30746 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 108 / Friday, June 5, 1998 / Notices

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6108–1]

Notice Announcing Availability,

Guidance and Evaluation Criteria for

Sector-Based Multimedia State

Cooperative Agreement Funds

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

PURPOSE: This Notice and Cooperative

Agreement Guidance and Evaluation

Criteria, announces the availability of

the cooperative agreements and

summarizes the requirements and

process for States to submit proposals

for funding. At this time EPA invites

eligible States and Territories to submit

pre-proposals no longer than 5 pages to

the appropriate EPA Regional office and

to the workgroup chair by Friday, July

10, 1998.

CONTACT: Amy Porter, 2225A, Office of

Compliance, US EPA, 401 M Street SW,

Washington, DC 20460, (202) 564–4149,

porter.amy@epamail.epa.gov.

This information is also being made

available, with additional details, on the

Internet at http://es.epa.gov/oeca/

polguid0.html. Hard copy of the full

package, with detailed pre-proposal

requirements, can be obtained at the

address above, or through any EPA

Regional Office.

Background and Purpose

The FY 1998 EPA budget contains

$1,836,000 in State cooperative

agreement funds available for

multimedia/sector-based work under

authority of section 28 of the Toxic

Substances Control Act (TSCA). EPA

plans to fund proposals in the range of

$100,000–$500,000 to address sector,

multimedia, ecosystem, or communitybased environmental protection (CBEP)

compliance and enforcement projects

which are part of State efforts to

establish or operate programs under

section 28 of TSCA. All projects should

have an impact on improving any aspect

of data quality, either for the area being

addressed, or overall. Projects relating to

the national priority and significant

sectors as defined by the OECA

Memoranda of Agreement with Regions,

as well as multi-State projects

addressing problems affecting adjoining

States, will be given priority for

funding. Also, any other sector or

priority project identified by Regions in

their individual MOAs will be given

funding priority. The national priority

sectors include Dry Cleaners, Primary

Nonferrous Metals, and Petroleum

Refining. The significant sectors are

Municipalities, Industrial Organic

Chemicals, Chemical Preparation, Iron

and Basic Steel Products, Pulp Mills,

Auto Service/Repair Shops, and

Agricultural Practices.

Statutory Authority

The funding authority for making

these grants is section 28 of TSCA

which allows ‘‘the Administrator to

make grants to States for the

establishment and operation of

programs to prevent or eliminate

unreasonable risks within the States to

health or the environment which are

associated with a chemical substance or

mixture and with respect to which the

Administrator is unable or is unlikely to

take action under [TSCA] for their

prevention and elimination.’’ The Office

of Compliance believes that all projects

that meet the criteria laid out in the

guidance and which qualify for funding

under this program will meet the

statutory standards of TSCA section 28

because there are no multi-media

compliance and enforcement initiatives

for the types of projects being funded by

this grant, nor are there likely to be.

If the forthcoming Environmental

Program Grants Rule has been

promulgated at the time these grants are

awarded, they will be governed by that

Rule.

Eligibility

Eligible entities include State

governments and U.S. Territories.

Eligible applicants will compete

nationally for a portion of the total

$1,836,000 allocation. The Agency

intends to announce a separate call for

proposals for Federally recognized

Tribes with a different focus at a later

date.

Scope

The funding authority provides an

avenue for cross-media environmental

concerns. Cooperative agreements

funded under this initiative are

intended to provide eligible States and

Territories the opportunity to try

different and/or innovative approaches

to multimedia compliance and

enforcement. Proposals must address

sector, multimedia, ecosystem, or

community based environmental

protection (CBEP) compliance

assistance, monitoring or enforcement

related to programs for the prevention or

elimination of risks associated with

chemical substances or mixtures. (For

the definitions of chemical substances

and mixtures, please refer to section 3

of TSCA, or contact EPA for further

clarification.) Proposals should address

how the project will improve at least

one of the following aspects of data

quality: accuracy, completeness,

consistency, utility, timeliness, and/or

access to existing data systems or those

newly developed for sector-related

projects, either for the area being

addressed, or overall.

Projects relating to the MOA national

priority and significant sectors will be

given priority for funding. Also, any

other sector or priority project identified

by Regions in their individual MOAs

will be given the same priority for

funding. Proposals for multi-State

projects submitted by the lead State

addressing problems affecting adjoining

States, proposals for multi-year projects

and multiple projects per State are also

welcome.

Funding

Proposals in the range of $100,000–

$500,000 will be considered for funding.

The funding authority requires that

recipients provide 25% matching funds.

In-kind contributions such as volunteer

labor hours may be applied towards the

match, provided they meet the criteria

in 40 CFR 31.24. Awards must be

received by the State within two years

of the budget allocation, but there are no

time constraints on when the States can

spend the money. States may use

awards all at once or over multiple

years, and at any time.

Process

Pre-proposals not longer than 5 pages,

following the format specified in the

guidance, must be submitted to EPA.

The format includes a detailed list of

proposal requirements. The preproposal process is intended to enable

EPA to evaluate the proposals, request

clarifications as needed, suggest

modifications, and select States invited

to submit a full proposal to the

appropriate Region. The pre-proposal

process is designed to reduce the

investment of State resources for those

States not invited to submit a full

proposal.

Schedule

(1) At this time, we are asking

interested States to submit preproposals of 5 pages or less to both the

appropriate EPA Regional office and to

the workgroup chair, Amy Porter, by

July 10, 1998. The name and address of

the Regional Contact can be obtained

from Amy Porter (see CONTACT section

above).

(2) EPA will complete its analysis of

the pre-proposals and request

clarification by September 4, 1998.

(3) Full State proposals are due to the

appropriate EPA Region no later than

November 27, 1998.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 108 / Friday, June 5, 1998 / Notices 30747

(4) EPA will analyze the final State

proposal to assure it is in concert with

the evaluation criteria and any

clarifications requested from the preproposal, and meet any necessary

administrative requirements before

making an award. The Congressional Review Act, 5

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides

that before a rule may take effect, the

agency promulgating the rule must

submit a rule report, which includes a

copy of the rule, to each House of the

Congress and to the Comptroller General

of the United States. EPA will submit a

report containing this rule and other

required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives, and

the Comptroller General of the United

States prior to publication of the rule in

the Federal Register. This rule is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

Dated: May 26, 1998.

Elaine Stanley,

Director, Office of Compliance.

[FR Doc. 98–15004 Filed 6–4–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[OPP–00538; FRL–5792–8]

Announcement of a Workshop to

Develop a Protocol for Testing the

Efficacy of Disinfectants Used to

Inactivate Hepatitis B Virus

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing a public

workshop to be held July 23 and 24,

1998, in the Washington DC area. The

purpose of this workshop is to allow all

interested parties to have input in

developing a new and usable protocol,

using a surrogate test species such as

‘‘Duck’’, for testing the efficacy of

disinfectants used to inactivate

Hepatitis B Virus (HBV). The Agency is

requesting that interested parties send

in any protocols and other information

that they would want to be included in

the deliberations of the workshop. A

package of pertinent information,

including the workshop agenda, will be

sent to the participants before the

workshop. The workshop will be

structured to allow the participants to

discuss all issues that are germane to the

development of a workable test

protocol.

DATES: Protocols, other information, and

comments, identified by the docket

number [OPP–00538], should be

received on or before July 6, 1998 to be

given full consideration.

ADDRESSES: Submit protocols and other

information identified by the docket

control number OPP–00538 by mail to:

Public Information and Records

Integrity Branch, Information Resources

and Services Division (7502C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW,

Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring

comments directly to the OPP Docket

Office, which is located in Rm. 119 of

Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA.

Information submitted as a comment

concerning this document may be

claimed confidential by marking any

part or all of that information as

Confidential Business Information (CBI).

Information so marked will not be

disclosed except in accordance with

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

A copy of the comment that does not

contain CBI must be submitted for

inclusion in the public record.

Information not marked confidential

may be disclosed publicly by EPA

without prior notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Ibrahim Barsoum, Antimicrobials

Division (7510W), Office of Pesticide

Programs, Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington,

DC 20460. Office location and telephone

number: 6W23, Crystal Station #1, 2800

Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA, (703) 308–

6417, fax: 703–308–6466, e-mail:

barsoum.ibrahim@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

EPA has the authority through FIFRA

to register antimicrobial pesticides. For

public health pesticides, OPP reviews

the submitted data for efficacy as well

as safety. Guidelines have been

developed for methods and performance

standards which are used to test the

efficacy of the various types of

antimicrobial products that need to be

registered.

II. Hepatitis Virus B Testing

The Agency has approved

registrations for products that have

Hepatitis Virus B claims based on a

method using chimpanzees as the test

subject. The continued use of the

chimpanzee test is in doubt because the

test is very expensive, which means that

only one animal can be economically

used for each test. An OPP Scientific

Advisory Panel Meeting in September

1997 recommended that EPA look at

alternative test systems, such as tests

using Duck Hepatitis Virus B, in order

to produce a new method to replace the

chimpanzee test. EPA has decided to

conduct a workshop in order to develop

a new protocol for HBV efficacy testing.

The workshop is being planned to

include all parties interested in this

issue. The group’s goal will be to

provide information that will aid EPA’s

development of a workable protocol.

The Agency will be responsible for

developing the actual protocol suitable

for testing and validation.

III. Workshop Process

The two-day workshop will

concentrate on producing an effective

protocol that will replace the

chimpanzee test. EPA anticipates that

individuals from academia, industry,

health care facilities, other federal

agencies and public health advocacy

groups will attend the workshop. The

Agency is requesting that all interested

parties submit any information that

would be relevant for developing a new

protocol. Submissions could include

protocols developed by the submitters

and those found in the open literature.

EPA requests that submitters not claim

the materials as confidential because the

Agency would like to disseminate the

materials to the public. Any confidential

information sent into the Agency for the

workshop would be used internally by

EPA scientists in identifying

appropriate topics to be discussed, but

would not be included in the

information that would be provided to

the participants. Any other pertinent

information that interested parties feel

would be helpful to the Agency in

setting the workshop agenda, especially

scientific issues that need to be

discussed and names of individuals

who should specifically be invited to

attend, should be sent to the Agency as

indicated under ADDRESSES or Unit V.

The goal of the workshop will be for

EPA to develop a draft protocol for

validation.

IV. Workshop Follow up

Once EPA produces a protocol, it will

be disseminated to the public, including

the regulated community, and to testing

laboratories for immediate use. If an

applicant submits data using the new

protocol, and EPA decides to register

the product based on the results of the

study along with the other required

information, the registration will be

time limited. This approach allows

products to be registered and used

during the time it takes for the AOAC

validation. However, the registration

will automatically expire, if the test

protocol does not pass the validation

process. EPA anticipates allowing a two

year registration that may be renewed if