### 61619 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the safety standard imposed by that statute. This citizen’s comment appears to be directed at the underlying statute and not EPA’s implementation of it; the citizen has made no contention that EPA has acted in violation of the statutory framework.

V. Conclusion

Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of chlorantraniliprole, 3- bromo-N -[4-chloro-2-methyl-6- [(methylamino)-carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3- chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1 H -pyrazole-5- carboxamide, in or on quinoa, forage at 40 ppm; quinoa, grain at 6.0 ppm; quinoa, hay at 40 ppm; and quinoa, straw at 40 ppm; teff, forage at 40 ppm; teff, grain at 6.0 ppm; teff, hay at 40 ppm; and teff, straw at 40 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ‘‘Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq. ), do not apply.

This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this action alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.

1501 et seq. ).

This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act

Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. ), EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register . This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: August 26, 2016. Michael Goodis, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

**PART 180—[AMENDED]**

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

■ 2. In § 180.628, add alphabetically the entries ‘‘Quinoa, forage’’, ‘‘Quinoa, grain’’, ‘‘Quinoa, hay’’, ‘‘Quinoa, straw’’, ‘‘Teff, forage’’, ‘‘Teff, grain’’, ‘‘Teff, hay’’, and ‘‘Teff, straw’’ to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows: **§ 180.628 Chlorantraniliprole; pesticide tolerances.** 

(a) * * *

Commodity Parts per million

* * * * * Quinoa, forage ...................... 40 Quinoa, grain ........................ 6.0 Quinoa, hay .......................... 40 Quinoa, straw ....................... 40

* * * * * Teff, forage ........................... 40 Teff, grain ............................. 6.0 Teff, hay ................................ 40 Teff, straw ............................. 40

* * * * *

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016–21458 Filed 9–6–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 228**

**[EPA–R04–OW–2016–0356; FRL–9951–96– Region 4]** 

**Ocean Dumping: Modification of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site**  **Offshore of Charleston, South Carolina**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule and technical amendment.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a modification of the ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS) offshore of Charleston, South Carolina pursuant to the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, as amended (MPRSA). The primary purpose for the site modification is to serve the long-term need for a location to dispose of material dredged from the Charleston Harbor federal navigation channel, and to provide a location for the disposal of dredged material for persons who have received a permit for such disposal. The modified site will be subject to ongoing monitoring and management to ensure continued protection of the marine environment. In addition, the EPA now issues a technical amendment to correct a clerical error in the proposed rule.

**DATES :**  The effective date of this final action shall be October 7, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  Docket: All documents in the Docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available, e.g.,


### 61620 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available or in hard copy at the EPA Region 4 Office, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The file will be made available for public inspection in the Region 4 library between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays. Contact the person listed in the **FOR FURTHER**

**INFORMATION CONTACT** paragraph below to make an appointment. If possible, please make your appointment at least two working days in advance of your visit. There will be a 15 cent per page fee for making photocopies of documents.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Gary W. Collins, 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) 562–9395; email: collins.garyw@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  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 action would be relevant to persons, including organizations and government bodies seeking to dispose of dredged material in ocean waters offshore of Charleston, South Carolina. 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 Charleston, South Carolina

The existing Charleston ODMDS is located approximately 9 nautical miles (nmi) southeast of the mouth of Charleston Harbor on the continental shelf off the coast of South Carolina. It is currently 12.1 nmi 2 in size, with an authorized disposal zone that is 3.0
nmi 2 in size. Since 1896, the area now designated as the Charleston ODMDS and vicinity has been used for disposal of dredged material ( e.g., sand, silt, clay, rock) primarily from the Charleston Harbor Navigation Project. The Charleston ODMDS received interim site designation status in 1977 and final designation in 1987. The discovery of live bottom habitats within the original site resulted in several modifications to use of the site resulting in the creation of the restricted disposal zone.

The USACE Charleston District and the EPA Region 4 have identified a need to either designate a new ODMDS or expand the existing Charleston ODMDS. The need for expanding current ocean disposal capacity is based on 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.

The modification 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 Modified Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site

This action modifies the ODMDS offshore of Charleston, South Carolina. The location of the modified ODMDS is bounded by the coordinates, listed below. The modification 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): Modified Charleston ODMDS
(A) 32 ° 36.280′ N., 79 ° 43.662 ′ W. (B) 32 ° 37.646′ N., 79 ° 46.576′ W. (C) 32 ° 39.943 ′ N., 79 ° 45.068 ′ W. (D) 32 ° 38.579′ N., 79 ° 42.152 ′ W.

