Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 22891 

VI. Executive Order 13175: 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments 

In compliance with Executive Order 

13175, EPA is in the process of 

consulting with tribal officials to gain an 

understanding of and, where necessary, 

to address the tribal implications of the 

draft CGP. In the course of this 

consultation, EPA plans to undertake 

the following activities: 

1. Provide education and outreach on 

the draft CGP; 

2. Hold national conference call(s) to 

discuss issues and concerns of the tribes 

and document discussions held in this 

call; 

3. Solicit comment on the draft 

permit; and 

4. Provide feedback through a written 

communication explaining how tribal 

issues and concerns were considered in 

the final action. This communication 

will be completed and made available to 

the tribes at the same time the permit is 

promulgated and the other responses to 

the comments are published. 

Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 

1251 et seq. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Carl-Axel P. Soderberg, 

Division Director, Caribbean Environmental 

Protection Division, EPA Region 2. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Kevin Bricke, 

Acting Director, Division of Environmental 

Planning & Protection, EPA. Region 2. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Jon M. Capacasa, 

Director, Water Protection Division, EPA 

Region 3. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Douglas Mundrick, 

Acting Director, Water Protection Division, 

EPA Region 4. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Tinka G. Hyde, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 5. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Miguel I. Flores, 

Director, Water Quality Protection Division, 

EPA Region 6. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Jamie Green, 

Acting Director, Water, Wetlands and 

Pesticides Division, EPA Region 7. 

Dated: April 11, 2011. 

Stephen S. Tuber, 

Assistant Regional Administrator, EPA 

Region 8. 

Dated: April 11, 2011. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 9. 

Dated: April 11, 2011. 

Michael A. Bussell, 

Director, Office of Water and Watersheds, 

EPA Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9929 Filed 4–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9297–8; EPA–HQ–OW–2008–0238] 

Modification to 2008 National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) General Permit for 

Stormwater Discharges Associated 

with Construction Activities 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: EPA Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 

8, 9, and 10 propose to modify the 2008 

National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) general 

permits for stormwater discharges 

associated with construction activity in 

order to extend until January 31, 2012 

the expiration date of the permit. 

Hereinafter, these NPDES general 

permits will be referred to as ‘‘permit’’ or 

‘‘2008 construction general permit’’ or 

‘‘2008 CGP.’’ This proposed modification 

would, if finalized, extend the threeyear permit so that it expires on January 

31, 2012 instead of June 30, 2011. Prior 

to this proposed extension, EPA 

modified the 2008 CGP in January 2010 

to extend the permit by one year, thus 

making it a three-year permit. By 

Federal law, no NPDES permit may be 

issued for a period that exceeds five 

years. 

DATES: EPA is proposing a modification 

to its 2008 CGP that would extend the 

permit until January 31, 2012. If the 

proposed modification is finalized, the 

2008 CGP would expire on midnight, 

January 31, 2012, instead of June 30, 

2011. Comments on EPA’s proposal 

must be postmarked by May 25, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg 

Schaner, Water Permits Division, Office 

of Wastewater Management (Mail Code: 

4203M), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., EPA East, Washington, DC 20460; 

telephone number: (202) 564–0721; fax 

number: (202) 564–6431; email address: 

schaner.greg@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

If a discharger chooses to apply for 

coverage under the 2008 CGP, the 

permit provides specific requirements 

for preventing contamination of 

waterbodies from stormwater discharges 

from the following construction 

activities: 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
22892 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 

Category Examples of affected entities 

North American 

Industry 

Classification 

System (NAICS) 

Code 

Industry.

Construction site operators disturbing 1 or more acres of land, or less than 1 acre but part of a larger common plan of 

development or sale if the larger common plan will ultimately disturb 1 acre or more, and performing the following 

activities: 

Building, Developing and General Contracting ................................................................................... 233 

Heavy Construction ............................................................................................................................. 234 

EPA does not intend the preceding 

table to be exhaustive, but provides it as 

a guide for readers regarding entities 

likely to be regulated by this action. 

