30404 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 92 / Thursday, May 11, 2000 / Notices

scrubbers continuously and

automatically.

Reporting shall include: initial

notifications listed; and initial

performance test results.

An agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to, a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number. The OMB control

numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed

in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter

15. The Federal Register document

required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d),

soliciting comments on this collection

of information was published on

January 21, 2000; no comments were

received.

Burden Statement: The annual public

reporting and recordkeeping burden for

this collection of information is

estimated to average 87.5 hours per

response. Burden means the total time,

effort, or financial resources expended

by persons to generate, maintain, retain,

or disclose or provide information to or

for a Federal agency. This includes the

time needed to review instructions;

develop, acquire, install, and utilize

technology and systems for the purposes

of collecting, validating, and verifying

information, processing and

maintaining information, and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

Respondents/Affected Entities:

Phosphate Fertilizer Industry.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

11.

Frequency of Response: 1.

Estimated Number of Responses: 11.

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:

963 hours.

Estimated Total Annualized Capital,

O&M Cost Burden: 0.

Send comments on the Agency’s need

for this information, the accuracy of the

provided burden estimates, and any

suggested methods for minimizing

respondent burden, including through

the use of automated collection

techniques to the following addresses.

Please refer to EPA ICR No.1061.08 and

OMB Control No. 2060–0037 in any

correspondence.

Ms. Sandy Farmer, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of

Environmental Information,

Collection Strategies Division (2822),

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,

Washington, DC 20460;

and

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for

EPA, 725 17th Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20503.

Dated: May 2, 2000.

Oscar Morales,

Director, Collection Strategies Division.

[FR Doc. 00–11819 Filed 5–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6605–6]

Notice of Availability of Funds for

Source Water Protection

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) seeks proposals from

organizations interested in working with

communities across the nation that are

served by public water systems with

highly or moderately susceptible

drinking water sources to protect their

sources of drinking water from

contamination using a watershed or

‘‘resource-based’’ approach.

EPA is providing this financial

support to:

• Facilitate the establishment of a

technical field presence nationwide to

help communities that would benefit

from collaborative source water

protection actions with other

communities; and

• Assist communities across the

country in addressing the obstacles to

protecting their water resources and

lowering the susceptibility of source

waters through a watershed or

‘‘resource-based’’ planning approach.

EPA intends to use at least part of the

funds to help an organization interested

in establishing a national network of

field technicians to assist communities

with watershed or resource-based

planning to protect their water supplies.

However, EPA is very interested in

seeing other types of approaches to help

communities across the country protect

drinking water sources, such as an

approach that provides direct financial

assistance and technical support to

communities through means other than

a field presence. Depending upon the

proposals received, EPA will consider

awarding a second grant that would

complement a field technician

approach.

DATES: All project proposals must be

received by EPA no later than June 12,

2000.

ADDRESSES: Send five copies of the

complete proposal to: Betsy Henry

(4606), Office of Ground Water and

Drinking Water, U.S. EPA, 1200

Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, DC

20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Betsy Henry, (202) 260–2399.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

What Is a State or Tribal Source Water

Assessment?

As mandated by the Safe Drinking

Water Act Amendments of 1996, a

state’s source water assessment

identifies the area that supplies water to

each public drinking water system

within the state, inventories the

significant potential sources of

contamination, and analyzes how

susceptible the drinking water source is

to contamination (often referred to as a

‘‘susceptibility determination’’). The

Amendments allocated funding to states

to complete source water assessments

for all 170,000 public water systems.

The results of these assessments are to

be provided to each water supplier and

made widely accessible to the public by

2003. EPA is also helping Tribes

complete source water assessments of

public water supplies in Indian

Country.

The assessments are intended to give

communities the information that they

need to make informed decisions to

protect their drinking water sources

from contamination.

What Is a Highly or Moderately

Susceptible Source Water Area?

There is a high degree of flexibility in

how a state determines the

susceptibility of its public water

systems. The organization would need

to work with the state source water

programs to identify those public water

systems or areas of the state that the

state determines are highly or

moderately susceptible to

contamination and would most benefit

from source water protection planning

on a watershed or resource-wide scale.

What Is Source Water Protection?

Source water protection is the

establishment of barriers that

significantly lower the risk of

contaminants of concern entering waters

serving as public drinking water

supplies. Building upon State or Tribal

source water assessments, more

communities will be examining what

actions are necessary to protect their

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 92 / Thursday, May 11, 2000 / Notices 30405

sources of drinking water from the

identified potential threats, and lower

the susceptibility of their water supply

to contamination. Planning is a critical

first step so that a community or group

of communities can use their limited

resources to most effectively target

sources of contamination that pose the

highest or most immediate threats.

Many communities need assistance

working through the planning process.

Ideally, communities with public

water systems that share the same

resource or common threats would work

together to identify their needs and

jointly set priorities. Some basic

planning elements include:

• An analysis of the state or tribal

source water assessment for the systems

involved in the planning.

• Identification of preventative action

priorities and recommended measures

for addressing them, including costs.

• Identification of an approach for

determining the effect of the proposed

priority actions on lowering the threats

to source waters.

• Identification of alternative water

supplies which would be needed in the

case of emergencies (contingency

planning).

Many communities also need

assistance in addressing their priority

preventative actions. Preventative

actions might include land acquisition,

land use ordinance establishment, leaky

underground gas tank removal from

sensitive areas, relocation of high-risk

threats, or other measures.

What Is ‘‘Resource-Based’’ Source Water

Protection?

A resource-based approach to source

water protection promotes partnerships

between public water systems that share

a common source (river, lake, spring or

aquifer) or face common contaminant

threats. The approach encourages joint

protection of water supplies through a

single planning and prioritization

process. A single water system might

also benefit from a resource-based

approach if the community can not

adequately protect its drinking water

source without collaborating with

communities in the same watershed or

recharge area that may have more

control over potential threats to the

water supply.

While similar, a resource-based

approach is distinguished from

watershed planning by focusing also on

ground water areas that may not

coincide with a watershed boundary. It

is distinguished from traditional

wellhead protection planning by

broadening the scope from the

traditional water system-by-system

planning approach to planning on a

shared resource scale that is based on

natural geological and hydrological

boundaries. However, a resource-based

approach is not necessarily the same as

large aquifer-wide planning (such as the

Edwards aquifer) or a large watershed

(e.g. Mississippi basin). These large

scales often are beyond the scope of

what is realistic or necessary for

protecting sources of drinking water.

Why Is EPA Limiting the Focus to Highly

or Moderately Susceptible Source

Waters, and Using a Watershed or

Resource-Wide Approach?

There are over 170,000 public water

systems in the United States. While

States have resources through the State

Revolving Fund Programs, EPA has

limited discretionary resources to help

local communities implement source

water protection for all of these systems’

sources of drinking water. EPA believes

that communities with public water

supplies that are most susceptible to

contamination should be the

communities first targeted for assistance

to identify and implement preventative

measures to protect their drinking water

sources.

EPA is also trying to encourage

watershed-based or resource-based

approaches to source water protection

as an alternative to the traditional water

system-by-system wellhead protection

approach. This ‘‘multi-system’’ planning

process can be more cost effective

because one protection plan serves

several systems. Also, it can result in a

level of protection that is sometimes

more effective in lowering threats, since

threats to water quality are not always

close to the intake or wellhead.

Funding Level and Statutory Authority

Funding is authorized under the Safe

Drinking Water Act 42 U.S.C. 300j–

1(c)(3)(C).

Total funding available for

distribution is $1.4 million dollars. EPA

intends to disburse these funds to one

or possibly two organizations if, based

on the applications received,

communities will benefit from two

approaches that complement one

another.

Proposal Contents

• Interested applicants should submit

a work plan that:

• Outlines the approach to assisting

communities to engage in communitybased source water protection planning

and priority action implementation.

• Includes a budget for no less than

$700,000 and no more than $1.4 million

for implementing the approach over a

two-year period.

• Provides biographies of the project

leaders.

Eligibility Criteria

• The recipient organization must be

a not-for-profit organization,

educational institution, or public agency

that meets the following criteria:

• Experience providing technical

assistance to communities

implementing community-based

environmental programs for protecting

drinking water, ground water or surface

water quality.

• Experience working with

communities to do resource-based/

watershed or multi-jurisdictional

planning, and facilitating partnerships

between disparate stakeholders.

• Access to an established network

capable of working with communities

nationwide.

• Experience working with state

agencies.

• Experience handling large grants of

$700,000 or more, timely periodic

reporting of progress and displaying the

results of those grants to a wide public.

EPA Project Proposal Evaluation

Criteria

EPA will evaluate all applicants based

on the following criteria:

• Clearly outlines the approach that

the organization will take to assist

communities in a variety of regions

across the country served by public

water systems that have state-identified

highly or moderately susceptible source

waters. (30 points)

• Demonstrates knowledge of source

water protection and ability to provide

assistance to communities to effectively

protect their drinking water supplies

and address their highest priority needs.

(25 points)

• Describes approach to community

involvement in source water protection

planning. (20)

• Identifies innovative means of

networking the different communities

receiving assistance with one another.

(20 points)

• Leverages other resources as part of

the proposed approach. (5 points)

Application Procedure

Please submit five copies of a

proposal that includes a narrative work

plan and budget that does not exceed 10

single spaced pages, with one-inch

margins and 12-point font, stapled in

one corner with no binding. You may

also include up to 15 pages of

supplementary material, such as the

resumes and summaries of prior work.

After EPA review, selected applicants

will be asked to submit an SF–424.

30406 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 92 / Thursday, May 11, 2000 / Notices

Schedule of Activities

This is the estimated schedule of

activities for review and award of

proposals.

• Day 30: Proposals due 30 days after

publication of Federal Register notice.

• Day 44: All applicants notified of

government review status.

• Day 54: Selected applicant(s)

submit a SF–424.

• July 10: Selected application(s)

forwarded to EPA grants office.

• Aug. 10: Grants processing

complete/Congressional notifications.

Dated: May 4, 2000.

Cynthia C. Dougherty,

Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking

Water.

[FR Doc. 00–11818 Filed 5–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6605–5]

Peer Review Meeting on the Draft

Guidance Document Entitled: Human

Health Risk Assessment Protocol for

Hazardous Waste Combustion

Facilities (Peer Review Draft, July

1998)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of peer review panel

meeting.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency’s (‘‘EPA’’ or ‘‘the Agency’’)

contractor, Tech Law, is announcing a

meeting for the external, scientific peer

review of the EPA draft guidance

document entitled: Human Health Risk

Assessment Protocol for Hazardous

Waste Combustion Facilities (Peer

Review Draft, July 1998—EPA530–D–

98–001A, B, & C) and the update to the

document entitled: Errata dated August

2, 1999. The meeting will be organized,

convened and conducted by Tech Law

and will be held on May 24 and 25,

2000 in Dallas, Texas at the EPA Region

VI building. Given the interest

expressed by members of the public

concerning this guidance document, the

meeting will be open to the public for

observation. The purpose of the meeting

is to afford an opportunity for the

members of Tech Law’s review panel to

present their individual peer review

comments and discuss scientific and

technical issues related to this guidance

with other technical experts. All peer

review comments will be incorporated

into a summary by Tech Law and

presented to EPA as recommendations.

Tech Law’s recommendations will be

considered by the Agency during

finalization of the document.

Background

This EPA document, Human Health

Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous

Waste Combustion Facilities (HHRAP),

is a three volume set of guidance for

performing risk assessments on

hazardous waste combustion facilities.

Risk assessments can provide a basis for

risk management decisions in hazardous

waste combustor permitting to ensure

that the permits are protective of human

health and the environment. This

guidance was released via Federal

Register on Friday, October 30, 1998 (63

FR 58381–58382). It updated and

replaced an earlier draft guidance

entitled: ‘‘Guidance for Performing

Screening Level Risk Analyses at

Combustion Facilities Burning

Hazardous Wastes’’ (April 15, 1994

draft). This new guidance was prepared

by EPA’s Region VI Center for

Combustion Science and Engineering in

coordination with the Office of Solid

Waste (OSW). The guidance contains

the OSW’s recommended approach for

conducting site-specific risk

assessments on RCRA hazardous waste

combustors. This guidance includes

recommended parameters, pathways

and algorithms to evaluate both direct

and indirect risks.

The goal of the Agency’s peer review

process is to enhance the quality and

credibility of Agency decision-making

by ensuring that the scientific and

technical work products relied on as

part of the decision-making process

receive the appropriate level of review

by independent, scientific and technical

experts. EPA has selected a contractor,

Tech Law Inc., to conduct a

comprehensive peer review of this

guidance document. To that end, Tech

Law, has selected nine independent

experts reviewers that have not

participated in the development of the

document. The peer review panel is

comprised of specialists which

represent scientific disciplines generally

covered in the HHRAP. The scientific

disciplines chosen consist of

combustion engineering, air dispersion

modeling, fate and transport, human

health exposure assessment, and human

health toxicology.

The peer reviewers have been asked

to respond to charge questions about the

guidance document. Two types of

charge statements were issued to the

reviewers. All of the reviewers were

asked to reply to charge questions

which were general in nature. In

addition, each expert was charged with

specific technical questions which

relate to their specialty. A number of the

technical questions charged to the

reviewers were chosen directly from

public comments received on the

guidance. To obtain or view copies of

the human health risk assessment

guidance document, the charges to the

peer reviewers, the pre-meeting

comments from the peer reviewers, or

the public comments received on the

document, see the supplementary

information section below.

DATES: The meeting will begin on

Wednesday, May 24 and end on

Thursday, May 25, 2000. It will start at

8:30 am and end at 5:00 pm, daily.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at

EPA’s Region VI building, at Fountain

Place, 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas.

Since seating capacity is limited, please

contact Antoinette Todd of Tech Law,

by telephone at (214) 953–0045, or by Email at ATodd@Techlawinc.com by

May 19, 2000 at 4:30 pm (central time)

to reserve a seat at the workshop as an

observer. Seating space will be filled on

a first-come, first-served basis. A limited

amount of time at the end of each

afternoon will be reserved for comments

from the observers. Observers who wish

to make a short presentation to the peer

review panel (limited to 5 minutes in

length) should register with Tech Law

by May 19 at 4:30 pm (central time), as

well. The amount of time allocated for

each observer making comment may

changed at the discretion of Tech Law,

depending on the meeting

circumstances. It is expected that all

public statements presented at this

meeting will not repeat any previously

submitted oral or written statements.

Comments should focus on the

scientific and technical aspects of the

document and the proceedings of the

meeting. Since commenting time is

limited, it will be filled on a first-come,

first-served basis.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

technical and logistical inquires, contact

Steve Cowan, of Tech Law by telephone,

at (214) 953–0045; facsimile at (214)

754–0819; or by E-mail at

SCowan@Techlawinc.com.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of

the (1) draft guidance document, Human

Health Risk Assessment Protocol for

Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities

(HHRAP); (2) Errata; (3) public

comments received on the document;

(4) peer review charges; and (5) peer

review pre-meeting comments can be

viewed or requested as follows.

The HHRAP, Errata, peer review

charges can be viewed on the world

wide web at http://www.epa.gov/

epaoswer/hazwaste/combust/risk.htm.

The peer review pre-meeting comments

will be available after May 11, 2000.