Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2010 / Notices 8697 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9115–1] 

Notice of Availability of Class 

Deviation; Disputes Resolution 

Procedures Related to Clean Water 

and Drinking Water State Revolving 

Fund (CWSRF and DWSRF, 

Respectively) Reallocation Under the 

American Reinvestment and Recovery 

Act of 2009 (ARRA) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: This document provides 

notice of availability of a Class 

Deviation from EPA’s assistance 

agreement dispute procedures and also 

sets forth the procedures that will apply 

to the resolution of disputes that may 

arise in connection with the CWSRF 

and DWSRF reallocation decisions 

made by EPA under the ARRA. 

Currently, with respect to states and 

local governments, assistance agreement 

disputes and disagreements are resolved 

in accordance with EPA assistance 

agreement disputes procedures at 40 

CFR 31.70. EPA has determined, 

however, through a Class Deviation, that 

these procedures are not practicable to 

use for CWSRF and DWSRF reallocation 

disputes and that it is appropriate to 

replace those procedures with the 

procedures contained in this document. 

The Class Deviation and this action only 

affect the dispute resolution procedures 

for CWSRF and DWSRF reallocation 

decisions under the ARRA. 

DATES: These procedures are effective as 

of February 17, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jordan Dorfman, (202) 564–0614. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 

EPA’s appropriation provisions 

contained in Division A, Title VII of the 

ARRA, the Administrator is required to 

‘‘reallocate funds appropriated * * * for 

the Clean and Drinking Water State 

Revolving Funds (Revolving Funds) 

where projects are not under contract or 

construction within 12 months of the 

date of enactment of this Act * * *.’’ On 

December 24, 2009, EPA’s Office of 

Water (OW) issued a memorandum to 

implement this requirement. See 

‘‘Reallocation Process for Funds 

Deobligated after February 17, 2010 

under the American Reinvestment and 

Recovery Act of 2009.’’ That 

memorandum, among other things, 

requires states to certify by March 1, 

2010, that they have complied with the 

statutory requirement that projects were 

under contract or construction, gives 

EPA the opportunity to assess the 

compliance, and describes the 

reallocation process. It also notes that 

EPA’s Office of Grants and Debarment 

will provide guidance regarding the 

resolution of any reallocation disputes. 

In addition to the February 17, 2010, 

reallocation requirement, Section 1603 

of the general provisions of the ARRA 

requires, with limited exceptions not 

applicable to the CWSRF or DWSRF 

programs, that all funds appropriated 

under the ARRA are available for 

obligation until September 30, 2010. To 

ensure that SRF funds are fully 

obligated for construction projects by 

September 30th, the OW guidance 

memorandum makes clear that any 

funds reallocated to a State that are not 

under assistance agreements and under 

contract by June 17, 2010 will be subject 

to further reallotment. 

As described in 40 CFR 31.70, the 

dispute resolution process can involve 

up to four levels of review and take 

several months to complete. 

Specifically, an entity disputing a 

decision can attempt to resolve the issue 

at the lowest level possible, request a 

final Agency decision, and request a 

reconsideration of the final decision. A 

possible fourth step is an EPA 

headquarters discretionary review of a 

final Regional decision. This timeframe 

is too long to permit the Agency to meet 

ARRA requirements for timely 

reallocation. 

EPA’s Office of Grants and Debarment 

has therefore issued a Class Deviation to 

streamline the 40 CFR 31.70 procedures. 

The Class Deviation will allow the 

Agency to comply with ARRA 

reallocation requirements and at the 

same time provide States with a 

meaningful disputes resolution process 

in the event a State disagrees with a 

reallocation decision. 

Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews: Under Executive Order 12866 

(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ and is therefore not subject to 

OMB review. Because this grant action 

is not subject to notice and comment 

requirements under the Administrative 

Procedures Act or any other statute, it 

is not subject to the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) or 

sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1999 (UMRA) 

(Pub. L. 104–4). In addition, this action 

does not significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments. This action does not 

have tribal implications, as specified in 

Executive Order 13175 (63 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000). This action will not 

have federalism implications, as 

specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 

FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action 

is not subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001), because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 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. This action 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. 

generally provides that before certain 

actions may take affect, the agency 

promulgating the action must submit a 

report, which includes a copy of the 

action, to each House of the Congress 

and to the Comptroller General of the 

United States. Since this final grant 

action contains legally binding 

requirements, it is subject to the 

Congressional Review Act, and EPA will 

submit this action in its report to 

Congress under the Act. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 31 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

ARRA CWSRF and DWSRF Assistance 

Agreement Reallocation Decision 

Dispute Resolution Procedures: 

EPA establishes ARRA CWSRF and 

DWSRF Assistance Agreement 

Reallocation dispute resolution 

procedures as follows: 

1. The authority citation for the ARRA 

CWSRF and DWSRF assistance 

agreement reallocation disputes 

resolution procedures in this document 

is the Federal Grant and Cooperative 

Agreement Act, 31 U.S.C. 6301(3). 

2. The disputes resolution procedures 

that will apply to ARRA CWSRF and 

DWSRF assistance agreement 

reallocation disputes are as follows: 

Dispute Resolution Procedures: 

1. After receiving certifications 

provided by states, but not later than 

March 2, 2010, EPA will assess the 

certifications. As soon as possible 

thereafter, EPA will notify states that 

have any amount of ARRA funds 

identified as not under contract by 

February 17, 2010, that those funds will 

be deobligated and reallocated to 

eligible states. 