This table lists the types of activities 

that EPA is now aware of that 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 definition of 

‘‘construction activity’’ and ‘‘small 

construction activity’’ in existing EPA 

regulations at 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)(x) 

and 122.26(b)(15), respectively. If you 

have questions regarding the 

applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the person 

listed for technical information in the 

preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

Eligibility for coverage under the 2008 

CGP is limited to operators of ‘‘new 

projects’’ or ‘‘unpermitted ongoing 

projects.’’ A ‘‘new project’’ is one that 

commences after the effective date of 

the 2008 CGP. An ‘‘unpermitted ongoing 

project’’ is one that commenced prior to 

the effective date of the 2008 CGP, yet 

never received authorization to 

discharge under the 2003 CGP or any 

other NPDES permit covering its 

construction-related stormwater 

discharges. Construction sites that 

originally obtained permit coverage 

under the 2003 CGP will continue to be 

covered under that permit. The 2008 

CGP is effective only in those areas 

where EPA is the permitting authority. 

A list of eligible areas is included in 

Appendix B of the 2008 CGP. 

B. How can I get copies of this document 

and other related information? 

1. Docket. EPA has established an 

official public docket for this action 

under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW– 

2008–0238. The official public docket is 

the collection of materials that is 

available for public viewing at the Water 

Docket in the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/ 

DC) EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. Although all documents in 

the docket are listed in an index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at the EPA Docket Center Public 

Reading Room, open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744 and the telephone 

number for the Water Docket is (202) 

566–2426. 

2. Electronic Access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. Electronic 

versions of the final permit and fact 

sheet are available at EPA’s stormwater 

website http://www.epa.gov/npdes/ 

stormwater. 

An electronic version of the public 

docket is available through EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA 

Dockets at http://www.regulations.gov/ 

fdmspublic/component/main to view 

public comments, access the index 

listing of the contents of the official 

public docket, and to access those 

documents in the public docket that are 

available electronically. Once in the 

system, select ‘‘search’’, then key in the 

appropriate docket identification 

number. 

Certain types of information will not 

be placed in the EPA Dockets. 

Information claimed as CBI and other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute, which is not 

included in the official public docket, 

will not be available for public viewing 

in EPA’s electronic public docket. EPA 

policy is that copyrighted material will 

not be placed in EPA’s electronic public 

docket but will be available only in 

printed, paper form in the official public 

docket. Although not all docket 

materials may be available 

electronically, you may still access any 

of the publicly available docket 

materials through the docket facility 

identified in Section I.B.1. 

Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark 

all of the information that you claim to 

be CBI. For CBI information on 

computer disks mailed to EPA, mark the 

surface of the disk as CBI. Also identify 

electronically the specific information 

contained in the disk or that you claim 

is CBI. In addition to one complete 

version of the specific information 

claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy 

that does not contain the information 

claimed as CBI for inclusion in the 

public document. Information so 

marked will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR Part 2. 

For public commenters, it is 

important to note that EPA’s policy is 

that public comments, whether 

submitted electronically or in paper, 

will be made available for public 

viewing in EPA’s electronic public 

docket as EPA receives them and 

without change, unless the comment 

contains copyrighted material, CBI, or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. When EPA 

identifies a comment containing 

copyrighted material, EPA will provide 

a reference to that material in the 

version of the comment that is placed in 

EPA’s electronic public docket. The 

entire printed comment, including the 

copyrighted material, will be available 

in the public docket. 

Public comments submitted on 

computer disks that are mailed or 

delivered to the docket will be 

transferred to EPA’s electronic public 

docket. Public comments that are 

mailed or delivered to the docket will be 

scanned and placed in EPA’s electronic 

public docket. Where practical, physical 

objects will be photographed, and the 

photograph will be placed in EPA’s 

electronic public docket along with a 

brief description written by the docket 

staff. 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 22893 

C. How and to whom do I submit 

comments? 

You may submit comments 

electronically, by mail, or through hand 

delivery/courier. To ensure proper 

receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate 

docket identification number in the 

subject line on the first page of your 

comment. To ensure that EPA can read, 

understand, and therefore properly 

respond to comments, the Agency 

would prefer that commenters cite, 

where possible, the paragraph(s) or 

section in the fact sheet or permit to 

which each comment refers. Please 

ensure that your comments are 

submitted within the specified comment 

period. Comments received after the 

close of the comment period will be 

marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not required to 

consider these late comments. 

1. Electronically. If you submit an 

electronic comment as prescribed 

below, EPA recommends that you 

include your name, mailing address, 

and an e-mail address or other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment. Also include this contact 

information on the outside of any disk 

or CD–ROM you submit, and in any 

cover letter accompanying the disk or 

CD–ROM. This ensures that you can be 

identified as the submitter of the 

comment and allows EPA to contact you 

in case EPA cannot read your comment 

due to technical difficulties or needs 

further information on the substance of 

your comment. EPA’s policy is that EPA 

will not edit your comment, and any 

identifying or contact information 

provided in the body of a comment will 

be included as part of the comment that 

is placed in the official public docket, 

and made available in EPA’s electronic 

public docket. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. 

i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA’s 

electronic public docket to submit 

comments to EPA electronically is 

EPA’s preferred method for receiving 

comments. The system is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity, 

email address, or other contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. 

ii. E-mail. In contrast to EPA’s 

electronic public docket, EPA’s e-mail 

system is not an ‘‘anonymous access’’ 

system. If you send an e-mail comment 

directly to the Docket without going 

through EPA’s electronic public docket, 

EPA’s e-mail system automatically 

captures your e-mail address. E-mail 

addresses that are automatically 

captured by EPA’s e-mail system are 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the official public docket, and 

made available in EPA’s electronic 

public docket. 

iii. Disk or CD–ROM. These electronic 

submissions will be accepted in 

Microsoft Word or ASCII file format. 

Avoid the use of special characters and 

any form of encryption. 

2. By mail. Send the original and three 

copies of your comments. 

3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation as 

identified in Section I.B. 

D. Public Hearings 

EPA has not scheduled any public 

hearings to receive public comment 

concerning the proposed extension. All 

persons will continue to have the right 

to provide written comments during the 

public comment period. However, 

interested persons may request a public 

hearing pursuant to 40 CFR 124.12 

concerning the proposed extension. 

Requests for a public hearing must be 

sent or delivered in writing to the same 

address as provided above for public 

comments prior to the close of the 

comment period. Requests for a public 

hearing must state the nature of the 

issues proposed to be raised in the 

hearing. Pursuant to 40 CFR 124.12, 

EPA shall hold a public hearing if it 

finds, on the basis of requests, a 

significant degree of public interest in a 

public hearing on the proposed 

extension. If EPA decides to hold a 

public hearing, a public notice of the 

date, time and place of the hearing will 

be made at least 30 days prior to the 

hearing. Any person may provide 

written or oral statements and data 

pertaining to the proposed permit at the 

public hearing. 

E. Finalizing This Action 

This action will not be finalized until 

after all significant public comments 

have been considered and addressed. 

EPA’s response to public comments 

received will be included in the docket 

as part of the final action. Once the final 

permit becomes effective, operators of 

new and unpermitted ongoing 

construction projects may seek 

authorization under the 2008 CGP prior 

to the midnight January 31, 2012 

expiration date. 

F. Who are the EPA Regional contacts 

for this permit? 

For EPA Region 1, contact Jessica 

Hing at tel.: (617) 918–1560 or e-mail at 

hing.jessica@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 2, contact Stephen 

Venezia at tel.: (212) 637–3856 or e-mail 

at venezia.stephen@epa.gov, or for 

Puerto Rico, contact Sergio Bosques at 

tel.: (787) 977–5838 or e-mail at 

bosques.sergio@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 3, contact Chuck 

Schadel at tel.: (215) 814–5761 or e-mail 

at schadel.chuck@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 5, contact Brian Bell 

at tel.: (312) 886–0981 or e-mail at 

bell.brianc@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 6, contact Suzanna 

Perea at tel.: (214) 665–7217 or e-mail 

at: perea.suzannabrent@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 7, contact Mark 

Matthews at tel.: (913) 551–7635 or 

e-mail at: matthews.mark@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 8, contact Amy Clark 

at tel.: (303) 312–7014 or e-mail at: 

clark.amy@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 9, contact Eugene 

Bromley at tel.: (415) 972–3510 or 

e-mail at bromley.eugene@epa.gov. 

For EPA Region 10, contact Misha 

Vakoc at tel.: (206) 553–6650 or e-mail 

at vakoc.misha@epa.gov. 

II. Background of Permit 

A. Statutory and Regulatory History 

The Clean Water Act (‘‘CWA’’) 

establishes a comprehensive program 

‘‘to restore and maintain the chemical, 

physical, and biological integrity of the 

Nation’s waters.’’ 33 U.S.C. 1251(a). The 

CWA also includes the objective of 

attaining ‘‘water quality which provides 

for the protection and propagation of 

fish, shellfish and wildlife and * * * 

recreation in and on the water.’’ 33 

U.S.C. 1251(a)(2)). To achieve these 

goals, the CWA requires EPA to control 

point source discharges of pollutants to 

waters of the United States through the 

issuance of National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (‘‘NPDES’’) permits. 

