44930 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 146 / Friday, July 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

drugs: Marijuana, cocaine, opiates, 

phencyclidine, and amphetamines. This 

testing is performed in conformance 

with the Department of Health and 

Human Services’ Mandatory Guidelines 

for Federal Workplace Drug Testing 

Programs. Should the Department’s 

contractor programs consider expanding 

randomized drug testing to include 

anabolic steroids, synthetic opiates, 

newer amphetamines, and other new 

prescription drugs, among others, to this 

list of drugs it routinely test for? If so, 

please specify what drugs should be 

added and why and provide evidence to 

support this addition. 

2. Are there prescription and/or legal 

over-the-counter medications or 

supplements that provide false positives 

for anabolic steroids? If so, should use 

of these medications or supplements by 

employees of DOE contractors or 

subcontractors performing work at DOE 

sites be prohibited and tested for? If so, 

please identify these medications or 

supplements, explain the reasons for 

your answer, and provide evidence to 

support them. 

3. Are there products available for 

sale in the United States or by import to 

the United States that mask prohibited 

drug use or anabolic steroid use? If so, 

what are these products and should 

their use by DOE contractor or 

subcontractor employees performing 

work at DOE sites be prohibited? Are 

there reliable and economically feasible 

means by which to test for these 

products? Please explain each of your 

answers and provide evidence to 

support your answers. 

4. When conducting reasonable 

suspicion or occurrence testing, DOE 

contractors may test for any drug listed 

in Schedules I or II of the Controlled 

Substance Act. Should DOE consider 

expanding this requirement to include 

any drug listed in Schedules I through 

V of the Controlled Substance Act? If so, 

please explain why these drugs should 

be added and provide evidence to 

support these additions. 

5. Are there reliable (i.e., adequately 

sensitive and specific) analytical testing 

methods and/or procedures currently 

available for anabolic steroids? If so, 

please describe those methods, their 

reliability, and provide evidence to 

support your answer. 

6. Compared to the types of drugs and 

classes of drugs currently being tested 

for, is it economically feasible (i.e., cost 

effective) at this time to test for anabolic 

steroids? Please provide evidence to 

support your answer. 

7. What is the cost per test for 

anabolic steroids? What other costs are 

associated with testing for anabolic 

steroids? Please describe the testing 

method(s) for which you provide cost 

information and provide evidence to 

support your answers. 

8. Currently, DOE contractors’ 

substance abuse programs do not 

include policies, procedures, and/or 

protocols for controlling the use of 

alcohol while performing work at a DOE 

site. The use of alcohol, even in small 

amounts, can impair judgment and 

affect the ability to perform critical 

duties. Should the Department consider 

adding the use of alcohol to its 

contractors’ workplace substance abuse 

program for its contractors? If so, why, 

what means of measurement of 

consumed alcohol should be used, and 

what measure of consumed alcohol 

should be prohibited at DOE sites? 

Please provide evidence to support your 

answers. 

9. Are there any Federal Agencies 

with policies and procedures for 

controlling the use of alcohol affecting 

the workplace? If so, which Agency, and 

should DOE consider adopting its 

protocols and procedures for the use of 

alcohol in the workplace? Please 

provide evidence to support your 

answers. 

10. The use of alcohol, even in small 

amounts, can impair judgment and 

affect the ability to perform critical 

duties. If an individual in a critical or 

sensitive position at a DOE site 

consumes alcohol while off duty, how 

long should that individual be required 

to abstain from alcohol use prior to 

reporting for duty? Please explain the 

reasons for your answer and provide 

evidence to support your answer. 

11. Should the Department consider 

requiring its medical review officers to 

obtain and maintain medical review 

officer certification? If so, how often 

should certification occur? Please 

provide evidence to support your 

answers. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 21, 

2010. 

Glenn S. Podonsky, 

Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer, 

Office of Health, Safety and Security. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18740 Filed 7–29–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 131 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2010–0606; FRL–9182–1] 

Stakeholder Input; Revisions to Water 

Quality Standards Regulation 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Listening sessions. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is announcing its plans to 

initiate national rulemaking to make a 

limited set of targeted changes to EPA’s 

water quality standards regulation. EPA 

expects to publish such proposed rule 

changes in the Federal Register in 

Summer 2011. EPA’s intent is to 

improve the regulation’s effectiveness in 

helping to restore and maintain the 

chemical, physical, and biological 

integrity of the Nation’s waters. The 

purpose of this notice is to announce 

EPA’s intent to hold two informal 

public ‘‘listening sessions’’ in August 

2010. The sessions will allow EPA to 

inform the public about the rulemaking, 

and will offer an opportunity for the 

public to express views on the general 

direction of the rulemaking, including 

the six specific elements of the 

rulemaking. 

DATES: The two public listening sessions 

will be held as audio teleconferences on 

August 24 and 26, 2010, from 1 to 2:30 

p.m. EDT. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas J. Gardner, EPA Headquarters, 

Office of Water, Office of Science and 

Technology, at 202–566–0386 or e-mail: 

gardner.thomas@epa.gov. 

In order to provide an adequate 

number of telephone lines for those 

wishing to attend EPA’s sessions, 

interested individuals should register in 

advance following instructions on the 

Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ 

waterscience/standards/rules/wqs. 

Although you may register at any time 

prior to the session of your choice, EPA 

prefers that you register at least three 

days in advance. 

The agenda and resource materials 

will be identical for the two sessions. 

You do not need to attend both sessions. 

If you do not have Internet access, 

please contact the person named in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section above. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Public Listening Sessions 

EPA will hold two informal public 

listening sessions via audio 

teleconference in August 2010 to inform 

the public about the rulemaking, and to 

hear views from the public regarding 

possible changes to EPA’s water quality 

standards regulation at 40 CFR part 131 

that are under consideration. The 

sessions will provide a review of EPA’s 

current water quality standards 

regulation and a summary of the 

clarifications that EPA is considering. 

Clarifying questions and brief oral 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 146 / Friday, July 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 44931 

comments (three minutes or less) will be 

accepted at the sessions, as time 

permits. 

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– 

2010–0606. 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. Although all documents in the 

docket are listed in an index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available 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. The docket 

can also accessed electronically at 

EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/ 

edocket/. Once in the system, select 

‘‘search’’, then key in the appropriate 

docket identification number. 

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 this notice and 

other water quality standards 

documents are available at EPA’s water 

quality standards Web site http:// 

www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards. 

II. Background 

Statutory and Regulatory Overview 

Water quality standards serve as the 

foundation for the water quality-based 

approach to pollution control and are a 

fundamental component of watershed 

management. Water quality standards 

are provisions of state, tribal, or federal 

law that define the water quality goals 

of a water body, or segment thereof, by 

designating the use or uses to be made 

of the water body; establishing criteria 

based on sound science that are 

protective of applicable uses; and 

protecting water quality through 

antidegradation requirements. See 40 

CFR part 131. States and tribes adopt 

water quality standards to protect public 

health or welfare, enhance the quality of 

water, and serve the purposes of the 

Act. See Clean Water Act (CWA or Act) 

303(c). ‘‘Serve the purposes of the Act’’ 

(as defined in sections 101(a)(2), and 

303(c) of the CWA) means that water 

quality standards should: (1) Include 

provisions for restoring and maintaining 

chemical, physical, and biological 

integrity of state and tribal waters; (2) 

provide, wherever attainable, water 

quality for the protection and 

propagation of fish, shellfish, and 

wildlife and recreation in and on the 

water; and (3) consider the use and 

value of state and tribal waters for 

public water supplies, propagation of 

fish and wildlife, recreation, agricultural 

and industrial purposes, and navigation. 

See 40 CFR 131.2. 

The statutory basis for water quality 

standards and EPA’s regulation is 

section 303(c) of the CWA. Section 

303(c)(2) of the CWA directs states to 

consider the use and value of waters for 

specific purposes, including public 

water supply, propagation of fish and 

wildlife, recreational purposes, 

agricultural and industrial water 

supplies and other purposes including 

navigation. Section 303(c)(2) also 

requires that standards protect public 

health or welfare, enhance the quality of 

water and serve the purposes of the Act. 

CWA section 303(c)(1) requires that 

states review their standards at least 

once every three years. CWA section 

303(c)(3) establishes timelines for EPA 

review and approval or disapproval of 

new or revised standards, and CWA 

section 303(c)(4) specifies requirements 

regarding promulgation of federal water 

quality standards in cases where a new 

or revised standard is found by EPA not 

to be consistent with the CWA or in any 

case where the Administrator 

determines that a new or revised 

standard is necessary to meet the 

requirements of the CWA. 

