the EPA welcomes comments on this
proposed action related to this
Executive Order.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
i. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This proposed action is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355)
because it is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as defined under
Executive Order 12866. However, we
welcome comments on this proposed
action related to this Executive Order.
j. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–
113, 12(d) (§ 15 U.S.C. 272), directs the
EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus bodies. The
NTTAA directs the EPA to provide
Congress, through Office of Management
and Budget, explanations when the
Agency decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus
standards. This proposed action
includes environmental monitoring and
measurement as described in the EPA’s
proposed SMMP. The EPA will not
require the use of specific, prescribed
analytic methods for monitoring and
managing the proposed modified
HOODS. The Agency plans to allow the
use of any method, whether it
constitutes a voluntary consensus
standard or not, that meets the
monitoring and measurement criteria
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 May 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
discussed in the SMMP. The EPA
welcomes comments on this aspect of
the proposed rulemaking and,
specifically, invites the public to
identify potentially applicable voluntary
consensus standards and to explain why
such standards should be used in this
proposed action.
k. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629)
establishes federal executive policy on
environmental justice. Its main
provision directs federal agencies, to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make
environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States. The
EPA determined that this proposed rule
will not have disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it does
not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment. The EPA has assessed the
overall protectiveness of modifying the
existing HOODS against the criteria
established pursuant to the MPRSA to
ensure that any adverse impact to the
environment will be mitigated to the
greatest extent practicable. The EPA
welcomes comments on this proposed
action related to this Executive Order.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
Environmental protection, Water
pollution control.
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of Section 102 of the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, as
amended, 33 U.S.C. 1401, 1411, 1412.
Dated: May 14, 2020.
John W. Busterud,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal
Register as follows:
2. Section 228.15 is amended by
revising paragraphs (l)(10) (i) through
(vi) to read as follows:
■
§ 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a
final basis.
*
*
*
*
*
(l) * * *
(10) * * *
(i) Location: The coordinates of the
four corners of the square site are: 40°
50.300′ North latitude (N) by
124°018.017′ West longitude (W);
40°49.267′ N by 124°15.767′ W;
40°47.550′ N by 124°17.083′ W; and
40°48.567′ N by 124°19.300′ W (North
American Datum from 1983).
(ii) Size: 4 square nautical miles (13.4
square kilometers).
(iii) Depth: Water depths within the
area range between approximately 150
to 200 feet (45 to 61 meters).
(iv) Use Restricted to Disposal of:
Disposal shall be limited to dredged
material determined to be suitable for
ocean disposal according to 40 CFR
220–228.
(v) Period of Use: Continuing use over
50 years from date of site designation,
subject to restrictions and provisions set
forth in paragraph (l)(10)(vi) of this
section.
(vi) Restrictions/Provisions: Site
management and monitoring activities
shall be implemented during the period
of site use in accordance with the
permit or Federal project that identifies
or incorporates the most recent Site
Management and Monitoring Plan
(SMMP) for the HOODS published by
EPA in consultation with USACE, and
as may be modified in EPA
concurrences for individual projects
disposing at HOODS. The SMMP may
be periodically revised as necessary;
proposed substantive revisions to the
SMMP shall be made following
opportunity for public review and
comment.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2020–11030 Filed 5–28–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM
29MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 104 (Friday, May 29, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32340-32346]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11030]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 228
[EPA-R09-OW-2020-0188; FRL-10009-64-Region 9]
Ocean Dumping: Modification of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal
Site Offshore of Humboldt Bay, California
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
modify the boundaries of the existing EPA-designated Humboldt Open
Ocean Disposal Site (referred to hereafter as HOODS) offshore of
Humboldt Bay, California, pursuant to Section 102 of the Marine
Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, as amended (MPRSA). The
primary purpose for the site modification is to enlarge the site to
serve the long-term need for disposal of permitted, suitable material
dredged from Humboldt Harbor and vicinity, in order to provide for
continued safe navigation in the vicinity of Humboldt Bay. The modified
site will be subject to monitoring and management to ensure continued
protection of the marine environment.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OW-2020-0188, by one of the following electronic methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments and accessing the docket and materials related to
this proposed rule.
Email: [email protected].
Mail: Note that due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic EPA's
office building in San Francisco is closed, and physical mail may not
be received for some time. Therefore, written comments should be
submitted by one of the electronic methods listed above. If you are
unable to access email, please contact Brian Ross via the phone number
listed below and he will assist you in determining how to best to
submit your comments.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OW-
2020-0188. The 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 through
www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov website is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means the 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 the 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, the EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment. If the
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, the 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. For
additional information about the EPA's public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: The Environmental Assessment (EA) supporting this proposed
action, and other publicly available docket materials, are accessible
electronically at www.regulations.gov, and also on the EPA Region 9 web
page: https://www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/humboldt-open-ocean-disposal-site-hoods-documents.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Ross, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region 9, Water Division, Dredging & Sediment
Management Team, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105;
phone number (415) 972-3475; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Potentially Affected Persons
Persons potentially affected by this action include those who seek
or might seek permits or approval to dispose of dredged material into
ocean waters pursuant to the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C. 1401 to 1445. The EPA's
proposed action would be relevant to persons, including organizations
and government bodies seeking to dispose of dredged material in ocean
waters offshore of Humboldt Bay, California. Currently, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) would be most affected by this action.
Potentially affected categories and persons include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially regulated
Category persons
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Government................ USACE Civil Works projects, and
other Federal agencies.
Industry and general public....... Port authorities, marinas and
harbors, shipyards and marine
repair facilities, berth owners.
State, local and tribal Governments owning and/or
governments. responsible for ports, harbors, and/
or berths, government agencies
requiring disposal of dredged
material associated with public
works projects.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 32341]]
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding persons likely to be affected by this
proposed action. For any questions regarding the applicability of this
proposed action to a particular entity, please refer to the contact
person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
II. Background
a. History of Ocean Disposal Offshore Humboldt Bay, California
HOODS is currently the only designated ocean dredged material
disposal site (ODMDS) off the coast of Humboldt Bay, California. The
existing HOODS is located three to four nautical miles (nmi) offshore
Humboldt Bay, and is currently 1.0 square nautical mile (nmi\2\) in
size. HOODS originally received final designation by the EPA in 1995.
Since that time an average of one million cubic yards (cy) of dredged
material has been disposed at HOODS each year. The great majority of
this material has been sand dredged by USACE from the Humboldt Harbor
entrance channel. The dredged sand that has been disposed at HOODS has
mounded to the point where the existing site is now effectively
reaching full capacity. The USACE San Francisco District and EPA Region
9 have identified a need to expand the capacity of HOODS so that
ongoing dredging can continue to provide for safe navigation in and
around Humboldt Bay. The need for modifying current ocean disposal
capacity is based on historical dredging volumes, estimates of future
dredging needs, and limited current capacity of alternatives to ocean
disposal in the area.
The EPA is proposing to expand the existing HOODS boundaries rather
than designate a new ocean disposal site off the coast of Humboldt Bay.
Monitoring studies at HOODS have confirmed that there have been no
significant adverse environmental consequences of disposal in this
area, and that there are no unique or limited habitats, features, or
uses of the ocean that would be affected by expanding the site. Note
that proposed expansion of the existing HOODS boundary does not by
itself mean that dredged material from any specific project will
necessarily be approved to be disposed at the site. Before any person
can ocean dump dredged material at either the existing HOODS or at the
proposed expanded HOODS in the future, the EPA and the USACE must
evaluate the project according to the ocean dumping regulatory criteria
(40 CFR 227) and the USACE must authorize the disposal under section
103 of the MPRSA. 33 U.S.C. 1413(b). The USACE relies on the EPA's
ocean dumping criteria when evaluating permit requests for (and
implementing federal projects involving) the transportation of dredged
material for the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters. MPRSA permits
and federal projects involving ocean dumping of dredged material are
subject to the EPA's review and concurrence in accordance with 33
U.S.C. 1413(c). The EPA may concur with or without conditions or
decline to concur (i.e., non-concur) on the permit. If the EPA concurs
with conditions, the final permit or authorization must include those
conditions. If the EPA declines to concur, the USACE cannot issue the
permit for ocean dumping of dredged material or authorize the disposal.
The Environmental Assessment (EA) supporting this proposed action,
along with other publicly available docket materials, are available for
public review and are accessible electronically at www.regulations.gov,
and also on the EPA Region 9 web page: https://www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/humboldt-open-ocean-disposal-site-hoods-documents.
b. Location and Configuration of the Proposed Expanded HOODS
This action proposes the modification (by expansion) of the
existing HOODS. The proposed modified HOODS is in approximately -150 to
-200 feet of water (-45 to -61 meters). The proposed modified
boundaries would expand the existing HOODS from a size of 1.0 nmi\2\ to
4.0 nmi\2\ in size. The location of the proposed modified ODMDS is
bounded by the coordinates listed below. The proposed coordinates for
the site are in North American Datum 83 (NAD 83):
Proposed Modified HOODS Coordinates (NAD 83)
(A) 40[deg]50.300' N, 124[deg]018.017' W
(B) 40[deg]49.267' N, 124[deg]15.767' W
(C) 40[deg]47.550' N, 124[deg]17.083' W
(D) 40[deg]48.567' N, 124[deg]19.300' W
The proposed modification of the existing HOODS boundary will allow
the EPA to adaptively manage the site to maximize its capacity, manage
mounding and loss of fine sediments outside of the site, and minimize
the potential for any long-term adverse effects to the marine
environment.
c. Management and Monitoring of the Site
The proposed modified ODMDS is expected to continue to receive
suitable dredged material from the Federal navigation project at
Humboldt Harbor, California, and suitable dredged material from other
local and regional dredging applicants who obtain an MPRSA permit for
the disposal of dredged material at the site. Under the Ocean Dumping
regulations (40 CFR 228.3(b)) EPA is responsible for the management of
all ocean disposal sites designated under the MPRSA. Management of the
ocean disposal sites consists of regulating the times, quantity and
characteristics of the material dumped at the site; establishing
disposal controls, conditions and requirements to avoid and minimize
potential impacts to the marine environment; and monitoring the site
and surrounding environment to verify that unanticipated or significant
adverse effects are not occurring from past or continued use of the
ocean disposal site and that terms of the MPRSA permit are met. All
persons using HOODS would be required to follow any project-specific
permit conditions, as well as provisions of the Site Management and
Monitoring Plan (SMMP) for the modified site as identified or
incorporated into a permit or Federal project. The draft SMMP is
currently available for review as an appendix to the EA, and separately
at https://www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/humboldt-open-ocean-disposal-site-hoods-documents. It includes management and monitoring considerations
to ensure that disposal activities will not unreasonably degrade or
endanger the marine environment, human health, welfare, or economic
potentialities. The draft SMMP for the proposed modified ODMDS also
includes management conditions to ensure adverse mounding does not
occur at the site. The SMMP will be finalized by the EPA Region 9 and
the USACE San Francisco District following finalization of the site
modification rule and consideration of any comments received on this
proposed rule and the draft SMMP.
d. MPRSA Criteria
In evaluating the proposed modified HOODS, the EPA assessed the
site according to the criteria of the MPRSA, with emphasis on the
general and specific regulatory criteria of 40 CFR part 228, to
determine whether the proposed site designation satisfies those
criteria. The EA provides a detailed evaluation of the criteria and
other related factors for the modification of the existing ODMDS.
General Criteria (40 CFR 228.5)
(a) Sites must be selected to minimize interference with other
activities in the
[[Page 32342]]
marine environment, particularly avoiding areas of existing fisheries
or shellfisheries, and regions of heavy commercial or recreational
navigation. (40 CFR 228.5(a)).
The original 1995 site designation identified the HOODS location as
having the least potential for adverse impacts to important fish and
shellfish resources (particularly including smelt, flatfish, and
decapods which are all most abundant in waters shallower than 50 m in
the area, closer to shore). In addition, as part of development of the
EA supporting this proposed rule, the EPA completed informal
consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and confirmed that ongoing use
of the proposed modified HOODS would continue to avoid adverse effects
on existing fisheries, shellfisheries, or habitats of concern. In
addition, expansion of HOODS will ensure that mounding of disposed sand
does not occur to the extent that the wave climate near the Humboldt
entrance channel is altered and adversely affects navigation
conditions. The proposed action therefore satisfies this MPRSA
criterion.
(b) Sites must be situated such that temporary perturbations to
water quality or other environmental conditions during initial mixing
caused by disposal operations would be reduced to normal ambient levels
or undetectable contaminant concentrations or effects before reaching
any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known geographically limited
fishery or shellfishery. (40 CFR 228.5(b)).
The proposed HOODS modification area will be used for disposal of
suitable dredged material as determined by Section 102 of the MPRSA, 33
U.S.C. 1412, and the Ocean Dumping Criteria published at 40 CFR 220-
228. Based on the USACE and EPA dredged material testing and evaluation
procedures, disposal of dredged maintenance material and proposed new
work material is not expected to have any significant impact on water
quality. The existing and proposed modified HOODS boundaries are
located sufficiently far from shore and fisheries resources to allow
temporary water quality disturbances caused by disposal of dredged
material to be reduced to ambient conditions before reaching any
environmentally sensitive areas.
(c) 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)).
The location, size, and configuration of the proposed modified
HOODS boundaries provide long-term capacity, while also permitting
effective site management, site monitoring, and limiting environmental
impacts to the surrounding area to the greatest extent practicable.
The EA supporting this proposed action considered two alternatives
for expanding HOODS: Expansion by 0.5 nmi to the north and west; and
expansion by 1.0 nmi to the north and west (the proposed action). Under
the proposed action, the effective total capacity of the site would
increase from the original 25 million cy to over 100 million cy (i.e.,
allowing for 75 million cy of additional disposal to occur), before
mounding to -130 feet could again occur across the entire site. If
today's disposal practices were to continue unchanged (i.e., if an
average of 1 million cy of entrance channel sand per year were to
continue being disposed of at HOODS indefinitely), the site would reach
capacity again in about 75 years. In contrast, the smaller expansion
alternative would provide effective capacity for about 30 years of
disposal. This smaller footprint would also limit on-site management
options compared to the proposed action.
When determining the size of the proposed modified site, the
ability to implement effective monitoring and surveillance programs was
considered to ensure that the environment of the site could be
protected, and that navigational safety would not be compromised by the
mounding of dredged material. The EPA and USACE have demonstrated that
the proposed modified HOODS area is feasible to manage and monitor, as
shown by successful surveys in 2008 and 2014. The draft SMMP (Appendix
D of the EA) describes the future monitoring and management activities
that the EPA and USACE will implement to confirm that disposal at the
site is not significantly affecting adjacent areas.
(d) EPA will, wherever feasible, designate ocean dumping sites
beyond the edge of the continental shelf and other such sites where
historical disposal has occurred. (40 CFR 228.5(e)).
The continental shelf break is approximately 10 nmi offshore at
Eureka, California. The Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF) analysis
prepared by USACE in support of the original (1995) HOODS designation
determined that an economically practicable ocean disposal site serving
Humboldt Harbor could not be located off the continental shelf, but
rather would have to be within approximately 4 nmi from the ends of the
entrance channel jetties. The existing HOODS boundary is 2.5 to 3.7 nmi
from these jetties. The proposed modified HOODS boundary will extend
from 3 nmi to 5 nmi from the jetties. While portions of the proposed
modified site will be slightly beyond the original ZSF threshold of 4
nmi, the expansion area remains as close to the entrance channel as
practicable while allowing capacity for future disposal needs without
creating potentially unsafe mounding. Also, the proposed modified HOODS
will occur immediately adjacent to where disposal of virtually
identical dredged material has occurred for the past 25 years. This
allows the least area to be disturbed overall from ongoing and future
disposal activity.
Specific Criteria (40 CFR 228.6)
(1) Geographical Position, Depth of Water, Bottom Topography and
Distance from Coast. (40 CFR 228.6(a)(1)).
The proposed modified HOODS is on the continental shelf three to
five nmi offshore of Eureka, California, in water depths of
approximately 150 to 200 feet (45 to 61 m). The seafloor in this area
is comprised of a gently sloping, essentially featureless sedimentary
plain that grades evenly from fine sand in shallower depths to silts in
deeper areas. The EA contains a map of the proposed modified HOODS
boundaries.
(2) Location in Relation to Breeding, Spawning, Nursery, Feeding,
or Passage Areas of Living Resources in Adult or Juvenile Phases. (40
CFR 228.6(a)(2)).
The HOODS area provides feeding and breeding areas for common
resident benthic organisms, fish, marine mammal, turtle, and seabird
species. However, the proposed modified HOODS boundaries have been
selected to avoid the presence of any unique or limited breeding,
spawning, nursery, feeding, or passage areas for adult or juvenile
phases of living resources and designation of the site is not expected
to affect any geographically limited (i.e., unique) resources or
habitats. Informal Endangered Species Act (ESA) consultation with
USFWS, and both ESA and Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultations with
NMFS, confirmed that ongoing disposal operations in an expanded HOODS
will not have significant impacts to sensitive living resources or
their habitats.
(3) Location in Relation to Beaches and Other Amenity Areas. (40
CFR 228.6(a)(3)).
[[Page 32343]]
The proposed modified HOODS boundaries begin at approximately three
nmi offshore and the square site extends two nmi further offshore. The
proposed site is therefore well removed from beaches or amenity areas,
and currents in the area are not expected to transport material
disposed at HOODS toward shore. No significant impacts to beaches or
amenity areas associated with use of the existing HOODS have been
detected.
(4) Types and Quantities of Wastes Proposed to be Disposed of, and
Proposed Methods of Release, including Methods of Packing the Waste, if
any. (40 CFR 228.6(a)(4)).
Only suitable dredged material that meets the Ocean Dumping
Criteria in 40 CFR 220-228 and receives a permit or is otherwise
authorized for dumping by the USACE, and concurred with by EPA, will be
disposed in the proposed modified HOODS. Dredged materials dumped in
this area will be primarily sand with some fines, and most will
originate from Humboldt Harbor. Average yearly disposal of dredged
material is expected to continue to be approximately 1,000,000 cubic
yards, primarily by government owned or contracted hopper dredges. None
of the material is packaged in any manner. If a Nearshore Sand
Placement Site (NSPS) is established nearby in the future, the volume
of sand disposed at HOODS could substantially decrease.
(5) Feasibility of Surveillance and Monitoring. (40 CFR
228.6(a)(5)).
The EPA expects monitoring and surveillance at the proposed
modified HOODS to continue to be feasible and readily performed from
ocean or regional class research vessels. The area of the proposed
modified HOODS has been successfully surveyed and sampled in 2008 and
2014. The EPA and USACE will continue to periodically monitor the site
for physical, biological and chemical attributes, as described in the
draft SMMP for the proposed modified site.
(6) Dispersal, Horizontal Transport and Vertical Mixing
Characteristics of the Area, including Prevailing Current Direction and
Velocity, if any. (40 CFR 228.6(a)(6)).
Ocean current monitoring in the vicinity of HOODS has confirmed
both up- and down-coast current directions (depending on the season),
with near-surface current velocities on the order of 25 cm/sec (0.5
knot), and deeper-water current velocities of 20 cm/sec (0.4 knot) at
45 meters deep and 15 cm/sec (0.3 knot) at the bottom. These current
conditions have not adversely affected the ability to successfully and
precisely dispose of dredged material permitted or authorized for
disposal at HOODS in the past nor are they expected to affect disposal
in the future.
(7) Existence and Effects of Current and Previous Discharges and
Dumping in the Area (including Cumulative Effects). (40 CFR
228.6(a)(7)).
Previous disposal of dredged material at the existing HOODS has
resulted in mounding of sand and burial of benthic organisms within the
site but no discernable physical, chemical, or biological effects
outside the site. Water quality effects from active disposal are
temporary, spatially limited, and return to background levels prior to
the next disposal event. Short-term, long-term, and cumulative effects
of dredged material disposal in the proposed modified ODMDS would be
negligible, and similar to those for the existing HOODS.
The only discharge in the vicinity of HOODS is from DG Fairhaven
Power LLC's Fairhaven Power Facility on the Samoa Peninsula. Fairhaven
Power is permitted to discharge a maximum of 0.35 million gallons per
day of powerplant-related process water, cooling tower water, and other
wastewater under terms of their current National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit No. CA0024571, issued by the State of
California's North Coast Water Board. The company discharges through an
existing outfall into ocean waters adjacent to the Samoa Peninsula. The
NPDES permit prohibits discharging wastewater in violation of effluent
standards or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the Clean
Water Act, and it also prohibits discharging sewage sludge. The outfall
is located approximately 3.5 nautical miles (6.5 kilometers) east of
the HOODS. Prevailing nearshore currents would direct discharge plumes
from this outfall up or down the coast, depending of the seasonal
current regime, not offshore towards the HOODS. The EPA believes that
there will be no adverse cumulative or synergistic impacts from the use
of HOODS and discharges from the outfall described.
(8) Interference with Shipping, Fishing, Recreation, Mineral
Extraction, Desalination, Fish and Shellfish Culture, Areas of Special
Scientific Importance and Other Legitimate Uses of the Ocean. (40 CFR
228.6(a)(8)).
Minor, short-term interferences with commercial and recreational
boat traffic may occur within Humboldt Harbor during dredging
operations. However, interference as a result of the transport and
disposal of dredged material to HOODS would be even less because
disposal vessels move slowly, remain in established navigation
channels, and operations are announced via U.S. Coast Guard Notice to
Mariners. There may be minor, temporary interferences with recreational
fishing in the area during disposal operations, but HOODS is not closed
to fishing or other uses. HOODS has not been identified as an area of
special scientific importance. There are no aquaculture areas near the
site. The likelihood of direct interference with these activities is
therefore negligible.
(9) The Existing Water Quality and Ecology of the Sites as
Determined by Available Data or Trend Assessment of Baseline Surveys.
(40 CFR 228.6(a)(9)).
Water quality at the existing HOODS is typical of waters offshore
of the northern California coast. Monitoring conducted in the vicinity
of the proposed modified HOODS and experience with past disposals in
the existing HOODS have not identified any adverse water quality
impacts from ocean disposal of dredged material. Water column plumes
associated with disposal events rapidly return to background, before
subsequent disposal events occur. The seafloor in this area is
comprised of a gently sloping, essentially featureless sedimentary
plain that grades evenly from fine sand in shallower depths to silts in
deeper areas. The existing HOODS supports benthic and epibenthic fauna
characteristic of the region, but there are no unique or limited
habitats in the vicinity. No adverse impacts to benthos outside the
disposal site have been identified based on comprehensive monitoring.
(10) Potentiality for the Development or Recruitment of Nuisance
Species in the Disposal Site. (40 CFR 228.6(a) (10)).
Nuisance species, considered as any undesirable organism not
previously existing at a location, have not been observed at, or in the
vicinity of, the proposed modified HOODS. Disposal of dredged material,
as well as monitoring, has been ongoing for the past 25 years. The
dredged material to be disposed at the proposed modified ODMDS is
expected to be from similar locations to those dredged previously and
disposed of at the existing site; therefore, it expected that any
benthic organisms transported to the site would be relatively similar
in nature to those already present.
(11) Existence at or in Close Proximity to the Site of any
Significant Natural or Cultural Feature of Historical Importance. (40
CFR 228.6(a) (11)).
EPA evaluated state records and coordinated with the California
State Lands Commission concerning historic shipwrecks near HOODS. The
EA documents that the nearest recorded shipwreck sites are close to
shore and
[[Page 32344]]
would not be affected by ongoing disposal at HOODS. In addition, USACE
conducted a survey for potential shipwrecks near the existing HOODS in
1991 (prior to designation of the existing HOODS). The USACE survey
identified three magnetic anomalies that could potentially be
associated with unrecorded shipwrecks. None of these anomalies has been
buried by the existing HOODS disposal mound. The EPA collected high-
resolution multibeam echo sounder data in 2014 at the locations of each
magnetic anomaly, and confirmed that no debris, structures, or other
material extended above the sediment surface at any of these locations.
Because these anomalies do not extend above the surface now, and
apparently have not since at least 1991, their exact character remains
unknown. Ongoing disposal operations may effectively bury these
features further but will not otherwise directly affect them.
III. Environmental Statutory Review
a. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
The EPA's primary voluntary NEPA document for expanding the
existing HOODS is the EA, prepared by the EPA in cooperation with the
USACE and issued for public review simultaneously with this proposed
rule. Anyone desiring to review the EA may access it at
www.regulations.gov under Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OW-2020-0188, or at
https://www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/humboldt-open-ocean-disposal-site-hoods-documents. The EA and its Appendices provide the threshold
environmental review for modification of HOODS. The EA discusses in
detail the purpose and need for the proposed action and examines
alternatives. The EPA determined that there would be no significant
adverse impacts of implementing either of the action alternatives
evaluated for expanding the existing HOODS.
The following three ocean disposal alternatives were considered in
detail in the EA.
No Action Alternative
The No Action Alternative is defined as not modifying the size of
the existing HOODS boundaries. This alternative would not address the
need for an adequately sized ocean disposal site to accommodate an
annual average of 1,000,000 cy of ongoing and future dredging. Because
there is no other currently available disposal site for this material,
rapid shoaling of the entrance channel would quickly render navigation
unsafe, significantly affecting the economy of the greater Eureka area.
Increased wave action in the Harbor entrance would endanger commercial
ships as well as fishing and recreational vessels. This situation would
discourage shippers from using Humboldt Bay for commerce, because it
requires additional vessel trips to accommodate ``light-loaded''
vessels, resulting in increased transportation costs, decreased vessel
safety, and maneuvering problems. This would have a long-term adverse
impact on the local economy. In addition, use of the Humboldt Harbor as
a port of refuge could be affected. Finally, ship groundings caused by
improperly maintained deep-draft channels could result in adverse
ecological repercussions (i.e., oil and fuel spills). Although the No
Action Alternative would not address the purpose and need for the
proposed action, it was evaluated in the EA as a basis to compare the
effects of the other alternatives considered.
Alternative 1: Expansion of HOODS by 1 nmi (Preferred Alternative)
Alternative 1, the Proposed Action, is to slightly reorient and
expand the existing HOODS boundary by 1 nmi to the north (upcoast) and
1 nmi to the west (offshore). Alternative 1 is the Proposed Action
because it would provide environmentally acceptable disposal capacity
for many years, while also affording the most operational flexibility
for managing the dredged material in a manner that would further
minimize even physical impacts over time. This configuration would
result in the total area of the site increasing from 1 square nmi to 4
square nmi. The effective total capacity of the site would increase
from the original 25 million cy to over 100 million cy (i.e., allowing
for 75 million cy of additional disposal to occur), before mounding to
-130 feet could again occur across the entire site. If current disposal
practices were to continue unchanged (i.e., if 1 million cy of entrance
channel sand per year were to continue to be disposed of at HOODS
indefinitely), the modified site would reach capacity in about 75
years.
Alternative 2: Expansion of HOODS by \1/2\ nmi
Alternative 2 is the expansion of the existing HOODS boundary by
\1/2\ nmi to the north (upcoast) and \1/2\ nmi to the west (offshore).
This configuration would result in the total area of the site
increasing from 1 square nmi to 2.25 square nmi. The effective total
capacity of the site would increase from the original 25 million cy to
approximately 56 million cy (i.e., allowing for approximately 31
million cy of additional disposal to occur), before mounding to -130
feet could again occur across the entire site. If current disposal
practices were to continue unchanged (i.e., if 1 million cy per year of
entrance channel sand were to continue to be disposed of at HOODS
indefinitely), the modified site would reach capacity in about 31
years.
b. Magnuson-Stevens Act
The EPA submitted an EFH assessment to the NMFS, pursuant to
Section 305(b), 16 U.S.C. 1855(b)(2), of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1801 to 1891.
The EPA determined that the expansion of HOODS by one nmi (the proposed
action) will not significantly affect managed species or EFH. NMFS
concurred with the EPA's determination, but included one Conservation
Recommendation to further minimize potential impacts. Specifically,
NMFS recommended continuing to manage future disposal at HOODS by
expanding the mound while leaving other areas of the site undisturbed
as long as possible, rather than purposely spreading disposal events
throughout the site each year. The draft SMMP (available along with
this proposed rule for public comment) discusses a proposed approach
for implementing this NMFS Conservation Recommendation; the SMMP will
be finalized after considering any comments on it and on this proposed
rule.
c. Coastal Zone Management Act
The EPA will submit a Consistency Determination (CD) package to the
California Coastal Commission (CCC) following the close of the public
comment period on the Environmental Assessment and the proposed rule.
The CD package will specifically address how the proposed action to
expand HOODS is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the
California Coastal Act Chapter 3 policies. EPA will not take final
action on the proposed HOODS expansion until CCC review of EPA's
consistency determination is complete and any comments have been
addressed to the maximum extent practicable.
d. Endangered Species Act
The ESA, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 to 1544, requires federal
agencies to consult with NMFS and the USFWS to ensure that any action
authorized, funded, or carried out by the federal agency is not likely
to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered
[[Page 32345]]
species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of any critical habitat. The EPA completed informal ESA
consultations with USFWS and NMFS, and the consultations are included
as an Appendix to the EA.
Based on those consultations, the EPA determined that the proposed
action will have ``no effect'' on marine mammals, sea turtles and
certain seabird species. The EPA further determined that the proposed
action ``may affect but is not likely to adversely affect'' anadromous
fish (including the SONCC Coho ESU, the CC Chinook Salmon ESU, the NC
Steelhead DPS, Eulachon, and sDPS Green Sturgeon), marbled murrelet,
and short-tailed albatross. The Services concurred with these findings
and no additional mitigation measures were recommended beyond the
avoidance and minimization aspects of the EPA mandatory disposal site
use conditions which would apply to every project using HOODS (these
conditions are included with the draft SMMP, and relevant provisions of
the SMMP would be identified or incorporated into subsequently issued
permits and Federal projects).
e. National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470 to
470a-2, requires federal agencies to consider the effect of their
actions on districts, sites, buildings, structures, or objects,
included in, or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places (NRHP). The depths of the proposed HOODS (approximately
150-200 feet) generally excludes potential habitation or resources
related to human settlements in this area. Historic shipwreck remnants
do exist in the general vicinity, but none would be affected by ongoing
disposal activities within the expanded HOODS boundaries.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This rule proposes to modify the HOODS by expanding the boundaries
of the existing site pursuant to Section 102 of the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C
1412. This proposed action complies with applicable executive orders
and statutory provisions as follows:
a. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993)
and is therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
b. Executive Order 13089: Coral Reef Protection
Executive Order 13089 on Coral Reef Protection directs agencies
``to preserve and protect the biodiversity, health, heritage, and
social and economic value of U.S. coral reef ecosystems and the marine
environment.'' This E.O. does not apply to this action because there
are no coral reef ecosystems in the HOODS area.
c. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed action does not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This proposed site
modification does not require persons to obtain, maintain, retain,
report, or publicly disclose information to or for a federal agency.
d. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires federal agencies
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes
of assessing the impacts of this rule on small entities, small entity
is defined as: (1) A small business defined by the Small Business
Administration's size regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district, or special district with a population of less than
50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. The EPA determined that this proposed action
will not have a significant economic impact on small entities because
the proposed rule will only have the effect of expanding an existing
site in order to allow ongoing disposal of dredged material in ocean
waters. After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule,
the EPA certifies that this proposed action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
e. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This proposed action contains no federal mandates under the
provisions of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of
1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531 to 1538, for State, local, or tribal governments or
the private sector. This proposed action imposes no new enforceable
duty on any State, local or tribal governments or the private sector.
Therefore, this proposed action is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This proposed action is also not
subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA because it
contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small government entities. Those entities are already
subject to existing permitting requirements for the disposal of dredged
material in ocean waters.
f. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This proposed action does not have federalism implications. It does
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to this proposed action. In the spirit of Executive Order
13132, and consistent with the EPA policy to promote communications
between the EPA and State and local governments, the EPA specifically
solicited comments on this proposed action from State and local
officials.
g. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This proposed action does not have tribal implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13175 because the modification of the
existing HOODS will not have a direct effect on Indian Tribes, on the
relationship between the federal government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian Tribes. In addition, the depths of the proposed
HOODS (approximately 150 to 200 feet) generally excludes potential
habitation or resources related to human settlements. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this action. Nevertheless, the EPA
specifically solicited input from officials of 10 potentially
interested tribal governments during the scoping phase of this action.
The EPA is now actively soliciting comments from these tribes on this
proposed action, as well as any
[[Page 32346]]
comments related to this Executive Order.
h. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the
potential to influence the regulation. This proposed action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
However, the EPA welcomes comments on this proposed action related to
this Executive Order.
i. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355) because it is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined under Executive Order
12866. However, we welcome comments on this proposed action related to
this Executive Order.
j. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (Sec. 15 U.S.C. 272),
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide
Congress, through Office of Management and Budget, explanations when
the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards. This proposed action includes environmental
monitoring and measurement as described in the EPA's proposed SMMP. The
EPA will not require the use of specific, prescribed analytic methods
for monitoring and managing the proposed modified HOODS. The Agency
plans to allow the use of any method, whether it constitutes a
voluntary consensus standard or not, that meets the monitoring and
measurement criteria discussed in the SMMP. The EPA welcomes comments
on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking and, specifically, invites
the public to identify potentially applicable voluntary consensus
standards and to explain why such standards should be used in this
proposed action.
k. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629) establishes federal executive
policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal
agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States. The EPA determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. The EPA has assessed the overall protectiveness of
modifying the existing HOODS against the criteria established pursuant
to the MPRSA to ensure that any adverse impact to the environment will
be mitigated to the greatest extent practicable. The EPA welcomes
comments on this proposed action related to this Executive Order.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
Environmental protection, Water pollution control.
Authority: This action is issued under the authority of Section
102 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, as
amended, 33 U.S.C. 1401, 1411, 1412.
Dated: May 14, 2020.
John W. Busterud,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Register 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 by revising paragraphs (l)(10) (i) through
(vi) to read as follows:
Sec. 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a final basis.
* * * * *
(l) * * *
(10) * * *
(i) Location: The coordinates of the four corners of the square
site are: 40[deg] 50.300' North latitude (N) by 124[deg]018.017' West
longitude (W); 40[deg]49.267' N by 124[deg]15.767' W; 40[deg]47.550' N
by 124[deg]17.083' W; and 40[deg]48.567' N by 124[deg]19.300' W (North
American Datum from 1983).
(ii) Size: 4 square nautical miles (13.4 square kilometers).
(iii) Depth: Water depths within the area range between
approximately 150 to 200 feet (45 to 61 meters).
(iv) Use Restricted to Disposal of: Disposal shall be limited to
dredged material determined to be suitable for ocean disposal according
to 40 CFR 220-228.
(v) Period of Use: Continuing use over 50 years from date of site
designation, subject to restrictions and provisions set forth in
paragraph (l)(10)(vi) of this section.
(vi) Restrictions/Provisions: Site management and monitoring
activities shall be implemented during the period of site use in
accordance with the permit or Federal project that identifies or
incorporates the most recent Site Management and Monitoring Plan (SMMP)
for the HOODS published by EPA in consultation with USACE, and as may
be modified in EPA concurrences for individual projects disposing at
HOODS. The SMMP may be periodically revised as necessary; proposed
substantive revisions to the SMMP shall be made following opportunity
for public review and comment.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-11030 Filed 5-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P