[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 17, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19770-19773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-9487]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL 6967-4]


EPA Science Advisory Board; Notification of Public Advisory 
Committee Meetings

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, 
notice is hereby given that several committees of the US EPA Science 
Advisory Board (SAB) will meet on the dates and times noted below. All 
times noted are Eastern Time. All meetings are open to the public, 
however, seating is limited and available on a first come basis. 
Important Notice: Documents that are the subject of SAB reviews are 
normally available from the originating EPA office and are not 
available from the SAB office--information concerning availability of 
documents from the relevant Program Office is included below.

1. Executive Committee--May 15, 2001

    The US EPA Science Advisory Board's (SAB's) Executive Committee 
(EC) will meet on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 from 8:30 to 5:00 pm. The 
meeting will convene in the Great Room, 3rd Floor, US Environmental 
Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Federal Building, 1200 Pennsylvania 
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004.
    Purpose of the Meeting--At this meeting, the Executive Committee 
will review the following draft report prepared by one of its 
subcommittees.
    Dioxin Reassessment Review Subcommittee (DRRS) of the EPA Science 
Advisory Board (SAB) ``2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-Dioxin (TCDD) and 
Related Compounds: USEPA's draft Exposure and Human Health 
Reassessment--An SAB Report'' (see 65 FR 60190, dated October 10, 2000 
for details).
    Charge to the Executive Committee--The SAB benefitted from more 
than 40 public comments on the Agency's dioxin reassessment document 
during the course of the DRRS review meeting on November 1-2, 2000. The 
DRRS's consideration of those public comments, as well as consideration 
of the Agency's reassessment document per se, are reflected in the 
current SAB draft report. The focus of the May 15th review will be on 
the following questions:
    (a) Does the draft report adequately respond to the questions posed 
in the Charge?
    (b) Are the statements and/or responses in the draft report clear?
    (c) Are there any errors of fact in the draft report?
    In accord with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the 
public and the Agency are invited to submit written comments on these 
three questions. Submissions should be received in the EPA Science 
Advisory Board Offices by May 8, 2001. Please address all 
correspondence to Ms. Diana Pozun, EPA Science Advisory Board, Mail 
Code 1400A, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 
Ave., NW., Washington DC 20460. (Telephone (202) 564-4544, FAX (202) 
501-0582; or via e-mail at [email protected]). Submission by e-mail 
is preferred and will maximize the time available for review by the 
Executive Committee.
    Although not required by FACA, the SAB will have a brief period (a 
total of half an hour) available for all applicable oral public 
comments (maximum of five minutes per speaker). Given the broad public 
input received at the November 1-2, 2000 meeting, the focus of the 
Charge of this review, and the opportunity to address amply the Charge 
in writing, the Board does not anticipate extensive oral comments at 
the May 15th meeting. However, anyone wishing to make oral comments 
that focus on the three questions above, and that are not duplicative 
of their written comments or earlier oral comments, should discuss the 
matter with the Designated Federal Officer for the Executive Committee, 
Dr. Donald G. Barnes (see contact information below) no later than noon 
on May 8, 2001.
    Availability of Materials--The draft meeting agenda and drafts of 
the report that will be reviewed at the meeting will be available to 
the public on the SAB website (http://www.epa.gov/sab) by close-of-
business on April 30, 2001. Information concerning the draft report and 
other relevant links can be found under the ``New'' button.
    For Further Information--Any member of the public wishing further 
information concerning this meeting should contact Dr. Donald G. 
Barnes, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the Executive Committee at 
US EPA Science Advisory Board (1400A), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20460; phone (202) 564-4533; fax (202) 501-0323; or via 
e-mail at [email protected].

2--Environmental Economics Advisory Committee (EEAC)--May 25, 2001

    The Environmental Economics Advisory Committee (EEAC) of the 
Science Advisory Board (SAB) will meet on May 25, 2001 at the Hilton 
Alexandria Old Town, 1767 King Street, Alexandria, Virginia, 22314; 
telephone (703) 837-0440. The meeting will begin at 9:00 am and end no 
later than 3:00 pm.
    Purpose of the Meeting--The purpose of the Environmental Economics 
Advisory Committee meeting is to: (a) Consult with EPA representatives 
on the agency's planned activities to develop analytical approaches for 
the implementation of Executive Order 13141 entitled Environmental 
Reviews of Trade Agreements; (b) to discuss EPA's letter noting its 
intention to work across various Agency programs to determine whether 
it should request that EPA and the Science Advisory Board conduct a 
joint workshop on ways to estimate the benefits from premature 
mortality risk reductions that are predicted to result from 
environmental regulations; and (c) to receive a briefing by EPA 
representatives on the Agency's economic benefit recapture approach.

[[Page 19771]]

    Background Information--(a) Trade and the Environment: The EEAC 
will engage in a Consultation with representatives of the US EPA 
National Center for Environmental Economics (EPA/NCEE) on trade and the 
environment. Executive Order 13141 (November 16, 1999), commits the 
U.S. government to assess the domestic environmental impacts of trade 
agreements at an early stage in their negotiations. The order also 
calls for an assessment of trans-boundary and global environmental 
impacts.
    EPA/NCEE will be working with the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) 
and the International Trade Commission (ITC) to comply with this order. 
Initially, they will analyze the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) 
which would expand the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to 
include the rest of the Western Hemisphere. EPA/NCEE is also developing 
a Trade and Environment Assessment Model (TEAM) that will estimate the 
direct/proximate environmental impacts of the economic changes 
estimated by the ITC. EPA will pursue further analysis of changes in 
ambient concentrations, human health and welfare impacts as warranted.
    EPA/NCEE is also pursuing related research, including an assessment 
of the relationship between economic growth and environmental quality, 
and the relationship between pre-existing distortions, trade 
liberalization, and environmental quality.
    EPA/NCEE will brief the EEAC on: (1) EPA/NCEE's role in the FTAA 
analysis, (2) the TEAM structure and data sources, (3) their proposed 
methodologies (and the literature on trade and environment they have 
identified in support of these methods), (4) criteria for follow-on 
analyses, and (5) some related research areas.
    A ``consultation'' is a means of conferring, as a group of 
knowledgeable individuals, in public session with the Agency on a 
technical matter, before the Agency has begun substantive work on that 
issue. The goal is to leaven EPA's thinking by brainstorming a variety 
of approaches to the problem very early in the development process. 
There is no attempt or intent to express an SAB consensus or to 
generate a formal SAB position. The Board, via a brief letter, simply 
notifies the Administrator that a Consultation has taken place.
    The Subcommittee will not attempt to develop a consensus, however, 
the agency is interested in obtaining comments from individual members 
on whether NCEE is considering an analytically sound approach for 
assessing the domestic environmental impacts of trade agreements; the 
soundness of their modeling approach; and whether data sources proposed 
for emission factors are the best available. The Agency also is 
interested in individual's comments on whether NCEE is considering an 
appropriate program of research germane to the relationship between 
trade (and economic integration more generally) and the environment.
    While no written report will be prepared of the Subcommittee's 
thoughts, individual members may provide their comments in writing to 
the DFO who will include these with the minutes of the meeting.
    (b) The Benefits of Premature Morality Risk Reduction: In a 
December 20, 2000 letter to Dr. Robert Stavins, Chair of the EPA SAB 
Environmental Economics Advisory Committee, the EPA Assistant 
Administrator for Air and Radiation, noted his intention ``* * * to 
work with my partner offices in EPA to propose to the SAB Executive 
Committee the organization of a workshop on pollution-related premature 
mortality valuation styled after the successful joint EPA/SAB workshop 
series on hazardous air pollutant benefits estimation.'' The primary 
focus of key objectives of such a workshop would be to: (1) Develop 
research needs and priorities for improving valuation procedures for 
mortality risk reductions, (2) develop concrete, practical 
recommendations for best practice interpretations and applications of 
existing literature on this topic, and (3) develop recommendations 
regarding practical procedures to pursue regarding ongoing evaluation 
and assimilation of new and emerging literature on this topic.
    Though the letter discussed above was not a firm commitment to 
conduct such a workshop, the research that might be identified by a 
workshop, nor the reevaluation of EPA's processes for premature 
mortality valuation, the letter did provide advance notice to the EEAC 
Chair of the Assistant Administrator's assignment of management 
oversight for that office's efforts to work within EPA to explore 
whether such a proposal should be made to the SAB Executive Committee.
    The focus of this effort would be how one assigns a value to the 
decrease in the risk of premature mortality that might be gained from 
environmental regulations. The EPA Guidelines for Preparing Economic 
Analyses provide background information on development of a value of 
statistical life (VSL) to estimate this value. Other EPA analyses and 
papers contain background information on and develop estimates of the 
benefits to be gained in regard to fatal risk reduction actions. Though 
there is much in the technical and popular literature, as well as in 
regulatory dockets about the benefits estimated to be associated with 
reduced mortality risk, the topic remains one of significant 
uncertainty and controversy. Efforts to improve on the methods to 
develop such estimates and to identify critical knowledge gaps, thus 
research needs, for improved methods could be instrumental in moving 
the state-of-science forward in this area. The EEAC will be briefed by 
EPA representatives to clarify EPA's needs and to explore the EEAC 
members' concerns, expectations, and desires for interacting with EPA 
in such a workshop should that proposal be made by EPA.
    (c) Calculating Economic Benefits from Failure to Comply with 
Environmental Laws: EPA representatives will brief the Committee on the 
approach it takes to calculate the economic benefit from noncompliance 
with environmental laws. The interaction at this meeting will not 
constitute a review of those procedures, rather, it will be for the 
purpose of introducing the issue to Committee members.
    Since 1984, EPA's policy has been to recapture a violator's 
economic benefit from violating the law as part of a civil penalty. 
This policy recognizes three types of economic benefit: (1) Benefit 
from delaying pollution control expenditures; (2) benefit from avoiding 
pollution control expenditures; and (3) benefit that accrues from 
actions other than the simple delay and/or avoidance of pollution 
control expenditures, a category that is broadly termed, ``illegal 
competitive advantage.'' The Agency developed a computer model, BEN, to 
assist its enforcement personnel in calculating the first two types of 
benefits (delaying and avoiding pollution control expenditures) for 
settlement purposes. BEN essentially performs net present value 
adjustments. It does not calculate the benefit from an illegal 
competitive advantage.
    The fundamental economic methodology underlying the BEN model was 
peer reviewed twice: Once in 1988 and again in 1991. The Agency made 
some fundamental changes to the model in 1992 in response to these peer 
reviews. Since that time, EPA has made some further changes to the 
model, but only to update some of the model's financial values and to 
move the model to the Windows operating environment. The Agency 
initiated an informal public comment process on the entire benefit 
recapture approach in the Federal Register (61 FR 53025-53030, October

[[Page 19772]]

9, 1996). The Agency response to the comments received, and its 
proposed revisions to the model, were published in a second Federal 
Register Notice (64 FR 32948-32972, June 18, 1999) that also requested 
comments on the proposed changes. The Senate Report that accompanied 
EPA's FY 2001 budget directed the Agency to peer review the BEN model, 
including the illegal competitive advantage benefit approach, prior to 
finalizing its revisions.
    Availability of Materials--Copies of the background materials 
provided by the Agency for these discussions can be obtained from the 
following: (a) Trade and the Environment: Dr. Brett Snyder, US EPA 
NCEE, telephone number (202) 564-4558, [email protected]; (b) The 
Benefits of Premature Mortality Risk Reduction: Mr. Thomas Miller, 
Designated Federal Officer, US EPA Science Advisory Board; telephone 
(202) 564-4558; fax (202) 501-0582; or via e-mail at 
[email protected]; and (c) Calculating Economic Benefits from Failure 
to Comply with environmental Laws: Mr. Jonathan Libber, US EPA Office 
of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, (telephone (202) 564-6102; or 
via e-mail at [email protected].
    For Further Information--Any member of the public wishing further 
information concerning this meeting or wishing to submit brief oral 
comments (10 minutes or less) must contact Mr. Thomas Miller, 
Designated Federal Officer, Science Advisory Board (1400A), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, 
Washington, DC 20460; telephone (202) 564-4558; fax (202) 501-0582; or 
via e-mail at [email protected]. Requests for oral comments must be in 
writing (e-mail, fax or mail) and received by Mr. Miller no later than 
noon Eastern Standard Time on Monday, May 21, 2001.

3--Drinking Water Committee (DWC) Meeting--June 12-13, 2001

    The Drinking Water Committee of the US EPA Science Advisory Board 
(SAB), will meet on June 12-13, 2001 at the Governor's House Hotel, 
1615 Rhode Island Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20036. The meeting will 
begin at 8:30 a.m. on June 12 and adjourn no later than 5:00 p.m. on 
June 13, 2001.
    A follow up teleconference meeting will be scheduled and announced 
(if necessary) at a later date to address any remaining issues that 
might arise as a result of the June 12-13, 2001 discussions. That 
meeting would be coordinated through a conference call connection in 
room 6013 Ariel Rios North (6th Floor), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC. Additional 
information about this conference call can be obtained by calling Ms. 
Wanda Fields at (202) 564-4539, or via e-mail at: [email protected] 
following the June 12-13, 2001 meeting.
    Purpose of the Meeting--The Drinking Water Committee will continue 
its review of EPA's draft research plan in support of the Safe Drinking 
Water Act's Contaminant Candidate Listing (CCL) program and engage in a 
Consultation with the Agency on its Microbiological Risk Assessment 
Framework.
    Background--(a) Research Plan for Candidate Contaminant Listing 
(CCL)--The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), as amended in 1996, requires 
the EPA to establish a list of unregulated microbiological and chemical 
contaminants to aid in priority setting for the Agency's drinking water 
program. A new list must be published every five years. The first 
Contaminant Candidate List (CCL1) was proposed by EPA in 1997 and was 
then finalized in 1998, following extensive consultation with 
stakeholders.
    The Agency must select five or more contaminants from CCL1 and 
determine, by August 2001, whether they should be regulated. To support 
these decisions, the Agency will have to evaluate when and where these 
contaminants occur, the extent of exposure and risk to public health, 
and determine if cost effective control methods are available.
    EPA has sorted CCL1 contaminants into categories depending upon 
whether they need additional research (Research or Occurrence 
Priorities categories) or have sufficient data for the evaluation of 
exposure and risk to public health, and therefore enough data to 
support a drinking water standard (Regulatory Determination Priorities 
category). The contaminants considered for selection and regulatory 
determination by August 2001 will be drawn from the Regulatory 
Determination category and are not duplicated under the Research or 
Occurrence Priorities categories.
    A Research Plan has been prepared to describe the nature, timing 
and priority of research needed in order to meet the CCL1 information 
needs of the Agency. The plan focuses on contaminants that are on CCL1. 
Nevertheless, it is important for some research to be conducted on 
emerging pathogens and chemicals to ensure that any future CCL includes 
contaminants that are of potential public health concern. The SAB, 
through its DWC, has been asked to review the technical adequacy of the 
decision process used to develop the plan.
    The DWC began its discussion of the CCL Research Plan at its 
meeting on August 8-9, 2000 (for further information, see 65 FR 44051-
44053). The charge questions were discussed by panelists and as a 
result of the discussions the Committee prepared an Advisory to EPA 
noting its preliminary advice and the need for additional information 
(An SAB Advisory on EPA's Draft Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) 
Research Plan; EPA-SAB-DWC-ADV-00-007--copies are available at 
www.epa.gov/sab under the REPORTS heading). The discussion at the June 
12-13, 2001 DWC meeting will focus on the revised Research Plan.
    Charge to the Committee for the CCL Research Plan--EPA asks: (1) 
Whether the decision process, as described in Figure 2 of the CCL 
Research Plan, has a high probability for providing appropriate 
information for the Office of Water's regulatory determinations 
concerning CCL contaminants; and (2) whether the Science Advisory Board 
has any suggestions for improving the integrated planning of research 
on unregulated contaminants.
    (b) Microbiological Risk Assessment Framework--The EPA developed a 
framework for microbial risk assessment in conjunction with the 
International Life Sciences Institute's Risk Science Institute (ILSI 
RSI) in a series of workshops held beginning in 1995. An initial 
workshop resulted in a conceptual framework for assessing human disease 
risk from exposure to waterborne pathogens. That framework was then 
tested by conducting two risk assessments by a group of contractors who 
worked in accordance with the framework's guidance. These assessments 
were discussed in a second workshop during May 1999 and the framework 
was revised according to a series of consensus-based recommendations 
that came from that workshop. The Agency now intends to move forward 
with the development of a formal Microbiological Risk Assessment 
Guidance document.
    Prior to developing the above discussed guidance, EPA has asked the 
SAB to engage in a consultation with it to help it begin its original 
thinking on a number of issues. These issues are noted in the Charge 
below.
    A ``consultation'' is a means of conferring, as a group of 
knowledgeable individuals, in public session with the Agency on a 
technical matter, before the Agency has begun substantive work on that 
issue. The goal is to leaven EPA's thinking by brainstorming a variety 
of approaches to the problem very early in the development process. 
There is no attempt or intent to express an SAB

[[Page 19773]]

consensus or to generate a formal SAB position. The Board, via a brief 
letter, simply notifies the Administrator that a Consultation has taken 
place. While no written report will be prepared of the Subcommittee's 
thoughts, individual members may provide their comments in writing to 
the DFO who will include these with the minutes of the meeting.
    Charge to the Committee for the Microbial Risk Assessment 
Framework--EPA asks the SAB to consider and to discuss with it: (1) 
Whether the current framework includes all the essential components and 
a logical flow needed to allow microbial risk assessments to be 
conducted for all waterborne pathogens and water media (waste waters, 
drinking waters and ambient waters); (2) any apparent missing 
components that would be needed to properly conduct risk assessments, 
as well as why the additional components would be needed; (3) any tools 
and methods (e.g., dose response and susceptibility models dealing with 
uncertainty, and data gaps, etc.) that can be used in the risk analysis 
portion of the methodology which would assist risk assessors who would 
be using this guidance, and (4) suitability of the framework for 
establishment of formal guidelines for microbiological risk assessment.
    Availability of Review Materials--(1) CCL Research Plan: 
Information on the Agency's CCL Research Plan can be obtained by 
contacting Dr. Robert Clark, US EPA, National Risk Management Research 
Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH by telephone at (513) 569-7201 or by e-mail 
at [email protected]. (2) Microbiological Risk Assessment 
Framework: Additional information on the framework for microbial risk 
assessment can be obtained from Dr. Stephen Schaub, US EPA, Office of 
Water, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC by telephone at 
(202) 260-7591 or by e-mail at [email protected].
    For Further Information--Any member of the public wishing further 
information concerning this meeting or wishing to submit brief oral 
comments (10 minutes or less) must contact Thomas O. Miller, Designated 
Federal Officer, Science Advisory Board (1400A), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; 
telephone (202) 564-4558; FAX (202) 501-0582; or via e-mail at 
[email protected]. Requests for oral comments must be in writing (e-
mail, fax or mail) and received by Mr. Miller no later than noon 
Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 5, 2001.

Providing Oral or Written Comments at SAB Meetings

    It is the policy of the Science Advisory Board to accept written 
public comments of any length, and to accommodate oral public comments 
whenever possible. The Science Advisory Board expects that public 
statements presented at its meetings will not be repetitive of 
previously submitted oral or written statements. Oral Comments: In 
general, each individual or group requesting an oral presentation at a 
face-to-face meeting will be limited to a total time of ten minutes. 
For teleconference meetings, opportunities for oral comment will 
usually be limited to no more than three minutes per speaker and no 
more than fifteen minutes total. Deadlines for getting on the public 
speaker list for a meeting are given above. Speakers should bring at 
least 35 copies of their comments and presentation slides for 
distribution to the reviewers and public at the meeting. Written 
Comments: Although the SAB accepts written comments until two days 
after the date of the meeting (unless otherwise stated), written 
comments should be received in the SAB Staff Office at least one week 
prior to the meeting date so that the comments may be made available to 
the committee for their consideration. Comments should be supplied to 
the appropriate DFO at the address/contact information noted above in 
the following formats: one hard copy with original signature, and one 
electronic copy via e-mail (acceptable file format: WordPerfect, Word, 
or Rich Text files (in IBM-PC/Windows 95/98 format). Those providing 
written comments and who attend the meeting are also asked to bring 25 
copies of their comments for public distribution.

General Information

    Additional information concerning the Science Advisory Board, its 
structure, function, and composition, may be found on the SAB Website 
(http://www.epa.gov/sab) and in The FY2000 Annual Report of the Staff 
Director which is available from the SAB Publications Staff at (202) 
564-4533 or via fax at (202) 501-0256. Committee rosters, draft Agendas 
and meeting calendars are also located on our website.

Meeting Access

    Individuals requiring special accommodation at this meeting, 
including wheelchair access to the conference room, should contact the 
appropriate DFO at least five business days prior to the meeting so 
that appropriate arrangements can be made.

    Dated: April 6, 2001.
John R. Fowle, III,
Acting Staff Director, Science Advisory Board.
[FR Doc. 01-9487 Filed 4-16-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P