EPA’s Water Quality Standards 

regulation is at 40 CFR part 131. The 

regulation implements the requirements 

of section 303(c) of the CWA. 

Fundamentally, the regulation: (1) 

Defines when and how designated uses 

may be revised; (2) requires criteria to 

protect those uses and be based on 

sound science; (3) requires EPA and 

states to prevent the degradation of 

water quality, except under certain 

circumstances; (4) requires states/tribes 

to review their water quality standards 

at least every three years and engage the 

public in any revisions to water quality 

standards; and (5) specifies roles of 

states and EPA and provides 

administrative procedures for EPA’s 

review and approval or disapproval of 

any new or revised state water quality 

standards. 

III. Changes to EPA’s Water Quality 

Standards Regulation Under 

Consideration 

EPA is planning to propose a limited 

set of targeted changes to its water 

quality standards regulation to improve 

its effectiveness in helping restore and 

maintain the chemical, physical, and 

biological integrity of the Nation’s 

waters. EPA expects to publish a 

proposed rule in the Federal Register in 

Summer 2011. 

The core requirements of the current 

regulation have been in place since 

1983. These requirements have 

provided a solid foundation for water 

quality-based controls, including CWA 

section 303(d) assessments, listings, and 

Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), 

as well as discharge permits issued 

under the National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES). The intent 

of the changes EPA is considering is to 

add or modify a limited number of 

provisions to address the specific areas 

described below. 

The following is a brief summary of 

the clarifications to the water quality 

standards regulation that EPA is 

considering. 

A. Antidegradation Implementation 

Methods 

The current regulation specifies that 

states and authorized tribes must 

identify the methods to implement the 

antidegradation policies that they are 

required to adopt in their water quality 

standards. 40 CFR 131.12(a). The 

regulation does not specify what the 

implementation methods must include, 

but only states that such methods must 

be, as the policies must be, ‘‘consistent 

with’’ 40 CFR 131.12(a). EPA is 

considering modifying the regulation to 

specify that antidegradation 

implementation methods must meet 

specific minimum requirements. 

Specifically, EPA is considering adding 

a subparagraph (b) to 40 CFR 131.12 

(which currently has a subparagraph (a) 

but not (b)) that would specify 

minimum elements to be included in 

state or authorized tribe antidegradation 

implementation methods. EPA is also 

considering requiring that 

antidegradation implementation 

methods be adopted into state and tribal 

water quality standards, and thus be 

subject to EPA review and approval 

under CWA section 303(c), rather than 

having them simply be identified. In the 

listening sessions, EPA will invite views 

from the public on these potential 

changes, including what the minimum 

requirements should include. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
44932 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 146 / Friday, July 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

B. Administrator’s ‘‘Determination’’ 

The CWA provides that the 

Administrator may determine that a 

revised or new standard is necessary to 

meet the requirements of the CWA. 

Section 303(c)(4)(B). If such a 

determination is made, EPA must 

promptly propose a revised or new 

federal standard to augment or replace 

the state’s or authorized tribe’s water 

quality standards, and promulgate the 

proposed standard within 90 days of 

proposal. See CWA 303(c)(4). Since this 

provision was enacted by Congress in 

1972, there have been recurring 

instances of confusion or 

misunderstanding about what 

constitutes such a determination. EPA is 

considering clarifying in the water 

quality standards regulation that an 

Administrator’s determination must be 

signed by the Administrator or his/her 

duly authorized designee, and must 

include a statement that the document 

constitutes a determination under 

section 303(c)(4)(B) of the CWA. In the 

listening sessions, EPA will invite views 

from the public on these changes. 

C. Designated Uses 

Section 101(a)(2) of the Act 

establishes a goal, wherever attainable, 

of water quality that provides for the 

protection and propagation of fish, 

shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in 

and on the water. The water quality 

standards regulation requires that the 

state or authorized tribe perform a use 

attainability analysis (that is, a 

structured scientific assessment of 

factors affecting attainment of 

designated uses) and submit this 

assessment to EPA in order to remove 

certain designated uses, including any 

designated use that is specified as a 

national goal in section 101(a)(2) of the 

CWA. See 40 CFR 131.10. The 

regulation does not, however, specify 

which uses, if any, must be adopted to 

replace the use that is being removed. 

