Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 12785 

‘‘USCG–2014–0063’’ in the ‘‘Search’’ 

box. Click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the ‘‘Open 

Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ 

column. If you do not have access to the 

Internet, you may view the docket 

online by visiting the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

on the ground floor of the Department 

of Transportation West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. We have an agreement with 

the Department of Transportation to use 

the Docket Management Facility. 

C. Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received into any of 

our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008 issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

II. Background and Purpose 

The Coast Guard published a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the 

Federal Register on November 28, 2014 

entitled, ‘‘Requirements for MODUs and 

Other Vessels Conducting Outer 

Continental Shelf Activities With 

Dynamic Positioning Systems’’ (79 FR 

70943). In the NPRM we stated our 

intention to hold a public meeting, and 

to publish a notice to announce the 

location and date of that meeting (79 FR 

70944). 

The proposed rule would establish 

minimum design, operation, training, 

and manning standards for MODUs and 

other vessels using dynamic positioning 

systems to engage in Outer Continental 

Shelf activities. Establishing these 

minimum standards is necessary to 

improve the safety of people and 

property involved in such operations, 

and the protection of the environment 

in which they operate. The rule would 

decrease the risk of a loss of position by 

a dynamically-positioned MODU or 

other vessel that could result in a fire, 

explosion, or subsea spill, and support 

the Coast Guard’s strategic goals of 

maritime safety and protection of 

natural resources. 

We plan to record this meeting using 

an audio-digital recorder and to make 

that audio recording available through a 

link in our online docket. We will also 

provide a written summary of the 

meeting and comments and will place 

that summary in the docket. 

III. Authority 

This notice is issued under the 

authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a). 

Dated: March 4, 2015. 

J.G. Lantz, 

Director of Commercial Regulations and 

Standards, U.S. Coast Guard. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05551 Filed 3–10–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 228 

[EPA–R04–OW–2014–0372; FRL–9921–73– 

Region 4] 

Ocean Dumping: Expansion of an 

Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site 

Offshore of Jacksonville, Florida 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

an expansion of the ocean dredged 

material disposal site (ODMDS) site 

offshore of Jacksonville, Florida 

pursuant to the Marine Protection, 

Research and Sanctuaries Act, as 

amended (MPRSA). The primary 

purpose for the site expansion is to 

serve the long-term need for a location 

to dispose of material dredged from the 

St. Johns River navigation channel, and 

to provide a location for the disposal of 

dredged material for persons who have 

received a permit for such disposal. The 

expanded site will be subject to ongoing 

monitoring and management to ensure 

continued protection of the marine 

environment. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 10, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OW–2014–0372, by one of the following 

methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments and accessing the docket and 

materials related to this proposed rule. 

• Email: mcarthur.christopher@

epa.gov. 

• Mail: Christopher McArthur, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, Water Protection Division, 

Marine Regulatory and Wetlands 

Enforcement Section, 61 Forsyth Street, 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OW–2014– 

0372. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means the EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your email address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, the EPA recommends that 

you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. For additional 

information about the EPA’s public 

docket visit the EPA Docket Center 

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

epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically at www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours from the regional library at the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4 Library, 9th Floor, 61 Forsyth 

Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. For 

access to the documents at the Region 

4 Library, contact the Region 4 Library 

Reference Desk at (404) 562–8190, 

between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 

p.m., and between the hours of 1:00 

p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays, for 

an appointment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher McArthur, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, Water Protection Division, 

Marine Regulatory and Wetlands 

Enforcement Section, 61 Forsyth Street, 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303; phone number 

(404) 562–9391; email: 

mcarthur.christopher@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12786 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

I. Potentially Affected Persons 

Persons potentially affected by this 

action include those who seek or might 

seek permits or approval to dispose of 

dredged material into ocean waters 

pursuant to the Marine Protection, 

Research, and Sanctuaries Act, as 

amended (MPRSA), 33 U.S.C. 1401 to 

1445. The EPA’s proposed action would 

be relevant to persons, including 

organizations and government bodies 

seeking to dispose of dredged material 

in ocean waters offshore of Jacksonville, 

Florida. Currently, the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers (USACE) would be most 

affected by this action. Potentially 

affected categories and persons include: 

Category Examples of potentially regulated persons 

Federal government ................................................................................. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works projects, U.S. Navy and 

other Federal agencies. 

Industry and general public ...................................................................... Port authorities, marinas and harbors, shipyards and marine repair facilities, berth owners. 

State, local and tribal governments .......................................................... Governments owning and/or responsible for ports, harbors, and/or 

berths, Government agencies requiring disposal of dredged material 

associated with public works projects. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding persons likely to 

be affected by this action. For any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular person, please 

refer to the contact person listed in the 

preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

II. Background 

a. History of Disposal Sites Offshore of 

Jacksonville, Florida 

The existing Jacksonville ODMDS is 

located approximately 5 nautical miles 

(nmi) southeast of the mouth of the St. 

Johns River on the continental shelf off 

the east coast of Florida. It is currently 

1 nmi by 1 nmi (1 nmi2) in size. Since 

1952, the area now designated as the 

Jacksonville ODMDS and vicinity has 

been used for disposal of dredged 

material (e.g., sand, silt, clay, rock) 

primarily from the Jacksonville Harbor 

Navigation Project, Naval Station 

Mayport entrance channel, and Naval 

Station Mayport turning basin. The 

Jacksonville ODMDS received interim 

site designation status in 1977 and final 

designation in 1983. 

The USACE Jacksonville District and 

the EPA Region 4 have identified a need 

to either designate a new ODMDS or 

expand the existing Jacksonville 

ODMDS. The need for expanding 

current ocean disposal capacity is based 

on observed mounding at the 

Jacksonville ODMDS, future capacity 

modeling, historical dredging volumes, 

estimates of dredging volumes for future 

proposed projects, and limited capacity 

of upland confined disposal facilities 

(CDFs) in the area. This section 

discusses in detail the current and 

future capacity issues at the existing 

Jacksonville ODMDS and CDFs. 

