[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10221-10222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-5314]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5972-4]
Notice of Proposed Revisions to Approved Programs To Administer
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permitting Program
in Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin Resulting in Part From
Adoption of the Water Quality Guidance for the Great Lakes System
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has received for review and approval revisions
to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs
in Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio. Most of the proposed
revisions were adopted to comply with section 118(c) of the Clean Water
Act and 40 CFR 132.4, although in some cases, States have also proposed
revisions that are not related to those required by section 118(c) of
the CWA and 40 CFR 132.4. EPA invites public comment on whether EPA
should approve these revisions pursuant to 40 CFR 123.62 and 132.5.
DATES: Comments on whether EPA should approve the revisions to
Indiana's, Michigan's, Ohio's and Wisconsin's NPDES programs must be
received in writing by April 1, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on these documents may be submitted to Jo
Lynn Traub, Director, Water Division, Attn: GLI Implementation
Procedures, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. In the alternative, EPA will accept
comments electronically. Comments should be sent to the following
Internet E-mail address: karnauskas.joan@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic
comments must be submitted in an ASCII file avoiding the use of special
characters and any form of encryption. EPA will print electronic
comments in hard-copy paper form for the official administrative
record. EPA will attempt to clarify electronic comments if there is an
apparent error in transmission. Comments provided electronically will
be considered timely if they are submitted electronically by 11:59 p.m.
(Central time), April 1, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mery Jackson-Willis, Standards and
Applied Sciences Branch, Water Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,
or telephone her at (312) 886-3717.
Copies of the rules adopted by the States, and other related
materials submitted by the States in support of these revisions, are
available for review at: EPA, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 15th
Floor, Chicago, Illinois; Indiana Department of Environmental
Management, Office of Water Management, Rule Section, 100 North Senate
Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana; Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality, Surface Water Quality Division, Knapps Centre, 300 South
Washington, Lansing, Michigan; Ohio Environmental Protection Agency,
Division of Surface Water, 1800 WaterMark Drive, Columbus, Ohio; and
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Wastewater
Management, GEF II Building, 101 South Webster, Madison, Wisconsin. To
access the docket material in Chicago, call (312) 886-3717 between 8
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (Central time) (Monday-Friday); in Indiana, call
(317) 232-8399; in Michigan, call (517) 335-4184; in Ohio, call (614)
644-2154; and in Wisconsin, call (608) 267-7662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 23, 1995, EPA published the Final
Water Quality Guidance for the Great Lakes System (Guidance) pursuant
to section 118(c)(2) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1268(c)(2)
(March 23, 1995, 60 FR 15366). The Guidance, which was codified at 40
CFR Part 132, requires the Great Lakes States to adopt and submit to
EPA for approval water quality criteria, methodologies, policies and
procedures that are consistent with the Guidance. 40 CFR 132.4 and
132.5. EPA is required to approve of the State's submission within 90
days or notify the State that EPA has determined that all or part of
the submission is inconsistent with the Clean Water Act or the Guidance
and identify any necessary changes to obtain EPA approval. If the State
fails to make the necessary changes within 90 days, EPA must publish a
notice in the Federal Register identifying the approved and disapproved
elements of the submission and a final rule identifying the provisions
of Part 132 that shall apply for discharges within the State.
As of January 31, 1998, EPA Region 5 had received submissions from
Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio. The bulk of these submissions
consist of new, revised or existing water quality standards which EPA
is reviewing for consistency with the Guidance in accordance with 40
CFR 131 and 132.5. EPA is not soliciting comment on those portions of
these submissions relating to the water quality criteria and
methodologies, use designations or antidegradation. EPA also is not
soliciting comment on the Guidance itself.
Instead, EPA is only requesting comment on whether it should
approve, pursuant to 40 CFR 123.62, and 132.5(g), those portions of
these submissions that revise the States' approved National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting program. In most cases
these revisions relate to the following provisions of 40 CFR Part 132,
Appendix F: Procedure 3 (``Total Maximum Daily Loads, Wasteload
Allocations for Point Sources, Load Allocations for Nonpoint Sources,
Wasteload Allocations in the Absence of a TMDL, and Preliminary
Wasteload Allocations for Purposes of Determining the Need for Water
Quality Based Effluent Limits''); Procedure 4 (``Additivity'');
Procedure 5 (``Reasonable Potential''); Procedure 6 (Whole Effluent
Toxicity''); Procedure 7 (``Loading Limits''); Procedure 8:
[[Page 10222]]
(``Water Quality-based Effluent Limitations Below the Quantification
Level); Procedure 9 (``Compliance Schedules''). EPA is not soliciting
comment on the States' adoption of requirements pertaining to
Implementation Procedures 1 (``Site Specific Modifications'') or 2
(``Variances'') because those requirements constitute parts of the
States' water quality standards, not its NPDES program.
Under 40 CFR 123.62(b)(2) and 132.5(e), whenever EPA determines
that a proposed revision to a State NPDES program is substantial, EPA
must provide notice and allow public comment on the proposed revisions.
The extent to which the States have modified their NPDES programs to be
consistent with the Guidance varies significantly, depending on the
extent to which their existing programs already were ``as protective
as'' the implementation procedures in the Guidance. EPA has not
conducted a State-by-State review of the submissions to ascertain for
each State individually whether their changes constitute substantial
program modifications. However, in light of the fact that the States
have modified these programs in response to the explicit statutory
mandate contained in section 118(c) of the Clean Water Act, EPA
believes that it is appropriate to consider the NPDES component of the
States' submissions to be substantial program modifications, and
therefore has decided to solicit public comment regarding those
provisions.
Based on General Counsel Opinion 78-7 (April 18, 1978), EPA has
long considered a determination to approve or deny a State NPDES
program submission to constitute an adjudication because an
``approval'', within the meaning of the APA, constitutes a ``license'',
which, in turn, is the product of an ``adjudication''. For this reason,
the statutes and Executive Orders that apply to rulemaking action are
not applicable here. Among these are provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. Sec. 601 et seq. Under the RFA,
whenever a federal agency proposes or promulgates a rule under section
553 [of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)], after being required
by that section or any other law to publish a general notice of
proposed rulemaking, the agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis for the rule, unless the Agency certifies that the rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the Agency does not certify the rule, the regulatory
flexibility analysis must describe and assess the impact of a rule on
small entities affected by the rule.
Even if the NPDES program modification were a rule subject to the
RFA, the Agency would certify that approval of the State's modified
program would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. EPA's action to approve an NPDES program
modification merely recognizes revisions to the program which have
already been enacted as a matter of State law; it would, therefore,
impose no additional obligations upon those subject to the State's
program. Accordingly, the Regional Administrator would certify that
this program modification, even if a rule, would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Michelle D. Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-5314 Filed 2-27-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