The Water Quality Act of 1987 (WQA) 

added section 402(p) of the Clean Water 

Act (CWA), which directed EPA to 

develop a phased approach to regulate 

stormwater discharges under the NPDES 

program. 33 U.S.C. 1342(p). EPA 

published a final regulation in the 

Federal Register, often called the ‘‘Phase 

I Rule’’ on November 16, 1990, 

establishing, among other things, permit 

application requirements for, among 

other things, ‘‘storm water discharges 

associated with industrial activity.’’ See 

55 FR 47990. EPA defines the term 

‘‘storm water discharge associated with 

industrial activity’’ in a comprehensive 

manner to cover a wide variety of 

facilities. See id. Construction activities, 

including activities that are part of a 

larger common plan of development or 

sale, that ultimately disturb at least five 

acres of land and have point source 

discharges to waters of the U.S. were 

included in the definition of ‘‘industrial 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
22894 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 

activity’’ pursuant to 40 CFR 

122.26(b)(14)(x). The second rule 

implementing section 402(p), often 

called the Phase II Rule, was published 

in the Federal Register on December 8, 

1999, requires NPDES permits for 

discharges from construction sites 

disturbing at least one acre but less than 

five acres, including sites that are less 

than one acre but are part of a larger 

common plan of development or sale 

that will ultimately disturb at least one 

acre but less than five acres, pursuant to 

40 CFR 122.26(b)(15)(i). See 64 FR 

68722. 

NPDES permits issued for 

construction stormwater discharges are 

required under Section 402(a)(1) of the 

CWA to include conditions for meeting 

technology-based effluent limits 

established under Section 301 and, 

where applicable, Section 306. Once an 

effluent limitations guideline or new 

source performance standard is 

promulgated in accordance with these 

sections, NPDES permits issued by the 

NPDES permitting authorities must 

incorporate requirements based on such 

limitations and standards. See 40 CFR 

122.44(a)(1). Prior to the promulgation 

of national effluent limitations 

guidelines and new source performance 

standards, permitting authorities 

incorporate technology-based effluent 

limitations on a best professional 

judgment basis. CWA section 

402(a)(1)(B); 40 CFR 125.3(a)(2)(ii)(B). 

B. Summary of 2008 CGP 

EPA announced the issuance of the 

2008 CGP on July 14, 2008. See 73 FR 

40338. Construction operators choosing 

to be covered by the 2008 CGP must 

certify in their notice of intent (NOI) 

that they meet the requisite eligibility 

requirements described in Part 1.3 of the 

permit. If eligible, operators are 

authorized to discharge under this 

permit in accordance with Part 2. 

Permittees must install and implement 

control measures to meet the effluent 

limits applicable to all dischargers in 

Part 3, and must inspect such 

stormwater controls and repair or 

modify them in accordance with Part 4. 

The permit in Part 5 requires all 

construction operators to prepare a 

stormwater pollution prevention plan 

(SWPPP) that identifies all sources of 

pollution, and describes control 

measures used to minimize pollutants 

discharged from the construction site. 

Part 6 details the requirements for 

terminating coverage under the permit. 

The 2008 CGP permit provides 

coverage for discharges from 

construction sites that occur in areas not 

covered by an approved State NPDES 

program. EPA Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 

8, 9, and 10 issued the 2008 CGP to 

replace the expired 2003 CGP for 

operators of new and unpermitted 

ongoing construction projects. The 

geographic coverage and scope of the 

2008 CGP is listed in Appendix B of the 

permit. 

C. What Is EPA’s rationale for the 

modification of the 2008 CGP for an 

extension of the expiration date? 

As stated above, EPA proposes to 

modify the 2008 CGP by extending to 

January 31, 2012 the expiration date of 

the permit. EPA finds it necessary to 

propose this extension in order to 

provide sufficient time to finalize the 

new CGP, which will incorporate for the 

first time new effluent limitations 

guidelines and new source performance 

standards, which EPA promulgated in 

December 2009. The extension is 

necessary in order to make up for a 

delay in the issuance process of the new 

CGP due to an error discovered in the 

December 2009 final rule regarding the 

calculation of the numeric limitation on 

turbidity. This numeric limit has since 

been stayed by EPA. EPA’s proposed 

extension would provide the Agency 

with sufficient time to account for this 

delay and to meet its other permit 

issuance obligations. 

NPDES permits issued for 

construction stormwater discharges are 

required under Section 402(a)(1) of the 

CWA to include conditions for meeting 

technology-based effluent limits 

established under Section 301 and, 

where applicable, Section 306. Once an 

effluent limitations guideline or new 

source performance standard is 

promulgated in accordance with these 

sections, any NPDES permits issued 

after the effective date of these 

requirements must incorporate limits 

based on such limitations and 

standards. See 40 CFR 122.44(a)(1). In 

the case of the CGP, EPA promulgated 

effluent limitations guidelines and new 

source performance standards for the 

construction and development point 

source category on December 1, 2009 

(‘‘C&D rule’’), which for the first time 

imposed a set of minimum federal 

numeric and non-numeric effluent 

limitations on regulated construction 

sites. See 74 FR 62996 (December 1, 

2009). The C&D rule (located at 40 CFR 

Part 450) became effective on February 

1, 2010, thus requiring that any NPDES 

permit issued after this date, whether 

issued by EPA or an authorized state, 

must incorporate the substantive 

technology-based requirements of the 

rule into the permit. For the next CGP, 

this means that EPA must incorporate 

the effective requirements of the C&D 

rule into the permit. 

Among other requirements, the C&D 

rule subjected discharges from certain 

larger construction sites to a numeric 

effluent limitation of 280 NTU for the 

pollutant turbidity starting in August of 

2011 (for sites disturbing 20 or more 

acres at one time) and February of 2014 

(for sites disturbing 10 or more acres at 

one time). Subsequent to the 

promulgation of the C&D rule, EPA 

received two petitions for 

reconsideration of the rule. These 

petitions pointed out a potential error in 

the calculation of the numeric 

limitation. Based on EPA’s examination 

of the dataset underlying the 280 NTU 

limit, EPA concluded that it improperly 

interpreted the data and, as a result, the 

calculations in the existing 

administrative record are no longer 

adequate to support the 280 NTU 

numeric effluent limitation. In response 

to this finding, EPA finalized a stay of 

the 280 numeric NTU limit and 

associated monitoring requirements (see 

40 CFR 450.22(a)) on January 4, 2011, in 

order to enable the Agency to correct its 

error in calculating the numeric 

limitation. See 75 FR 68215 (November 

5, 2010). EPA is currently in the process 

of initiating a limited rulemaking to 

correct the numeric limitation. 

Preceding the decision to stay the 

numeric turbidity limit, the uncertainty 

surrounding the error in calculating the 

280 NTU limit and the appropriate way 

for EPA to address it, caused a delay of 

several months to the permit issuance 

process for the new CGP. The result of 

this delay makes it a near certainty that, 

given even the most optimistic 

timeframe for finalizing the new CGP, 

EPA will not be able to finalize the new 

CGP by the June 30, 2011 expiration 

date of the 2008 CGP. With less than 

three months remaining before the 2008 

CGP expires, EPA believes it is 

impracticable to finalize the new CGP 

when considering the minimum tasks 

required of the Agency to finalize the 

permit. For instance, EPA has provided 

60 days for the public to comment on 

the draft CGP (Refer to other FR Notice), 

which is typical of the amount of time 

provided for review of similar permits. 

Depending on the type and amount of 

comments the Agency receives, it is not 

unusual for EPA to take between two to 

three additional months to adequately 

review and respond to those comments, 

and to make corresponding changes to 

the permit and fact sheet. In addition to 

this time, EPA is required to complete 

inter-agency review on the modified 

permit prior to final issuance, which 

may take up to 90 days, all requiring an 

amount of time that is several months 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Notices 22895 

beyond the June 30, 2011 expiration of 

the 2008 CGP. 

EPA was unaware of the present need 

to extend the expiration date of the 2008 

CGP when it first modified the 2008 

CGP’s expiration date in January 2010 

by one year to June 30, 2011. At that 

time, EPA was under the impression 

that June 30, 2011 provided sufficient 

time to finalize a new permit 

incorporating all of the new C&D rule 

requirements. However, with the 

setback of time related to the stay of the 

280 NTU limit, EPA needs additional 

time to complete the permit issuance 

process as explained above. EPA 

believes that the proposed extension to 

January 31, 2012 will provide the 

Agency with sufficient time to finalize 

the new CGP. 

EPA believes it is imperative that EPA 

has sufficient time to incorporate the 

C&D ELG into the new CGP and issue 

the new CGP prior to the existing 

permit’s expiration date. If EPA does not 

issue the new CGP before expiration of 

the existing permit, no new construction 

projects may be permitted under the 

CGP, leaving individual NPDES permits 

as the only available option for 

permitting new projects. The sole 

reliance on individual permits would 

mean that discharge authorizations 

would almost certainly be delayed due 

to the greater amount of time and 

Agency resources that are required for 

developing and issuing individual 

permits. In turn, construction projects 

that need to begin construction activity 

on or after midnight June 30, 2011 

would be delayed for an uncertain 

amount of time until EPA can review 

their individual permit application and 

issue the necessary permits. Rather than 

risk detrimental delays to new 

construction projects, with no clear 

benefit to our nation’s surface waters, 

EPA has decided that it is advisable to 

instead propose a modification to the 

2008 CGP to extend the expiration date 

until January 31, 2012. 

D. EPA’s Authority To Modify NPDES 

Permits 

EPA regulations establish when the 

permitting authority may make 

modifications to existing NPDES 

permits. In relevant part, EPA 

regulations state that ‘‘[w]hen the 

Director receives any information * * * 

he or she may determine whether or not 

one or more of the causes listed in 

paragraph (a) * * * of this section for 

modification * * * exist. If cause exists, 

the Director may modify * * * the 

permit accordingly, subject to the 

limitations of 40 CFR 124.5(c).’’ 40 CFR 

122.62. For purposes of this Federal 

Register notice, the relevant cause for 

modification is at 40 CFR 122.62(a)(2), 

which states that a permit may be 

modified when ‘‘[t]he Director has 

received new information’’ and that 

information was not available at the 

time of permit issuance * * * and 

would have justified the application of 

different permit conditions at the time 

of issuance.’’ Pursuant to EPA 

regulations, ‘‘[w]hen a permit is 

modified, only the conditions subject to 

the modification are reopened.’’ 40 CFR 

122.62. 

In the case of the 2008 CGP, a permit 

modification is justified based on the 

new information EPA received since it 

issued the 2008 CGP, and more 

specifically, since it modified the 2008 

CGP in January 2010, in terms of the 

delay to the permit process associated 

with the discovery of the numeric limit 

calculation error and resulting stay to 

the numeric turbidity limit. If this 

information was available at the time of 

issuance of the 2008 CGP, and more 

specifically, in January 2010 when EPA 

extended the expiration date to June 30, 

2011, it would have justified EPA 

establishing an expiration date for the 

2008 CGP that was later than June 30, 

2011. As a result, cause exists under 

EPA regulations to justify modification 

of the 2008 CGP to extend the expiration 

date of the permit from midnight June 

30, 2011 to midnight January 31, 2012. 

EPA notes that, by law, NPDES 

permits cannot be extended beyond 5 

years. 40 CFR 122.46. The proposed 

extension of the 2008 CGP complies 

with this restriction. The 2008 CGP was 

first issued on June 30, 2008. Assuming 

the extension of the 2008 CGP is 

finalized as proposed, the permit would 

still have been in effect for less than the 

5-year limit. 

Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 

et seq. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Carl-Axel P. Soderberg, 

Division Director, Caribbean Environmental 

Protection Division, EPA Region 2. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Kevin Bricke, 

Acting Director, Division of Environmental 

Planning & Protection, EPA Region 2. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Jon M. Capacasa, 

Director, Water Protection Division, EPA 

Region 3. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Tinka G. Hyde, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 5. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Miguel I. Flores, 

Director, Water Quality Protection Division, 

EPA Region 6. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Jamie Green, 

Acting Director, Water, Wetlands and 

Pesticides Division, EPA Region 7. 

Dated: April 11, 2011. 

Stephen S. Tuber, 

Assistant Regional Administrator, EPA 

Region 8. 

Dated: April 11, 2011. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Director, Water Division, EPA Region 9. 

Dated: April 11, 2011 

Michael A. Bussell, 

Director, Office of Water and Watersheds, 

EPA Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9926 Filed 4–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Submission for OMB Review 

AGENCY: Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission. 

ACTION: Final Notice of Submission for 

OMB Review—Request for an Extension 

Without Change: State and Local 

Government Information Report (EEO– 

4). 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, the Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

(EEOC or Commission) hereby gives 

notice that it has submitted to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) a 

request for an extension through 2014 of 

the existing collection requirements 

under 29 CFR part 1602, Recordkeeping 

and Reporting Requirements, under 

Title VII. The Commission has 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES