[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 71 (Wednesday, April 12, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19659-19662]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-8957]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 131
[FRL-6576-2]
Withdrawal of Certain Federal Human Health and Aquatic Life Water
Quality Criteria Applicable to Rhode Island, Vermont, the District of
Columbia, Kansas and Idaho
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In 1992, EPA promulgated Federal regulations establishing
water quality criteria for toxic pollutants for several States,
including Rhode Island, Vermont, the District of Columbia, Kansas and
Idaho. These States have now adopted, and EPA has approved, human
health and aquatic life water quality criteria. In this action, EPA is
amending the Federal regulations to withdraw certain human health and
aquatic life criteria applicable to these States. EPA is withdrawing
its criteria applicable to these States without a notice and comment
rulemaking because the States' adopted criteria are no less stringent
than the Federal criteria.
DATES: This rule is effective April 12, 2000.
ADDRESSES: The administrative record for consideration of Rhode Island
and Vermont's criteria is available for public inspection at EPA Region
1, Office of Water, 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston MA 02114-1505
during normal business hours of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The
administrative record for consideration of the District of Columbia
human health criteria is available at EPA Region 3, Water Protection
Division, 1650 Arch St, Philadelphia PA 19103-2029 during normal
business hours of 9:00 am to 5:00 pm. The administrative record for
consideration of Kansas's human health and aquatic life criteria is
available for public inspection at EPA Region 7, Water Resources
Protection Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101
during normal business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The
administrative record for consideration of Idaho's aquatic life
criteria is available for public inspection at EPA Region 10, Office of
Water, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101 during normal
business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Gardner at EPA Headquarters,
Office of Water (4305), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, D.C.,
20460 (tel: 202-260-7309). For questions regarding Rhode Island and
Vermont, contact Bill Beckwith in EPA's Region 1 at 617-918-1544. For
questions regarding the District of Columbia, contact Garrison Miller
in EPA's Region 3 at 215-814-5745. For questions regarding Kansas,
contact Ann Jacobs in EPA's Region 7 at 913-551-7930. For questions
regarding Idaho, contact Lisa Macchio in EPA's Region 10 at 206-553-
1834.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Potentially Affected Entities
Citizens concerned with water quality in Rhode Island, Vermont,
Kansas, the District of Columbia and Idaho may be interested in this
rulemaking. Entities discharging toxic pollutants to waters of the
United States in these States could be affected by this rulemaking
since criteria are used in determining NPDES permit limits. Potentially
affected categories and entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially
Category affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry............................... Industries discharging toxic
pollutants to surface waters
in Rhode Island, Vermont,
District of Columbia, Kansas
and Idaho.
Municipalities......................... Publicly-owned treatment works
discharging toxic pollutants
to surface waters in Rhode
Island, Vermont, District of
Columbia, Kansas and Idaho.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be potentially affected
by this action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now
aware could potentially be affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in the table could also be affected. To determine
whether your facility is affected by this action, you should carefully
examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 131.36 of title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
appropriate person(s) listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
Background
In 1992, EPA promulgated a final rule (known as the ``National
Toxics Rule'', or ``NTR'') to establish numeric water quality criteria
for 12 States and two Territories (hereafter ``States'') that had
failed to comply fully with section 303(c)(2)(B) of the Clean Water Act
(``CWA'') (57 FR 60848). The criteria, codified at 40 CFR 131.36,
became the applicable water quality standards in those 14 jurisdictions
for all purposes and programs under the CWA effective February 5, 1993.
When a State adopts criteria that meet the requirements of the CWA,
EPA will issue a rule amending the NTR to withdraw its criteria.
Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, U.S.C. 533(b)(B)
provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that notice and
public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the
public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice
and opportunity for public comment. EPA has determined that there is
good cause for making today's rule final without prior proposal and
opportunity for comment because EPA has determined that, if the State's
criteria are no less stringent than the Federal regulations, additional
comment on the criteria is unnecessary. EPA finds that this constitutes
good cause for issuing this final rule without notice and comment. EPA
has determined that the States criteria are no less stringent than the
[[Page 19660]]
NTR criteria because they are identical, identical when rounded using
conventional rounding techniques, or more stringent. For the same
reason, and because this rule relieves a restriction, EPA has
determined that good cause exists to waive the requirement for a 30-day
period before the amendment becomes effective and therefore, the
amendment will be immediately effective.