The modified ODMDS is located in approximately 30 to 45 feet of water, and is located to approximately 6.0 nmi offshore. The modified ODMDS would be 7.4 nmi 2 in size.
C. Response to Comments Received

On July 13, 2016, the EPA published a proposed rule to modify the site and opened a public comment period under Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OW–2016– 0356. The comment period ended on August 12, 2016. The EPA received two comments on the proposed rule. One comment was from the U.S. Department of Interior stating that they had no comments at this time. The second comment was from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in regards to a clerical error with three site coordinates describing the location of the ODMDS. The EPA acknowledges the error and is making corrections as described in the technical amendment section below.
D. Management and Monitoring of the
Site

The modified ODMDS is expected to receive sediments dredged by the USACE to deepen and maintain the federally authorized navigation project at Charleston Harbor, South Carolina, and dredged material from other persons who have obtained a permit for the transportation of dredged material


### 61621 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

for the purpose of disposal 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 modified 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 modified ODMDS. The SMMP, which was available for public review, is currently being routed for signature by the Charleston District Engineer.

E. MPRSA Criteria

In modifying the ODMDS, the EPA assessed the modified 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 site modification satisfies those criteria. The EPA’s Final Environmental Assessment for Modification of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Offshore Charleston, South Carolina, [June 2016] (EA), provides an extensive evaluation of the criteria and other related factors for the modification 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)).

Dredged material disposal within the existing Charleston ODMDS has been confined to the eastern side of the designated site within a defined 4-mi 2 disposal zone to avoid impacts to live hardbottom. During this time, dredged material disposal at the site has not interfered with commercial or recreational navigation, commercial fishing, or sportfishing activities. The modification of the site boundaries to the north, east, and south is not expected to change these conditions. This action avoids major fisheries, natural and artificial reefs, and areas of recreational use. Modification of the site to the east will minimize interference with shellfisheries by avoiding areas located primarily to the west of the ODMDS that are frequently used by commercial shrimpers. Construction of the berm will provide an additional approximately 427 acres of hardbottom habitat and will protect existing hardbottom habitat by minimizing sediment transport. There will be a 3000-foot buffer along the northern perimeter of the ODMDS where dumping will not occur. Modeling results indicate that this buffer should be sufficient to protect probable hardbottom areas to the north of the site.

(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)).

The ODMDS modification area will be used for disposal of suitable dredged material as determined by Section 103 of the MPRSA. Based on the USACE and EPA sediment testing and evaluation of dredged maintenance material and proposed new work material from the Post 45 deepening project, disposal is not expected to have any long-term impact on the water quality. Results of the maximum concentration found outside the disposal area after 4 hours of mixing for each dredging unit was zero. Based on these results, water quality perturbations that could reach any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known geographically-limited fishery or shellfishery are not expected. The western edge of the modified ODMDS is approximately 7 miles offshore such that prevailing current will not transport dredged material to beaches. Water quality perturbations caused by dispersion of disposal material will be reduced to ambient conditions before reaching any environmentally sensitive

areas.

(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 configurationof the modified ODMDS provides longterm capacity, site management, and site monitoring while limiting environmental impacts to the surrounding area. Based on 25 years of projected new work and maintenance dredged material disposal needs, it is estimated that the ODMDS modification area should accommodate approximately 66.5 mcy of dredged material in order to meet the long-term disposal needs of the area. The dump zone within the modified ODMDS is estimated to have approximately 75 mcy of capacity. The capacity in the dump zone provides a reasonable amount of additional capacity to manage risk, account for future unknown disposal operations from private entities, and provides a margin of navigation safety. The remaining area within the boundaries of the existing 12 nmi 2 Charleston ODMDS (parallelogram) would be de-designated. The area to be de-designated is approximately 10.4 mi 2 (7.8 nmi 2 ) in size and contains documented hardbottom habitat.

By adding 5.8 mi 2 (4.4 nmi 2 ) to the existing ODMDS disposal zone, the total area of the modified Charleston ODMDS would be 9.8 mi 2 (7.4 nmi 2 ), with a dump zone area of 5.1 mi 2 (3.9 nmi 2 ). An ODMDS of this size and capacity will provide a long-term ocean disposal option for the region.

To help protect nearby hardbottom habitat from being buried by sediment migrating from the ODMDS, a U-shaped berm along the east, south, and west perimeters of the modified ODMDS will be constructed. Although there is probable hardbottom located north of the modified ODMDS, no berm will be constructed along the northern boundary. However, there will be a 3000-foot buffer along the northern perimeter of the ODMDS where dumping will not occur. Fate modeling indicates that this buffer should be sufficient to protect probable hardbottom areas to the north of the site.

When determining the size of the modified site, the ability to implement effective monitoring and surveillance programs, among other things, was factored in to ensure that navigational safety would not be compromised and to prevent mounding of dredged material, which could result in adverse wave conditions. 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, and a health assessment of the benthic community.

(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)).


### 61622 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

The continental slope is approximately 55 nmi offshore of Charleston. Disposal off the continental shelf (shelf break) was evaluated in detail the 1983 ODMDS Designation EIS document. In comparison to locating the site in the nearshore region, it was determined that monitoring and surveillance would be more difficult and expensive in the shelf break area because of the distance from shore to the deeper waters. Transporting material to and performing long-term monitoring of a site located off the continental shelf is not economically or operationally feasible.

The historically used ocean dumping site, Charleston ODMDS, is not located beyond the continental shelf. A portion of the modified ODMDS encompasses an area previously designated for disposal.
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 modified ODMDS is located on the shallow continental shelf, approximately 6 nmi offshore of Charleston, South Carolina. Water depths range from

¥ 30 to

¥ 45 feet (9 to 13 meters) with an overall average depth of

¥ 40 feet (12 meters). Characteristics of the South Atlantic Bight seafloor include low relief, relatively gentle gradients, and smooth bottom surfaces exhibiting physiographic features contoured by erosional processes. Sediments largely consist of fine to coarse sands. Some areas contain extensive coarse grains and shell hash. Fines were found to be typically less than 10%.

(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 modified ODMDS is not located in exclusive breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding, or passage areas for adult or juvenile phases of living resources. The intensity of these activities within the vicinity of the ODMDS is seasonally variable, with peaks typically occurring in the spring and early fall for most commercially important finfish and shellfish species (USEPA 1983). The ODMDS is not located within North Atlantic right whale critical habitat.

(3) Location in relation to beaches and other amenity areas (40 CFR 228.6(a)(3)).

The center of the modified ODMDS is approximately 7 mi (6 nmi) from the nearest coastal beach. The site is approximately 3.1 mi (2.7 nmi) south of the nearest artificial reef. No significant impacts to beaches or amenity areas associated with the existing ODMDS have been documented.

(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)).

Only material that meets EPA Ocean Dumping Criteria in 40 CFR 220–229 will be placed in the ODMDS. Average annual maintenance material is approximately 1.4 mcy and approximately 31.2 mcy of new work material is expected from the Charleston Harbor Deepening Project. Sediments dredged from Charleston Harbor and the entrance channel are a mixture of silt, sand, and rock. Hopper dredge, barge, and scow combinations are the usual vehicles of transport for the dredged material. None of the material is packaged in any manner.

(5) Feasibility of surveillance and monitoring (40 CFR 228.6(a)(5)).

The EPA expects monitoring and surveillance at the modified ODMDS to be feasible and readily performed from ocean or regional class research vessels. The modified ODMDS is of similar size, water depth and distance from shore as are 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)).

A study conducted by EPA from 2013–2015 indicated that currents in the vicinity of the Charleston ODMDS tend to have a significant tidal componentwith predominant currents in the crossshore direction. The depth-averaged median current velocity was 18 cm/sec (0.6 ft/sec) with 90% of the measurements below 30 cm/sec (1.1 ft/ sec). Wind-driven circulation is the most important factor in controlling sediment transport. Strong winds generate waves that steer the sediment on the seabed and create large nearbed suspended sediment concentrations. Suspended sediment transport is directed mainly NE and SW in responseto local wind climate and the windgenerated alongshore flows. LTFATE and MPFATE modeling results over a 25-year period indicate depths of sediment deposited outside the boundaries of the ODMDS will not exceed the 5 cm deposition contour guidance provided by EPA.

(7) Existence and effects of current and previous discharges and dumping in the area (including cumulative effects) (40 CFR 228.6(a)(7)).

Previous disposal of dredged material resulted in temporary increases in suspended sediment concentrations during disposal operations, localized mounding within the site, burial of benthic organisms within the site, changes in the abundance and composition of benthic assemblages, and changes in the sediment composition from sandy sediments to finer-grained silts. Impacts to live bottoms were identified in the western portion of the 12-mi 2 ODMDS.

Short-term, long-term, and cumulative effects of dredged material disposal in the ODMDS modification area would be similar to those for the existing ODMDS.

(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 modified 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 modified ODMDS. The modified ODMDS avoids the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recommended vessel routes offshore Charleston, South Carolina, thereby avoiding conflict with commercial navigation.

Commercial fishing (shrimp trawling) occurs primarily to the west of the modified ODMDS. 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 modified ODMDS at this time. The modified 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)).

Water quality of the existing site is typical of the Atlantic Ocean. Water and sediment quality analyses conducted in the study area and experience with past


### 61623 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

disposals in the Charleston ODMDS have not identified any adverse water quality impacts from ocean disposal of dredged material. The site supports benthic and epibenthic fauna characteristic of the South Atlantic Bight. Neither the pelagic (mobile) or benthic (non-mobile) communities should sustain irreparable harm due to their widespread occurrence off the South Carolina coast.

(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 modified ODMDS. They are either transported to or recruited to the site because the disposal of dredged material creates an environment where they can establish. Habitat conditions have changed somewhat at the Charleston ODMDS because of the disposal of some silty material on what was predominately sandy sediments. While it can be expected that organisms will become established at the site which were not there previously, this new community is not regarded as a nuisance, or ‘‘undesirable,’’ community.

(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 modified ODMDS at this time. Surveys conducted in 2012–2013 did not identify any cultural features of historical importance. The EPA has coordinated with South Carolina’s State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to identify any cultural features. The SHPO concurred with the EPA’s determination that the modification of the ODMDS will have no effect on cultural resources listed, or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as no such resources exist in the project area.

F. Technical Amendment

The EPA corrected a clerical error that was included in the proposed language regarding the modified ODMDS coordinates. The second, third, and fourth latitude coordinates were incorrect in the proposed language but have been corrected to reflect the actual corner coordinates for the modified
ODMDS. 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 Assessment for Modification of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Offshore Charleston, South Carolina, [June 2016] (FEA), prepared by the EPA in cooperation with the USACE. Anyone desiring a copy of the FEA may obtain one from the addresses given above. A draft of this document was released for public review in December, 2015. The public comment period on the FEA closed on August 9, 2016. The FEA and its Appendices, which are part of the Docket for this action, provide the threshold environmental review for modification of the ODMDS. The information from the FEA is used above, in the discussion of the ocean dumping
criteria.

B. MSA

The EPA integrated the essential fish habitat (EFH) assessment with the EA, 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 December 4, 2015. The NMFS responded via letter that they have no comments on the proposed project.

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 South Carolina’s (the State) approved coastal management program. The EPA has determined that the designation of the modified 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 conditionally concurred with this determination on February 17, 2016. The EPA has taken the State’s comments into account in preparing the FEA for the site, in determining whether the site should be modified as proposed, and in determining whether restrictions or limitations should be placed on the use of the site, if it is designated.

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 incorporated a Biological Assessment (BA) into the EA to assess the potential effects of expanding the Charleston ODMDS on aquatic and wildlife species and submitted that document to the NMFS and USFWS on December 4, 2016. The EPA concluded that the proposed project would not adversely affect any threatened or endangered species, nor would it adversely modify any designated critical habitat. 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 NMFS concluded the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect listed species under their jurisdiction.

E. NHPA

The USACE and the EPA initiated consultation with the State of South Carolina’s Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) on December 4, 2015, to address the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470 to 470a-2, which requires Federal agencies


### 61624 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

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). In a letter dated January 6, 2016, the SHPO determined that no properties listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places will be affected by the project.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This rule modifies the designation of an ODMDS pursuant to Section 102 of the MPRSA. This 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 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 site modification does not require persons to obtain, maintain, retain, report, or publicly disclose information to or for a Federal agency.D
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 action will not have a significant economic impact on small entities because this 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 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 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 action does not have federalism implications. It does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among 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 action from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments

This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 because the modification of the Charleston 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. The EPA specifically solicited comments 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 action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks. The action concerns the modification of the Charleston 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.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This 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.

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 action includes environmental monitoring and measurement as described in EPA’s 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 SMMP.


### 61625 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

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 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 modifying the Charleston 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 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: August 24, 2016. V. Anne Heard, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, the EPA amends 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)(5)(i) through (iii) and (vi) to read as follows:

**§ 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a final basis.** 

* * * * *

(h) * * * (5) * * * (i) Location: 32 ° 36.280′ N., 79 ° 43.662 ′ W.; 32 ° 37.646 ′ N., 79 ° 46.576 ′ W.; 32 ° 39.943 ′ N., 79 ° 45.068 ′ W.; 32 ° 38.579′ N., 79 ° 42.152 ′ W.

(ii) Size: Approximately 7.4 square nautical miles in size.

(iii) Depth: Ranges from approximately 30 to 45 feet (9 to 13.5 meters).

* * * * *

(vi) Restrictions: (A) Disposal shall be limited to dredged material from the Charleston, South Carolina, area;

(B) Disposal shall be limited to dredged material determined to be suitable for ocean disposal according to 40 CFR 227.13;

(C) Disposal shall be managed by the restrictions and requirements contained in the currently-approved Site Management and Monitoring Plan (SMMP);

(D) Monitoring, as specified in the SMMP, is required.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016–21454 Filed 9–6–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE**

**National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration** 

**50 CFR Part 665**

**[Docket No. 150908833–6738–02]**

**RIN 0648–BF37**

**Mariana Archipelago Fisheries; Remove the CNMI Medium and Large**  **Vessel Bottomfish Prohibited Areas**

**AGENCY :**  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  This final rule removes the medium and large vessel bottomfish prohibited fishing areas in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). Conditions in the fishery that led to establishing the prohibited areas are no longer present, and the restriction is no longer necessary. This rule also makes administrative housekeeping changes to the description of the CNMI management subarea and to the regulations for the CNMI management subarea crustacean fishing. The intent of this final rule is to improve the viability of the CNMI bottomfish fishery and promote optimum yield while preventing overfishing.

**DATES :**  Effective October 7, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) and NMFS prepared Amendment 4 to the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for the Marianas Archipelago that provides background information on this final rule. Amendment 4, including a final environmental assessment and regulatory impact review, is identified as NOAA–NMFS–2015–0115 and is available from www.regulations.gov or the Council, 1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, tel 808–522– 8220, fax 808–522–8226, www.wpcouncil.org

. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Sarah Ellgen, NMFS PIRO Sustainable Fisheries, 808–725–5173.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Federal regulations currently prohibit medium and large vessels (40 ft and greater) from commercial fishing for bottomfish management unit species in certain Federal waters around the CNMI. The prohibited areas include waters within approximately 50 nm of the Southern Islands (i.e., Rota, Aguigan (alt. Aguijan), Tinian, Saipan, and Farallon de Medinilla) and within 10 nm of Alamagan Island. In 2008, the Council recommended, and NMFS implemented, the prohibited areas to prevent large bottomfish vessels based in Guam from traveling to CNMI fishing grounds. At the time, the Council was concerned that the Guam vessels could negatively affect fish stocks and local fisheries through stock depletion, catch competition, and gear conflicts. You may read more about the establishment of the prohibited areas in the 2008 proposed rule (73 FR 51992; September 8, 2008) and final rule (73 FR 75615; December 12, 2008).

The CNMI bottomfish fishery has changed since 2008, and the conditions that led the Council and NMFS to establish the prohibited areas are no longer present. Large vessels from Guam have not shown interest in fishing for CNMI bottomfish. The prohibited areas may also be negatively affecting the CNMI bottomfish fishery. Only a few small vessels have been operating on a regular basis, and the few medium and large vessels have faced declining participation, possibly resulting from higher fuel costs that prevent them from traveling beyond the prohibited areas. The prohibited areas may becontributing to the potential underutilization of the bottomfish resource in CNMI, and removing them may promote optimum yield.

To address fishery conditions resulting from the CNMI prohibited areas, the Council recommended that NMFS remove them. The Council and NMFS will continue to manage the fishery under a suite of management