The proposed expansion of the 

ODMDS for dredged material does not 

mean that the USACE or the EPA has 

approved the use of the ODMDS for 

open water disposal of dredged material 

from any specific project. Before any 

person can dispose dredged material at 

the ODMDS, the EPA and the USACE 

must evaluate the project according to 

the ocean dumping regulatory criteria 

(40 CFR, part 227) and authorize the 

disposal. The EPA independently 

evaluates proposed dumping and has 

the right to restrict and/or disapprove of 

the actual disposal of dredged material 

if the EPA determines that 

environmental requirements under the 

MPRSA have not been met. 

b. Location and Configuration of 

Expanded Ocean Dredged Material 

Disposal Site 

This action proposes the expansion of 

the ocean dredged material site offshore 

of Jacksonville, Florida. The location of 

the proposed expanded ocean dredged 

material disposal site is bounded by the 

coordinates, listed below, and shown in 

Figure 1. The proposed expansion of the 

ODMDS will allow the EPA to 

adaptively manage the ODMDS to 

maximize its capacity, minimize the 

potential for mounding and associated 

safety concerns, potentially create hard 

bottom habitat and minimize the 

potential for any long-term adverse 

effects to the marine environment. 

The coordinates for the site are, in 

North American Datum 83 (NAD 83): 

Expanded Jacksonville ODMDS 

(A) 30°21.514′ N, 81°18.555′ W 

(B) 30°21.514′ N, 81°17.422′ W 

(C) 30°20.515′ N, 81°17.422′ W 

(D) 30°20.515′ N, 81°17.012′ W 

(E) 30°17.829′ N, 81°17.012′ W 

(F) 30°17.829′ N, 81°18.555′ W 

The proposed expanded ODMDS is 

located in approximately 28 to 61 feet 

of water, and is located to 4.4 nmi 

offshore the mouth of the St. Johns 

River. The proposed expanded ODMDS 

would be 3.7 nmi long on the west side 

and 2.7 nmi long on the east side. It 

would be 1 nmi long on the north side 

and 1.3 nmi wide on the south side. It 

would be 4.56 nmi2 in size. 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 12787 

c. Management and Monitoring of the 

Site 

The proposed expanded ODMDS is 

expected to receive sediments dredged 

by the USACE to deepen and maintain 

the federally authorized navigation 

project at Jacksonville Harbor, Florida, 

maintain Naval Station Mayport and 

dredged material from other persons 

who have obtained a permit for the 

disposal of dredged material at the 

ODMDS. All persons using the ODMDS 

are required to follow a Site 

Management and Monitoring Plan 

(SMMP) for the ODMDS. The SMMP 

includes management and monitoring 

requirements to ensure that dredged 

materials disposed at the ODMDS are 

suitable for disposal in the ocean and 

that adverse impacts of disposal, if any, 

are addressed to the maximum extent 

practicable. The SMMP for the proposed 

expanded ODMDS, in addition to the 

aforementioned, also addresses 

management of the ODMDS to ensure 

adverse mounding does not occur, 

promotes habitat creation where 

possible and to ensure that disposal 

events minimize interference with other 

uses of ocean waters in the vicinity of 

the proposed expanded ODMDS. The 

SMMP is available as a draft document 

for review and comment at this time. 

The public is encouraged to take 

advantage of this opportunity to read 

and submit comments on the draft 

SMMP. 

d. MPRSA Criteria 

In proposing to expand the ODMDS, 

the EPA assessed the proposed 

expanded ODMDS according to the 

criteria of the MPRSA, with particular 

emphasis on the general and specific 

regulatory criteria of 40 CFR part 228, to 

determine whether the proposed site 

designations satisfy those criteria. The 

EPA’s Final Environmental Impact 

Statement for Designation of an Ocean 

Dredged Material Disposal Site Offshore 

Jacksonville, Florida, [October 2014] 

(EIS), provides an extensive evaluation 

of the criteria and other related factors 

for the expansion of the ODMDS. 

General Criteria (40 CFR 228.5) 

(1) Sites must be selected to minimize 

interference with other activities in the 

marine environment, particularly 

avoiding areas of existing fisheries or 

shellfisheries, and regions of heavy 

commercial or recreational navigation 

(40 CFR 228.5(a)). 

Historical disposal of dredged 

material at the existing Jacksonville 

ODMDS has not interfered with 

commercial or recreational navigation, 

commercial fishing, or sportfishing 

activities. Expansion of this site is not 

expected to change these conditions. 

The proposed expanded ODMDS avoids 

any identified major fisheries, natural 

and artificial reefs, and areas of 

recreational use. The proposed 

expanded ODMDS is approximately 1 

nmi east of the areas identified by 

commercial shrimpers as important 

shrimp trawling areas. The proposed 

expanded ODMDS minimizes 

interference with shellfisheries by 

avoiding areas frequently used by 

commercial shrimpers. The proposed 

expanded ODMDS is not expected to 

adversely affect recreational boating and 

is located outside of designated 

shipping/navigation channels and 

anchorage areas. The draft SMMP 

outlines site management objectives, 

including minimizing interference with 

other uses of the ocean. Should a site 

use conflict be identified, site use could 

be modified according to the SMMP to 

minimize that conflict. 

(2) Sites must be situated such that 

temporary perturbations to water quality 

or other environmental conditions 

during initial mixing caused by disposal 

operations would be reduced to normal 

ambient levels or undetectable 

contaminant concentrations or effects 

before reaching any beach, shoreline, 

marine sanctuary, or known 

geographically limited fishery or 

shellfishery (40 CFR 228.5(b)). 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP11MR15.007</GPH>
12788 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Based on the EPA’s review of 

modeling, monitoring data, sediment 

quality, and history of use, no detectable 

contaminant concentrations or water 

quality effects, e.g., suspended solids, 

would be expected to reach any beach 

or shoreline from disposal activities at 

the proposed expanded ODMDS. The 

expanded proposed ODMDS is removed 

far enough from shore (4.4 nmi) and 

fishery resources to allow water quality 

perturbations caused by dispersion of 

disposed material to be reduced to 

ambient conditions before reaching any 

environmentally sensitive areas. 

Dilution rates are expected to range 

from 140:1 to 2800:1 after four hours. 

The primary impact of disposal 

activities on water quality is expected to 

be temporary turbidity caused by the 

physical movement of sediment through 

the water column. All dredged material 

proposed for disposal will be evaluated 

according to the ocean dumping 

regulations at 40 CFR 227.13 and 

guidance developed by the EPA and the 

USACE. 

(3) The sizes of disposal sites will be 

limited in order to localize for 

identification and control any 

immediate adverse impacts, and to 

permit the implementation of effective 

monitoring and surveillance to prevent 

adverse long-range impacts. Size, 

configuration, and location are to be 

determined as part of the disposal site 

evaluation (40 CFR 228.5(d)). 

