[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24748-24767]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09603]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 228

[FRL-9945-52-Region 1]

Ocean Disposal; Designation of a Dredged Material Disposal Site
in Eastern Region of Long Island Sound; Connecticut

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to
designate one dredged material disposal site, the Eastern Long Island
Sound Disposal Site (ELDS) located offshore from New London,
Connecticut, for the disposal of dredged material from harbors and
navigation channels in eastern Long Island Sound in the states of
Connecticut and New York. This action is necessary to provide a long-
term, open-water dredged material disposal site as an alternative for
the possible future disposal of such material. This disposal site
designation is subject to various restrictions designed to support the
goal of reducing or eliminating the disposal of dredged material in
Long Island Sound.
    While EPA is currently proposing to designate the ELDS as its
preferred alternative, EPA also has concluded, based on the analysis in
the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the
Designation of Dredged Material Disposal Site(s) in Eastern Long Island
Sound, Connecticut and New York (DSEIS), that two other alternatives,
the Niantic Bay and Cornfield Shoals disposal sites (NBDS and CSDS), or
portions thereof, could potentially be designated in addition to, or
instead of, the ELDS. EPA is not currently recommending the NBDS and
CSDS as preferred alternatives, but is inviting public comments on the
option of designating one or both of these sites instead of, or as a
complement to, the ELDS.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 27, 2016. EPA will
hold four public hearings to receive comments on the proposed rule. The
first two will be held on May 25, 2016, from 1-3 p.m. at the Suffolk
County Community College Culinary Arts Center, 20 East Main St.,
Riverhead, NY 11901, and from 5:30-7:30 p.m. at the Mattituck-Laurel
Library, 13900 Main Rd., Mattituck, NY 11952. The second two will be
held on May 26, 2016, from 1-3 p.m. and from 5-7 p.m. at the University
of Connecticut--Avery Point, Academic Building, Room 308, 1084
Shennecossett Rd., Groton, CT 06340. Registration will begin 30 minutes
before each of the four hearings.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jean Brochi, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square,
Suite 100, Mail Code: OEP06-1, Boston, MA 02109-3912, telephone: (617)
918-1536, fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The supporting document for this site
designation is the DSEIS. The DSEIS is considered supplemental because
it updates and builds on analyses that were conducted for the 2005 Long
Island Sound Environmental Impact Statement that supported the
designation of the Central and Western Long Island Sound dredged
material disposal sites. This document is available for public
inspection at the following locations:
    1. EPA Web site: https://www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/dredged-material-management-long-island-sound.
    2. Regulations.gov: Docket No. EPA-R01-OW-2016-0239.
    3. In person: EPA Region 1 Library, 5 Post Office Square, Boston,
MA 02109.
    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. Background
II. Purpose and Need
III. Potentially Affected Entities
IV. Disposal Site Descriptions
    A. Eastern Long Island Sound Disposal Site
    B. Niantic Bay Disposal Site
    C. Cornfield Shoals Disposal Site
V. Compliance With Statutory and Regulatory Authorities
    A. Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act and Clean
Water Act
    B. National Environmental Policy Act
    C. Coastal Zone Management Act
    D. Endangered Species Act
    E. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
VI. Restrictions
VII. Proposed Action
VIII. Supporting Documents
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Section 102(c) of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act of 1972 (MPRSA), as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1412, gives the
Administrator of EPA the authority to designate sites where ocean
disposal may be permitted. On October 1, 1986, the Administrator
delegated the authority to designate ocean dredged material disposal
sites to the Regional Administrator of the Region in which the sites
are located. The preferred alternative site, ELDS, and the other two
alternatives, NBDS and CSDS, are all located within Connecticut state
waters, which is within the area assigned to EPA Region 1, see 40 CFR
1.7(b)(1); therefore the designation of one or more of these sites is
being proposed pursuant to the EPA Region 1 Administrator's delegated
authority.
    EPA regulations (40 CFR 228.4(e)(1)) promulgated under the MPRSA
require, among other things, that EPA designate ocean disposal sites by
promulgation in 40 CFR 228. Designated ocean disposal sites are
codified at 40 CFR 228.15.
    The primary authorities that govern the aquatic disposal of dredged
material in the United States are the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.,
and the Clean Water Act of 1972, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. (CWA). While
the CWA does not apply specifically to an EPA designation of a long-
term dredged material disposal site

under the MPRSA, future federal and non-federal projects involving
dredged material disposal in Long Island Sound will require both a
section 404 permit as well as a State Water Quality Certification
pursuant to section 401 of the CWA. In 1980, the MPRSA was amended to
add Section 106(f) to the statute. 33 U.S.C. 1416(f). This provision is
commonly referred to as the ``Ambro Amendment,'' named after its
author, Congressman Jerome Ambro. MPRSA section 106(f), 33 U.S.C.
1416(f), was itself amended in 1990. Under this provision, the disposal
of dredged material in Long Island Sound from both federal projects
(i.e., projects carried out by the USACE Civil Works Program or the
actions of other federal agencies) and from non-federal projects
generating more than 25,000 cubic yards of material must satisfy the
requirements of both CWA section 404 and the MPRSA. Disposal from non-
federal projects generating less than 25,000 cubic yards of material,
however, are subject only to CWA section 404.
    This rule proposes to designate the ELDS for open-water disposal of
dredged material. While EPA is currently proposing the designation of
the ELDS as its preferred alternative, EPA also has concluded, based on
the analysis in the DSEIS, that two other alternatives, the Niantic Bay
and Cornfield Shoals disposal sites (NBDS and CSDS), or portions
thereof, could potentially be designated in addition to, or instead of,
the ELDS. All three sites are described in detail in section IV,
Disposal Site Descriptions.
    EPA has conducted the disposal site designation process consistent
with the requirements of the MPRSA, the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA), the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), and other relevant
statutes and regulations. The site designations are intended to be
effective for an indefinite period of time.
    It is important to understand that the designation of a dredged
material disposal site by EPA does not by itself authorize the disposal
at that site of dredged material from any particular dredging project.
For example, designation of the ELDS would only make that site
available to receive dredged material from a specific project if no
environmentally preferable, practicable alternative for managing that
dredged material exists, and if analysis of the dredged material
indicates that it is suitable for open-water disposal. See 40 CFR
227.1(b), 227.2 and 227.3; 40 CFR part 227, subparts B and C.
    Thus, each proposed dredging project will be evaluated on a case-
by-case basis to determine whether there are practicable,
environmentally preferable alternatives to open-water disposal (i.e.,
whether there is a need for open-water disposal). In addition, the
dredged material from each proposed disposal project will be subjected
to MPRSA and/or CWA sediment testing requirements to determine its
suitability for possible open-water disposal at an approved site.
Alternatives to open-water disposal that will be considered include
upland disposal and beneficial uses such as beach nourishment. If
environmentally preferable, practicable disposal alternatives exist,
open-water disposal will not be allowed. EPA also will not approve
dredged material for open-water disposal if it determines that the
material has the potential to cause unacceptable adverse effects to the
marine environment or human health. The review process for proposed
disposal projects is discussed in more detail below and in the DSEIS.
    Dredged material disposal sites designated by EPA under the MPRSA
are subject to detailed management and monitoring protocols to track
site conditions and prevent the occurrence of unacceptable adverse
effects. EPA and the USACE typically share responsibility for the
management and monitoring of these disposal sites. The management and
monitoring protocols for the ELDS are described in the Site Management
and Monitoring Plan (SMMP) that is incorporated in the DSEIS as
Appendix I. See 33 U.S.C. 1412(c)(3). EPA is authorized to close or
limit the use of these sites to further disposal activity if their use
causes unacceptable adverse impacts to the marine environment or human
health.

II. Purpose and Need

    As described in the DSEIS, the purpose of EPA's proposed action is
to determine whether one or more environmentally sound open-water
dredged material disposal sites should be authorized for future long-
term use in the eastern Long Island Sound region and, if so, to
designate the site or sites accordingly and consistent with applicable
law. The need for this effort derives from the following facts: (1)
There are currently no disposal sites designated for long-term use in
the eastern Long Island Sound region; (2) the two currently used sites
in this region are only authorized for use until December 23, 2016; (3)
periodic dredging is necessary to maintain safe navigation and marine
commerce, and dredged material disposal is necessary when practicable
alternative means of managing the material are not available; (4) EPA
determined, based on the evaluation of projected dredging needs over a
30-year planning horizon and alternatives to open-water disposal
conducted for the USACE's DMMP, that there are dredging and dredged
material disposal/handling needs that exceed the available disposal/
handling capacity in the eastern region of Long Island Sound; and (5)
the MPRSA requires an EPA designation for any long-term dredged
material disposal site.
    In addition, the closest designated sites outside the eastern Long
Island Sound region (and outside the ``Zone of Siting Feasibility,'' or
ZSF, which is discussed in Section 1.3 of the DSEIS), are the Central
Long Island Sound Disposal Site (CLDS) and the Rhode Island Sound
Disposal Site (RISDS), which are 29.9 nautical miles (nmi) and 51.4
nmi, respectively, from the Saybrook Outer Bars at the mouth of the
Connecticut River. The Saybrook Outer Bars is the southernmost project
in the Connecticut River dredging center, which is the largest dredging
center in the eastern Long Island Sound region. The Western Long Island
Sound Disposal Site (WLDS) is even farther to the west than the CLDS,
lying 58.4 nmi from the Connecticut River dredging center (DMMP,
Section 5.3).
    While the CLDS, WLDS, and RISDS have all been determined to be
environmentally sound sites for receiving suitable dredged material,
proposing to use any of them for suitable dredged material from the
eastern region of Long Island Sound would be problematic and EPA would
consider them to be options of last resort. Indeed, EPA does not
consider the WLDS to be a truly viable option for eastern Long Island
Sound material given how distant it is and given the fact that if
material was being hauled long distance to the west from the eastern
region of the Sound, the material would be taken to the CLDS and not
hauled even farther to the WLDS. At the same time, using the CLDS or
RISDS (not to mention the WLDS) would greatly increase the transport
distance for, and duration of, open-water disposal for dredging
projects from the eastern Long Island Sound region. This, in turn,
would greatly increase the cost of such projects and would likely
render many dredging projects too expensive to conduct, thus
threatening safe navigation and interfering with marine recreation and
commerce. Furthermore, the greater transport distance would also be
environmentally detrimental in that it would entail greater energy use,
increased air emissions, and increased risk of spills and short dumps
(DSEIS, Section 2.1). Regarding air emissions, increased hauling
distances may require using larger scows with more powerful

tug boats, which would use more fuel and cause more emission of air
pollutants.
    As determined by the USACE through the development of its recently
completed Long Island Sound Dredged Material Management Plan (DMMP),
and described in the DSEIS (Section 2.3 and Tables 2-2 and 2-3),
dredging in eastern Long Island Sound is projected to generate
approximately 22.6 million cubic yards (mcy) of dredged material over
the next 30 years, including 17.9 mcy from Connecticut ports and
harbors and 4.7 mcy from ports and harbors in New York. Of the total
amount of 22.6 mcy, approximately 13.5 mcy are projected to be fine-
grained sediment that meets MPRSA and CWA standards for aquatic
disposal (i.e., ``suitable'' material), and 9.1 mcy are projected to be
coarse-grained sand that also meets MPRSA and CWA standards for aquatic
disposal (i.e., also ``suitable'' material). In addition, the DMMP
estimates that approximately 80,900 cy of material from eastern Long
Island Sound will be fine-grained sediment that does not meet MPRSA and
CWA standards for aquatic disposal (i.e., ``unsuitable'' material).
    Although Rhode Island is included in the ZSF for an eastern Long
Island Sound dredged material disposal site--the ZSF is described later
in section V, Compliance with Statutory and Regulatory Authorities--the
volume of material estimated to come from two Rhode Island dredging
centers (Block Island and South-Central/Southeast Washington County)
located within the ZSF in Rhode Island is not included in the total
amount of material estimated to come from the eastern portion of the
Sound. This is because these dredging centers are closer to the RISDS.
In addition, much of the dredged material from these two dredging
centers is sand and will end up being used beneficially to nourish
beaches.
    The DMMP also estimates the total dredging needs for the entire
Long Island Sound region at 52.9 mcy, meaning the central and western
regions are projected to generate approximately 30.3 mcy of dredged
material over the 30-year planning horizon (DMMP, Section 4.7 and Table
4.1). Of the total of 30.3 mcy, 20.9 mcy are projected to be fine-
grained sediment that meets MPRSA and CWA standards for aquatic
disposal (i.e., ``suitable'' material), 6.1 mcy are projected to be
course-grained sand that also would be suitable for open-water
disposal, and 3.3 mcy is projected to be fine-grained sediment
unsuitable for open-water disposal. This leaves a total of 27 mcy of
dredged material that could be suitable for open-water disposal,
although EPA expects most, if not all, of the 6.1 mcy of sand would be
used beneficially. The combined capacity of the CLDS and WLDS is
approximately 40 mcy, which is enough to handle the 27 mcy from those
regions. Those sites, however, neither have the capacity nor were
intended also to meet the dredging needs of the eastern Long Island
Sound region, which, as stated above, has been estimated to be
approximately 22.6 mcy of suitable material (which, when added to the
27 mcy of suitable material from the central and western regions,
amounts to a total of 49.6 mcy of suitable material from all of Long
Island Sound). Furthermore, the distances from mouth of the Connecticut
River to the CLDS and WLDS are 29.9 nmi and 58.4 nmi, respectively.
Thus, both sites are outside the ZSF for the eastern Long Island Sound
Region and for the reasons discussed above, neither would be a viable
as a long-term solution for dredged material from the eastern Long
Island Sound region, even if the CLDS could conceivably be used for
material from the eastern Sound in an emergency situation.
    The DMMP also included a detailed assessment of alternatives to
open-water disposal and determined that, while all the sand generated
in this region should be able to be used beneficially to nourish
beaches, there are not practicable alternatives to open-water disposal
with sufficient capacity to handle the projected volume of fine-grained
sediment. As described in section VI, Restrictions, and in the proposed
rule itself, there will be restrictions on the use of all Long Island
Sound dredged material disposal sites that are designed to facilitate
and promote the use of practicable alternatives to open-water disposal
whenever available, but one or more designated open-water disposal
sites are needed in eastern Long Island Sound.
    EPA designation of a long-term dredged material disposal site(s)
provides environmental benefits. First, when use of a site under the
USACE short-term site selection authority is due to expire, designation
by EPA is the only way to authorize continued use of that site, even if
the site is environmentally suitable or even environmentally preferable
to all other sites. With the NLDS and CSDS closing in December 2016,
EPA's site designation studies were designed to determine whether or
not these or any other sites should be designated for continued long-
term use. Congress has directed that the disposal of dredged material
should take place at EPA-designated sites, rather than USACE-selected
sites, when EPA-designated sites are available (see MPRSA 103(b)).
Thus, Congress has identified a preference for use of EPA-designated
sites.
    Second, MPRSA criteria for selecting and designating sites require
EPA to consider previously used disposal sites or areas, with active or
historically used sites given preference in the evaluation (40 CFR
228.5(e)). This preference is intended to concentrate the effects, if
any, of disposal practices to small, discrete areas that have already
received dredged material, and avoid distributing any effects over a
larger geographic area. Finally, EPA designated sites require a SMMP
that will help ensure environmentally sound monitoring and management
of the sites.
    Periodic dredging of harbors and channels and, therefore, dredged
material management, are essential for ensuring safe navigation and
facilitating marine commerce. This is because the natural processes of
erosion and siltation result in sediment accumulation in federal
navigation channels, harbors, port facilities, marinas, and other
important areas of our water bodies. Unsafe navigational conditions not
only threaten public health and safety, but also pose an environmental
threat from an increased risk of spills from vessels involved in
accidents. Navigation safety is a regulatory requirement for such
agencies as the USACE and U.S. Coast Guard.
    Economic considerations also contribute to the need for dredging
(and the environmentally sound management of dredged material). There
are a large number of important navigation-dependent businesses and
industries in the eastern Long Island Sound region and Block Island
Sound, ranging from shipping (especially the movement of petroleum
fuels and the shipping of bulk materials), to recreational boating-
related businesses, marine transportation, commercial and recreational
fishing, interstate ferry operations, and military navigation, such as
that associated with the U.S. Naval Submarine Base in New London. These
businesses and industries contribute substantially to the region's
economic output, the gross state product (GSP) of the bordering states
and tax revenue. Continued access to harbors, berths, and mooring areas
is vital to ensuring the continued economic health of these industries,
and to preserving the ability of the region to import fuels, bulk
supplies, and other commodities at competitive prices. In addition,
preserving navigation channels, marinas, harbors, berthing areas, and

other marine resources, improves the quality of life for residents and
visitors to the eastern Long Island Sound region by facilitating
recreational boating and associated activities, such as fishing and
sightseeing.
    Finally, maintaining these marine areas (i.e., navigation channels,
harbors, berthing areas) also is important for homeland security and
public safety, as they support the operation of the U.S. Naval
Submarine Base and USCG facilities in the region, as well as other
governmental entities that operate on the waters of Long Island Sound.

III. Potentially Affected Entities

    Entities potentially affected by this proposed action are persons,
organizations, or government bodies seeking to dispose of dredged
material in waters of eastern Long Island Sound, subject to the
requirements of the MPRSA and/or the CWA and their implementing
regulations. This proposed rule is expected to be primarily of
relevance to: (a) Private parties seeking permits from the USACE to
transport more than 25,000 cubic yards of dredged material for the
purpose of disposal into the waters of eastern Long Island Sound; (b)
the USACE for its own dredged material disposal projects; and (c) other
federal agencies seeking to dispose of dredged material in eastern Long
Island Sound. Potentially affected entities and categories of entities
that may seek to use the proposed dredged material disposal site and
would be subject to the proposed rule include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Examples of potentially  affected
           Category                             entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal government...........  USACE (Civil Works Projects), and other
                                federal agencies.
State, local, and tribal       Governments owning and/or responsible for
 governments.                   ports, harbors, and/or berths,
                                government agencies requiring disposal
                                of dredged material associated with
                                public works projects.
Industry and general public..  Port authorities, shipyards and marine
                                repair facilities, marinas and
                                boatyards, and berth owners.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding the types of entities that could
potentially be affected should the proposed rule become a final rule.
EPA notes that nothing in this proposed rule alters the jurisdiction or
authority of EPA, the USACE, or the types of entities regulated under
the MPRSA and/or CWA. Questions regarding the applicability of this
proposed rule to a particular entity should be directed to the contact
person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

IV. Disposal Site Descriptions

    This rule proposes to designate the ELDS for open-water disposal of
dredged material for several reasons. First, unlike the other two
alternatives (i.e., Cornfield Shoals and portions of the Niantic Bay
site), the entire ELDS is a containment site, which would support
effective management and monitoring. Second, the NLDS, a part of which
makes up part of the ELDS, has been used for dredged material disposal
for over 35 years, and monitoring of the site has determined that past
and present management practices have been successful in minimizing
short-term, long-term, and cumulative impacts to water quality and
benthic habitat. Third, designating the ELDS, which includes a portion
of the NLDS, would be consistent with USEPA's ocean disposal
regulations, which indicate a preference for designating disposal sites
in areas that have been used in the past, rather than new, relatively
undisturbed areas (40 CFR 228.5(e)). Finally, the capacity of the ELDS
is approximately 27 million cy (based on water volume below 59 feet [18
m]), which would be sufficient to meet the dredging needs of the
eastern Long Island Sound region for the next 30 years and beyond.
    While EPA is currently proposing the designation of the ELDS as its
preferred alternative, EPA also has concluded, based on the analysis in
the DSEIS, that two other alternatives, the Niantic Bay and Cornfield
Shoals disposal sites (NBDS and CSDS), or portions thereof, could
potentially be designated in addition to, or instead of, the ELDS. The
Niantic Bay alternative, located just to the west of the existing NLDS,
contains an area that was historically used (i.e., the NBDS), which is
a criterion in the regulations. It also has a capacity of up to 27
million cy (based on water volume below 59 feet [18 m]), which is
sufficient to meet the dredging needs of the eastern Long Island Sound
region. However, the Niantic Bay site is predominately a transitional
area, with a containment area in the northeastern corner, and the
remainder of the site being dispersive. EPA is not recommending this
site as a preferred alternative at this time primarily because it is
not fully a containment site, as is the ELDS site.
    The CSDS, located in the western part of eastern Long Island Sound,
has been used for dredged material disposal for over 30 years. Because
the site is located in a highly dispersive environment, disposal there
has been limited to certain types of sediment (e.g., sandy material).
Monitoring of the site has determined that past and present management
practices have been successful in minimizing short-term, long-term, and
cumulative impacts to water quality and benthic habitat from dredged
material disposal. Designation of this site in addition to one of the
other alternatives would provide a disposal site on both ends of
eastern Long Island Sound, which could reduce travel time for tugs/
scows transporting dredged material for disposal at the CSDS. This, in
turn, could reduce costs and further minimize any risks of spills or
short dumps. Due to the high energy and dispersive nature of the area,
the site has unlimited capacity, but disposal at the site would be
restricted to only certain types of sediments, such as sand, consistent
with past practice.
    Despite these considerations, EPA does not currently recommend
designating the CSDS. Given the site's dispersive characteristics, EPA
concludes that the CSDS would not be appropriate to designate as the
sole disposal site in eastern Long Island Sound. See 40 CFR 228.6(a)(5)
and (6). Furthermore, EPA is not proposing to designate the Cornfield
Shoals site even as a limited complement to one or more other sites
because of the growing opportunities for sand and other dredged
sediments to be beneficially used, such as for beach nourishment.
    The following site descriptions are based on information in section
3.4.3 of the DSEIS and other support documents. Specifically, Figures
3-9 and 3-10 in the DSEIS show the locations of the sites, and Table 3-
8 provides corner coordinates.

A. Eastern Long Island Sound Disposal Site

    The ELDS alternative is located to the south of the mouth of Thames
River

estuary, approximately halfway between Connecticut and New York. The
ELDS encompasses approximately the western half of the existing New
London Disposal Site (NLDS), along with Sites NL-Wa and NL-Wb, which
are adjacent areas immediately to the west of the NLDS (see DSEIS,
Figure 3-9). The dimensions of the ELDS, which combines these three
areas, are 1 x 2 nautical miles (nmi), for a total size of 2 square
nautical miles (nmi\2\). The closest upland points to the ELDS are
Goshen Point, Connecticut, approximately 1.2 nmi (2.2 km) to the north,
and Fishers Island, New York, approximately 1.4 nmi (2.6 km) to the
southeast. The following are descriptions of the three areas that
together would comprise the ELDS.
1. New London Disposal Site
    The NLDS is located in the eastern part of the eastern Long Island
Sound region and has been used for dredged material disposal since 1955
(SAIC, 2001b). This active open-water dredged material disposal site
was previously selected by the USACE using their site selection
authority under MPRSA 103(b), 33 U.S.C. 1413(b). The statute limits the
use of USACE-selected sites to two five-year periods, 33 U.S.C.
1413(b), but Congress extended the period of use of the NLDS by five
additional years by Public Law on December 23, 2011 (Pub. L. 112-74,
Title I, Sec 116).
    The center of the NLDS is located 3.1 nmi (5.4 km) south of Eastern
Point in Groton, Connecticut. The site has an area of 1 nmi\2\ (3.4
km\2\) centered at 41[deg]16.306' N., 72[deg]04.571' W. (NAD83); corner
coordinates are presented in Table 3-8. Water depths in the site range
from approximately 46 to 79 feet (14 to 24 m). Most of the site is
located within Connecticut waters, while a small portion in the
southeastern corner of the site is located in New York state waters.
However, this rule proposes to include only the western half of the
NLDS, which would exclude the portion of the site that is in New York
waters.
    Approximately 5.4 mcy (4.1 million m\3\) were disposed at the NLDS
between 1955 and 1976. A total of approximately 3.5 mcy (2.6 million
m\3\) of dredged material have been placed at this location since it
was formally selected in 1982. The dredged materials mounds on the
seafloor result in an uneven seafloor within the site; the dredged
material deposits can rise as much as 16 to 20 feet (5 to 6 m) above
the surrounding seafloor.
    The USGS mapped the sediment at the NLDS as predominantly sand,
while sediments in the northernmost part of the site were mapped as
gravelly. NUSC (1979) described the sediment at the site as generally
fine sand. Much of the surface sediment at the site consists of placed
dredged material. Sediment sampled by the DAMOS program at locations
approximately 0.5 nmi (1 km) to the east and west of the NLDS consisted
of silt/clay and very fine silty sand, which may reflect pre-disposal
sediment textures at the NLDS.
2. Site NL-Wa
    Site NL-Wa is immediately to the west of the NLDS and also has an
area of 1 nmi\2\ (3.4 km\2\). Water depths range from approximately 45
feet (14 m) in the north, to 100 feet (30 m) in the south. The site
consists of mostly sandy areas, but also an area of boulders and rocks
in the northern part of the site (WHG, 2014). This boulder area may be
a lag deposit of a glacial moraine. The water depth in parts of the
boulder area is shallower than 59 feet (18 m).
3. Site NL-Wb
    Site NL-Wb is immediately to the west of Site NL-Wa and has an area
of 0.5 nmi\2\ (1.7 km\2\). Water depths across the site range from
approximately 59 feet (18 m) in the north, to 95 feet (28 m) in the
south. The site consists of an extension of the sandy areas of Site NL-
Wa. The southwestern corner of Site NL-Wb contains an area of bedrock
and boulders; this area is an extension of a larger area with a similar
substrate further to the south. The bedrock appears as parallel ridges
of dipping, layered rock that can be correlated to bedrock on shore.
The bedrock area within Site NL-Wb also contains some sand waves.
Bartlett Reef is located approximately 0.5 nmi (0.9 km) to the west of
the western boundary of the site.

B. Niantic Bay Disposal Site

    The NBDS alternative is located to the south of Niantic Bay,
between the Connecticut and Thames Rivers (DSEIS, Figure 3-9). It
consists of the historic NBDS and Site NB-E immediately to the east.
The NBDS alternative includes areas that were used historically for
dredged material disposal, but it has not been used since at least
1972.
    The northern edge of the alternative site is located approximately
0.6 nmi (1.1 km) from Black Point (southwestern corner of Niantic Bay)
and 1.6 nmi (3.0 km) from the Millstone Nuclear Power Station
(southeastern corner of Niantic Bay). The Niantic Bay alternative has
an area of 2.8 nmi\2\, with a length of 2.08 nmi and a width of 1.33
nmi. Water depths at the site range from approximately 60 to 130 feet
(18 to 40 m). The site is located entirely within Connecticut waters.
1. Niantic Bay Disposal Site (Historic)
    The NBDS was used historically for the disposal of dredged
materials between 1969 and 1972, when a total of 176,000 cy (135,000
m\3\) of dredged material was disposed at this location. The site,
however, has not been used for many years and it is not currently an
active disposal site. Sediments at the site mostly consist of sand to
the north and northwest and gravelly sediment with patches of gravel in
the remainder of the area. There is a boulder area in the north-central
part of the site and scour depressions in the south. The southeastern
corner of the site abuts a bedrock area. The historic NBDS has an area
of approximately 1.8 nmi\2\ (6.2 km\2\).
2. Site NB-E
    Water depths at Site NB-E range from 43 feet (13 m) in the north to
230 feet (70 m) in the southeast. Surface sediments at the site are
generally similar to sediments at the NBDS. The southwestern corner of
Site NB-E contains a bedrock area, which is an extension of an exposed
area of dipping bedrock layers to the south of the site. Site NB-E has
an area of 1.0 nmi\2\ (3.4 km\2\). Bartlett Reef, a bedrock shoal, is
located approximately 0.5 nmi (1 km) to the east of the site.

C. Cornfield Shoals Disposal Site

    The CSDS alternative consists entirely of the active CSDS, which is
located in the westernmost part of eastern Long Island Sound,
approximately halfway between the states of Connecticut and New York
(Figure 3-10). Like the NLDS, the CSDS was selected by the USACE using
its site selection authority, and use of the site was then further
extended by Congress on December 23, 2011 (Pub. L.-112-74, Title I, Sec
116). An estimated 1.2 mcy (0.95 million m\3\) were disposed at the
site between 1960 and 1976, and an additional 1.7 mcy (1.3 million
m\3\) between 1982 and 2013.
    The center of the site is located 3.3 nmi (6.1 km) south of
Cornfield Point in Old Saybrook, Connecticut. The site has an area of 1
nmi\2\ (3.4 km\2\) centered at 41[deg]12.6858' N., 72[deg]21.4914' W.,
(NAD83). The water depth is around 150 feet (50 m). The site is located
mostly within Connecticut waters, with only approximately 17 percent in
New York state waters.
    Bottom currents generally move in an ENE-WSW direction. The
seafloor around the CSDS is relatively flat, with longitudinal ripples
and other bedforms that suggests that this area is sediment-starved.
The site is classified as

erosional/non-depositional in the DSEIS. The surface of the seafloor at
the CSDS consists predominantly of gravel and gravelly sediment.
Gravelly sediment consists of a mixture of 50 to 90% sand, silt and
clay, with the remaining fraction consisting of gravel.

V. Compliance With Statutory and Regulatory Authorities

    In proposing to designate a dredged material disposal site for the
eastern portion of Long Island Sound, EPA has conducted the dredged
material disposal site designation process consistent with the
requirements of the MPRSA, NEPA, CZMA, the Endangered Species Act
(ESA), the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(MSFCMA), and any other applicable legal requirements.

A. Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act

    Section 102(c) of the MPRSA, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1412(c) et seq.,
gives the Administrator of EPA authority to designate sites where ocean
disposal of dredged material may be permitted. See also 33 U.S.C.
1413(b) and 40 CFR 228.4(e). The statute places no specific time limit
on the term for use of an EPA-designated disposal site. Thus, EPA site
designations can be for an indefinite term and are generally thought of
as long-term designations. EPA may, however, place various restrictions
or limits on the use of a site based on the site's capacity to
accommodate dredged material or other environmental concerns. See 33
U.S.C. 1412(c).
    Section 103(b) of the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C. 1413(b), provides that any
ocean disposal of dredged material should occur at EPA-designated sites
to the maximum extent feasible. In the absence of an available EPA-
designated site, however, the USACE is authorized to ``select''
appropriate disposal sites. In 1992, Congress amended MPRSA section
103(b) to place maximum time limits on the use of USACE-selected
disposal sites. Specifically, the statute restricted the use of such
sites to two separate five-year terms. There are no EPA-designated
dredged material disposal sites in the eastern portion of Long Island
Sound and past open-water disposal of dredged material from projects
subject to MPRSA requirements under section 106(f) has been conducted
in this area of Long Island Sound at sites used pursuant to the USACE
site selection authority. The two active USACE-selected sites, the NLDS
and CSDS, will no longer be available after December 23, 2016, however,
when their Congressionally-authorized term of use expires.
    The Ocean Dumping Regulations, see generally 40 CFR Subchapter H,
prescribe general and specific criteria at 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6,
respectively, to guide EPA's choice of disposal sites for final
designation. EPA regulations at 40 CFR 228.4(e)(1) provide, among other
things, that EPA will designate any disposal sites by promulgation in
40 CFR part 228. Ocean dumping sites designated on a final basis are
promulgated at 40 CFR 228.15. Section 102(c) of the MPRSA, 33 U.S.C.
1412(c), and 40 CFR 228.3 also establish requirements for EPA's ongoing
management and monitoring, in conjunction with the USACE, of disposal
sites designated by EPA to ensure that unacceptable, adverse
environmental impacts do not occur. Examples of such management and
monitoring include the following: Regulating the times, rates, and
methods of disposal, as well as the quantities and types of material
that may be disposed; conducting pre- and post-disposal monitoring of
sites; conducting disposal site evaluation and designation studies;
and, if warranted, recommending modification of site use and/or
designation conditions and restrictions. See also 40 CFR 228.7, 228.8,
228.9.
    Finally, a disposal site designation by EPA does not actually
authorize any dredged material to be disposed of at that site. It only
makes that site available as a possible management option if various
other conditions are met first. Use of the site for dredged material
disposal must be authorized by the Corps under MPRSA section 103(b),
subject to EPA review, and such disposal at the site can only be
authorized if: (1) It is determined that there is a need for open-water
disposal for that project (i.e., that there are no practicable
alternatives to such disposal that would cause less harm to the
environment); and (2) the dredged material satisfies the applicable
environmental impact criteria specified in EPA's regulations at 40 CFR
part 227. See 40 CFR 227.1(b), 227.2 and 227.16. Furthermore, the
authorization for disposal is also subject to review for compliance
with other applicable legal requirements, which may include the ESA,
the MSFCMA, the CWA (including any applicable state water quality
standards), NEPA, and the CZMA. The following describes EPA's
evaluation of the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS alternatives pursuant to the
applicable site evaluation criteria, and its compliance with site
management and monitoring requirements.
    EPA undertook its evaluation of whether to designate any dredged
material disposal sites in the eastern Long Island Sound region
pursuant to its authority under MPRSA section 102(c) in response to
several factors. These factors include the following:
     The determination by EPA, based on the evaluation of
projected dredging needs over the 30-year planning horizon and
alternatives to open-water disposal conducted for the USACE's DMMP,
that the potential alternatives to open-water disposal do not provide
sufficient capacity to accept the quantity of dredged material expected
to be generated over the next 30 years in the region;
     The prohibition on use of the NLDS and CSDS disposal sites
after December 23, 2016, pursuant to the USACE site selection authority
under MPRSA section 103(b) and the five-year extension provided by
Congress under Public Law 112-74, Title I, Sec 116.
     The understanding that in the absence of an EPA-designated
disposal site or sites, any necessary open-water disposal would either
be stymied, despite the importance of dredging for ensuring
navigational safety and facilitating marine commercial and recreational
activities, or the USACE would have to undertake additional short-term
site selections, perhaps many of them, in the future;
     The clear Congressional preference expressed in MPRSA
section 103(b) that any open-water disposal of dredged material take
place at EPA-designated sites, if feasible;
     The fact that the two closest EPA-designated sites outside
the eastern Long Island Sound region, the CLDS and RISDS, do not have
the capacity to accept the quantity of suitable dredged material
estimated to be generated from the eastern region of Long Island Sound,
which was not anticipated when these sites were designated in 2005, and
the additional fact that the two sites are 29.9 nmi and 51.4 nmi
respectively from the Connecticut River dredging center, which would
significantly increase transportation costs and project durations,
while also increasing energy use, air emissions, and the risk of spills
or short-dumps; and
     EPA's policy view that it is generally environmentally
preferable to concentrate any open-water disposal at sites that have
been used historically and at fewer sites, rather than relying on the
selection of multiple sites to be used for a limited time, see 40 CFR
228.5(e).
    EPA's evaluation considered whether there was a need to designate
one or more disposal sites for long-term dredged material disposal,
including an

assessment of whether other dredged material management methods could
reasonably be judged to obviate the need for such designations. Having
concluded that there was a need for open-water disposal sites, EPA then
assessed whether there were sites that would satisfy the applicable
environmental criteria to support a site designation under MPRSA
section 102(c). The MPRSA and EPA regulations promulgated thereunder
impose a number of requirements related to the designation of dredged
material disposal sites. These include procedural requirements,
specification of criteria for use in site evaluations, and the
requirement that a SMMP must be developed for all designated sites. As
discussed below, EPA complied with each of these requirements in
proposing to designate the ELDS.
1. Procedural Requirements
    MPRSA sections 102(c) and 103(b) indicate that EPA may designate
ocean disposal sites for dredged material. EPA regulations at 40 CFR
228.4(e) specify that dredged material disposal sites will be
``designated by EPA promulgation in this [40 CFR] part 228 . . . .''
EPA regulations at 40 CFR 228.6(b) direct that if an EIS is prepared by
EPA to assess the proposed designation of one or more disposal sites,
it should include the results of an environmental evaluation of the
proposed disposal site(s), the Draft EIS (DEIS) should be presented to
the public along with a proposed rule for the proposed disposal site
designation(s), and that a Final EIS (FEIS) should be provided at the
time of final rulemaking for the site designation. EPA has complied
with all procedural requirements related to the publication of this
proposed rule and associated DSEIS. The Agency has prepared a thorough
environmental evaluation of the recommended alternative site being
proposed for designation, the other two alternative sites still being
considered, and other courses of action (including the option of not
designating open-water disposal sites). This evaluation is presented in
the DSEIS (and related documents) and this proposed rule.
2. Disposal Site Selection Criteria
    EPA regulations under the MPRSA identify four general criteria and
11 specific criteria for evaluating locations for the potential
designation of dredged material disposal sites. See 40 CFR 228.4(e),
228.5 and 228.6. The evaluation of the ELDS with respect to the four
general and 11 specific criteria is discussed in detail in the DSEIS
and supporting documents and is summarized below. The evaluation of the
NBDS and CSDS with respect to the criteria also is discussed in detail
in the DSEIS and supporting documents, but is not discussed in detail
below because EPA is not currently proposing to designate these sites.
General Criteria (40 CFR 228.5)
    As described in the DSEIS, and summarized below, EPA has determined
that the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS satisfy the four general criteria
specified in 40 CFR 228.5. This is discussed in Chapter 5 and
summarized in Table 5-9, ``Summary of Impacts for Action and No Action
Alternatives,'' of the DSEIS.
    i. 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)).
    EPA's evaluation determined that use of the ELDS would cause
minimal interference with the aquatic activities identified in the
criterion. The site is not located in shipping lanes or any other
region of heavy commercial or recreational navigation. In addition, the
site is not located in an area that is important for commercial or
recreational fishing or shellfish harvesting. EPA used Geographic
Information System (GIS) software to overlay the locations of various
uses and natural resources of the marine environment on the disposal
site location and surrounding areas (including their bathymetry).
Analysis of this data indicated that use of the site would have minimal
potential for interfering with other existing or ongoing uses of the
marine environment in and around the ELDS, including lobster harvesting
or fishing activities. In addition, the western half of the ELDS has
been used for dredged material disposal for many years (as the NLDS)
and not only has this activity not significantly interfered with the
uses identified in the criterion, but mariners in the area are
accustomed to use of this site. Finally, time-of-year restrictions
(also known as ``environmental windows'') imposed to protect fishery
resources will typically limit dredged material disposal activities to
the months of October through April, thus further minimizing any
possibility of interference with the various activities specified in
the criterion. The NBDS and CSDS also meet this criterion for largely
the same reasons.
    ii. 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 to undetectable contaminant concentrations or effects before
reaching any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known
geographically limited fishery or shellfishery (40 CFR 228.5(b)).
    EPA's analysis concludes that the ELDS satisfies this criterion.
First, the site is a significant distance from any beach, shoreline,
marine sanctuary (in fact, there are no federally-designated marine
sanctuaries in Long Island Sound), or known geographically limited
fishery or shellfishery. Second, the site will be used only for the
disposal of dredged material determined to be suitable for open-water
disposal by application of the MPRSA's ocean dumping criteria. See 40
CFR part 227. These criteria include provisions related to water
quality and account for initial mixing. See 40 CFR 227.4, 227.5(d),
227.6(b) and (c), 227.13(c), 227.27, and 227.29. Data evaluated during
development of the DSEIS, including data from monitoring conducted
during and after past disposal activities, indicates that any temporary
perturbations in water quality or other environmental conditions at the
site during initial mixing from disposal operations will be limited to
the immediate area of the site and will neither cause any significant
environmental degradation at the site nor reach any beach, shoreline,
marine sanctuary, or other important natural resource area. The NBDS
and CSDS also meet this criterion for the same reasons.
    iii. 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)).
    EPA has determined, based on the information presented in the
DSEIS, that the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS alternatives are sufficiently
limited in size to allow for the identification and control of any
immediate adverse impacts, and to permit the implementation of
effective monitoring and surveillance to prevent adverse long-range
impacts. The maximum combined size of the three sites is approximately
5.8 nmi2, which is just 0.015 (1.5 percent) of the approximately 370
nmi\2\ surface area of the eastern Long Island Sound region (the ZSF
excluding Block Island Sound), and just 0.0043 (less than one-percent)
of the surface area of the entire Long Island Sound. The long history
of dredged material disposal site monitoring in New England through the

DAMOS program, and specifically at active and historic dredged material
disposal sites in Long Island Sound, provides ample evidence that these
surveillance and monitoring programs are effective at determining
physical, chemical, and biological impacts at sites of the size of the
options considered in this case.
    All three alternative sites are identified by specific coordinates
spelled out in the DSEIS, and the use of precision navigation equipment
in both dredged material disposal operations and monitoring efforts
will enable accurate disposal operations and contribute to effective
management and monitoring of the sites. Detailed plans for the
management and monitoring of the ELDS are described in the SMMP
(Appendix I of the DSEIS). Finally, as discussed herein and in the
DEIS, EPA has tailored the boundaries of each of the alternative sites
in light of site characteristics, such as local currents and bottom
features, so that the area and boundaries of the sites are optimized
for environmentally sound dredged material disposal operations.
    iv. EPA will, wherever feasible, designate ocean dumping sites
beyond the edge of the continental shelf and other such sites that have
been historically used (40 CFR 228.5(e)).
    EPA evaluated sites beyond the edge of the continental shelf and
historical disposal sites in Long Island Sound as part of the
alternatives analysis conducted for the DSEIS. The continental shelf
extends about 60 nmi seaward from Montauk Point, New York, and a site
located on the continental slope would result in a transit of
approximately 80 nmi from New London. This evaluation determined that
the long distances and travel times between the dredging locations in
eastern Long Island Sound and the continental shelf posed significant
environmental, operational, safety, and financial concerns, rendering
such options unreasonable. Environmental concerns include increased
risk of encountering endangered species during transit, increased fuel
consumption and air emissions, and greater potential for accidents in
transit that could lead to dredged material being dumped in unintended
areas.
    As described in the Disposal Site Descriptions section, the ELDS,
NBDS, and CSDS all encompass the footprints of historically used sites.
To the extent that the site boundaries have been adjusted to include
adjacent areas outside of the existing sites, EPA has concluded that
these adjustments will be environmentally beneficial, as discussed in
the DSEIS. For example, rather than propose designation of the existing
NLDS, the eastern half of which is at capacity and nearing depths that
could lead to scouring of the sediment by surface currents and storms,
EPA is proposing a new ELDS that encompasses the western half of the
existing NLDS along with two adjacent areas immediately to the west of
the NLDS. These two adjacent areas have been determined to be
containment areas by physical oceanographic modeling. Long-term
monitoring of the three alternative sites, or at least the historically
used parts of them, has shown minimal adverse impacts to the adjacent
marine environment and rapid recovery of the benthic community in the
disposal mounds. While there are also other historically used disposal
sites in eastern Long Island Sound, the analysis in the DSEIS concludes
that the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS are the preferable locations. Thus,
designation of the ELSD, NBDS, and/or CSDS would be consistent with
this criterion.
a. Specific Criteria (40 CFR 228.6)
    In addition to the four general criteria discussed above, 40 CFR
228.6(a) lists eleven specific factors to be used in evaluating the
impact of using the site(s) for dredged material disposal under the
MPRSA. Compliance with the eleven specific criteria is discussed below.
It is also discussed in detail in Chapter 5 and summarized in Table 5-
13, ``Summary of Impacts at the Alternative Sites,'' of the DSEIS.
    i. Geographical Position, Depth of Water, Bottom Topography and
Distance From Coast (40 CFR 228.6(a)(1)).
    Based on analyses in the DSEIS, EPA has concluded that the
geographical position (i.e., location), water depth, bottom topography
(i.e., bathymetry), and distance from coastlines of the ELDS (and part
of the NBDS) will facilitate containment of dredged material within
site boundaries, and reduce the likelihood of material being
transported away from the site to adjacent sea floor areas. As
described in the preceding Disposal Sites Description section and in
the above discussion of compliance with general criteria iii and iv (40
CFR 228.5(c) and (d)), all three sites (ELDS, NBDS and CSDS) are
located far enough from shore and are in deep enough water to avoid
adverse impacts to the coastline.
    The ELDS and northeastern portion of the NBDS are containment
areas, so disposal of dredged material there is expected to stay in
those sites and not cause adverse effects to the adjacent seafloor
areas. The CSDS and remaining portions of the NBDS are dispersive, so
any dredged material disposed there would not be expected to stay
within the site boundaries. However, disposal site monitoring, ambient
water quality monitoring, and fisheries surveys have not documented any
adverse impacts from the use of the CSDS since the early 1980s. The
closest points of land to the ELDS are Goshen Point, Connecticut,
approximately 1.2 nmi (2.2 km) to the north, and Fishers Island, New
York, approximately 2 nmi (3.2 km) to the southeast, in water depths
ranging from approximately 45 feet (14 m) in the north to 100 feet (30
m) in the south. The northern edge of the NBDS alternative is located
approximately 0.6 nmi (1.1 km) from Black Point (southwestern corner of
Niantic Bay) and 1.6 nmi (3.0 km) from the Millstone Nuclear Power
Station (southeastern corner of Niantic Bay). Water depths at the site
range from approximately 60 to 130 feet (18 to 40 m). The center of the
CSDS is 3.3 nmi (6.1 km) south of Cornfield Point in Old Saybrook,
Connecticut, and the water depth at the site is around 150 feet (50 m).
    As discussed in the DSEIS, long-term monitoring of disposal sites
in Long Island Sound has indicated that creating mounds above a depth
of 46 feet (14 meters) can result in material being removed from the
mounds by currents. All three sites are of a sufficient depth to allow
the disposal of the amount of material that is projected over the 30-
year planning horizon without exceeding this depth threshold. As
discussed in the DSEIS, the entire ELDS and the northeastern part of
the NBDS are containment areas and, as a result, EPA expects material
placed at these sites to remain there. As a result, any short-term
impacts from dredged material placement will be localized and this,
together with other regulatory requirements described elsewhere in this
document, will facilitate prevention of any adverse impacts at the
sites.
    The CSDS alternative and a part of the NBDS, however, are
dispersive areas from which dredged material disposed there would
likely be eroded over time. This material would then be dispersed in
the water column and transported predominantly toward the west. As a
result, past disposal at the CSDS has been limited to certain types of
sediments (i.e., sandy material). If the NBDS were designated, similar
restrictions would likely be appropriate regarding any use of the
dispersive areas of the site. Monitoring of the CSDS has determined
that past and present management practices have been successful in
minimizing short-term, long-term, and cumulative impacts to

water quality and benthic habitat from dredged material disposal. EPA
expects that similar results would follow from using the dispersive
portions of the NBDS with similar restrictions.
    ii. 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)).
    EPA considered the proposed ELDS and the other two sites in
relation to breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding, and passage areas for
adult and juvenile phases (i.e., life stages) of living resources in
Long Island Sound. From this analysis, EPA concluded that, while
disposal of suitable dredged material at the ELDS, NBDS, or CSDS would
cause some short-term, localized effects, overall it would not cause
adverse effects to the habitat functions and living resources specified
in the above criterion. As previously noted, the maximum combined size
of the three sites is approximately 5.8 nmi \2\, which is just 0.015
(1.5 percent) of the approximately 370 nmi\2\ surface area of the
eastern Long Island Sound region (the ZSF excluding Block Island
Sound), and just 0.0043 (less than one-percent) of the surface area of
the entire Long Island Sound.
    Generally, there are three primary ways that dredged material
disposal could potentially adversely affect marine resources. First,
disposal can cause physical impacts by injuring or burying less mobile
fish, shellfish, and benthic organisms, as well as their eggs and
larvae. Second, tug and barge traffic transporting the dredged material
to a disposal site could possibly collide or otherwise interfere with
marine mammals and reptiles. Third, contaminants in the dredged
material could potentially bioaccumulate through the food chain.
However, EPA and the other federal and state agencies that regulate
dredging and dredged material disposal impose requirements that prevent
or greatly limit the potential for these types of impacts to occur.
    For example, the agencies impose ``environmental windows,'' or
time-of-year restrictions, for both dredging and dredged material
disposal. This type of restriction has been a standard practice for
more than a decade in Long Island Sound, and New England generally, and
is incorporated in USACE permits and authorizations in response to
consultation with federal and state natural resource agencies (e.g.,
NMFS). Dredged material disposal in Long Island Sound is generally
limited to the period between October 1 and April 30 to avoid time
periods when any threat of effects on aquatic organisms would be
greater. Indeed, environmental windows are often set depending on the
location of specific dredging projects in relation to certain fish and
shellfish species. For example, dredging in nearshore areas where
winter flounder spawning occurs is generally prohibited between
February 1 and April 1; dredging that may interfere with anadromous
fish runs is generally prohibited between April 1 and May 15; and
dredging that may adversely affect shellfish is prohibited between June
1 and September 30. These environmental windows, in effect, serve to
further restrict periods during which dredged material disposal would
occur.
    Another benefit of using environmental windows is that they reduce
the likelihood of dredged material disposal activities interfering with
marine mammals and reptiles. While there are several species of marine
mammal or reptile, such as harbor porpoises, long-finned pilot whales,
seals, and sea turtles, that either inhabit or migrate through Long
Island Sound, most of them either leave the Sound during the winter
months for warmer waters to the south or are less active and remain
near the shore. There also are many species of fish (e.g., striped
bass, bluefish, scup) and invertebrates (e.g., squid) that leave the
Sound during the winter for either deeper water or warmer waters to the
south, thus avoiding the time of year when most dredging and dredged
material disposal occurs. The use of environmental windows has been
refined over time and is considered an effective management tool to
minimize impacts to marine resources.
    Dredged material disposal will, however, have some localized
impacts to fish, shellfish, and benthic organisms, such as clams and
worms, that are present at a disposal site (or in the water column
directly above the site) during a disposal event. The sediment plume
may entrain and smother some fish in the water column, and may bury
some fish, shellfish, and other marine organisms on the sea floor. It
also may result in a short-term loss of forage habitat in the immediate
disposal area, but the DAMOS program has documented the recolonization
of disposal mounds by benthic infauna within 1-3 years after disposal
and this pattern would be expected at the sites evaluated in the DSEIS.
As discussed in the DSEIS (section 5.2.2), over time, disposal mounds
recover and develop abundant and diverse biological communities that
are healthy and able to support species typically found in the ambient
surroundings. Some organisms may burrow deeply into sediments, often up
to 20 inches, and are more likely to survive a burial event.
    To further reduce potential environmental impacts associated with
dredged material disposal, the dredged material from each proposed
dredging project will be subjected to the MPRSA sediment testing
requirements set forth at 40 CFR part 227 to determine its suitability
for open-water disposal. Suitability for open-water disposal is
determined by testing the proposed dredged material for toxicity and
bioaccumulation and by quantifying the risk to human health from
consuming marine organisms that are exposed to dredged material and its
associated contaminants using a risk assessment model. If it is
determined that the sediment is unsuitable for open-water disposal--
that is, that it may unreasonably degrade or endanger human health or
the marine environment--it cannot be disposed at disposal sites
designated under the MPRSA. See 40 CFR 227.6. Therefore, EPA does not
anticipate significant effects on marine organisms from dredged
material disposal at the sites under evaluation.
    EPA also is complying with the ESA by consulting with the NMFS and
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) concerning EPA's conclusion that
the designation of the ELDS, NBDS, or CSDS would not likely adversely
affect federally listed species under their respective jurisdictions or
any habitat designated as critical for such species. Additionally, EPA
consulted with NMFS under the MSFCMA on potential impacts to essential
fish habitat (EFH). NMFS determined that the use of environmental
windows and the stringent testing requirements were sufficient steps to
minimize any impacts to EFH and did not offer additional conservation
recommendations. Further details on these consultations are provided in
the DSEIS and the section below describing compliance with the ESA and
MSFCMA.
    EPA recognizes that dredged material disposal causes some short-
term, localized adverse effects to marine organisms in the immediate
vicinity of each disposal event. But because dredged material disposal
would be limited to suitable material at the 1-3 small sites under
consideration here (see above regarding compliance with general
criteria (40 CFR 2285(e)), and during only several months of the year,
EPA concludes that designating ELDS, NBDS, or CSDS would not cause
unacceptable or unreasonable adverse impacts to breeding, spawning,
nursery, feeding, or passage areas of living resources in adult or
juvenile phases.

There is no evidence of long-term effects on benthic processes or
habitat conditions.
    iii. Location in Relation to Beaches and Other Amenity Areas (40
CFR 228.6(a)(3)).
    EPA's analysis concludes that the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS all satisfy
this criterion. All three sites are far enough away from beaches,
parks, wildlife refuges, and other areas of special concern to prevent
adverse impacts to these amenities and, as previously noted, there are
no marine sanctuaries in Long Island Sound. As previously described,
the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS are 1.2 nmi (2.2 km), 0.6 nmi (1.1 km), and
2.8 nmi (5.2 km) from the nearest shore, respectively, and none of the
sites is closer than 1.7 nmi (3.2 km) to public beaches in either
Connecticut or New York. Based on modeling results that are presented
in section 5.5.3 of the DSEIS, and past monitoring of actual disposal
activities, this distance is beyond any expected transport of dredged
material due to tidal motion or currents. As noted above, any temporary
perturbations in water quality or other environmental conditions at the
sites during initial mixing from disposal operations will be limited to
the immediate area of the sites and will not reach any beach, parks,
wildlife refuges, or other areas of special concern.
    Thus, EPA does not anticipate that the use of the ELDS, NBDS, or
CSDS would cause any adverse impacts to beaches or other amenity areas.
    iv. 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)).
    The typical composition of dredged material to be disposed at the
sites is expected to range from predominantly ``clay-silt'' to ``mostly
sand.'' This expectation is based on data from historical dredging
projects from the eastern region of Long Island Sound. For federal
dredging projects and private projects generating more 25,000 cubic
yards of dredged material, EPA and the USACE will conduct sediment
suitability determinations applying the criteria for testing and
evaluating dredged material under 40 CFR 227 and further guidance in
the ``Regional Implementation Manual for the Evaluation of Dredged
Material Proposed for Disposal in New England Waters'' (EPA, 2004), and
the material would have to satisfy these suitability criteria before it
could be authorized for disposal under the MPRSA. Private dredging
projects generating up to 25,000 cubic yards will continue to be
regulated under CWA section 404. The requirements under the MPRSA and
the CWA are discussed in detail in the DSEIS.
    The ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS would receive dredged material that is
transported by either government or private contractor hopper dredges
or oceangoing bottom-dump barges (``scows'') towed by tugboat. Both
types of equipment release the material at or very near the surface,
which is the standard operating procedure for this activity. The
disposal of this material will occur at specific coordinates marked by
buoys and will be placed so as to concentrate material from each
disposal project. This concentrated placement is expected to help
minimize bottom impacts to benthic organisms. In addition, there are no
plans to pack or package dredged material prior to disposal.
    Furthermore, it should be emphasized that the three alternative
sites are only being considered for the disposal of dredged material;
disposal of other types of material will not be allowed at these sites.
It also should be noted that the disposal of certain other types of
material is expressly prohibited by the MPRSA and EPA regulations
(e.g., industrial waste, sewage sludge, chemical warfare agents,
insufficiently characterized materials) (33 U.S.C. 1414b; 40 CFR
227.5).
    As previously discussed, dredging in eastern Long Island Sound is
projected to generate approximately 22.6 million cubic yards (mcy) of
dredged material over the next 30 years, including 17.9 mcy from
Connecticut ports and harbors and 4.7 mcy from ports and harbors in New
York. Of the total amount of 22.6 mcy, approximately 13.5 mcy are
projected to be fine-grained sediment that meets MPRSA and CWA
standards for aquatic disposal (i.e., ``suitable'' material), and 9.1
mcy are projected to be course-grained sand that also meets MPRSA and
CWA standards for aquatic disposal (i.e., also ``suitable'' material).
Even if none of the sand is used beneficially, which is highly unlikely
given the high demand for this resource, the maximum quantity of
dredged material that may possibly be disposed of at one or more of the
three alternatives is approximately 22.6 mcy, and EPA expects that
increased efforts to develop and use practicable alternatives to open-
water disposal will reduce that amount significantly. Since the
estimated capacity of the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS is 27 mcy, 27 mcy, and
unlimited respectively, there is more than sufficient capacity even if
only ELDS or one of the other two alternatives is designated for long-
term use. (As previously stated, EPA is not considering designating the
CSDS alone because it is a dispersive site.) For all of these reasons,
no significant adverse impacts are expected to be associated with the
types and quantities of dredged material that may be disposed at the
sites.
    v. Feasibility of Surveillance and Monitoring (40 CFR 228.6(a)(5)).
    Monitoring and surveillance are expected to be feasible at all
three sites, although the ELDS and the northeast portion of the NBDS
would be most conducive to monitoring because they're containment sites
and material disposed there is expected to stay there. The ELDS, NBDS,
and CSDS are all readily accessible for bathymetric and side-scan sonar
surveys and the NLDS portion of the ELDS and the CSDS have been
successfully monitored by the USACE over the past 35 years under the
DAMOS program. Upon designation of a site or sites, monitoring would
continue under the DAMOS program in accordance with the most current
approved Site Management and Monitoring Plan (SMMP) for each site. A
draft SMMP has been developed only for the ELDS at this time, since it
is EPA's preferred alternative, but EPA will develop SMMPs for any
other sites that may be designated following a similar format. As a
containment site, the ELDS is conducive to the type of monitoring most
commonly conducted at dredged material disposal sites, including side-
scan sonar, sediment profile imaging, and sediment grab sampling. The
draft SMMP for the ELDS is included as Appendix I of the DSEIS.
    While the CSDS and transitional part of the NBDS can be monitored,
they are more dispersive sites, which means that currents take dredged
sediments away from the sites over time. Therefore, it is not possible
to accurately track the fate of material placed at these sites. As
explained above, that is why use of the CSDS has been limited over the
years to receiving sediments from non-industrial harbors and channels,
like the mouth of the Connecticut River. EPA is not currently proposing
to designate the NBDS or CSDS, but if that changes after consideration
of public comments, EPA would prepare an SMMP for public review and
comment in conjunction with a proposal to designate the site. The SMMPs
are subject to review and updating at least once every ten years, if
necessary, and may be subject to additional revisions based on the
results of site monitoring and other new information. Any such
revisions will be closely coordinated with other federal and state
resource management agencies and stakeholders during the review and
approval process and will become final

only when approved by EPA, in conjunction with the USACE. See 33 U.S.C.
1413 (c)(3).
    vi. Dispersal, Horizontal Transport and Vertical Mixing
Characteristics of the Area, Including Prevailing Current Direction and
Velocity, if Any (40 CFR 228.6(a)(6)).
    Although the interactions of bathymetry, wind-generated waves, and
river and ocean currents in Long Island Sound are complex, the ELDS,
NBDS, and CSDS are located in areas that are generally calm except
during storms. (Dredging and dredged material disposal would not be
conducted during storm events. See e.g., 40 CFR 228.15(b)(4)(vi)(L)).
Consistent with this, past monitoring during disposal operations at the
NLDS (in the vicinity of the proposed ELDS), NBDS, and CSDS revealed
minimal drift of sediment out of the disposal site area as it passed
through the water column.
    Conditions are more complicated at the seafloor within the
alternative disposal sites. Disposal site monitoring has confirmed that
peak wave-induced bottom current velocities are not sufficient to cause
significant erosion of dredged material placed at either the ELDS or
the containment portions of the NBDS. As noted above, physical
oceanographic monitoring and modeling has indicated that the ELDS and
portions of the NBDS are depositional locations that collect, rather
than disperse, sediment. For these reasons, EPA has determined that the
dispersal, horizontal transport, and vertical mixing characteristics,
as well as the current velocities and directions at the ELDS and within
portions of the NBDS are appropriate to support their designation as
dredged material disposal sites.
    As discussed above, EPA also has determined that the CSDS and
portions of the NBDS are dispersive sites with bottom currents that
would likely move dredged material away from the site to surrounding
areas. Therefore, EPA does not currently favor designating these sites,
but they could be designated for limited use for the placement of
suitable sediments with similar characteristics to native sediments in
the general vicinity of the sites. This is how the CSDS was used in the
past. EPA is interested in receiving comments concerning the option of
designating the CSDS for such limited use.
    vii. Existence and Effects of Current and Previous Discharges and
Dumping in the Area (Including Cumulative Effects) (40 CFR
228.6(a)(7)).
    As previously described in the Disposal Sites Descriptions section,
the portion of the ELDS that was used historically as the NLDS has
received approximately 8.9 mcy (6.7 million m\3\) since 1955. The NBDS
is not currently an active disposal site, but it was used between 1969
and 1972, when a total of 176,000 cy (135,000 m\3\) of dredged material
was disposed at this location. The CSDS has received an estimated 2.9
mcy of dredged material (2.25 million m\3\) since 1960.
    Until the passage of the CWA in 1972, dredged material disposal was
not a heavily regulated activity. Since 1972, open-water disposal in
Long Island Sound has been subject to the sediment testing and
alternatives analysis provisions of section 404 of the CWA. With
passage of the Ambro Amendment in 1980 (which was further amended in
1990), dredged material disposal from all federal projects and non-
federal projects generating more than 25,000 cubic yards of material
became subject to the requirements of both CWA section 404 and the
MPRSA. The result of these increasingly stringent regulatory
requirements for dredged material disposal, combined with the reduction
in contaminants entering waterways from other Clean Water Act programs,
is that there has been a steady, measurable improvement in the quality
of material that has been allowed to be placed at the NLDS portion of
the ELDS and CSDS over the past 35 years.
    The NLDS portion of the ELDS and CSDS both have been used on a
consistent basis since the early 1980s pursuant to the USACE's short-
term site selection authority under section 103(b) of the MPRSA (33
U.S.C. 1413(b)). Since then, disposal operations at these sites have
been carefully managed and the material disposed there has been
monitored. In EPA's view, past use of these sites generally makes them
preferable to more pristine sites that have either not been used or
have been used in the more distant past. See 40 CFR 228.5(e).
Continuing to use existing sites, as long as they have remaining
capacity, rather using a multitude of sites, helps to limit or
concentrate the footprint of dredged material disposal on the seafloor
of Long Island Sound. While the effects of placing suitable dredged
material at a disposal site are primarily limited to short-term
physical effects, such as burying benthic organisms in the location
where the material is placed, EPA regards it to be preferable to
concentrate such effects in particular areas and leave other areas
untouched as much as possible.
    That said, EPA's evaluation of data and modeling results indicates
that past disposal operations have not resulted in unacceptable or
unreasonable environmental degradation, and that there should be no
such adverse effects in the future from the projected use of any of the
three sites, although it would be easier to determine this at the ELDS
and the containment portion of the NBDS, since the material is expected
to stay at those sites and could be monitored. As part of this
conclusion, discussed in detail in the DSEIS, EPA found that there
should be no significant adverse cumulative environmental effects from
using these sites on a long-term basis for dredged material disposal in
compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements regarding
sediment quality and site usage.
    viii. 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)).
    In evaluating whether disposal activity at the sites could
interfere with shipping, fishing, recreation, mineral extraction,
desalination, fish or shellfish culture, areas of scientific
importance, and other legitimate uses of the ocean, EPA considered both
the effects of placing dredged material on the bottom of the Sound at
the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS and any effects from vessel traffic associated
with transporting the dredged material to the disposal sites. From this
evaluation, EPA concluded there would be no unacceptable or
unreasonable adverse effects on the considerations noted in this
criterion. Some of the factors listed in this criterion have already
been discussed above due to the overlap of this criterion with aspects
of certain other criteria. Nevertheless, EPA will address each point
below.
    The ELDS is the only site in close proximity to significant
shipping activity. The eastern boundary of the proposed ELDS is one-
half mile west of the eastern boundary of the current NLDS; this shift
to the west would move the disposal site out of about half of the
Submarine Transit Corridor into New London Harbor, further reducing the
potential for conflicts between the disposal site and submarine
traffic. Vessel traffic generated by disposal activity is expected to
be similar to that which has occurred over the past 20-30 years, which
has not interfered with other shipping activity. Moreover, research by
EPA and the USACE concluded that after disposal at any of the three
sites, resulting water depths will be sufficient to permit navigation
in the area without interference. (And by providing an open-water
alternative for dredged material disposal in the absence of
environmentally preferable,

practicable alternatives, the sites are likely to improve and
facilitate navigation in many of the harbors, bays, rivers and channels
around eastern Long Island Sound.)
    EPA also carefully evaluated the potential effects on commercial
and recreational fishing for both finfish and shellfish (including
lobster) of designating the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS for dredged material
disposal and concluded that there would be no unreasonable or
unacceptable adverse effects. As discussed above in relation to other
site evaluation criteria, dredged material disposal will only have
short-term, incidental, and insignificant effects on organisms in the
disposal sites and no appreciable effects beyond the sites. Indeed,
since past dredged material disposal has been determined to have no
significant adverse effects on fishing, the similar projected levels of
future disposal activities at the designated sites also are not
expected to have any significant adverse effects.
    Four main reasons that EPA concluded that no unacceptable adverse
effects would occur from placing dredged material at the site
alternatives are discussed below. First, as discussed above, EPA has
concluded that any contaminants in material permitted for disposal--
having satisfied the dredged material criteria in the regulations that
restrict any toxicity and bioaccumulation--will not cause any
significant adverse effects on fish, shellfish, or other aquatic
organisms. Because both the ELDS and portions of the NBDS are
containment areas, dredged material disposed at those sites is expected
to remain there. If the CSDS and/or dispersive portion of the NBDS were
to be designated, EPA would restrict the types of material to be placed
at those sites, as discussed above.
    Second, as also discussed above, the disposal sites do not
encompass any especially important, sensitive, or limited habitat for
the Sound's fish and shellfish, such as key spawning or nursery habitat
for species of finfish. Numerous studies and data reviewed by EPA and
the USACE indicate that there is low potential for any future
incremental risk from the placement of dredged sediments at the three
alternative sites, either in the long- or short-term.
    Third, while EPA found that a small number of demersal fish (e.g.,
winter flounder), shellfish (e.g., clams and lobsters), benthic
organisms (e.g., worms), and zooplankton and phytoplankton could be
lost due to the physical effects of disposal (e.g., burial of organisms
on the bottom by dredged material and entrainment of plankton in the
water column by dredged material upon its release from a disposal
barge), EPA also determined that these minor, temporary adverse effects
would be neither unreasonable nor unacceptable. This determination was
based on EPA's conclusion that the numbers of organisms potentially
affected represent only a minuscule percentage of those in eastern Long
Island Sound, and on DAMOS monitoring that consistently documents the
rapid recovery of the benthic community in an area that has received
dredged material. In addition, any physical effects will be further
limited by the relatively few months in which disposal activities could
be permitted by the environmental window (or time-of-year)
restrictions.
    Fourth, EPA has determined that vessel traffic associated with
dredged material disposal will not have any unreasonable or
unacceptable adverse effects on fishing. As explained above,
environmental window restrictions will limit any disposal to the period
between October 1 and April 30, and often to fewer months depending on
species-specific restrictions for each dredging project, each year.
Moreover, there is generally far less vessel traffic in the months when
disposal would occur due to the seasonal nature of recreational boating
and commercial shipping. There currently are no mineral extraction
activities or desalinization facilities in the eastern Long Island
Sound region with which disposal activity could potentially interfere.
Energy transmission pipelines and cables are located near the sites,
but none are within their boundaries. No finfish aquaculture currently
takes place in Long Island Sound and the only form of shellfish culture
in the area, oyster production, occurs in nearshore locations far
enough away from the three alternative sites that it should not be
impacted in any manner by this proposed action. Finally, none of the
disposal site options are in an area of special scientific importance;
in fact, areas with such characteristics were screened out very early
in the alternatives screening process. Accordingly, depositing dredged
material at any of the three sites will not interfere with any of the
activities described in this criterion or other legitimate uses of Long
Island Sound.
    ix. The Existing Water Quality and Ecology of the Sites as
Determined by Available Data or by Trend Assessment or Baseline Surveys
(40 CFR 228.6(a)(9)).
    EPA's analysis of existing water quality and ecological conditions
at the site in light of available data, trend assessments and baseline
surveys indicates that use of the designated disposal sites will cause
no unacceptable or unreasonable adverse environmental effects.
Considerations related to water quality and various ecological factors
(e.g., sediment quality, benthic organisms, fish and shellfish) have
already been discussed above in relation to other site selection
criteria, and are discussed in detail in the DSEIS and supporting
documents. In considering this criterion, EPA took into account
existing water quality and sediment quality data collected at the
disposal sites, including from the USACE's DAMOS site monitoring
program, as well as water quality data from the Department of Energy
and Environmental Protection's (CT DEEP) Long Island Sound Water
Quality Monitoring Program. As discussed herein, EPA has determined
that placement of suitable dredged material at the disposal site
alternatives should not cause any significant adverse environmental
effects to water quality or to ecological conditions at the disposal
sites. EPA and the USACE have prepared a draft SMMP for the ELDS to
guide future monitoring of site conditions (DSEIS Appendix I), and
would prepare SMMPs for the NBDS and/or CSDS if either of them were to
be designated.
    x. Potentiality for the Development or Recruitment of Nuisance
Species in the Disposal Sites (40 CFR 228.6(a)(10)).
    Monitoring at disposal sites in Long Island Sound over the past 35
years has shown no recruitment of nuisance (invasive, non-native)
species and no such adverse effects are expected to occur at the ELDS,
NBDS, or CSDS in the future. EPA and the USACE will continue to monitor
EPA-designated sites under their respective SMMPs, which include a
``management focus'' on ``changes in composition and numbers of
pelagic, demersal, or benthic biota at or near the disposal sites''
(section 6.1.5 of the SMMP, Appendix I of the DSEIS).
    xi. Existence at or in Close Proximity to the Sites of Any
Significant Natural or Cultural Feature of Historical Importance (40
CFR 228.6(a)(11)).
    There are no natural features of historical importance in the ELDS,
NBDS, or CSDS, and the cultural resources that have the greatest
potential for being impacted in eastern Long Island Sound are
shipwrecks. As discussed in the DSEIS, a review of submerged vessel
reports in the NOAA and Connecticut State Historic Preservation Office
(CT SHPO) shipwreck databases indicate that there are three charted
shipwrecks within 0.5

nmi (0.9 km) of the alternative sites. One of these charted shipwrecks
is located within Site NL-Wa of the ELDS; this wreck was also
identified by the side-scan sonar survey. The side-scan sonar survey
identified two additional wrecks within the 0.5-nm (0.9-km) perimeter
outside of the NBDS. None of these known shipwrecks are currently
considered to be of historical significance. Consultation with the New
York Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP; acts
as the NY SHPO) revealed that there are no submerged vessels or
historic resources within the portion of the CSDS that is located in
New York State waters.
    As additional side-scan sonar surveys are conducted at the disposal
sites in the future under the SMMPs, and if potential shipwrecks are
identified, EPA will take appropriate action in cooperation with
federal and state historic preservation officials in response to any
significant cultural resources. The CT SHPO also determined that there
are no known aboriginal artifacts at the ELDS, NBDS, or CSDS. EPA
coordinated with Indian tribes in Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New
York throughout the development of the DSEIS and the tribes did not
identify any important natural, cultural, spiritual, or historical
features or areas within any of the three disposal sites under
consideration.
    In summary, there are no historic or archaeological resources
within the NBDS or CSDS, and while the NL-Wa portion of the ELDS
contains a shipwreck near its southern boundary, this wreck is not
considered to be of historical significance. Nevertheless, any impacts
to that wreck from dredged material disposal could be minimized by
establishing a 164-foot (50 m) avoidance buffer surrounding the
shipwreck and appropriate site management, which accommodates both the
minimum buffer of 30 m recommended by the CT SHPO, and the 40-50 m
minimum buffer applied by the NY OPRHP.
3. Disposal Site Management (40 CFR 228.3, 228.7, 228.8 and 228.9)
    The ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS would be subject to specific management
requirements to ensure that unacceptable adverse environmental impacts
do not occur. Examples of these requirements include: (1) Restricting
the use of the sites to the disposal of dredged material that has been
determined to be suitable for ocean disposal following MPRSA and/or CWA
requirements in accordance with the provisions of MPRSA section 106(f),
as well as to material from waters in the vicinity of the disposal
sites; (2) monitoring the disposal sites and their associated reference
sites, which are not used for dredged material disposal, to assess
potential impacts to the marine environment by providing a point of
comparison to an area unaffected by dredged material disposal; and (3)
retaining the right to limit or close these sites to further disposal
activity if monitoring or other information reveals evidence of
unacceptable adverse impacts to the marine environment. As mentioned
above, dredged material disposal will not be allowed when weather and
sea conditions could interfere with safe, effective placement of any
dredged material at a designated site. In addition, although not
technically a site management requirement, disposal activity at the
sites will generally be limited to the period between October 1 and
April 30, but often less depending on environmental windows to protect
certain species, as described above.
    EPA and the USACE have managed and monitored dredged material
disposal activities at the CSDS and the historically used portion of
the ELDS since the early 1980s. Site monitoring has been conducted
under the USACE's DAMOS disposal site monitoring program. In accordance
with the requirements of MPRSA section 102(c) and 40 CFR 228.3, EPA and
the USACE have developed a draft SMMP for the ELDS, and are prepared to
do so for the NBDS and/or CSDS if a decision is made to propose either
for designation. The draft SMMP is incorporated in the DSEIS as
Appendix I and is available for review and comment. The SMMP describes
in detail the specific management and monitoring requirements for the
ELDS. With respect to site monitoring, the SMMP builds on the USACE's
DAMOS monitoring program, which will continue to provide the backbone
of the site monitoring effort.

B. National Environmental Policy Act

    The NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., requires the public analysis of
the potential environmental effects of proposed federal agency actions
and reasonable alternative courses of action to ensure that these
effects, and the differences in effects among the different
alternatives, are understood. The goal of this analysis is to ensure
high quality, informed decision-making, to facilitate avoiding or
minimizing any adverse effects of proposed actions, and to help restore
and enhance environmental quality. See 40 CFR 6.100(a) and 1500.1(c)
and 1500.2(d)-(f). NEPA requires public involvement throughout the
decision-making process. See 40 CFR 6.400(a) and 40 CFR 1503 and
1501.7, 1506.6.
    Section 102(c) of NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., requires federal
agencies to prepare an EIS for major federal actions significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment. An EIS should assess:
(1) The environmental impact of the proposed action; (2) any adverse
environmental effects that cannot be avoided should the proposal be
implemented; (3) alternatives to the proposed action; (4) the
relationship between local short-term uses of the environment and the
maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity; and (5) any
irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that would be
involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. The required
content of an EIS is further described in regulations promulgated by
the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). See 40 CFR
1502.
    EPA disposal site designation evaluations conducted under the MPRSA
have been determined to be ``functionally equivalent'' to NEPA reviews,
so that they are not subject to NEPA analysis requirements as a matter
of law. Nevertheless, as a matter of policy, EPA voluntarily uses NEPA
procedures when evaluating the potential designation of ocean dumping
sites. See 63 FR 58045 (Notice of Policy and Procedures for Voluntary
Preparation of National Environmental Policy Act Documents, October 29,
1998). While EPA voluntarily uses NEPA review procedures in conducting
MPRSA disposal site designation evaluations, EPA also has explained
that ``[t]he voluntary preparation of these documents in no way legally
subjects the Agency to NEPA's requirements'' (63 FR 58046).
    In this case, EPA has prepared a Draft Supplemental EIS (DSEIS) to
evaluate the possibility of designating one or more open-water disposal
sites to serve the eastern Long Island Sound region. As previously
noted, the DSEIS is considered supplemental because it updates and
builds on the analyses that were conducted for the 2005 Long Island
Sound Environmental Impact Statement that supported the designation of
the Central and Western Long Island Sound disposal sites. As part of
the NEPA process, federal agencies prepare a public record of decision
(ROD) at the time of their final decision on any action for which an
FEIS has been prepared. If EPA decides to proceed with this proposed
action after full consideration of public comments, the Agency will
publish a final rule (in conjunction with the FEIS)

that will serve as the ROD for the site designation. See 40 CFR 1505.2
and 1506.4 (the ROD may be integrated into any other agency document
prepared in carrying out its action). In addition, EPA will also
publish a Responses to Comments document in conjunction with
publication of a FSEIS and final rule. The Responses to Comments will
identify and respond to comments received on the DSEIS and proposed
rule. EPA's use of NEPA procedures to evaluate this proposed action is
further described below.
    Consistent with its voluntary NEPA policy, as described and
referenced above, EPA has followed the NEPA process and undertaken NEPA
analyses as part of its decision-making process for the disposal site
designations. EPA published a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS, held
public meetings regarding the scope of issues to be addressed by the
SEIS, and has now published a DSEIS for public review and comment. The
DSEIS, entitled, ``Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
for the Designation of Dredged Material Disposal Site(s) in Eastern
Long Island Sound, Connecticut and New York,'' assesses and compares
the effects, including the environmental effects, of designating
dredged material disposal sites in eastern Long Island Sound, and of
various alternative approaches to managing dredging needs, including
the ``no action'' alternative (i.e., the alternative of not designating
any open-water disposal sites). See 40 CFR 1502.14.
1. Third-Party Contracting
    EPA is the agency authorized by the MPRSA to designate dredged
material disposal sites and is responsible for the DSEIS. However, EPA
does not receive appropriations to support disposal site designation
studies, so the state of Connecticut provided funding to hire
contractors to carry out the studies, support the public participation
program, and help to produce the DSEIS, all with participation and
close supervision by EPA. CEQ regulations state that an EIS can be
prepared by a contractor under contract to and paid directly by the
applicant (i.e., a ``third-party contract''). 40 CFR 1506.5(c); Forty
Most Asked Questions Concerning CEQ's National Environmental Policy Act
Regulations, 46 FR 18026, 18031 (1981). The contractor answers to the
federal agency preparing the EIS (in this case, the EPA), not the
applicant, for preparing an EIS that meets the requirements of the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 40 CFR 1506.5(c).
    Because EPA is ultimately responsible for the SEIS, the Agency
worked closely with the state of Connecticut to select the contractors
and then maintained close involvement with production of the SEIS and
control over its analyses and conclusions. The state of Connecticut is
not an ``applicant'' because it is not applying directly for the
disposal site designation. Nevertheless, because Connecticut has
expressed past support for designating one or more dredged material
disposal sites in the eastern region of Long Island Sound, EPA followed
the third-party contracting method described in 40 CFR 1506.5 to ensure
the impartiality of the EIS.
    Under the third-party contracting method, EPA must be involved in
the selection of the contractor, furnish guidance and participate in
the preparation of the EIS, and independently evaluate the EIS prior to
approval. See 40 CFR 1506.5(c). The third-party contracting process
used by EPA requires the third party (or parties) to pay for the
contractor's services while EPA retains control of and supervisory
authority over the analysis. See 66 FR 15527, 15531 (2001). While EPA
retains final control over the selection of the contractor, applicants
are allowed some input. Id. Once a contractor is selected, EPA and the
applicant enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) outlining a
general timeframe for the completion of the EIS and defining the scope
of the EIS. Id. If EPA determines more information is needed, the MOU
may be amended or EPA can complete the analysis itself. Id. The
applicant and the contractor also enter into an agreement. Id.
Additionally, the contractor must sign a disclosure statement for EPA
declaring that it has no financial or other interest in the outcome of
the project. Id.; 46 FR at 18031; 40 CFR 6.604(g)(3)(ii).
    The Connecticut Department of Transportation (CT DOT) was the lead
agency for the state with regard to preparation of the DSEIS, with
technical assistance provided by the CT DEEP. CT DOT, with extensive
input from EPA and CT DEEP, selected as its primary contractor the
University of Connecticut, in large part due to its expertise in
physical oceanography. The university selected as its subcontractor the
Louis Berger Group (LBG). EPA worked in close partnership with CT DOT
to ensure both that all project components carried out through third-
party contracting would meet federal statutory and regulatory
requirements, and that CT DOT's contractors were qualified to support
public participation and other necessary processes under NEPA and the
MPRSA, including scoping and site screening.
    The U.S. Navy also contributed to the site designation process by
funding biological and other environmental studies in support of the
DSEIS. The Navy, with extensive input from EPA and CT DEEP, used its
contractor Tetra Tech due to its expertise in biological resources
studies and risk assessment.
2. Cooperating Agencies
    The USACE was a ``cooperating agency[r x dquo] in the
development of the DSEIS because of its knowledge concerning the
region's dredging needs, its technical expertise in monitoring dredged
material disposal sites and assessing the environmental effects of
dredging and dredged material disposal, its history in the regulation
of dredged material disposal in Long Island Sound and elsewhere, and
its ongoing legal role in regulating dredging, dredged material
disposal and the management and monitoring of disposal sites. Other
cooperating agencies were NMFS, CT DEEP, CT DOT, New York Department of
State (NY DOS), New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NY
DEC), and Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council (RI CRMC).
To take advantage of expertise held by other entities, and to promote
strong inter-agency communications, EPA also coordinated with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; the Mashantucket (Western) Pequot Tribal
Nation, Mohegan Tribe, Eastern Pequot Tribal Nation, and Paucatuck
Eastern Pequot Indians (in Connecticut); the Narragansett Indian Tribe
(in Rhode Island); the Shinnecock Indian Nation (in New York), and, as
previously discussed, the CT SHPO and NY OPRHP.
    Throughout the SEIS development process, EPA communicated with the
cooperating federal and state agencies and tribes to keep them apprised
of progress on the project and to solicit input. EPA conducted
approximately ten interagency meetings and teleconferences between
October 2012 and January 2016 to review progress and get feedback, and
EPA was in regular contact with representatives of these agencies
throughout the SEIS process.
3. Public Participation
    Consistent with the public participation provisions of the NEPA
regulations, EPA conducted an extensive public participation program
throughout the development of the DSEIS as described in detail in
Chapter 7 and Appendix A of the DSEIS.

4. Zone of Siting Feasibility
    As one of the first steps in the SEIS process, EPA, in cooperation
with other federal and state agencies delineated a ``Zone of Siting
Feasibility'' (ZSF). The ZSF is the geographic area from which
reasonable and practicable open-water dredged material disposal site
alternatives should be selected for evaluation. EPA's 1986 site
designation guidance manual describes the factors that should be
considered in delineating the ZSF and recommends locating open-water
disposal sites within an economically and operationally feasible radius
from areas where dredging occurs. Other factors to be considered
include navigational restrictions, political or other jurisdictional
boundaries, the distance to the edge of the continental shelf, the
feasibility of surveillance and monitoring, and operation and
transportation costs. In 2012, consistent with the guidance and in
cooperation with the other agencies, EPA established the ZSF to include
the eastern region of Long Island Sound, with a western boundary
consisting of a line from Mulberry Point in Guilford, CT, to Mattituck
Point in Mattituck, NY, a southern boundary from Montauk Point to the
southern tip of Block Island, and an eastern boundary from the northern
tip of Block Island due north to the Rhode Island shoreline.
5. Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
    The DSEIS evaluates whether--and if so, which--open-water dredged
material disposal sites should be designated in the eastern region of
Long Island Sound. The DSEIS describes the purpose and need for any
such designations, evaluates several alternatives to this action,
including the option of ``no action'' (i.e., no designation). From this
evaluation, EPA concludes that designation of the ELDS under the MPRSA
is the preferred alternative.
    The purpose of this designation is to provide a long-term, open-
water dredged material disposal site as a potential option for the
future disposal of such material. The action is necessary because
periodic dredging and dredged material disposal is unavoidably
necessary to maintain safe navigation and marine commerce in Long
Island Sound. As previously noted, dredging in eastern Long Island
Sound is projected to generate approximately 22.6 million cubic yards
(mcy) of dredged material over the next 30 years, including 17.9 mcy
from Connecticut ports and harbors and 4.7 mcy from ports and harbors
in New York. Of the total amount of 22.6 mcy, approximately 13.5 mcy
are projected to be suitable, fine-grained sediment, and 9.1 mcy are
projected to be suitable, coarse-grained sand. In addition, the DMMP
estimates that approximately 80,900 cy of material from eastern Long
Island Sound will be fine-grained sediment that does not meet MPRSA and
CWA standards for aquatic disposal (i.e., ``unsuitable'' material).
    With the USACE's DMMP as its primary source, EPA evaluated
potential alternatives to open-water disposal in Long Island Sound but
determined that they are not sufficient to meet the regional dredging
needs. In accordance with EPA regulations, use of alternatives to open-
water disposal will be required for dredged material management when
they provide a practicable, environmentally preferable option for the
dredged material from any particular disposal project. See 40 CFR
227.16. When no such practicable alternatives exist, however, EPA's
designation of the ELDS will provide an open-water disposal site as a
potential management option for dredged material regulated under the
MPRSA that has been tested and determined to be environmentally
suitable for open-water disposal. Sediments found to be unsuitable for
open-water disposal will not be authorized for placement at a disposal
site designated by EPA under the MPRSA and will have to be managed in
other ways.
    EPA's initial screening of alternatives, which involved input from
other federal and state agencies, local governments, academic
institutions, and the public, led to the determination that the open-
water disposal sites were the most environmentally sound, cost-
effective, and operationally feasible options for the full quantity of
dredged material expected to be found suitable for open-water disposal
over the 30-year planning horizon. Regardless of this conclusion, in
practice, each individual dredging project will be analyzed on a case-
specific basis and open-water disposal of dredged material at a
designated site would only be authorized when there is a need for such
disposal (i.e., there are no practicable, environmentally preferable
alternatives). See 40 CFR 227.2(a)(1), 227.16(b). EPA analyzed
alternatives for the management of dredged material from navigation
channels and harbors in eastern Long Island Sound. This analysis was
informed by the DMMP and evaluated several different potential
alternatives, including open-water disposal sites, upland disposal,
beneficial uses, sediment treatment, and the no-action alternative.
From this analysis, EPA determined that at least one open-water
disposal site, such as the ELDS, was necessary to provide sufficient
capacity to meet long-term dredged material disposal needs in the
eastern Long Island Sound region, in the event that practicable
alternatives to open-water disposal are not available for all the
material. Again, EPA's analysis also acknowledged that options for
dredged material management other than open-water disposal might be
identified and required for specific dredged material disposal projects
in the future.
    EPA also evaluated several open-water disposal site alternatives
other than the ELDS, NBDS, and CSDS. This evaluation considered
multiple factors, such as reasonable distances to transport dredged
material, the potential for adverse effects on important natural
resources, and other measures that might indicate incompatibility for
use as a disposal site. Specific factors evaluated included: The
sensitivity and value of natural resources; geographically limited
habitats; fisheries and shellfisheries; shipping and navigation lanes;
physical and environmental parameters; and economic and operational
feasibility. The analysis was carried out in a tiered process in which
some options were ``screened out'' at an earlier stage based on certain
factors, while other options were retained for further evaluation. The
final tier involved a detailed analysis of the no-action alternative
and the following three open-water alternative sites: ELDS, NBDS, and
CSDS. Based on this analysis, designating the ELDS as an open-water
dredged material disposal site was identified as the preferred
alternative, but we are soliciting public comments on the other two
alternative sites (NBDS and CSDS). A management and monitoring strategy
was developed for the ELDS and is set forth in the SMMP for the site.

C. Coastal Zone Management Act

    The CZMA, 16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq., authorizes states to establish
coastal zone management programs to develop and enforce policies to
protect their coastal resources and promote uses of those resources
that are desired by the state. These coastal zone management programs
must be approved by the Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is responsible for
administering the CZMA. Sections 307(c)(1)(A) and (C) of the CZMA
require federal agencies to provide relevant states with a
determination that each federal agency activity, whether taking place
within or

outside the coastal zone, that affects any land or water use or natural
resource of the state's coastal zone, will be carried out in a manner
consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable
policies of the state's approved coastal zone management program. EPA's
compliance with the CZMA is described below.
    Based on the evaluations presented in the DSEIS and supporting
documents, and a review of the federally approved Connecticut and New
York coastal zone programs and policies, EPA has determined that
designation of the ELDS, and/or the NBDS and CSDS for open-water
dredged material disposal under the MPRSA would be consistent to the
maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of the coastal
zone management programs of Connecticut, New York, and Rhode Island.
EPA will provide a written determination to that effect to each of the
three states within the statutory and regulatory mandated timeframes.
    In EPA's view, there are several broad reasons why the proposed
designation of the ELDS would be consistent with the applicable,
enforceable policies of both states' coastal zone programs. First, the
designation is not expected to cause any significant adverse impacts to
the marine environment, coastal resources, or uses of the coastal zone.
Indeed, EPA expects the designation to benefit uses involving
navigation and berthing of vessels by facilitating needed dredging, and
to benefit the environment by concentrating any open-water dredged
material disposal at a small number of environmentally appropriate
sites designated by EPA and subject to the previously described SMMP,
rather than at a potential proliferation of USACE-selected sites.
Second, designation of the sites does not actually authorize the
disposal of any dredged material at the sites, since any proposal to
dispose dredged material from a particular project at a designated site
will be subject to case-specific evaluation and be allowed only if: (a)
The material satisfies the sediment quality requirements of the MPRSA
and the CWA; (b) no practicable alternative method of management with
less adverse environmental impact can be identified; and (c) the
disposal complies with the site restrictions for the site. (EPA is
proposing a number of restrictions on the potential use of the ELDS in
today's Proposed Rule. See Proposed 40 CFR 228.15(b)(6)). These
restrictions are described and discussed in the next section of the
preamble. Third, the designated disposal site(s) will be managed and
monitored pursuant to a SMMP and if adverse impacts are identified, use
of the sites will be modified to reduce or eliminate those impacts.
Such modification could further restrict, or even terminate, use of the
sites, if appropriate. See 40 CFR 228.3, 228.11.
    On December 22, 2015, as suggested by NOAA guidance on federal
consistency determinations, EPA sent letters to NY DOS and CT DEEP (1)
identifying EPA's effort to prepare a DSEIS to assess whether to
propose designation of one or more dredged material disposal sites in
the eastern portion of Long Island Sound, and (2) requesting
information from each state concerning their respective coastal zone
management programs to assist EPA with its federal consistency
determination. On March 11, 2016, EPA sent a similar letter to the
State of Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council. All three
states responded in writing to EPA's letters and provided the most
current information on their respective coastal management programs.

D. Endangered Species Act

    Under section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2), federal
agencies are required to ensure that their actions are ``not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or result
in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat of such species,
which is determined * * * to be critical * * * .'' Depending on the
species involved, a federal agency is required to consult with the NMFS
and/or USFWS if the agency's action ``may affect'' an endangered or
threatened species or its critical habitat (50 CFR 402.14(a)). Thus,
the ESA requires consultation with NMFS and/or USFWS to adequately
address potential impacts to threatened and endangered species that may
occur at the proposed dredged material disposal alternative sites from
any proposal to dispose dredged material.
    To comply with the ESA, EPA has coordinated with NMFS and USFWS and
will request consultation concurrent with the release of the draft
SEIS. EPA has determined that the designation of a disposal site will
not result in adverse impacts to threatened or endangered species,
species of concern, marine protected areas, or essential fish habitat.
In addition, the USACE would coordinate with the NMFS and USFWS for
individual permitted projects to further ensure that impacts would not
adversely impact any threatened or endangered species.

E. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act

    The 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act amendments to the MSFCMA, 16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq., require the designation of essential fish habitat
(EFH) for federally managed species of fish and shellfish. The goal of
the these amendments is to ensure that EFH is not adversely impacted by
fishing or other human activities, including dredged material disposal,
and to further the enhancement of these habitats, thereby protecting
both ecosystem health and the fisheries industries. Pursuant to section
305(b)(2) of the MSFCMA, federal agencies are required to consult with
NMFS regarding any action they authorize, fund, or undertake that may
adversely affect EFH. An adverse effect has been defined by the Act as,
``[a]ny impact which reduces the quality and/or quantity of EFH [and]
may include direct (e.g., contamination or physical disruption),
indirect (e.g., loss of prey, reduction in species' fecundity), site-
specific or habitat-wide impacts, including individual, cumulative, or
synergistic consequences of actions'' (50 CFR 600.810(a)).
    EPA is coordinating with NMFS to ensure compliance with the EFH
provisions of the MSFCMA and has prepared an essential fish habitat
assessment in compliance with the Act. EPA will incorporate any
conservation recommendations from NMFS or explain why it has not done
so in its final action.

VI. Restrictions

    EPA proposes to restrict use of the ELDS in the same manner that it
has restricted use of the CLDS and WLDS. The existing site use
restrictions for the CLDS are detailed in 40 CFR 228.15(b)(4)(vi) and
are incorporated for the WLDS by the cross-references in 40 CFR
228.15(b)(4)(vi) and 228.15(b)(5)(vi). Similarly, EPA is proposing to
apply to the ELDS the same restrictions as are applied to the CLDS and
WLDS by including simple cross-references to those restrictions in the
new proposed regulations at 40 CFR 228.15(b)(4) and 228.15(b)(6)(vi).
    While EPA is planning for the restrictions applicable to the CLDS
and WLDS to also be applied to the ELDS, it also should be understood
that EPA is currently proposing amendments to the CLDS/WLDS
restrictions. Specifically, on February 10, 2016, EPA published in the
Federal Register (81 FR 7055) a proposed rule to amend the restrictions
on the CLDS and WLDS. EPA is currently considering public

comments received on the proposed regulatory amendments.
    EPA has proposed amendments to the CLDS/WLDS restrictions in order
to incorporate new standards and procedures for the use of those sites
consistent with the recommendations of the Long Island Sound DMMP
completed by the USACE on January 11, 2016. The DMMP identifies a wide
range of alternatives to open-water disposal and recommends standards
and procedures to help determine whether and which of these
alternatives should be pursued for particular dredging projects. The
goal of EPA's proposed regulatory amendments based on these standards
and procedures is to reduce or eliminate the open-water disposal of
dredged material in Long Island Sound wherever practicable.
    The DMMP addresses dredging and dredged material management issues
for all of Long Island Sound, including the eastern portion of the
Sound. Therefore, EPA concludes that it makes sense to apply site use
restrictions based on the DMMP to the ELDS as well as to the CLDS and
WLDS. Again, it is intended that these restrictions will help to reduce
or eliminate dredged material disposal in the Eastern portion of Long
Island Sound as well as in the Central and Western portions. That said,
no final decisions have been made about final restrictions for the ELDS
and such final decisions will only be made after EPA considers public
comments received on this proposed rule and other relevant information.
    In order to understand the nature of the site use restrictions that
EPA is considering for the ELDS, reviewers of this proposed rule for
the ELDS should review the site use restrictions in 40 CFR
228.15(b)(4)(vi), as cross-referenced in proposed 40 CFR
228.15(b)(6)(vi). Reviewers can also review the regulatory amendments
that EPA has proposed for 40 CFR 228.15(b)(4)(vi). See 81 FR 7055. EPA
is currently considering public comments submitted on these proposed
amendments and, as explained above, EPA expects that the amendments,
including any changes made to them based on public comments, will
ultimately be applied to the ELDS, as well as to the CLDS and WLDS.
This expectation is, however, subject to EPA considering the final
amendments to the restrictions for the CLDS and WLDS, public comments
received on this proposed rule for the ELDS, and other relevant
information. The proposed restrictions on site use are summarized
below.

A. Standards

    The proposed restrictions provide that disposal at the site shall
be allowed only if there is no practicable alternative to open-water
disposal and that any practicable alternative will be fully utilized
for the maximum volume of dredged material practicable. EPA recognizes
that an alternative to open-water disposal may add additional costs.
The decision regarding whether there is a ``practicable alternative''
will continue to be made on a case-by-case basis, in connection with
the permitting process. The term ``practicable alternative'' is defined
in 40 CFR 227.16(b) of the EPA's ocean disposal regulations as an
alternative which is ``available at reasonable incremental cost and
energy expenditures, [and] which need not be competitive with the costs
of ocean dumping, taking into account the environmental benefits
derived from such activity, including the relative adverse
environmental impacts associated with the use of alternatives to ocean
dumping.''
    The following standards for the disposal of dredged material, by
type of material, are derived from the DMMP. These proposed
restrictions do not make decisions about the suitability of any
particular dredged material for open-water disposal or any other type
of management. Each dredging project will have to go through project-
specific permitting evaluations.
1. Unsuitable Material
    ``Unsuitable fine-grained materials'' are those determined by
physical, chemical and biological testing to be unsuitable for
unconfined open-water placement. Accordingly, EPA's proposed rule
specifies that unsuitable fine-grained materials shall not be disposed
of at the designated sites.
2. Sandy Material
    ``Sandy material'' in Long Island Sound is coarse-grained material
of generally up to 20 percent fines when used for direct beach
placement, or up to 40 percent fines when used for nearshore bar/berm
nourishment. Clean sandy material should be used for beach or nearshore
bar/berm nourishment whenever practicable. Sandy material has a high
value as nourishment or in other coastal resiliency applications, and
recent experience is that state and local governments, as well as
property owner groups, are willing to fund the additional cost for such
material even where there is no other federal project authority to
assist in that cost. As long as beach or nearshore placement is a
practicable alternative, project proponents will need to identify and
secure funding for any needed non-federal cost-sharing. Accordingly,
the proposed restriction specifies that coarse-grained material should
be used for beach or nearshore bar/berm nourishment, or other
beneficial use whenever practicable.
3. Suitable Fine-Grained Material
    ``Suitable fine-grained material'' in Long Island Sound is
typically clay and silty material of more than 20 to 40 percent fines
that is not suitable for beach or nearshore placement, yet is
determined through testing and analysis to be suitable for open-water
placement. Although the most likely cost-effective and environmentally
acceptable method of placement of this material is at open-water
disposal sites, EPA proposes that every proposed project will continue
to have to exhaust the possibility for a practicable alternative to
open-water disposal. More specifically, for materials dredged from
upper river channels in the Connecticut, Housatonic and Thames Rivers,
whenever practicable, the one existing Confined Open Water site, and
on-shore or in-river placement, should be used for such projects.
    The proposed restrictions specify that beneficial uses such as
marsh creation, should be examined and used whenever practicable. If no
other alternative is determined to be practicable, suitable fine-
grained material may be placed at the designated site.
4. Source Reduction
    Efforts to control sediment entering waterways can reduce the need
for maintenance dredging of harbor features and facilities by reducing
shoaling rates. Reducing sediment loads could help reduce the volumes
dredged in each maintenance operation as well as reduce the frequency
of maintenance. In addition, efforts to prevent introduction of
contaminants into the watershed (e.g., multi-sector and municipal
stormwater permits, measures to control nonpoint agricultural runoff)
can result in reduced contaminant levels in sediments that can increase
the range of options available to beneficially use those sediments.
Continued source reduction efforts for both sediment and contaminants
will assist in further reducing the need for open-water placement of
dredged material in Long Island Sound. The EPA expects that federal,
state and local agencies tasked with regulating those discharges into
the watersheds tributary to Long Island Sound will exercise their
authority under various statues and regulations in a continuing effort
to reduce the flow of

sediments and contaminants into state waterways and harbors.

B. Procedures

    The Long Island Sound Regional Dredging Team (RDT) was formed to
identify practicable alternatives to open-water disposal and recommend
their use for projects proposed while the USACE was preparing the DMMP.
EPA proposes to include restrictions that redefine the role of the RDT
to ensure that the Standards described above are utilized in evaluating
proposed dredging projects in Long Island Sound. EPA proposes
restrictions that make explicit the RDT's purpose, geographic scope,
membership, structure and general process as described below.
1. Purpose of the Long Island Sound Regional Dredging Team (LIS RDT)
    The primary purpose of the LIS RDT is to reduce or eliminate
wherever practicable the open-water disposal of dredged material in
Long Island Sound. The LIS RDT will accomplish this by reviewing all
proposed dredging projects subject to MPRSA (namely all federal
projects and non-federal projects that generate greater than 25,000
cubic yards) to assess whether there are practicable alternatives to
open-water disposal, by recommending that any available alternative(s)
to open-water disposal be utilized for the maximum volume of dredged