Rhode Island
On August 6, 1997, Rhode Island adopted revisions to its surface
water quality standards (Regulation EVM 112-88.97-1), regarding human
health criteria. Rhode Island adopted human health criteria for toxic
pollutants contained in the NTR. EPA Region 1 approved the State's
human health criteria on January 15, 1999, because Rhode Island's
numeric criteria for the protection of human health were consistent
with the CWA and EPA's implementing regulations at 40 CFR Part 131. By
adoption of numeric criteria, Rhode Island complied with the
requirements of Section 303(c)(2)(b) of the CWA to have numeric
criteria for toxic pollutants. EPA Region 1 requested that the Agency
withdraw the Federal criteria applicable to Rhode Island for which the
State now has numeric criteria.
In today's action, EPA is withdrawing Rhode Island from the NTR for
those criteria that the State has adopted that are no less stringent
than the Federal criteria in the NTR. Rhode Island adopted, and EPA
approved, a human health (organisms only) criterion of 50 g/l
for arsenic. The value promulgated in the NTR for this criterion is
0.14 g/l. Rhode Island will remain in the NTR for this
criterion. In a separate, upcoming action, EPA will propose to remove
Rhode Island from the NTR for this criterion and provide for public
comment. Additionally, Rhode Island adopted, and EPA approved, human
health criteria of 18 mg/l and 59 mg/l (water and organisms, and
organisms only, respectively) for bis(2)ethylhexyl pthalate. The values
promulgated in the NTR are 18 g/l and 59 g/l,
respectively. Rhode Island will remain in the NTR for these criteria.
Vermont
On July 12, 1994, Vermont adopted revisions to its surface water
quality standards (Appendix C, Vermont Water Quality Standards,
effective August 1, 1994). EPA Region 1 approved the State's adoption
of criteria for all toxics contained in the NTR on December 5, 1996,
because they are consistent with the CWA and EPA's implementing
regulations at 40 CFR Part 131. EPA Region 1 requested that the Agency
withdraw the Federal criteria applicable to Vermont for which the State
now has numeric criteria.
In today's action, EPA is withdrawing Vermont from the NTR for
certain human health and aquatic life criteria where the State adopted
criteria that are no less stringent than the Federal criteria. Vermont
adopted, and EPA approved, a human health (organisms only) criterion of
1.5 g/l for arsenic. The value promulgated in the NTR for this
criterion is 0.14 g/l. Vermont will remain in the NTR for this
criterion. In a separate, upcoming action, EPA will propose to remove
Vermont from the NTR for this criterion and provide for public comment.
Additionally, Vermont adopted and EPA approved, an aquatic life
criterion continuous concentration (CCC) of 0.8 g/l for gamma-
BHC. The value promulgated for this criterion in the NTR was 0.08.
Vermont will remain in the NTR for this criterion.
District of Columbia
On March 4, 1994, the District of Columbia adopted revisions to its
surface water quality standards [amended Chapter 11 of Title 21 DCMR
pursuant to the authority set forth in Section 5 of the Water Pollution
Control Act of 1984, D.C. Law 5-188, effective March 16, 1985, D.C.
Code Section 6-924 (1988) and Mayor's Order 85-152, September 12,
1985], adopting human health criteria to protect from effects related
to fish consumption. EPA Region 3 approved these revisions on November
4, 1996, because the District's numeric criteria are consistent with
section 303(c)(2)(B) of the Clean Water Act and EPA's implementing
regulations at 40 CFR Part 131. EPA Region 3 requested that the Agency
withdraw the Federal human health (organism only) criteria applicable
to the District for which the District now has numeric criteria.
In today's action, EPA is withdrawing the District of Columbia from
the NTR for those human health ``organism only'' criteria that the
District has adopted that are no less stringent than the Federal
criteria in the NTR. The District remains in the NTR for organism +
water human health criteria. The District removed the drinking water
use for the only water body in the District designated for that use.
EPA approved the removal of this use and, in a separate upcoming
action, EPA will propose to remove the District from the NTR for
organism + water human health criteria and will provide for public
comment.
Kansas
On June 29, 1994, Kansas adopted revisions to its water quality
standards (K.A.R. 28-16-28) regarding both human health and aquatic
life criteria, and submitted them to EPA Region 7 for review and
approval on October 31, 1994. On February 19, 1998, EPA Region 7
approved certain new or revised water quality criteria for the
protection of human health and aquatic life because they are consistent
with section 303(c)(2)(B) of the CWA and EPA's implementing regulations
at 40 CFR 131, and requested that the Agency withdraw the Federal
criteria applicable to Kansas for which the State now has numeric
criteria. Additionally, on June 29, 1999, Kansas adopted new and
revised ambient water quality criteria for additional pollutants. They
were submitted to EPA for review and approval on August 10, 1999. On
January 19, 2000, EPA Region 7 approved these additional criteria
because they are also consistent with section 303(c)(2)(B) of the CWA
and EPA's implementing regulations at 40 CFR 131, and requested that
the Agency withdraw the Federal criteria applicable to Kansas for which
the State now has numeric criteria.
In today's action, EPA is removing Kansas from the NTR for certain
human health and aquatic life criteria because the State's adopted
criteria are no less stringent than the Federal criteria. Kansas
remains in the NTR for arsenic (human health--organisms only) and
cadmium (acute and chronic aquatic life). For these pollutants, Kansas
adopted criteria that are less stringent than the Federal rule. In a
separate, upcoming action, EPA will propose to withdraw the NTR
criteria for these pollutants and provide for public comment. In
addition, Kansas remains in the NTR for certain other toxic pollutants
for which it has not yet adopted numeric criteria.
In addition, EPA is modifying the NTR for Kansas to reflect the
State's adoption of a 10-\6\ risk level for carcinogens and
a change in nomenclature for one of the State's use classifications.
Idaho
On August, 24, 1994, Idaho adopted revisions to its surface water
quality standards (Title 1, chapter 2, Section 250 of the Idaho
Administrative Code). For all aquatic life toxic pollutants, Idaho
adopted the NTR criteria by reference. On June 25, 1996, EPA Region 10
approved the criteria because they were identical to the Federal
criteria. EPA Region 10 requested that the
[[Page 19661]]
Agency withdraw the Federal criteria applicable to Idaho for which the
State now has numeric criteria.
In today's action, EPA is withdrawing Idaho from the NTR for all
aquatic life criteria because the State adopted criteria that are
identical to the Federal criteria.
Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. Because the
agency has made a ``good cause'' finding that this action is not
subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute, it is not subject to the regulatory
flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.), or to sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). In addition, this action does
not significantly or uniquely affect small governments or impose a
significant intergovernmental mandate, as described in sections 203 and
204 of UMRA. This rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect
the communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order
13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This rule also
is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it is not economically significant.
This action does not involve technical standards; thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. The rule
also does not involve special consideration of environmental justice
related issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994). This rule does not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as added by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to
make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the
agency makes a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. This
determination must be supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2).
As stated previously, EPA made such a good cause finding, including the
reasons therefore, and established an immediate effective date of April
12, 2000. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not
a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804 (2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 131
Environmental protection, Indians--lands, Intergovernmental
relations, Water pollution control.
Dated: April 4, 2000.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble title 40, chapter I, of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 131--WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for part 131 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.
Sec. 131.36 [Amended]
2. Section 131.36 is amended by:
a. Revising the table in paragraph (d)(1)(ii).
b. Revising the table in paragraph (d)(2)(ii).
c. Revising the table in paragraph (d)(5)(ii).
d. Revising the table in paragraph (d)(9)(i).
e. Revising the table in paragraph (d)(9)(ii).
f. In paragraph (d)(9)(iii) by revising ``State-proposed'' to read
``State-adopted''.
g. Removing and reserving paragraph (d)(13).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 131.36 Toxics criteria for those states not complying with Clean
Water Act Section 303(c)(2)(B).
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use classification Applicable criteria
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class A................................... These classifications are
Class B waters where water supply use is assigned the criteria in
designated. Column D1--#2, 68
Class B waters where water supply use is Each of these
not designated. classifications is assigned
Class C;.................................. the criteria in: Column D2--
Class SA;................................. #2, 68
Class SB;.................................
Class SC..................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) * * *
(ii) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use classification Applicable criteria
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class A................................... This classification is
Class B waters where water supply use is assigned criteria in:
designated. Column B2--#105
Class B waters where water supply use is These classifications are
not designated Class C. assigned all the criteria
in:
Column B2--#105
Column D2--#2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(5) * * *
(ii) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use classification Applicable criteria
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class C................................... This classification is
assigned the additional
criteria in:
Column B2--#10, 118, 126
Column D1--#15, 16, 44, 67,
68, 79, 80, 81, 88, 114,
116, 118.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(9) * * *
(i) * * *
Section (2)(A)--Special Aquatic Life Use Waters
Section (2)(B)--Expected Aquatic Life Use Waters
Section (2)(C)--Restricted Aquatic Life Use Waters
Section (3)--Domestic Water Supply.
Section (4)--Food Procurement Use.
(ii) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use classification Applicable criteria
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sections (2)(A), (2)(B), (2)(C), (4)...... These classifications are
each assigned criteria as
follows:
Column B1, #2, 4
Column B2, #4
Column D2, #2, 12, 21, 29,
39, 46, 68, 79, 81, 86, 93,
104, 114, 118
Section (3)............................... This classification is
assigned all criteria in:
Column D1, all except #1, 9,
12, 14, 15, 17, 22, 33, 36,
39, 44, 75, 77, 79, 90,
112, 113, and 115.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 19662]]
(iii) The Human Health Criteria shall be applied at the State
adopted 10-\6\ risk level.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-8957 Filed 4-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P