The location, size, and configuration 

of the proposed expanded ODMDS 

allow and facilitate long-term capacity, 

site management, and site monitoring 

while limiting environmental impacts to 

the surrounding area to the extent 

possible. Based on projected future new 

work and maintenance dredged material 

disposal needs, it is estimated that the 

new ODMDS should be approximately 4 

nmi2 in size to meet the long-term (>50 

years) disposal needs of the area. An 

ODMDS of this size should have a 

capacity of greater than 65 million cubic 

yards. The proposed expanded ODMDS 

is 4.56 nmi2 in size inclusive of the 

existing Jacksonville ODMDS. 

A site management and monitoring 

program will be implemented to 

determine if disposal at the site is 

significantly affecting adjacent areas and 

to detect the presence of long-term 

adverse effects. At a minimum, the 

monitoring program will consist of 

bathymetric surveys, sediment grain 

size analysis, chemical analysis of 

constituents of concern in the 

sediments, an assessment of the health 

of the benthic community, and an 

assessment of any movement of 

disposed dredged material offsite. The 

size of the proposed expanded ODMDS 

is similar to that of other ocean dredged 

material disposal sites in the 

Southeastern United States. Monitoring 

of sites of this size have proved to be 

effective and feasible. 

(4) EPA will, wherever feasible, 

designate ocean dumping sites beyond 

the edge of the continental shelf and 

other such sites where historical 

disposal has occurred (40 CFR 228.5(e)). 

Disposal areas located off of the 

continental shelf would be at least 60 to 

70 nautical miles offshore. This distance 

is well beyond the 5 to 10 nautical mile 

haul distance determined to be feasible 

by the USACE for maintenance of their 

Jacksonville Harbor project. Additional 

disadvantages to off-shelf ocean 

disposal would be the unknown 

environmental impacts of disposal on 

deep-sea, stable, fine-grained benthic 

communities and the higher cost of 

monitoring sites in deeper waters and 

further offshore. 

Historic disposal has occurred at the 

proposed location for the expanded 

ODMDS. The substrate of the proposed 

expanded ODMDS is similar grain size 

to the disposal material. 

Specific Criteria (40 CFR 228.6) 

(1) Geographical Position, Depth of 

Water, Bottom Topography and 

Distance from Coast (40 CFR 

228.6(a)(1)). 

The EPA does not anticipate that the 

geographical position of the proposed 

expanded ODMDS, including the depth, 

bottom topography and distance from 

the coastline, will unreasonably degrade 

the marine environment. The proposed 

expanded ODMDS is located on the 

shallow continental shelf off northeast 

Florida and is 7.1 nautical miles 

southeast of the mouth of the St. Johns 

River. Depths within the proposed 

expansion area of the ODMDS range 

from 43 to 66 feet (13 to 20 meters) with 

an average depth of 57 feet (17 meters). 

To help avoid adverse mounding at the 

proposed expanded ODMDS, 

bathymetry will be routinely monitored 

following disposal activities and 

disposal locations modified as 

necessary. In this way, mounding that 

could create a navigation hazard will be 

avoided. Material disposed in the 

proposed expanded ODMDS is not 

expected to move from the proposed 

expanded ODMDS except during large 

storm events. 

(2) Location in Relation to Breeding, 

Spawning, Nursery, Feeding, or Passage 

Areas of Living Resources in Adult or 

Juvenile Phases (40 CFR 228.6(a)(2)). 

The proposed expanded ODMDS is 

located within the North Atlantic right 

whale critical habitat. The coastal 

waters off Georgia and northern Florida 

are the only known calving ground for 

the North Atlantic right whale between 

November and April. The proposed 

expansion of the ODMDS is not 

expected to alter the critical habitat. 

Disposed dredged material will settle 

out of the water column to the benthos, 

which is not considered part of the 

critical habitat. Disturbances from ships 

transiting through the area would not be 

significantly different from normal 

vessel operations that occur daily in the 

project area, although during dredging 

activities there would be an increase in 

vessel activity in the areas between the 

river entrance and the proposed 

expanded ODMDS which may lead to 

an increase risk of animal collisions. 

Observance of critical habitat 

designations and the North Atlantic 

right whale Early Warning System 

should mitigate for this potential 

increase. 

The proposed expanded ODMDS is 

not located in exclusive breeding, 

spawning, nursery, feeding or passage 

areas for adult or juvenile phases of 

living resources. The most active fish 

breeding and nursery areas are located 

in inshore estuarine waters, along 

adjacent beaches, or in nearshore reef 

areas. At and in the immediate vicinity 

of the proposed expanded ODMDS, 

spawning and migrating adult penaeid 

shrimp may be present. However, as 

much of the dredged material will 

consist of silts and clays, it appears 

likely that the area will remain suitable 

for penaeid shrimp. 

(3) Location in Relation to Beaches 

and Other Amenity Areas (40 CFR 

228.6(a)(3)). 

The proposed site is approximately 

4.4 nmi from coastal beaches and 

protected inshore waters. Shore-related 

amenities include Nassau River-St. 

Johns River Marshes Aquatic Preserve, 

Little Talbot Island State Park, Kingsley 

Plantation Historic Monument, and Fort 

Caroline National Memorial. These 

amenity areas are outside the area to be 

affected by disposal in the proposed 

expanded ODMDS. The site is 

approximately 4 to 5 nmi west of the 

nearest artificial reef or fishing hotspots. 

(4) Types and Quantities of Wastes 

Proposed to be Disposed of, and 

Proposed Methods of Release, including 

Methods of Packing the Waste, if any (40 

CFR 228.6(a)(4)). 

Dredged material found suitable for 

ocean disposal pursuant to the 

regulatory criteria for dredged material, 

or characterized by chemical and 

biological testing and found suitable for 

disposal into ocean waters, will be the 

only material allowed to be disposed at 

the proposed expanded ODMDS. No 

material defined as ‘‘waste’’ under the 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 12789 

MPRSA will be allowed to be disposed 

at the site. The dredged material to be 

disposed at the proposed expanded 

ODMDS will be a mixture of rock, 

sands, silts and clays. Annual average 

quantities are expected to range 0.5 to 

1.1 million cubic yards. 18 million 

cubic yards is expected to be disposed 

from the Jacksonville Harbor Deepening 

Project. Generally, disposal is expected 

to occur from a hopper dredge or 

disposal scow, in which case, material 

will be released just below the surface 

while the disposal vessel remains 

underway and slowly transits the 

disposal location. 

(5) Feasibility of Surveillance and 

Monitoring (40 CFR 228.6(a)(5)). 

The EPA expects monitoring and 

surveillance at the proposed expanded 

ODMDS to be feasible and readily 

performed from ocean or regional class 

research vessels. The proposed 

expanded ODMDS is of similar size, 

water depth and distance from shore of 

a majority of the ODMDSs within the 

Southeastern United States which are 

routinely monitored. The EPA will 

ensure monitoring of the site for 

physical, biological and chemical 

attributes as well as for potential 

impacts beyond the site boundaries. 

Bathymetric surveys will be conducted 

routinely as defined in the SMMP, 

contaminant levels in the dredged 

material will be analyzed prior to 

dumping, and the benthic infauna and 

epibenthic organisms will be monitored 

every 10 years, as funding allows. 

(6) Dispersal, Horizontal Transport 

and Vertical Mixing Characteristics of 

the Area, including Prevailing Current 

Direction and Velocity, if any (40 CFR 

228.6(a)(6)). 

Waves are predominately out of the 

east and a few exceed 2 meters (6.6 feet) 

in height or 15 seconds (s) in period. 

Waves are the primary factor 

influencing re-suspension of disposed 

dredged material, and currents probably 

affect the direction and magnitude of 

transport. Currents flow predominately 

in a north-northwest and southsoutheast direction and rarely exceeds 

30 cm/s in magnitude. Modeling and 

monitoring conducted at the existing 

ODMDS has shown that the net 

direction of transport is to the south. 

Dilution rates due to mixing are 

expected to range from 140:1 to 2800:1 

after four hours. 

(7) Existence and Effects of Current 

and Previous Discharges and Dumping 

in the Area (including Cumulative 

Effects) (40 CFR 228.6(a)(7)). 

The areas within the vicinity of the 

Jacksonville ODMDS have been in use 

since 1952 for disposal of dredged 

material (e.g., sand, silt, clay, gravel, 

shell, and some rock) from the 

Jacksonville Harbor Navigation Project 

and the Naval Station Mayport entrance 

channel and turning basin. The 

Jacksonville ODMDS received interim 

site designation status in 1977 and final 

designation in 1983. Prior to 1970 and 

in the early 1970s, material was 

disposed in an area 0.5 nmi east of the 

Jacksonville ODMDS. In the late 1970s 

material was unintentionally disposed 

south of the site. Water column 

chemistry in past studies at ODMDS 

sites has typically shown little or no 

impact due to dredged material 

disposal. Sediment analysis in the late 

1970s showed higher concentrations of 

certain heavy metals (nickel, copper, 

zinc, lead, and chromium), Kjeldahl 

nitrogen, and organic carbon in 

sediments within the disposal site 

versus outside the site. Sediment 

analysis as part of a 1995 benthic survey 

showed that, in general, metal 

concentrations within the ODMDS 

remained elevated compared to 

concentrations outside the ODMDS. 

However, concentrations within the 

ODMDS have decreased since 1978 and, 

based on a 1998 study, continue to 

decrease. The average percentage of silts 

and clays at stations within the ODMDS 

exceeds that of stations outside the 

ODMDS, but has decreased both inside 

and outside the ODMDS since. A 2009 

study documented tri-n-butyltin, di-nbutyltin, and n-butyltin present at 

sampling stations both inside and 

outside the Jacksonville ODMDS. 

Benthic infaunal community studies at 

the existing Jacksonville ODMDS have 

showed that communities remain 

diverse with no significant changes. The 

normal equilibrium benthic community 

in the area consists of surface-dwelling 

suspension feeders that are pre-adapted 

to energetic sandy environments. 

(8) Interference with Shipping, 

Fishing, Recreation, Mineral Extraction, 

Desalination, Fish and Shellfish 

Culture, Areas of Special Scientific 

Importance and Other Legitimate Uses 

of the Ocean (40 CFR 228.6(a)(8)). 

The proposed expanded ODMDS is 

not expected to interfere with shipping, 

fishing, recreation or other legitimate 

uses of the ocean. Commercial 

navigation, commercial fishing, and 

mineral extraction (sand mining) are the 

primary activities that may spatially 

overlap with disposal at the proposed 

expanded ODMDS. The proposed 

expanded ODMDS avoids the National 

Oceanographic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) recommended 

vessel routes offshore Jacksonville, 

Florida, thereby avoiding conflict with 

commercial navigation. 

Commercial fishing (shrimp trawling) 

occurs primarily to the west of the 

proposed expanded ODMDS. The 

northern portion of the proposed 

expanded ODMDS encompasses areas 

with rubble and other debris that 

commercial shrimp trawlers avoid due 

to potential damage to their shrimp nets. 

The southern portion of the proposed 

expanded ODMDS includes areas used 

for commercial shrimp trawling. The 

proposed expanded ODMDS will be 

managed such that rock will be 

disposed in the eastern portion of the 

proposed expanded ODMDS outside of 

the fishing area and finer grained 

material (silts/clays) will be disposed in 

the western portion. Additionally, the 

southern portion will only be used if the 

northern portion has reached capacity. 

Potential sand borrow areas have been 

identified to the east of the proposed 

expanded ODMDS. The proposed 

expanded ODMDS will be managed to 

avoid impacts to these areas. Only rock 

and sand will be disposed in the eastern 

portions of the proposed expanded 

ODMDS providing a buffer between the 

disposal of silts and clays and the 

potential borrow areas. The nearest 

potential borrow areas is adjacent to the 

southern half of the proposed expanded 

ODMDS. This borrow area is expected 

to be exhausted prior to use of the 

southern portion of the proposed 

expanded ODMDS as the southern 

portion will only be used if the northern 

portion has reached capacity. 

The likelihood of direct interference 

with these activities is low, provided 

there is close communication and 

coordination among users of the ocean 

resources. The EPA is not aware of any 

plans for desalination plants, or fish and 

shellfish culture operations near the 

proposed expanded ODMDS at this 

time. The proposed expanded ODMDS 

is not located in areas of special 

scientific importance. 

(9) The Existing Water Quality and 

Ecology of the Sites as Determined by 

Available Data or Trend Assessment of 

Baseline Surveys (40 CFR 228.6(a)(9)). 

Spring and fall season baseline 

surveys were conducted in 2010 at the 

proposed expanded ODMDS. Water 

quality was determined to be good with 

no evidence of degradation. No hypoxia 

conditions were observed and all 

chemical constituents were below EPA 

national recommended water quality 

criteria for salt water. Annelid worms, 

arthropods, echinoderms, gastropods, 

and bivalves are common benthic 

taxonomic groups. The Atlantic croaker, 

spotted hake, searobins, drums, and 

sand flounders are common fish species. 

Important mollusks include transverse 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12790 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

and ponderous arks, mussels, and 

Atlantic calico scallops. 

(10) Potentiality for the Development 

or Recruitment of Nuisance Species in 

the Disposal Site (40 CFR 228.6(a)(10)). 

Nuisance species, considered as any 

undesirable organism not previously 

existing at a location, have not been 

observed at, or in the vicinity of, the 

proposed expanded ODMDS. Material 

expected to be disposed at the proposed 

expanded ODMDS will be rock, sand, 

silt and clay similar to the sediment 

present at the proposed expanded 

ODMDS. Finer-grained material could 

have the potential to attract different 

species to the proposed expanded 

ODMDS then currently exist as was 

documented following disposal of 

significant amounts of silts and clays 

from deepening of Naval Station 

Mayport. However, it is expected that 

over time, as currents and waves energy 

transport the finer-grained sediments 

away, the normal equilibrium benthic 

community will re-establish itself. The 

proposed SMMP includes benthic 

infaunal monitoring requirements, 

which will act to identify any nuisance 

species and allow the EPA to direct 

special studies and/or operational 

changes to address the issue if it arises. 

(11) Existence at or in Close Proximity 

to the Site of any Significant Natural or 

Cultural Feature of Historical 

Importance (40 CFR 228.6(a)(11)). 

No significant cultural features have 

been identified at, or in the vicinity of, 

the proposed expanded ODMDS at this 

time. Archaeological surveys of the 

proposed expanded ODMDS were 

conducted in 2011 and 2012. The 

survey identified three sub-bottom 

features and one magnetic cluster. 

Archaeological divers investigated these 

targets and determined that they did not 

represent significant cultural features of 

historical or prehistorical importance. 

The EPA has coordinated with Florida’s 

State Historic Preservation Officer 

(SHPO) to identify any cultural features. 

The SHPO concurred with the EPA’s 

determination that the proposed 

expansion of the ODMDS will have no 

effect on cultural resources listed, or 

eligible for listing on the National 

Register of Historic Places. No 

shipwrecks have been observed or 

documented within the proposed 

expanded ODMDS or its immediate 

vicinity. 

III. Environmental Statutory Review— 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA); Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA); 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA); Coastal Zone Management 

Act (CZMA); Endangered Species Act 

(ESA); National Historic Preservation 

Act (NHPA) 

a. NEPA 

Section 102 of the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 

amended (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 to 

4370f, requires Federal agencies to 

prepare an Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) for major federal actions 

significantly affecting the quality of the 

human environment. NEPA does not 

apply to EPA designations of ocean 

disposal sites under the MPRSA because 

the courts have exempted the EPA’s 

actions under the MPRSA from the 

procedural requirements of NEPA 

through the functional equivalence 

doctrine. The EPA has, by policy, 

determined that the preparation of 

NEPA documents for certain EPA 

regulatory actions, including actions 

under the MPRSA, is appropriate. The 

EPA’s ‘‘Notice of Policy and Procedures 

for Voluntary Preparation of NEPA 

Documents,’’ (Voluntary NEPA Policy), 

63 FR 58045, (October 29, 1998), sets 

out both the policy and procedures the 

EPA uses when preparing such 

environmental review documents. The 

EPA’s primary voluntary NEPA 

document for expanding the ODMDS is 

the Final Environmental Impact 

Statement for Designation of an Ocean 

Dredged Material Disposal Site Offshore 

Jacksonville, Florida, [October 2014] 

(FEIS), prepared by the EPA in 

cooperation with the USACE. On 

October 17, 2014, the Notice of 

Availability (NOA) of the FEIS for 

public review and comment was 

published in the Federal Register (79 

FR 62436 [October 17, 2014]). Anyone 

desiring a copy of the FEIS may obtain 

one from the addresses given above. The 

public comment period on the FEIS 

closed on November 17, 2014. The FEIS 

and its Appendices, which are part of 

the docket for this action, provide the 

threshold environmental review for 

expansion of the ODMDS. The 

information from the FEIS is used 

above, in the discussion of the ocean 

dumping criteria. 

The EPA received five comment 

letters on the FEIS. There were two 

main concerns expressed in those 

letters: (1) Potential movement of 

disposed material impacting areas such 

as habitat, fisheries and sand borrow 

areas; and (2) effects on nearby recently 

designated loggerhead critical habitat. 

No objections to the ODMDS expansion 

were received. The proposed expanded 

ODMDS was sited to minimize impacts 

to shrimping grounds, habitat and sand 

borrow areas to the extent possible. The 

EPA and USACE have conducted 

computer modeling and field 

monitoring to evaluate sediment 

transport. The SMMP developed for the 

proposed expanded ODMDS outlines 

how the proposed expanded ODMDS 

will be monitored and managed to 

minimize impacts outside the 

boundaries of the proposed expanded 

ODMDS. This includes buffer zones, 

monitoring for sediment transport and 

deposition offsite and staged site use to 

avoid conflict with sand borrow 

activities. Regarding critical habitat for 

loggerhead sea turtles, the National 

Marine Fisheries Service issued the 

final rule on July 10, 2014 to designate 

critical habitat for the Northwest 

Atlantic Ocean Distinct Population 

Segment (DPS) of the loggerhead sea 

turtle (Caretta caretta) within the 

Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico 

regarding critical habitat for loggerhead 

sea turtle in the Northwest Atlantic 

Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. Nearshore 

reproductive habitat is located within 

the vicinity of the proposed expanded 

ODMDS along parts of Duval and St. 

Johns counties extending from the mean 

high water mark to 1.6 km offshore. The 

analysis of endangered and threatened 

species and associated critical habitat 

presented in the FEIS did not include 

this habitat. The EPA has conducted a 

supplementary analysis of the 

loggerhead critical habitat and 

concluded that the action is not likely 

to adversely affect the loggerhead sea 

turtle or its critical habitat. 

The proposed action discussed in the 

FEIS is the permanent designation of an 

expanded ODMDS offshore Jacksonville, 

Florida. The purpose of the proposed 

action is to provide an environmentally 

acceptable option for the ocean disposal 

of dredged material. The need for the 

expanded ODMDS is based on a 

demonstrated USACE need for ocean 

disposal of dredged material from the 

Jacksonville Harbor Navigation Project, 

Naval Station Mayport, and the 

proposed Jacksonville Harbor 

Deepening Project. The need for ocean 

disposal for these and other projects, 

and the suitability of the material for 

ocean disposal, will be determined on a 

case-by-case basis as part of the USACE 

process of issuing permits for ocean 

disposal for private/federal actions and 

a public review process for its own 

actions. This will include an evaluation 

of disposal alternatives. 

For the proposed expanded ODMDS, 

the USACE and the EPA would evaluate 

all federal dredged material disposal 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 12791 

projects pursuant to the EPA criteria set 

forth in the Ocean Dumping Regulations 

(40 CFR 220–229) and the USACE 

regulations (33 CFR 209.120 and 335– 

338). The USACE issues Marine 

Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries 

Act (MPRSA) permits to applicants for 

the transport of dredged material 

intended for disposal after compliance 

with regulations is determined. The 

EPA has the right to disapprove any 

ocean disposal project if, in its 

judgment, all provisions of MPRSA and 

the associated implementing regulations 

have not been met. 

The FEIS discusses the need for the 

proposed expanded ODMDS and 

examines ocean disposal site 

alternatives to the proposed actions. The 

need for expanding the current ODMDS 

is based on observed excessive 

mounding at the existing ODMDS, 

future capacity modeling, historical 

dredging volumes, estimated dredging 

volumes for proposed projects, and 

limited capacity of upland CDFs in the 

area. Non-ocean disposal options have 

been examined in the FEIS based on 

information provided by the USACE in 

the Dredged Material Management Plans 

for Jacksonville Harbor. There is 

sufficient capacity at CDFs for 

continued maintenance of the 

Jacksonville Harbor Cuts 14 through 42 

for the next 20 years and nearshore 

placement is the preferred disposal 

alternative for beach-compatible 

material from Cuts 3 through 13. 

However, capacity at the CDFs is 

limited and may not be a viable 

alternative in the long term (greater than 

20 years) and nearshore placement 

alternatives are limited to beach-quality 

sand and the expected quantity of beach 

quality sand can be minimal. 

Furthermore, neither of these 

alternatives provides capacity for 

disposal of material from Naval Station 

Mayport or the proposed Jacksonville 

Harbor Deepening Project. 

The following ocean disposal 

alternatives were evaluated in the FEIS: 

1. Alternative 2: South of the 

Jacksonville ODMDS 

Alternative 2 is the designation of a 

new ODMDS approximately 1 nmi 

south of the southernmost boundary of 

the existing Jacksonville ODMDS. 

Alternative 2 had more potential 

impacts to sand borrow areas and was 

not preferred by shrimp fishing 

industry. 

2. Alternative 3: North of the 

Jacksonville ODMDS 

Alternative 3 is the designation of a 

new ODMDS approximately 6 nmi north 

of the northernmost boundary of the 

existing Jacksonville ODMDS. 

Alternative 3 is located in an area 

frequently fished by the shrimping 

industry. Additionally, it is in an area 

that historically has had a high number 

of recorded North Atlantic right whale 

visits compared to south of the St. Johns 

River. 

3. Alternative Sites Beyond the 

Continental Shelf 

Alternative sites beyond the 

continental shelf would be more than 60 

nmi from the mouth of the St. Johns 

River, a distance beyond the point at 

which dredged material disposal is 

considered economically and 

operationally feasible. This limitation to 

a 5 to 10 nmi radius reflects the 

economic constraints on dredging and 

disposal operations for the Jacksonville 

Harbor area, particularly as they relate 

to increasing fuel costs, which could be 

as much as seven times higher if a site 

off the continental shelf were selected. 

Regular monitoring of the site, as 

required by the SMMP, would also be 

more difficult logistically and more 

costly than a site located beyond the 

continental shelf. Based on these 

factors, the option of using off shelf sites 

for disposal of dredged material was 

eliminated from detailed consideration. 

4. No Action Alternative 

The No-Action Alternative means that 

the EPA would not designate a new or 

expand the existing Jacksonville 

ODMDS. Dredged material that would 

normally have gone to the Jacksonville 

ODMDS may have to go to the 

Fernandina Beach ODMDS once the 

Jacksonville ODMDS reaches capacity. 

There are several concerns associated 

with using the Fernandina Beach 

ODMDS for disposal of dredged material 

from the Jacksonville Harbor area, 

including: (1) Adverse impacts to 

dredging projects from the Fernandina 

Beach, Florida area due to reduced 

capacity at the Fernandina Beach 

ODMDS; (2) increased costs associated 

with additional fuel consumption; (3) 

increased air emissions associated; and 

(4) increased risk of vessel strikes with 

the North Atlantic right whale. The No 

Action Alternative does not meet the 

proposed action’s purpose and need. 

However, it was evaluated in the FEIS 

as a basis to compare the effects of the 

other alternatives considered. 

5. Preferred Alternative: Expansion of 

the Existing Jacksonville ODMDS 

The preferred alternative is the 

proposed expansion of the existing 

Jacksonville ODMDS. Under this 

alternative, an additional 3.56 nmi2 area 

would be added adjacent to the south 

and east of the existing Jacksonville 

ODMDS. The eastern portion of the 

proposed expanded ODMDS contains 

approximately 3.5 acres of rubble from 

what is believed to be historic dredged 

material disposal. Disposal operations 

will be managed so that only rock 

disposal occurs in this area to enhance 

any potential habitat features. The 

eastern edge of proposed expanded 

ODMDS is approximately 1 nmi west of 

the Duval County Sand borrow area and 

does not overlap with any potential 

future sand band areas. It is 

approximately 1 nmi east of primary 

shrimp trawling areas and is in an area 

less frequented by the North Atlantic 

right whale. Furthermore, from an 

operations and site management 

standpoint, it is advantageous to have a 

single expanded ODMDS rather than the 

existing ODMDS and a new ODMDS as 

it can be managed as a single entity and 

will provide additional disposal 

capacity in areas that would otherwise 

be used as buffer zones. Therefore, 

expansion of the existing Jacksonville 

ODMDS has been selected as the 

preferred alternative in the FEIS. 

The FEIS presents the information 

needed to evaluate the suitability of 

ocean disposal areas for final 

designation use and is based on a series 

of disposal site environmental studies. 

The environmental studies and final 

designation are being conducted in 

accordance with the requirements of 

MPRSA, the Ocean Dumping 

Regulations, and other applicable 

Federal environmental legislation. The 

site coordinates have been adjusted 

slightly from those presented in the 

FEIS to align site corners with lines of 

longitude and latitude. Differences 

differ by no more than 100 feet and do 

not affect the conclusions and 

information presented in the FEIS. 

b. MSA 

The EPA prepared an essential fish 

habitat (EFH) assessment pursuant to 

Section 305(b), 16 U.S.C. 1855(b)(2), of 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act, as amended 

(MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801 to 1891d, and 

submitted that assessment to the 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

(NMFS) on May 11, 2012. The NMFS 

provided EFH Conservation 

Recommendations and a request for 

additional information on July 11, 2012. 

The EPA prepared an interim response 

with the requested additional 

information on August 2, 2012 and a 

revised EFH Assessment for the 

preferred alternative on October 6, 2014. 

In a letter dated January 5, 2015, NMFS 

determined that the EPA and the 

USACE have provided the substantive 

justification required by 50 CFR 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12792 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

600.920(k) for not following EFH 

conservation recommendations. 

c. CZMA 

Pursuant to an Office of Water policy 

memorandum dated October 23, 1989, 

the EPA has evaluated the proposed site 

designations for consistency with the 

State of Florida’s (the State) approved 

coastal management program. The EPA 

has determined that the designation of 

the proposed site is consistent to the 

maximum extent practicable with the 

State coastal management program, and 

submitted this determination to the 

State for review in accordance with the 

EPA policy. The State concurred with 

this determination on November 17, 

2014. In addition, as part of the NEPA 

process, the EPA has consulted with the 

State regarding the effects of the 

dumping at the proposed site on the 

State’s coastal zone. The EPA has taken 

the State’s comments into account in 

preparing the FEIS for the site, in 

determining whether the proposed site 

should be designated, and in 

determining whether restrictions or 

limitations should be placed on the use 

of the site, if they are designated. The 

EPA modified Alternative 1 to address 

the State’s concern regarding potential 

impacts to hard bottom benthic habitat 

and has incorporated management and 

monitoring requirements into the SMMP 

to ensure that disposed dredged 

materials do not negatively affect 

important benthic resources and sand 

borrow areas located outside of the 

designated ODMDS boundaries. 

Furthermore, at the request of the State, 

the EPA has conducted an evaluation of 

recently designated critical habitat for 

the loggerhead sea turtle. 

d. ESA 

The Endangered Species Act, as 

amended (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531 to 1544, 

requires Federal agencies to consult 

with NMFS and the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) to ensure that 

any action authorized, funded, or 

carried out by the Federal agency is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered species or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

any critical habitat. The EPA prepared 

a Biological Assessment (BA) to assess 

the potential effects of expanding the 

Jacksonville ODMDS on aquatic and 

wildlife species and submitted that BA 

to the NMFS and USFWS on October 6, 

2014. A supplement to the BA 

addressing loggerhead critical habitat 

was submitted on January 15, 2015. The 

EPA concluded that its action may 

affect, but is not likely to adversely 

affect 10 ESA-listed species and is not 

likely to adversely affect designated 

critical habitat for the North Atlantic 

right whale or the loggerhead sea turtle. 

The USFWS concurred on the EPA’s 

finding that the proposed action is not 

likely to adversely affect listed 

endangered or threatened species under 

the jurisdiction of the USFWS. The EPA 

will not take final action on the 

proposed site until consultation with 

NMFS under the ESA is complete. 

e. NHPA 

The USACE and the EPA initiated 

consultation with the State of Florida’s 

Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) on 

November 24, 2010, to address the 

National Historic Preservation Act, as 

amended (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470 to 

470a–2, which requires Federal agencies 

to take into account the effect of their 

actions on districts, sites, buildings, 

structures, or objects, included in, or 

eligible for inclusion in the National 

Register of Historic Places (NRHP). A 

submerged cultural resource survey of 

the area including the use of 

magnetometer, side scan sonar, and subbottom profiler was conducted in 2011. 

A follow-up archaeological diver 

investigation was conducted in 2012. 

No historic properties were found 

within the proposed expanded ODMDS 

boundaries and SHPO concurred with 

the determination that designated the 

expanded ODMDS would have no effect 

on cultural resource listed, or eligible 

for listing on the NRHP. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This rule proposes the designation of 

an expanded ODMDS pursuant to 

Section 102 of the MPRSA. This 

proposed action complies with 

applicable executive orders and 

statutory provisions as follows: 

a. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This proposed action is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 

FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is 

therefore not subject to review under 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 

FR 3821, January 21, 2011). 

b. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This 

proposed site designation, does not 

require persons to obtain, maintain, 

retain, report, or publicly disclose 

information to or for a Federal agency. 

c. Regulatory Flexibility 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires Federal agencies to 

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis 

of any rule subject to notice and 

comment rulemaking requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

or any other statute unless the agency 

certifies that the rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. For 

purposes of assessing the impacts of this 

rule on small entities, small entity is 

defined as: (1) A small business defined 

by the Small Business Administration’s 

size regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) 

a small governmental jurisdiction that is 

a government of a city, county, town, 

school district, or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (3) 

a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. The EPA 

determined that this proposed action 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on small entities because the 

proposed rule will only have the effect 

of regulating the location of site to be 

used for the disposal of dredged 

material in ocean waters. After 

considering the economic impacts of 

this proposed rule, I certify that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

d. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This proposed action contains no 

Federal mandates under the provisions 

of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 

1531 to 1538, for State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. This 

action imposes no new enforceable duty 

on any State, local or tribal governments 

or the private sector. Therefore, this 

action is not subject to the requirements 

of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. 