EPA is considering clarifying that 

designated uses reflecting the CWA 

101(a)(2) goals of the CWA are 

presumed attainable unless otherwise 

demonstrated and that states and 

authorized tribes must designate such 

uses unless they have conducted a use 

attainability analysis to support a lesser 

designated use and EPA has approved 

that action. EPA is also considering 

clarifying that the highest attainable 

use(s) closest to the section 101(a)(2) 

goal must be adopted if a CWA 101(a)(2) 

goal use is unattainable. In the listening 

sessions, EPA will invite views from the 

public on these changes. 

D. Variances 

The current regulation allows states 

and authorized tribes to adopt variances 

as general policies for applying and 

implementing their water quality 

standards. See 40 CFR 131.13. The 

regulation does not provide a definition 

of, a description of, or any requirements 

for the use of variances. EPA is 

considering establishing regulatory 

requirements for variances to ensure 

proper use of variances and reduce the 

possibility of inappropriate use. In the 

listening sessions, EPA will invite views 

from the public on these clarifications, 

and what the regulatory requirements 

should include. 

E. Triennial Reviews 

The CWA and the current water 

quality standards regulation require 

states and authorized tribes to review 

their water quality standards at least 

once every three years, and modify 

standards or adopt new standards as 

appropriate. CWA 303(c); 40 CFR 

131.20. EPA is considering revising the 

regulatory requirements to clarify that 

states and authorized tribes must solicit 

and consider public comments in 

determining the scope of each such 

triennial review. EPA is also 

considering establishing a new triennial 

review requirement that states and 

authorized tribes must evaluate whether 

their existing water quality criteria 

continue to be protective of designated 

uses, taking into consideration any new 

information, including EPA’s most 

recent national recommended CWA 

304(a) water quality criteria, that has 

become available since the state or tribal 

criteria were adopted or last revised. In 

the listening sessions, EPA will invite 

views from the public on these changes. 

F. Updates To Reflect Court Decisions 

EPA is considering making three 

clarifications to the water quality 

standards regulation to codify the 

results of court decisions over the years. 

First, EPA is considering revising the 

definition of ‘‘water quality standards’’ 

in 40 CFR 131.3 to reflect the results of 

and EPA’s actions on remand from 

Florida Public Interest Research Group 

Citizen Lobby, Inc., Save our Suwannee, 

Inc., et al. v. EPA, et al., 386 F.3d 1070 

(11th Cir. 2004) concerning Florida’s 

Impaired Water Rule (IWR). That court 

decision and EPA’s response to it more 

clearly define which of state or tribal 

provisions constitute water quality 

standards that need to be submitted to 

EPA for review and approval. EPA is 

considering revising 40 CFR part 131 to 

reflect these developments. 

Second, EPA is considering specifying 

that authorizing provisions for 

compliance schedules for implementing 

water quality-based effluent limits in 

NPDES permits must be adopted as part 

of a state’s or tribe’s water quality 

standards, and therefore be submitted to 

EPA for review and approval. See In the 

Matter of Star-Kist Caribe, Inc., 1990 WL 

324290 (EPA), 3 EAD 172 (April 16, 

1990). 

Third, EPA is considering clarifying 

that states and authorized tribes must 

submit to EPA records of public 

participation that has occurred in 

reviewing and revising state or tribal 

water quality standards. These records 

would include public comments, and 

the state’s or tribe’s responses to the 

comments. This change would reflect 

the results of City of Albuquerque v. 

Browner, 97 F.3d 415 (10th Cir. 1996). 

In the listening sessions, EPA will 

invite views from the public on these 

changes. 

IV. Other EPA Outreach 

EPA expects to conduct outreach with 

additional stakeholders as well as local, 

state, and tribal governments before 

proposing any revisions to the water 

quality standards regulation. This 

outreach includes discussions and 

consultation with federally-recognized 

Indian tribes, consistent with Executive 

Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation); 

consultation with representatives of 

elected officials of state and local 

government, consistent with Executive 

Order 13132 (Federalism); and 

consultation with state water quality 

program officials as co-regulators. EPA 

will continue outreach efforts prior to 

finalizing any revisions. 

Dated: July 22, 2010. 

Ephraim S. King, 

Director, Office of Science and Technology. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18557 Filed 7–29–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1986–0005; FRL–9183–1] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Intent To 

Delete the SMS Instruments, Inc. 

Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 2, is issuing a 

Notice of Intent to Delete the SMS 

Instruments, Inc. Superfund Site (Site), 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS