[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 142 (Tuesday, July 26, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-18124]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: July 26, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
23 CFR Part 650
[FHWA Docket No. 93-6]
RIN 2125-AD08
Erosion and Sediment Control on Highway Construction Projects
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Section 1057 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) requires the Secretary of Transportation
to develop erosion control guidelines for States to follow when
carrying out Federal-aid construction projects. Pursuant to this
authority, the existing erosion and sediment control regulation, issued
in 1974, is being updated and modified by the FHWA to reflect current
state-of-the-art practices and management techniques. To fulfill the
requirements of section 1057, the FHWA is adopting, as guidelines, the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) publication Highway Drainage Guidelines, Volume III, ``Erosion
and Sediment Control in Highway Construction,'' 1992. The updated
regulation includes a statement recommending that each State highway
agency (SHA) apply these guidelines, or their own more stringent
guidelines, to develop specific standards and practices for the control
of erosion.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 26, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robin L. Schroeder, Office of
Engineering, HNG-23, 202-366-1577; or Mr. Robert J. Black, Office of
the Chief Counsel, HCC-31, 202-366-1359; Federal Highway
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington D.C. 20590. Office
hours are 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except
legal Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 1057 of the ISTEA (Pub. L. 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914, 2002)
requires the Secretary to develop erosion control guidelines for the
States to follow in carrying out federally funded construction
projects. It requires that these guidelines not preempt any requirement
under State law if such requirement is more stringent than the
guidelines. It also requires that these guidelines be consistent with
nonpoint source management programs under section 319 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1339) and coastal nonpoint
pollution control guidance1 under section 6217(g) of the Coastal
Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 codified at 16 U.S.C.
Sec. 1455b (Pub. L. 101-508, 104 Stat. 1388-299, as amended) (Coastal
Zone Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The final guidance document ``Guidance Specifying Management
Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Source Pollution in Coastal
Waters,'' 84-B-92-002, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, January
1993, is available in FHWA docket 93-6 for inspection and copying in
Room 4232, HCC-10, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Highway
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington D.C. 20590.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To satisfy this requirement the FHWA is adopting, as guidance, the
AASHTO publication Highway Drainage Guidelines, Volume III, ``Erosion
and Sediment Control in Highway Construction,'' 1992. Other minor
editorial changes to 23 CFR 650 were also made to correct typographical
errors and to change the wording to reflect current practice. A notice
of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to revise 23 CFR 650, subpart B
to reference this AASHTO publication was published in the Federal
Register on March 1, 1993, at 58 FR 11814.
Comments To Docket
Nine comments were submitted to the docket. Eight comments were
received from SHA's and one comment from a Federal Government agency.
The following is a summary of the comments and the FHWA responses:
Supportive of Change
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) supported
FHWA's proposal to adopt the AASHTO guidelines.
The Connecticut Department of Transportation submitted a letter
stating that they had no comment concerning the guidelines.
Existing Guidelines More Stringent
The California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) did not
object to the changes to 23 CFR 650 subpart B. CALTRANS stated that it
has adopted requirements and guidelines for erosion control on
construction projects that are equal to or more stringent than the
guidelines set forth in the AASHTO publication.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Requirements
The Hawaii Department of Transportation stated that the FHWA should
adopt the AASHTO publication. It suggested, though, that the final rule
reference the NPDES permit requirements in 23 CFR 650. The NPDES
permits are issued under the authority of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) in compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., as amended by
Pub. L. 92-500).
The FHWA does not believe that it is necessary to specifically
reference NPDES permit requirements in 23 CFR 650. There is a statement
in 23 CFR 650.207(b) that the FHWA shall take all reasonable steps to
insure that all project designs for control of erosion and
sedimentation comply with applicable standards and regulations of other
agencies. This would include the NPDES permit requirements as well as
any other State or local regulations concerning the control of erosion
and sedimentation.
Guidelines
Four of the SHA respondents had comments concerning specific
sections of the AASHTO publication Highway Drainage Guidelines, Volume
III, ``Erosion and Sediment Control in Highway Construction,'' 1992.
The Nebraska Department of Roads (NDOR) questioned the use of a
hydraulic engineer in the design and review of diversion dikes and
ditches, and temporary slope drains. The NDOR believed that normal
roadway design engineers would be adequate for most hydraulic designs.
Hydraulic engineers, the NDOR argued, could be used for the design and
review of complex sediment and erosion control systems.
While the FHWA agrees that a roadway design engineer may be capable
of conducting an adequate hydraulic design, it is important that
erosion and sediment control structures are designed properly. These
structures should be sized and located based on flows resulting from
the design year storm. Proper design of the project requires a working
knowledge of hydraulic engineering. While it is not required that a
hydraulic engineer conduct the design and review of the erosion and
sediment control structures, the design must be conducted by someone
competent in hydraulic design procedures. While the FHWA does not agree
with the NDOR suggestion that the reference to a hydraulic engineer be
removed from the guidance, it does agree that a person who is competent
in hydraulic design could adequately fulfill the intent of the
guidelines.
The Arkansas State Highway Department had no reservations about
adopting the AASHTO guidelines, but suggested that a summary be added
indicating that the level of effort dedicated to the planning of a
project and the development of the erosion control plan be commensurate
with size and complexity of project. While the FHWA agrees that more
complex projects or projects that may affect sensitive ecosystems such
as wetlands, streams, rivers, or other water bodies will include
detailed erosion and sediment control plans, every project should be
planned, located, designed, and constructed with the intent of limiting
the project's effects on the environment. Though projects may differ in
the type and extent of the mitigation measures and practices that are
implemented, the level of effort put forth to limit the environmental
effects for smaller, less complex projects should be equal to that put
forth on larger, more complex ones.
The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) found the AASHTO
document acceptable but had the following minor comments. The GDOT
argued that detailed erosion and sediment control plans should not be
required as part of the contract document in order to allow the
contractor the necessary flexibility to develop a site and operational-
specific plan. Instead the GDOT argued that the contract plans should
include any extremely sensitive areas such as lakes, wetlands, and
streams and sufficient quantities of erosion control devices should be
provided as a bid item to mitigate possible erosion and sedimentation
effects. According to the GDOT this would allow the contractor and the
project engineer the flexibility to customize the erosion control
measures employed to the contractor's approach to the work.
While the FHWA agrees erosion and sediment control plans should be
flexible, both contractors and contracting agencies should be fully
aware of the possible environmental effects of their projects.
Therefore, all potential environmental impacts associated with erosion
and sedimentation, not just those affecting sensitive areas, and the
measures and practices required to mitigate these impacts, should be
included in the plans, specifications, and special provisions. As
previously mentioned, the effectiveness of many erosion and sediment
control measures is dependent upon proper design and installation.
The FHWA believes it is inappropriate to delegate responsibility
for the planning and design of erosion and sediment control measures to
the contractor or the project engineer, who may or may not have
sufficient design expertise in this area. However, erosion and sediment
control plans should be flexible enough to properly fulfill their
intended purpose. Accordingly, each erosion and sediment control plan
should be periodically evaluated to insure that all necessary controls
are being implemented correctly and that unnecessary or improperly
installed controls are eliminated or revised. Additions, deletions, or
revisions to the erosion and sediment control plan should be reviewed
by a person competent in erosion and sediment control design.
The GDOT and the Michigan Department of Transportation had minor
technical comments on specific design details contained in the AASHTO
publication. While the FHWA may agree with some of these design-related
comments, the agency emphasizes that the AASHTO publication is intended
to provide guidance on the development and implementation of erosion
and sediment control measures and practices. The design details that
are included are provided as a basis for the development of more
detailed project-specific designs. Each State should apply the AASHTO
guidelines or its own guidelines, if those guidelines are more
stringent, to develop standards and practices for the control of
erosion and sedimentation on Federal-aid construction projects.
Although the AASHTO guidelines can be used for the development of a
statewide implementation program for controlling erosion and
sedimentation, each project must be analyzed separately to assure that
the most appropriate and effective erosion and sediment control
measures and practices are designed, implemented, and maintained.
Revisions to Part 650
A comment concerning the revisions to Part 650 was made by the
EPA's Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds. Although the EPA
supported the regulatory changes proposed in the NPRM, it had two
specific comments. Both concerned the requirement of the ISTEA that
FHWA erosion control guidelines be consistent with nonpoint source
management programs under section 319 of the FWPCA and coastal nonpoint
pollution control guidance issued by the EPA in January 1993, under
section 6217(g) of the Coastal Zone Act of 1990.
Request to Add a New Paragraph
The EPA proposed that the FHWA add a specific paragraph to 23 CFR
Part 650 that would quote a management measure contained in the section
6217(g) management measure guidance document (see footnote #1). The
management measure at issue is in Chapter 4.II.A., ``New Development
Management Measure,'' and concerns reducing the amount of total
suspended solids (TSS) leaving the site after construction has been
completed and the site is permanently stabilized. It allows for two
options to accomplish this goal. Under the first option, after
construction, the average amount of TSS (including sediment) leaving
the project site would be reduced by 80 percent. The second option
would limit the post-development discharge of suspended solids to an
amount equal to or less than pre-development conditions.
Guidance under section 6217(g) specifies management measures for a
wide range of pollutant sources. These include agricultural, forestry,
urban area, and marina and recreational boating sources. The management
measure cited by the EPA is found under Chapter 4: ``Management
Measures for Urban Areas,'' and specifically under Section II, ``Urban
Runoff.'' It is intended to be applied by States in areas within the
designated coastal zone, under the authority of the Coastal Zone
Management Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-583, 86 Stat. 1280, as amended), to
control urban runoff and treat associated pollutants from new
development, redevelopment, and new and relocated roads, highways, and
bridges.
This management measure deals with the post construction control of
erosion and sedimentation. It applies to the reduction of TSS after the
project has been fully stabilized. However, during several meetings
between the EPA and the FHWA, the EPA emphasized that this reduction
can be accomplished through design or by performance. In other words,
projects should be designed, using the best available technology, with
the intent of reducing or limiting TSS by the specified amount. The
intent was not to require the actual measurement of the TSS leaving the
project site either before or after construction but to establish
guidance relative to project design standards.
The section 6217(g) guidance does not apply to storm water
discharges covered by the NPDES storm water permit program. This
includes all highway construction projects disturbing five or more
acres of land. In addition, the section 6217(g) guidance does not apply
to States without coastal zone management programs approved by the
United States Department of Commerce.
The ability to limit or reduce the amount of TSS leaving a specific
site will depend on the type of best management practice (BMP)
selected. Each BMP has its own strengths and weaknesses, and no one BMP
will be applicable to every situation. The effectiveness of the
selected BMP can also be highly variable. For example, wet ponds, which
are one of the most reliable and attractive BMPs that exist, have a
reported sediment removal rate of between 50 to 90 percent.2
Extended detention ponds, or dry ponds, on the other hand, have a
sediment removal efficiency of only 30 to 70 percent. Both of these
BMPs may need to be supplemented by other controls to conform with the
6217(g) guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\``A Current Assessment of Urban Best Management Practices,
Techniques for Reducing Non-Point Source Pollution in the Coastal
Zone,'' Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key design factors in determining the effectiveness of particular
BMPs include size, configuration, retention time and long term
maintenance. The effectiveness of a particular BMP is influenced by a
variety of locational factors as well. For example, problems will be
encountered if wet ponds are located in areas experiencing long periods
of dry weather and/or high evaporation rates, or long periods of cold
weather when the pond is frozen. In any case, many aspects related to
BMP performance are not well understood and all BMP options will
require careful site assessment prior to design.
The provisions of 23 CFR part 650, subpart B, deal with erosion and
sediment control for all federally funded construction projects
nationwide. Their objectives are to control erosion and sedimentation
during the construction of highway projects and to assure that highway
projects are located, designed, and operated to minimize erosion and
sediment damage. The AASHTO guidelines that are being proposed for
adoption as guidance include three objectives for erosion and sediment
control. These objectives are:
1. Limit off-site effects to acceptable levels,
2. Facilitate project construction and minimize overall cost, and
3. Comply with Federal, State, and local regulations.
As stated in the first objective, an intent of these guidelines is
not to establish specific design standards but to limit off-site
effects to acceptable levels. The determination of what constitutes an
undesirable effect is not specified. The intent is to assess possible
adverse off-site effects and to implement BMPs as appropriate to
minimize these effects.
The FHWA agrees with the EPA that a goal of any highway
construction project would be to limit the amount of erosion and
resulting sedimentation attributable to that project. The FHWA also
recognizes that within the coastal zone there may be water bodies that
are extremely sensitive to the deposition of sedimentation. However,
the FHWA believes that it is inappropriate to set specific design
standards for all projects nationwide. The FHWA is amending 23 CFR part
650 to add Sec. 650.211 which provides that projects located within
coastal zone management areas, as specified by States with coastal zone
management programs approved by the United States Department of
Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, utilize
``Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint
Source Pollution in Coastal Waters.''
Request to Incorporate Additional Guidance
The EPA also requested that the FHWA add a new paragraph to Part
650 that incorporates, by reference, certain portions of the section
6217(g) guidance. These other management measures, found under Chapter
4.VIII, ``Roads, Highways, and Bridges,'' would include management
measures in the areas of planning, siting, and developing roads and
highways; bridges; construction projects; construction site chemical
control; operation and maintenance; and road, highway and bridge runoff
systems.
Section 1057 of the ISTEA requires that the guidelines that are
developed be consistent with the section 6217(g) guidance. The AASHTO
guidelines that the FHWA is now adopting deal primarily with erosion
and sediment control during construction. However, the guidelines also
state that, ``While much of the effort for control of erosion and
sedimentation is expended during the construction phase of highway
development, a successful program must address erosion and sediment
control during the planning, location, design, and future maintenance
phases as well.'' The AASHTO guidelines provide comprehensive guidance
concerning the establishment of criteria and controls for erosion and
sedimentation. These guidelines provide detailed information that
addresses and is consistent with the pertinent sections of the section
6217(g) guidance.
However, as previously stated, the FHWA is amending 23 CFR Part 650
to add Sec. 650.211 which provides that highway construction projects
covered under the provisions of the section 6217(g) guidance should
utilize ``Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of
Nonpoint Source Pollution in Coastal Waters.''
Additional Revisions
The language of Sec. 650.209(c), dealing with monitoring erosion
and sediment control measures and practices, has been revised from that
proposed in the NPRM. As set forth in the NPRM, this section implied
that if a problem in the effectiveness of the erosion and sediment
control measure is indicated, revision of that measure would be
required. The intent of this section is to ensure that erosion and
sediment control measures are periodically reviewed to assure their
effectiveness. This would include maintenance of the existing measures
as well as revising those measures that are found to be less than fully
effective. The language of Sec. 650.209(c) has been revised to clarify
this issue.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Administrative Procedure Act
This final rule is made effective upon publication. The FHWA
believes that this final rule is exempt from the 30-day delayed
effective date requirement of 5 U.S.C. Sec. 553(d) for the following
reason. The FHWA finds that good cause exists to dispense with the 30-
day delay because an earlier version of the AASHTO erosion and sediment
control publication adopted by this action has already been adopted, as
guidance ``to provide valuable information in attaining good design''
in highway construction projects. See 23 CFR 625.5. This final rule
simply amends title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, to reference the
updated AASHTO guidelines on this subject and it includes this
reference under 23 CFR part 650, which specifically addresses erosion
and sediment control on highway construction projects. Therefore, this
final rule imposes no new requirements or mandates on State highway
agencies. Instead, it simply cites the revised AASHTO guidelines with
the aim of assisting States in assuring that highway projects are
located, designed, and operated to minimize erosion and sediment
damage.
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
The FHWA has determined that this action is not a significant
regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 or
significant within the meaning of Department of Transportation
regulatory policies and procedures. The FHWA (at 23 CFR 650, Subpart B)
and other Federal agencies currently have regulations regarding erosion
and sediment control. Adopting the AASHTO guidelines would merely
update and reinforce existing policy. Therefore, it is anticipated that
the economic impact of this rulemaking will be minimal and a full
regulatory evaluation is not required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), the FHWA has evaluated the effects of this rule on small
entities. The FHWA concluded that it and other Federal agencies
currently have regulations dealing with erosion and sediment control,
and adopting the 1992 AASHTO guidelines would merely reinforce existing
policy. Therefore, the FHWA hereby certifies that this rulemaking will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined
that this action would not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a federalism assessment.
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205,
Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing
Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not contain a collection of information
requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44
U.S.C. 3501-3520.
National Environmental Policy Act
This rulemaking will provide guidance to State Highway Agencies
when implementing or developing erosion and sediment control
guidelines. This will aid in the control and prevention of nonpoint
source pollutants. It does not constitute a major action having a
significant effect on the environment, and therefore does not require
the preparation of an environmental impact statement pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each
regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations.
The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda
in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of
this document can be used to cross reference this action with the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 650
Grant programs--transportation, Highways and roads, Soil
conservation.
In consideration of the foregoing, the FHWA is amending title 23,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 650, subpart B as set forth below.
Issued on: July 18, 1994.
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
PART 650--BRIDGES, STRUCTURES, AND HYDRAULICS [AMENDED]
1. The authority for part 650 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 109 (a) and (h), 144, 151, 315, and 319; 23
CFR 1.32; 49 CFR 1.48(b), E.O. 11988 (3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 117);
Department of Transportation Order 5650.2 dated April 23, 1979 (44
FR 24678); Sec. 161 of Public Law 97-424, 96 Stat. 2097, 3135;
Sec. 4(b) of Public Law 97-134, 95 Stat. 1699; 33 U.S.C. 401, 491 et
seq., 511 et seq.; and Sec. 1057 of Public Law 102-240, 105 Stat.
2002.
Subpart B--Erosion and Sediment Control on Highway Construction
Projects
2. Part 650 is amended by revising Secs. 650.201, 650.203, 650.205
and 650.209 and by adding Sec. 650.211 to read as follows:
Sec. 650.201 Purpose.
The purpose of this subpart is to prescribe policies and procedures
for the control of erosion, abatement of water pollution, and
prevention of damage by sediment deposition from all construction
projects funded under title 23, United States Code.
Sec. 650.203 Policy.
It is the policy of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) that
all highways funded in whole or in part under title 23, United States
Code, shall be located, designed, constructed and operated according to
standards that will minimize erosion and sediment damage to the highway
and adjacent properties and abate pollution of surface and ground water
resources. Guidance for the development of standards used to minimize
erosion and sediment damage is referenced in Sec. 650.211 of this part.
Sec. 650.205 Definitions.
Erosion control measures and practices are actions that are taken
to inhibit the dislodging and transporting of soil particles by water
or wind, including actions that limit the area of exposed soil and
minimize the time the soil is exposed.
Permanent erosion and sediment control measures and practices are
installations and design features of a construction project which
remain in place and in service after completion of the project.
Pollutants are substances, including sediment, which cause
deterioration of water quality when added to surface or ground waters
in sufficient quantity.
Sediment control measures and practices are actions taken to
control the deposition of sediments resulting from surface runoff.
Temporary erosion and sediment control measures and practices are
actions taken on an interim basis during construction to minimize the
disturbance, transportation, and unwanted deposition of sediment.
* * * * *
Sec. 650.209 Construction.
(a) Permanent erosion and sediment control measures and practices
shall be established and implemented at the earliest practicable time
consistent with good construction and management practices.
(b) Implementation of temporary erosion and sediment control
measures and practices shall be coordinated with permanent measures to
assure economical, effective, and continuous control throughout
construction.
(c) Erosion and sediment control measures and practices shall be
monitored and maintained or revised to insure that they are fulfilling
their intended function during the construction of the project.
(d) Federal-aid funds shall not be used in erosion and sediment
control actions made necessary because of contractor oversight,
carelessness, or failure to implement sufficient control measures.
(e) Pollutants used during highway construction or operation and
material from sediment traps shall not be stockpiled or disposed of in
a manner which makes them susceptible to being washed into any
watercourse by runoff or high water. No pollutants shall be deposited
or disposed of in watercourses.
Sec. 650.211 Guidelines.
(a) The FHWA adopts the AASHTO Highway Drainage Guidelines, Volume
III, ``Erosion and Sediment Control in Highway Construction,'' 1992,\1\
as guidelines to be followed on all construction projects funded under
title 23, United States Code. These guidelines are not intended to
preempt any requirements made by or under State law if such
requirements are more stringent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\This document is available for inspection from the FHWA
headquarters and field offices as prescribed by 49 CFR part 7,
appendix D. It may be purchased from the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials offices at Suite 225, 444
North Capitol Street, NW., Washington, DC 20001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Each State highway agency should apply the guidelines
referenced in paragraph (a) of this section or apply its own
guidelines, if these guidelines are more stringent, to develop
standards and practices for the control of erosion and sediment on
Federal-aid construction projects. These specific standards and
practices may reference available resources, such as the procedures
presented in the AASHTO ``Model Drainage Manual,'' 1991.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\This document is available for inspection from the FHWA
headquarters and field offices as prescribed by 49 CFR part 7,
appendix D. It may be purchased from the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials offices at Suite 225, 444
North Capitol Street, NW., Washington, DC 20001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Consistent with the requirements of section 6217(g) of the
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-508,
104 Stat. 1388-299), highway construction projects funded under title
23, United States Code, and located in the coastal zone management
areas of States with coastal zone management programs approved by the
United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, should utilize ``Guidance Specifying Management
Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Source Pollution in Coastal Waters,''
84-B-92-002, U.S. EPA, January 1993.\3\ State highway agencies should
refer to this Environmental Protection Agency guidance document for the
design of projects within coastal zone management areas.
\3\This document is available for inspection and copying as
prescribed by 49 CFR part 7, appendix D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 94-18124 Filed 7-25-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