This action is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of the 

UMRA because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small government 

entities. Those entities are already 

subject to existing permitting 

requirements for the disposal of dredged 

material in ocean waters. 

e. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This proposed action does not have 

federalism implications. It does not 

have substantial direct effects on the 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 12793 

States, on the relationship between the 

national government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among various levels of 

government, as specified in Executive 

Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order 

13132 does not apply to this action. In 

the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and 

consistent with EPA policy to promote 

communications between the EPA and 

State and local governments, the EPA 

specifically solicited comments on this 

proposed action from State and local 

officials. 

f. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This proposed action does not have 

tribal implications, as specified in 

Executive Order 13175 because the 

expansion of the Jacksonville ODMDS 

will not have a direct effect on Indian 

Tribes, on the relationship between the 

federal government and Indian Tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the federal 

government and Indian Tribes. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this action. Although Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this proposed 

action the EPA consulted with tribal 

officials in the development of this 

action, particularly as the action relates 

to potential impacts to historic or 

cultural resources. The EPA specifically 

solicits additional comments on this 

proposed action from tribal officials. 

g. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern health or 

safety risks, such that the analysis 

required under Section 5–501 of the 

Executive Order has the potential to 

influence the regulation. This proposed 

action is not subject to Executive Order 

13045 because it does not establish an 

environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. The 

proposed action concerns the expansion 

of the Jacksonville ODMDS and only has 

the effect of providing a designated 

location for ocean disposal of dredged 

material pursuant to Section 102(c) of 

the MPRSA. However, we welcome 

comments on this proposed action 

related to this Executive Order. 

h. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This proposed action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355) 

because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined under 

Executive Order 12866. However, we 

welcome comments on this proposed 

action related to this Executive Order. 

i. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272), directs 

the EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus bodies. The 

NTTAA directs the EPA to provide 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary 

consensus standards. This proposed 

action includes environmental 

monitoring and measurement as 

described in EPA’s proposed SMMP. 

The EPA will not require the use of 

specific, prescribed analytic methods for 

monitoring and managing the 

designated ODMDS. The Agency plans 

to allow the use of any method, whether 

it constitutes a voluntary consensus 

standard or not, that meets the 

monitoring and measurement criteria 

discussed in the proposed SMMP. The 

EPA welcomes comments on this aspect 

of the proposed rulemaking and, 

specifically, invites the public to 

identify potentially-applicable 

voluntary consensus standards and to 

explain why such standards should be 

used in this proposed action. 

j. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and Low 

Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629) 

establishes federal executive policy on 

environmental justice. Its main 

provision directs federal agencies, to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law, to make 

environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. The 

EPA determined that this proposed rule 

will not have disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or 

low-income populations because it does 

not affect the level of protection 

provided to human health or the 

environment. The EPA has assessed the 

overall protectiveness of expanding the 

Jacksonville ODMDS against the criteria 

established pursuant to the MPRSA to 

ensure that any adverse impact to the 

environment will be mitigated to the 

greatest extent practicable. We welcome 

comments on this proposed action 

related to this Executive Order. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228 

Environmental protection, Water 

pollution control. 

Authority: This action is issued under the 

authority of Section 102 of the Marine 

Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, as 

amended, 33 U.S.C. 1401, 1411, 1412. 

Dated: February 11, 2015. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, The EPA proposes to amend 

chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations as follows: 

PART 228—CRITERIA FOR THE 

MANAGEMENT OF DISPOSAL SITES 

FOR OCEAN DUMPING 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 228 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418. 

■ 2. Section 228.15 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (h)(9)(i) through (iii) 

and (vi) to read as follows: 

§ 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a 

final basis. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(9) * * * 

(i) Location: 30°21.514′ N, 81°18.555′ 

W., 30°21.514′ N, 81°17.422′ W., 

30°20.515′ N, 81°17.422′ W., 30°20.515′ 

N, 81°17.012′ W., 30°17.829′ N, 

81°17.012′ W., 30°17.829′ N, 81°18.555′ 

W. 

(ii) Size: Approximately 3.68 nautical 

miles long and 1.34 nautical miles wide 

(4.56 square nautical miles); 3,861 acres 

(1,562 hectares). 

(iii) Depth: Ranges from 

approximately 28 to 61 feet (9 to 19 

meters). 

* * * * * 

(vi) Restrictions: (A) Disposal shall be 

limited to dredged material determined 

to be suitable for ocean disposal 

according to 40 CFR 227.13; 

(B) Disposal shall be managed by the 

restrictions and requirements contained 

in the currently-approved Site 

Management and Monitoring Plan 

(SMMP); 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12794 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 47 / Wednesday, March 11, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

(C) Monitoring, as specified in the 

SMMP, is required. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–05232 Filed 3–10–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0471; FRL–9924–36– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AS26 

Petition To Add n-Propyl Bromide to 

the List of Hazardous Air Pollutants; 

Extension of Comment Period 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Receipt of a complete petition; 

extension of public comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is announcing that the 

period for providing public comments 

on the February 6, 2015, receipt of a 

complete petition document titled 

‘‘Petition To Add n-Propyl Bromide to 

the List of Hazardous Air Pollutants’’ is 

being extended by 60 days. 

DATES: The public comment period for 

the receipt of a complete petition 

document published in the Federal 

Register on February 6, 2015 (80 FR 

6676), is being extended by 60 days to 

May 7, 2015, in order to provide the 

public additional time to submit 

comments and supporting information. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

receipt of a complete petition document 

may be submitted to the EPA 

electronically, by mail, by facsimile or 

through hand delivery/courier. Please 

refer to the Federal Register document 

(80 FR 6676) for the addresses and 

detailed instructions. 

Docket. Publicly available documents 

relevant to this action are available for 

public inspection either electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at the EPA Docket Center, Room 

3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC. The Public Reading 

Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. A reasonable fee may be 

charged for copying. The official public 

docket for this rulemaking is Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0471. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

John Schaefer, Policy and Strategies 

Group (D205–02), Sector Policies and 

Programs Division, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711; Telephone number: (919) 541– 

0296; Fax number (919) 541–5600; 

Email address: schaefer.john@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comment Period 

After considering a request received 

to extend the public comment period, 

the EPA has decided to extend the 

public comment period for an 

additional 60 days. Therefore, the 

public comment period will end on May 

7, 2015, rather than March 9, 2015. This 

extension will help ensure that the 

public has sufficient time to review the 

proposed rule, the supporting technical 

documents and data available in the 

docket. 

Dated: March 2, 2015. 

Stephen D. Page, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05550 Filed 3–9–15; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS