[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 92 (Friday, May 12, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25718-25723]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11792]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5206-5]


Water Pollution Control; Approval of Application by the State of 
Florida to Administer the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Approval of application.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On May, 1, 1995, the Regional Administrator for the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region IV, approved the 
application by the State of Florida to administer the National 
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program for regulating 
point source discharges of pollutants into surface waters within the 
State. The State NPDES program, as authorized, is a phased NPDES 
program encompassing permitting for: (1) domestic discharges; (2) 
industrial discharges, including those which also have storm water 
discharges; and (3) the pretreatment program for Publicly Owned 
Treatment Works. Storm water discharges from municipal separate storm 
sewer systems (MS4's), individual storm water-only discharges, storm 
water general permits, and Federal facility discharges are to be phased 
in by the year 2000. Further, the State of Florida is not being 
authorized to administer a sewage sludge management program.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 1, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Dee Stewart, Environmental 
Engineer, Permits Section, U.S. EPA Region IV, 345 Courtland Street, 
NE. Atlanta, Georgia, 30365, 404/347-3012, ext. 2928. The 
administrative record (which comprises approximately 1650 pages) can be 
obtained from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) 
office in Tallahassee, Florida or the EPA office in Atlanta, Georgia at 
a minimal cost per page.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Governor of Florida requested NPDES 
program approval on November 21, 1994, by submitting a complete program 
application. Several modifications were made to the application based 
on public comments and discussions between the EPA and FDEP, and as 
allowed by Federal regulations. These modifications include the 
clarification of Section III.C. and additions of Attachments A, B, and 
C, to the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). Attachment A, represents 
permits under active Federal enforcement at the time of authorization 
which EPA will complete the enforcement action but FDEP will assume 
permitting, compliance, and future enforcement authority for. 
Attachment B represents permits for which an evidentiary hearing has 
been requested at the time of program authorization and EPA will retain 
full jurisdiction until the matter is resolved. Attachment C represents 
certain facilities as agreed upon by FDEP and EPA where EPA will retain 
full jurisdiction of these NPDES permits following authorization. 
Section IV.C.1.a of the MOA was changed to [[Page 25719]] allow for EPA 
review of all discharges which may affect the waters of another state 
or Indian Lands. The final changes, including the signing of the MOA by 
the Regional Administrator for EPA, Region IV and the Secretary for 
FDEP, were completed on May 1, 1995.
    Florida's application was described in the Federal Register on 
January 27, 1995, at 60 FR 5390 and in notices published in: The 
Orlando Sentinel, Pensacola News-Journal, Tallahassee Democrat, News-
Press, The Tampa Tribune, The Palm Beach Post, Key West Citizen, The 
Florida Times-Union, and The Miami Herald, on that same date. Copies of 
Florida's application were available for review at the EPA Region IV 
office and at any FDEP office, copying was also available at a minimal 
cost per page.
    As part of the public comment process, EPA conducted four public 
hearings on Florida's application. The hearings occurred on March 7, 
1995, in Orlando, Florida, and on March 9, 1995, in Tallahassee, 
Florida, at 10:00 a.m and 7:00 p.m. on each day. EPA accepted written 
comments from the public until March 13, 1995. All comments or 
objections presented at the public hearings or received in writing by 
EPA Region IV by March 13, 1995, were considered by EPA.
    Comments were received regarding the following issues: (1) The 
language in Section IV.E. of the MOA representing endangered species, 
(2) The language in Section IV.B. of the MOA representing procedures 
and policies by which draft and proposed permits will be reviewed, (3) 
Concern regarding Florida's ability to administer the NPDES program, 
(4) Concern with FDEP and the South Florida Water Management District 
regarding its water quality obligations as provided in the Federal 
Everglades Case Settlement, (5) Concern with the Florida Everglades 
Forever Act, (6) Concern with Florida's implementation and enforcement 
of its Minimum Water Flows and Level Law, (7) Concern regarding the 
possible degradation of the Central Everglades following state program 
approval, (8) Concern that the United States (including the 
Environmental Protection Agency) owes the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians 
of Florida a trust responsibility to protect tribal land and resources 
which might be violated by delegation of the Florida NPDES program, (9) 
Concern that NPDES authorization should be held in abeyance until 
existing and future NPDES challenges pertaining to the Everglades Storm 
Water Treatment Areas are settled, (10) Concern that discharges beyond 
the territorial seas (Federal waters) will continue to be permitted by 
EPA, and (11) Comments regarding overall benefits resulting from 
authorization. EPA's response to all comments are contained in this 
notice. The comments and hearing record are contained in the 
administrative record supporting this notice.

I. Comment Concerning the Language in Section IV.E. of the MOA 
Representing Endangered Species

    Informal consultation was initiated under Section 7 of the 
Endangered Species Act (ESA) during a meeting scheduled between the 
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service (FWS), FDEP, and EPA on June 16, 1994. This consultation was 
opened to utilize the expertise of the NMFS and FWS to evaluate EPA's 
assessment of potential effects on Federally listed species and 
critical habitat in the State of Florida. Since NMFS was unable to 
attend, a letter dated June 23, 1994, was sent to the NMFS reaffirming 
the initiation of informal consultation with NMFS.
    A mechanism to address possible adverse impacts to Federally listed 
species and their habitats associated with state-issued NPDES permits 
was developed through discussions with FDEP, NMFS, FWS, and EPA. The 
measures and provision agreed upon are represented in Section IV.E. of 
the MOA. In letters, both dated December 16, 1994, EPA requested 
concurrence from NMFS and FWS with EPA's determination that the 
authorization of the FDEP NPDES permit program is ``not likely to 
adversely affect'' listed species or their critical habitat, pursuant 
to 50 CFR 402.13. FWS concurred with this determination on December 21, 
1994, and NMFS concurred with this determination on January 18, 1995.
    On December 15, 1994, EPA requested concurrence from the Florida 
Bureau of Historic Preservation with EPA's determination that NPDES 
program approval for FDEP will have no effect on the preservation of 
historic properties within the State of Florida with respect to the 
National Historic Preservation Act. Florida's Bureau of Historic 
Preservation concurred with EPA's determination in a letter dated March 
3, 1995.

A. Comments

    Two organizations provided specific comments suggesting 
clarification that all ESA issues resulting in an EPA objection be 
limited to impacts associated to the permitted discharge. Their 
comments pertained to Section IV.E. of the MOA and the concern that it 
could provide a framework by which a Section 7 review of a draft permit 
being reviewed by EPA would focus upon the permit issuance or other 
aspects of the permit process that are unrelated to the discharge 
allowed under the permit.

B. EPA's Response

    Section 7 of the ESA requires interagency cooperation between the 
Services and all Federal agencies. Section 7(a)(1) requires all 
agencies to review and utilize their programs in furtherance of the 
purposes of the ESA. Section 7(a)(2) requires each Federal agency, in 
consultation with and with the assistance of the Services, to insure 
that any action is not likely to jeopardize an endangered species or 
adversely affect critical habitat. The Federal action which underwent 
Section 7(a)(2) consultation with the Services was EPA's approval of 
Florida's administration of the NPDES program.
    Section IV.E. of the MOA was an important factor in developing 
EPA's approval of the State NPDES program. Because issuance of a state 
NPDES permit and EPA's review of a proposed state permit does not 
trigger Section 7 of the ESA, the MOA calls for close coordination 
between EPA, the State, and the Services to ensure that the state-
issued permits are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of 
Federally listed species. Since the Services are natural resource 
agencies with several areas of responsibilities and maintain the right 
to comment on any issue, as does the public, the MOA should not attempt 
to limit the scope of the Services' review of a draft state NPDES 
permit. The authority provided by the CWA, on the other hand, only 
allows the State and EPA to ensure that the permitted discharge will 
comply with applicable CWA requirements, including compliance with 
state water quality standards. EPA is moreover only authorized to 
object to a state permit that is outside the guidelines and 
requirements of the CWA (402(d)). EPA's review therefore will focus on 
impacts on the discharge subject to CWA requirements. EPA believes that 
the MOA between the State of Florida and EPA adequately and 
appropriately addresses ESA concerns.

II. The Language in Section IV.B. of the MOA Representing Procedures 
and Policies by Which Draft and Proposed Permits Will Be Reviewed

A. Comments

    One organization provided comments requesting that Section IV.B. of 
the MOA be changed to require that the basis of EPA's objections be 
provided to [[Page 25720]] the permit applicant when EPA makes an 
objection to a proposed permit, and FDEP denies the permit or issues 
the permit in accordance with the EPA objections.

B. EPA's Response

    EPA does not believe that additional notification in the MOA is 
necessary. Florida Administrative Code (FAC) Section 620.510(18)(b) 
(November 29, 1994) requires that if EPA objects in accordance with 40 
CFR 123.44 to the issuance of an NPDES permit, FDEP shall address EPA's 
objections in the issuance or denial of the NPDES permit. In accordance 
with the FAC, FDEP will advise the applicant of the basis for the EPA 
objections and EPA believes that additional language for the MOA is not 
necessary. In addition, EPA is required by 40 CFR 123.44(a)(1) to send 
a copy of any comment, objection or recommendation on any draft NPDES 
permit to the permit applicant.

III. Concern Regarding Florida's Ability to Administer the NPDES 
Program

A. Comments

    Three commentors contend that Florida is unqualified to administer 
the NPDES program for regulating discharges of pollutants into water of 
the U.S. The commentors stated that FDEP was unable to maintain an un-
biased position and an objective appearance while collecting and 
evaluating information required for an NPDES permit, especially with 
respect to FDEP's Northeast District Office. One commentor expressed 
concern that Florida does not utilize a centralized wastewater 
permitting system and stated that delegation to local government 
agencies within the state would be in violation of the Clean Water Act 
(CWA).

B. Response

    EPA disagrees. EPA is not in the practice of speculating on future 
program implementation. EPA reviewed the State program submission and 
found it complete and sufficient under Federal law. On November 21, 
1994, the State of Florida submitted its formal State Program 
Submission requesting EPA approval for authorization to administer the 
NPDES program under Sections 402(b) and 304(i) of the CWA. The 
submittal included a complete program description (including funding, 
personnel requirements and organization, and enforcement procedures), 
an Independent Counsel's Statement, copies of applicable State statutes 
and regulations, and a MOA to be executed by the EPA, Region IV, 
Regional Administrator and the FDEP Secretary. On December 28, 1994, 
EPA informed the State of Florida that EPA had reviewed the submittal 
and found it ``complete'' under the requirements of 40 CFR Part 123. 
Modifications to this package, based on discussions between EPA and 
FDEP, were submitted to EPA in a letter, with attachments, dated 
February 2, 1995. EPA reviewed the program submittal and modifications 
and determined that it meets the requirements of Section 402(b) of the 
CWA and Federal regulations, which include, among other things, 
authority to issue permits which comply with the CWA, authority to 
impose civil and criminal penalties for permit violations, and 
authority to ensure the public is given notice and opportunity for a 
hearing on each proposed NPDES permit issuance. Finally, EPA examined 
all public comments and considered the overall advantages and 
disadvantages of authorizing NPDES program administration by the State 
of Florida.
    The State program MOA as approved, also provides ample opportunity 
for continuing Federal oversight of the State program. EPA may review, 
in accordance with Section IV.C of the MOA, certain draft permits, 
sufficiency of permit applications, permit revisions, revocations, and 
reissuances for: (a) Discharges which may affect the waters of another 
state or Indian Tribe, (b) discharges proposed to be regulated by 
general permits, (c) discharges from Publicly Owned Treatment Works 
with a permitted daily average discharge of at least 1.0 million 
gallons per day, (d) discharges from any major facility or facilities 
within any of the industrial categories listed in Appendix A to 40 CFR 
Part 122, (e) discharges from sources other than a. through d. with an 
average discharge exceeding 0.5 million gallons per day, and (f) 
discharges from Publicly Owned Treatment Works required to have a 
pretreatment program. In accordance with the MOA, EPA has the right to 
request review, at any time, on any other NPDES permit.
    The EPA permit review process is outlined in the MOA. On the date 
the draft permit is sent to the applicant, FDEP will send EPA Region IV 
one copy of the public notice, draft permit, application, and the fact 
sheet or statement of basis associated with the draft permit. When 
applicable, the submittal will be accompanied by a new source/new 
discharger determination. If the initial permit information supplied by 
FDEP is inadequate to determine whether the draft permit meets the 
guidelines and requirements of the CWA, EPA may, in accordance with 40 
CFR 123.44(d)(2) request additional information. If EPA determines the 
draft permit is insufficient, EPA shall have 90 days from the date the 
draft permit is sent to EPA to supply specific grounds for objection, 
and the terms and conditions which should be included in the permit. 
These written objections must be based upon one or more of the criteria 
identified in 40 CFR 123.44(c). Following expiration of the period for 
public comment for the draft permit, FDEP will prepare a proposed 
permit. If the proposed permit is the same as the draft permit defined 
in the public notice, EPA has not objected to such draft permit, and 
valid and significant public comments have not been made, FDEP may 
assume EPA has waived their review of the proposed permit and issue the 
permit without further review by EPA. In all other cases, FDEP will 
send EPA one copy of the proposed permit, recommendations of any other 
affected State, and copies of written comments and hearing records, 
including the response to comments prepared under 40 CFR 124.17 to EPA 
for review. If EPA objects to the proposed permit, in accordance with 
40 CFR 123.44, FDEP will deny the proposed permit or will issue a 
permit in accordance with EPA objections and will mail a copy of the 
final permit to EPA. This review process will ensure that FDEP is 
operating an authorized NPDES program in accordance with the 
requirements of the CWA.
    In response to the commentors other concern, as the State Program 
is approved, there will be no subdelegation of permitting authority 
outside of the FDEP. Although in 1987, the CWA was amended to allow for 
NPDES program authorization to more than one state agency, the state 
program request must demonstrate equivalent scope and stringency to the 
CWA and the agency(ies) seeking program approval must have statewide 
jurisdiction over the class or categories of discharges it seeks to 
regulate. As is provided in the MOA, the FDEP will be the State Agency 
implementing the NPDES permitting program and EPA concurs with the 
management of the NPDES program in this manner. The State is not 
authorized to delegate any authority to any local agency.

IV. Concern with FDEP and the South Florida Water Management District 
and Its Water Quality Obligations as Provided in the Federal Everglades 
Case Settlement

Comment

    One commentor contended that the Florida Department of 
Environmental Protection and the South Florida Water 
[[Page 25721]] Management District have violated and continue to 
violate their water quality obligations in the Federal Everglades Case 
Settlement [United States of America vs. South Florida Water Management 
District et al., 847 F.Supp. 1567 (S.D. Fla. 1992)]. The commentor 
asserted that the proposed changes to the settlement attest those 
violations.

Response

    EPA reviewed the program submittal and modifications and determined 
that it meets the requirements of Section 402(b) of the CWA and Federal 
regulations. (See response to Comment III, above.) The Federal 
Everglades Case Settlement is not relevant to EPA's determination.

V. Concern With the Florida Everglades Forever Act

Comment

    One commentor contended that Chapter 373.4592 (Supp. 1994), Florida 
Statutes, also known as the Everglades Forever Act of 1994 (EFA), 
violates the Federal Everglades Case Settlement and the CWA, and that 
Florida is failing to enforce water quality standards as a result of 
the passage of the EFA. The commentor contended that its testimony to 
the Florida Legislature, a summary authored by the U.S. Department of 
Interior, and other documented statements, outline the deficiencies of 
the EFA. The commentor further claimed that the refusal by FDEP to 
allow the Florida Environmental Regulation Commission (ERC) to consider 
its petition for a numeric phosphorus standard, and statements by FDEP 
in appellate court act as admissions of weakening water quality 
standards and estops the State of Florida from claiming otherwise. In 
addition, the commentor stated that FDEP did not properly submit the 
EFA for EPA review, that FDEP has failed to respond to EPA's questions 
about the law, and that the authorization of the NPDES program should 
not be decided while litigation against EPA is pending concerning the 
necessity of EPA approval of the EFA under the CWA.

Response

    This issue is not relevant to EPA's determination of completeness 
or sufficiency of the State NPDES Program submission. EPA has made a 
determination the Florida's NPDES program submission and modifications 
meet the requirements of Section 402(b) and 304(i) of the CWA. The 
passage of the EFA was a State action, and the litigation concerning 
the necessity of EPA approval of the EFA is not relevant to EPA's 
determination concerning NPDES program authorization. It must be noted 
that the EFA was submitted by the State to EPA on October 1, 1994. 
Based upon review of the entire statute, EPA does not consider the EFA 
to be a revision of existing water quality standards, or to change 
existing designated uses. FDEP and EPA are in agreement that the EFA is 
not a change to water quality standards but instead provides a 
compliance schedule for bringing existing sources of pollution into 
compliance with State water quality standards.

VI. Concern With Florida's Implementation and Enforcement of Its 
Minimum Water Flows and Level Law

Comment

    One commentor asserted that FDEP and the South Florida Water 
Management District have failed to implement and enforce the State's 
minimum water flows and levels law for more than two decades and is 
thus unqualified to administer the NPDES Program.

Response

    EPA has made a determination the Florida's NPDES program submission 
and modifications meet the requirements of Section 402(b) and 304(i) of 
the CWA. As part of this determination, EPA reviewed FDEP's resources 
and believes that FDEP has adequate resources to administer the NPDES 
program. Chapter 373.042, Florida Statutes, Minimum Water Flows and 
Levels, is a state law which is not relevant to the NPDES regulations 
in Section 402 of the CWA or EPA's determination because it deals with 
a quantity and not a water quality issue. In addition, if necessary, 
EPA retains federal oversight authority, as discussed above.

VII. Concern Regarding Potential Degradation of the Central Everglades 
Following State Program Approval

Comment

    One commentor claimed that the State of Florida has improperly 
allowed continued degradation and pollution of the central Everglades, 
which include Water Conservation Area (WCA) 3-A and the lands of 
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida. The commentor further asserted 
that the lack of enforcement on the part of the State has irreparably 
harmed and degraded the Everglades and allowed phosphorus-laden 
discharges into the Everglades and other state water bodies in excess 
of two hundred (200) parts per billion.

Response

    EPA has made a determination the Florida's NPDES program submission 
and modifications meet the requirements of Section 402(b) and 304(i) of 
the CWA. The issue to which the commentor refers is being addressed by 
the Federal Everglades Case Settlement [United States of America vs. 
South Florida Water Management District et al., 847 F.Supp. 1567 (S.D. 
Fla. 1992)]. That case and the issues associated with it are not 
relevant to EPA's decision on authorization of Florida's application 
for the NPDES program.

VIII. Comment Stating that the United States (Including the 
Environmental Protection Agency) Owes the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians 
of Florida (Miccosukee Tribe) a Trust Responsibility to Protect Tribal 
Land and Resources Which Might be Violated by Delegation of the Florida 
NPDES Program

Comment

    One commentor contended that the United States (including the EPA) 
owes the Miccosukee Tribe a trust responsibility to protect tribal land 
and resources, and that said trust responsibility would be violated by 
the delegation of the State of Florida's NPDES program.

Response

    As a Federal agency, EPA recognizes the Federal trust 
responsibility to the Miccosukee Tribe and other Indian Tribes. 
However, EPA believes that the authorization to the State of Florida to 
administer the NPDES program will not violate that trust 
responsibility.
    EPA must reiterate that, at this time, it retains full jurisdiction 
to administer the NPDES program on the Miccosukee Tribe's Reservation. 
Until the Miccosukee Tribe seeks program authorization, all permit 
application and related issues concerning discharges on the Miccosukee 
Reservation must be directed to EPA Region IV. Further, as noted above, 
EPA retains the authority to ensure compliance with water quality 
standards, including any water quality standard set by and approved by 
EPA by one Miccosukee Tribe. In addition, the Miccosukee Tribe may 
petition for water quality standards and Section 401 certification 
authority or NPDES program authority under Sections 303, 402, 405 and 
518 of the CWA.
    Finally, as noted in Comment III above, EPA does not ``delegate'' a 
state permitting program. Rather, EPA authorizes the state to implement 
the [[Page 25722]] permitting program, as provided for under the CWA 
and 40 C.F.R. Part 123, while retaining program oversight authority for 
permitting and enforcement activities. Should the State of Florida fail 
to implement its NPDES program in accordance with the CWA, EPA has the 
authority to rescind authorization.

IX. Comment that NPDES Authorization Should be Held in Abeyance Until 
Existing and Future NPDES Challenges Pertaining to the Everglades Storm 
Water Treatment Areas are Settled

Comment

    One commentor asserted that the State of Florida's application for 
authorization to administer the NPDES program should be denied or held 
in abeyance until the existing and future NPDES permit challenges 
pertaining to the Everglades Storm Water Treatment Areas (STAs) are 
settled.

Response

    EPA disagrees. This comment is not relevant to EPA's decision on 
authorization of Florida's application for the NPDES program. The NPDES 
permit for the Everglades Nutrient Removal (ENR) Project (NPDES No. 
FL0043885), referenced in Comment IX above, is one of several permits 
currently being challenged through the evidentiary hearing process (40 
CFR Part 124). Section III.C.3. of the MOA states that, for permits for 
which an evidentiary hearing has been requested at the time of program 
authorization, EPA will retain full jurisdiction until resolution of 
the administrative challenge or expiration of the permit. These permits 
are listed in Attachment B to the MOA. In addition, in accordance with 
Section III.C.4. and listed on Attachment C to the MOA, which 
represents certain facilities as agreed upon by FDEP and EPA where EPA 
will retain full jurisdiction to issue these NPDES permits following 
authorization, EPA and FDEP have agreed that EPA will retain full 
jurisdiction for the ENR Project (NPDES No. FL0043885), until such time 
that FDEP and the permittee are notified by EPA that full jurisdiction 
has been transferred to FDEP. FDEP shall retain its rights under 
Section 401 of the CWA to consider certification to any NPDES permit 
issued by EPA. Any NPDES permit issued to any STA must meet state water 
quality standards and all applicable Federal regulations. Therefore, 
EPA believes that the argument presented above by the commentor is not 
relevant to EPA's determination.

X. Concern that Discharges Beyond the Territorial Seas (Federal Waters) 
Will Continue to be Permitted by EPA

A. Comments

    One commentor suggested that EPA specifically state in the MOA that 
dischargers to waters beyond the territorial seas (Federal waters) will 
not be included in the State of Florida's NPDES program authorization.

B. Response

    EPA, as listed in Attachment C of the MOA (which represents certain 
facilities as agreed upon by FDEP and EPA where EPA will retain full 
jurisdiction to issue these NPDES permits following authorization), 
will contain all facilities which discharge into waters outside the 
jurisdiction of the State (i.e., beyond the territorial sea (Federal 
waters)).

XI. Comments Regarding Overall Benefits Resulting from 
Authorization

A. Comments

    EPA received comments from three organizations supporting the 
delegation of NPDES authority to Florida. These comments clearly 
indicated support for delegation because:
    1. It would result in the consolidation of wastewater permitting 
into one permitting agency,
    2. Provide cost benefits to those who pay to have facilities 
permitted,
    3. As well as, reduce the confusion of separate permitting and 
enforcement.
    These comments stated the opinion that State and Federal 
governments, the public, and the environment will benefit from 
delegation of NPDES authority to Florida.

B. Response

    Comment noted and supported by EPA's response to comment number 
III. above.

Conclusion

    EPA is announcing today the approval of the State of Florida NPDES 
permitting program on May 1, 1995. The State of Florida has 
demonstrated that it adequately meets the requirements for program 
authorization as defined in Sections 402 and 304(i) of the CWA and at 
40 CFR Parts 123 and 403. The State program will implement state law in 
lieu of the Federally administered program. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service concurred with the EPA ``not likely to adversely affect'' 
determination. This authorization also represents a phased NPDES 
program authorization encompassing permitting for: (1) Domestic 
discharges; (2) Industrial discharges, including those which also have 
storm water discharges; and (3) pretreatment. Storm water discharges 
from municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4's), individual storm 
water-only discharges, storm water general permits, and Federal 
facility discharges are to be phased in by the year 2000 for 
administration by the State. The State is required to submit a program 
modification for authorization of jurisdiction of these types of NPDES 
permits to EPA for approval in accordance with the schedule set forth 
in the MOA. This authorization does not include the sludge management 
program.
    At this time, EPA has full jurisdiction of NPDES program authority 
for Indian Lands. All permit applications and related issues concerning 
discharges on Federal Indian Reservations or Indian Tribal Lands will 
be directed to EPA Region IV.

Federal Register Notice of Approval of State NPDES Programs or 
Modifications

    EPA must provide Federal Register notice of any action by the 
Agency approving or modifying a State NPDES program. Today's Federal 
Register notice is to announce the approval of Florida's authority to 
administer the phased NPDES permit program.

Review Under Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, EPA is required to prepare a 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for all rules that may have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of entities.

State NPDES Program Status

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Approved to                      Approved   
                                                  Approved State     regulate     Approved State      general   
                      State                        NPDES permit       federal      pretreatment       permits   
                                                      program       facilities        program         program   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.........................................        10/19/79        10/19/79        10/19/79        06/26/91
Arkansas........................................        11/01/86        11/01/86        11/01/86        11/01/86
California......................................        05/14/73        05/05/78        09/22/89       09/22/89 
[[Page 25723]]
                                                                                                                
Colorado........................................        03/27/75  ..............  ..............        03/04/83
Connecticut.....................................        09/26/73        01/09/89        06/03/81        03/10/92
Delaware........................................        04/01/74  ..............  ..............        10/23/92
Georgia.........................................        06/28/74        12/08/80        03/12/81        01/28/91
Hawaii..........................................        11/28/74        06/01/79        08/12/83        09/30/91
Illinois........................................        10/23/77        09/20/79  ..............        01/04/84
Indiana.........................................        01/01/75        12/09/78  ..............        04/02/91
Iowa............................................        08/10/78        08/10/78        06/03/81        08/12/92
Kansas..........................................        06/28/74        08/28/85  ..............        11/24/93
Kentucky........................................        09/30/83        09/30/83        09/30/83        09/30/83
Maryland........................................        09/05/74        11/10/87        09/30/85        09/30/91
Michigan........................................        10/17/73        12/09/78        04/16/85        11/29/93
Minnesota.......................................        06/30/74        12/09/78        07/16/79        12/15/87
Mississippi.....................................        05/01/74        01/28/83        05/13/82        09/27/91
Missouri........................................        10/30/74        06/26/79        06/03/81        12/12/85
Montana.........................................        06/10/74        06/23/81  ..............        04/29/83
Nebraska........................................        06/12/74        11/02/79        09/07/84        07/20/89
Nevada..........................................        09/19/75        08/31/78  ..............        07/27/92
New Jersey......................................        04/13/82        04/13/82        04/13/82        04/13/82
New York........................................        10/28/75        06/13/80  ..............        10/15/92
North Carolina..................................        10/19/75        09/28/84        06/14/82        09/06/91
North Dakota....................................        06/13/75        01/22/90  ..............        01/22/90
Ohio............................................        03/11/74        01/28/83        07/27/83        08/17/92
Oregon..........................................        09/26/73        03/02/79        03/12/81        02/23/82
Pennsylvania....................................        06/30/78        06/30/78  ..............        08/02/91
Rhode Island....................................        09/17/84        09/17/84        09/17/84        09/17/84
South Carolina..................................        06/10/75        09/26/80        04/09/82        09/03/92
South Dakota....................................        12/30/93        12/30/93        12/30/93       *12/30/93
Tennessee.......................................        12/28/77        09/30/86        08/10/83        04/18/91
Utah............................................        07/07/87        07/07/87        07/07/87        07/07/87
Vermont.........................................        03/11/74  ..............        03/16/82        08/26/93
Virgin Islands..................................        06/30/76  ..............  ..............  ..............
Virginia........................................        03/31/75        02/09/82        04/14/89        05/20/91
Washington......................................        11/14/73  ..............        09/30/86        09/26/89
West Virginia...................................        05/10/82        05/10/82        05/10/82        05/10/82
Wisconsin.......................................        02/04/74        11/26/79        12/24/80        12/19/86
Wyoming.........................................        01/30/75        05/18/81  ..............        09/24/91
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals......................................              40              35              28             39 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Fully Authorized Programs (Federal Facilities, Pretreatment, General Permits) = 25.                   

Review Under Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, EPA is required to prepare a 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for all rules that may have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of entities. The proposed 
approval of the Florida NPDES program does not alter the regulatory 
control over any industrial category. No new substantive requirements 
are established by this action. Therefore, because this notice does not 
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, a 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not needed.
    On October 12, 1993, the Office of Management and Budget exempted 
this Agency action from the requirements of Executive Order 12866.
John H. Hankinson, Jr.,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-11792 Filed 5-11-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P