2. If a state disagrees with the 

decision to deobligate funds or the 

amount of funds that the Agency 

determined is appropriate for 

deobligation of the state’s CWSRF or 

DWSRF assistance agreement, it must 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
8698 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2010 / Notices 

file a written request for reconsideration 

within three (3) calendar days of 

receiving the notification of intent to 

deobligate the funds. Any detail or 

arguments regarding why the state 

disagrees with the deobligation decision 

shall be provided at that time. 

3. The written request for 

reconsideration shall be sent via E–Mail 

(PDF) or Facsimile to Jordan Dorfman. 

E–Mail address is 

Dorfman.Jordan@epa.gov; Fax is 202– 

501–2346. 

4. The Assistant Administrator for the 

Office of Water shall review all 

reconsideration submissions, and shall 

issue a decision in writing within three 

(3) calendar days of receiving the 

reconsideration request. This decision 

shall be the final decision of the 

Agency. 

5. The Agency will follow the same 

type of procedure for any subsequent 

reallotments. 

Craig E. Hooks, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Administration and Resources Management. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3847 Filed 2–24–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9118–5] 

Clean Water Act Section 303(d): 

Availability of Ten Total Maximum 

Daily Loads (TMDLs) in Louisiana 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

availability for comment on the 

administrative record files and the 

calculations of ten TMDLs prepared by 

EPA Region 6. 

This notice covers waters in the State 

of Louisiana’s Atchafalaya and 

Mississippi River Basins that were 

identified as impaired on the States 

Section 303(d) list. These TMDLs were 

completed in response to a court order 

in the lawsuit styled Sierra Club, et al. 

v. Clifford, et al., No. 96–0527, (E.D. 

La.). 

DATES: Comments must be submitted in 

writing to EPA on or before March 29, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the ten 

TMDLs should be sent to Diane Smith, 

Environmental Protection Specialist, 

Water Quality Protection Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Ave., Dallas, TX 

75202–2733 or e-mail: 

smith.diane@epa.gov. For further 

information, contact Diane Smith at 

(214) 665–2145 or fax 214.665.7373. The 

administrative record files for the ten 

TMDLs are available for public 

inspection at this address as well. 

Documents from the administrative 

record files may be viewed at http:// 

www.epa.gov/earth1r6/6wq/npdes/ 

tmdl/index.htm, or obtained by calling 

or writing Ms. Smith at the above 

address. Please contact Ms. Smith to 

schedule an inspection. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Diane Smith at (214) 665–2145. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1996, 

two Louisiana environmental groups, 

the Sierra Club and Louisiana 

Environmental Action Network 

(plaintiffs), filed a lawsuit in Federal 

Court against the EPA, styled Sierra 

Club, et al. v. Clifford, et al., No. 96– 

0527, (E.D. La.). Among other claims, 

plaintiffs alleged that EPA failed to 

establish Louisiana TMDLs in a timely 

manner. EPA proposes these ten TMDLs 

pursuant to a consent decree entered in 

this lawsuit. 

EPA Seeks Comment on Ten TMDLs 

By this notice EPA is seeking 

comment on the following ten TMDLs 

for waters located within Louisiana: 

Subsegment Waterbody name Pollutant 

010301 ............................................ West Atchafalaya Basin Floodway ........................................................ Dissolved Oxygen. 

070203 ............................................ Devil’s Swamp Lake and Bayou Baton Rouge ..................................... Fecal Coliform. 

070401 ............................................ Mississippi River Passes (estuarine) ..................................................... Fecal Coliform. 

070403 ............................................ Octave Pass and Main Pass (estuarine) ............................................... Fecal Coliform. 

070404 ............................................ Tiger Pass, Red Pass, Grand Pass, and Tante Phine Pass (estuarine).Fecal Coliform. 

070501 ............................................ Bayou Sara ............................................................................................ Fecal Coliform. 

070502 ............................................ Thompson Creek ................................................................................... Fecal Coliform. 

070503 ............................................ Capitol Lake ........................................................................................... Fecal Coliform. 

070505 ............................................ Tunica Bayou ......................................................................................... Fecal Coliform. 

070601 ............................................ Mississippi River Basin Coastal Bays and Gulf Waters to the State 

three-mile limit.

Fecal Coliform. 

EPA requests the public provide to 

EPA any water quality related data and 

information that may be relevant to the 

calculations for the ten TMDLs. EPA 

will review all data and information 

submitted during the public comment 

period and will revise the TMDLs where 

appropriate. EPA will then forward the 

TMDLs to the Louisiana Department of 

Environmental Quality (LDEQ). The 

LDEQ will incorporate the TMDLs into 

its current water quality management 

plan. 

Dated: February 18, 2010. 

Miguel I. Flores, 

Director, Water Quality Protection Division, 

EPA Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3830 Filed 2–24–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2009–0921; FRL–9118–6] 

Extension of Request for Scientific 

Views for Draft 2009 Update Aquatic 

Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for 

Ammonia—Freshwater 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice; extension of the request 

for scientific views. 

SUMMARY: On December 30, 2009 (74 FR 

69086), EPA announced the availability 

of draft national recommended water 

quality criteria for ammonia for the 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES