[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-11986]

[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: May 17, 1994]




Clean Water Act (CWA) 304(l): Availability of List Submissions 
and Proposed Approval Decisions

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.


SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of a list submitted to 
U.S. EPA pursuant to section 304(l)(1)(C) of the Clean Water Act 
(``CWA''), 33 U.S.C. 1314(l)(1)(C) as well as U.S. EPA's proposed 
approval decision, and request for public comment.

DATES: Comments must be submitted to U.S. EPA on or before June 16, 

ADDRESSES: Copies of these items can be obtained by writing or calling: 
Mr. Howard Pham, U.S. EPA-Region 5, 304(l) Coordinator, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency-Region 5, Water Division (Mail Code 
WQP-16J), 77 West Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois 60604-3507, 
Telephone: (312) 353-2310. Comments on these items should be sent to 
Howard Pham, U.S. EPA-Region 5 at the address given above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Howard Pham at the address and 
telephone number given in ADDRESSES.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 304(l) of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. 
1314(l), required each state, within two years after February 4, 1987, 
to submit to the U.S. EPA, three lists of waters, including a list of 
those waters that the state does not expect to achieve applicable water 
quality standards, after application of technology-based controls, due 
to discharges of toxic pollutants from point sources (the ``B List'' or 
``Short List''). 33 U.S.C. 1314(l)(1)(B). The second, or ``Mini'' list 
consists of waters that are not meeting the new water quality standards 
developed under Section 303(c)(2)(B) for toxic pollutants because of 
pollution from point and nonpoint sources. 33 U.S.C. 1314(l)(1)(A)(i). 
The third, or ``Long'' list includes all waters on the other two lists, 
plus any waters which, after the implementation of technology-based 
controls, are not expected to meet the water quality goals of the Act. 
33 U.S.C. 1314(l)(1)(A)(ii).
    For each water segment identified in these lists, the state was 
required, by February 4, 1989, to submit a ``C List'' specifying point 
sources discharging toxic pollutants believed to be preventing or 
impairing such water quality. 33 U.S.C. 1314(l)(1)(C).
    For each point source identified on the state's C list as 
discharging toxic pollutants into a water segment on the state's B 
list, the state was further required to submit to U.S. EPA an 
individual control strategy (ICS) that the state determined would serve 
to reduce point source discharges of toxic pollutants to the receiving 
water to a degree sufficient to attain water quality standards in that 
water within three years after the date of the establishment of the 
ICS. 33 U.S.C. 1314(l)(1)(D).
    U.S. EPA initially interpreted the statute to require states to 
identify on the C list, only those facilities that discharge toxic 
pollutants believed to be impairing waters listed on the B list. In 
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. U.S. EPA, the Ninth Circuit 
Court of Appeals remanded that portion of the regulation and directed 
U.S. EPA to amend the regulations to require the states to identify all 
point sources discharging any toxic pollutant that is believed to be 
preventing or impairing water quality of any stream segment listed on 
any of the three lists of waters, and to indicate the amount of the 
toxic pollutant discharges by each source. See NRDC v. U.S. EPA, 915 
F.2d 1313, 1323-24 (9th Cir. 1990). U.S. EPA amended 40 CFR 
130.10(d)(3) accordingly. See 57 Fed. Reg. 33040 (July 24, 1992).
    Consistent with U.S. EPA's amended regulation, the State of 
Wisconsin submitted on May 4, 1992 to U.S. EPA, for approval, a 
response on the need to revise the listing decisions under Section 
304(l)(1)(C). The State of Wisconsin did not add any point sources to 
its list because it believed that its original process listed all 
appropriate point sources.
    U.S. EPA's review of Wisconsin's submittal identified one facility 
which should be added to Wisconsin's 304(l) facility list. Ambient data 
from 1989 show the Lower Fox River to be impaired as a result of 
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) contamination. Effluent from Fort 
Howard Paper Corporation showed net addition of PCBs to the river based 
on 1989 data. While not sufficient to cause a listing decision in our 
1990 notice, it is now sufficient to cause Fort Howard's facility to be 
listed on the 304(l) facility list in accordance with the 1990 Court 
remand in NRDC v. U.S. EPA.
    Based upon the above justification, the State of Wisconsin revised 
its response and on December 8, 1993, added Fort Howard Paper, Corp. 
(W10001848) to the facility list. The pollutant of concern is PCBs.
    U.S. EPA notes that Fort Howard Paper's existing National Pollutant 
Discharge Elimination System permit is an acceptable ICS. That existing 
permit required significant reductions in the discharge of PCBs from 
the previous permit.
    U.S. EPA today proposes to approve the revised facility list for 
Wisconsin. U.S. EPA solicits public comment on the approval decision.

    Dated: April 29, 1994.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator. 

                        U.S. EPA Region 5--Section 304(l) Additional Listings/Revisions                         
          State                 Waterbody name        NPDES No.      name            Pollutants of concern      
WI.......................  Lower Fox River.........    W10001848  Fort Howard  Polychlo-rinated biphenyls.      

[FR Doc. 94-11986 Filed 5-16-94; 8:45 am]