47162 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 13, 2008 / Notices 

appropriated BEACH Act grant funds 

above the $10 million current level. 

EPA would implement this approach 

by reviewing State and Territorial 

spending every October 1 and adjusting 

the allocation to certain States and 

Territories on the basis of the funds that 

these States and Territories have not yet 

expended. EPA would review EPA’s 

Financial Database Warehouse to 

confirm the amount of outstanding 

funds reported. In making this 

determination, EPA will take into 

account those funds that have been 

committed through an appropriate State, 

Territorial or Tribal contract, interagency agreement, or similar type of 

binding agreement, but have not been 

requested for reimbursement, i.e., that 

are not showing as ‘‘drawn down’’ in 

EPA’s Data Warehouse. As noted in 

section III.F., EPA recognizes that States 

and Territories have different financial 

management systems and that those 

systems could result in delayed billing 

to EPA, even though the States and 

Territories might have already expended 

funds to monitor beaches and notify the 

public. EPA also recognizes that States 

and Territories typically spend the 

previous year’s grant award in any given 

beach season due to the timing of the 

availability of BEACH Act grants in the 

middle of the beach season. Therefore, 

to account for these factors, EPA is 

considering an approach that would 

reduce the new grant award by the 

amount of unexpended grant funds that 

are more than three years old. 

For the 2010 beach season, EPA 

would review State and Territory 

spending in October 2009 and 

determine how much grant funding 

from fiscal years 2001 to 2007 is still 

unspent by each State and Territory. 

EPA would identify the unspent 

amounts from 2001 through 2007 in the 

Financial Database Warehouse and 

compare them to the amount EPA 

expects to award in fiscal year 2010. 

EPA would then reduce the 2010 grant 

award for those States and Territories 

with unobligated funds from 2001 

through 2007 by the amount remaining. 

For example, in 2010, consider a State 

that normally receives $250,000 

annually yet has $100,000 remaining 

from grants awarded up to fiscal year 

2007. Under the approach that EPA is 

considering, EPA would reduce the 

State’s grant award for the following 

year’s beach season by $100,000 (the 

amount the State has left unspent from 

fiscal years up to 2007), thus resulting 

in an award of $150,000 in 2010. The 

$100,000 not awarded to the State 

would be combined with unused grant 

funds from other States and Territories 

and re-allocated among the States and 

Territories that have fully used their 

funds from fiscal years up to 2007 using 

a modified allocation formula, described 

below. 

EPA is considering reallocating these 

additional funds according to a second, 

modified allocation formula composed 

of only two factors—beach miles and 

beach use—to only those States and 

Territories that do not have remaining 

money older than three years old. EPA 

is working with States and Territories to 

obtain sufficient information to base a 

supplemental allocation formula on 

those two factors. As discussed in 

Section III.B.2.a, with the help of State 

and Territorial beach program managers, 

EPA is compiling and quality testing 

beach mile information for all the 

BEACH Act States and Territories and 

expects to have reliable beach mile data 

on the extent of beaches by mid-2009. 

EPA is also working with the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration to expand its research 

on beach use to Great Lakes States, and 

is also looking for information on beach 

use in the Territories. EPA will work 

with States to ensure effective 

implementation of the new allocation 

formula. 

B. Why Isn’t EPA Amending Other Parts 

of the Allocation Formula? 

EPA is considering the retention of 

the use of the surrogates EPA has used 

for beach mileage and beach use—i.e., 

shoreline miles and coastal 

population—as factors of the current 

allocation formula for the first $10 

million in BEACH Act grant funds. As 

discussed in section III.D, States 

consider their current level of BEACH 

Act funding to be the financial 

foundation for their beach monitoring 

and notification programs. Because this 

funding has been relatively stable over 

the last six years, States and Territories 

rely on these funds to provide them a 

generally consistent level of funding for 

their programs. For many States, funds 

for recreational water monitoring are 

limited to the amount received in 

BEACH Act grant funding. Some States 

have indicated to EPA that they might 

choose to opt out of EPA’s BEACH Act 

grant program if their grant amounts are 

reduced. For these reasons, EPA is 

considering retaining the use of 

shoreline miles and coastal population 

factors in the core allocation formula for 

the first $10 million of appropriated 

grant funds and not making any other 

changes to this formula. 

C. How Would This Change Affect 

Current State Funding? 

Based on grant fund use as of 2008, 

EPA expects that most States and 

Territories will not be affected in 2010 

because they currently have no unused 

BEACH Act grant funds that are more 

than three years old. The expected 

changes to the allocation formula will 

affect only those States and Territories 

that have unspent BEACH Act grant 

funds that are more than three years old. 

In 2008, only 7 States and Territories—

Alaska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, 

New York, Ohio, Puerto Rico, and the 

U.S. Virgin Islands—fall into this 

category. As noted in Table 4, New 

Hampshire, New Jersey, and New York 

all have balances of less than 1 percent 

of their total BEACH Act grant funds 

more than three years old. EPA 

recognizes that Agency accounting 

practices contributed to the remaining 

balances in New Jersey and New York, 

and has worked to ensure that the oldest 

money is now invoiced first. Under the 

process EPA is considering, should any 

State or Territory in 2010 have 

uninvoiced funds from FY 2001 through 

FY 2007, EPA would reduce their 2010 

grant funding by the amount equal to 

this older money and redistribute these 

funds to the other States and Territories. 

D. How Would EPA Involve States in 

Developing This Change? 

EPA intends to reconstitute the 

workgroup of EPA and State 

representatives to discuss the details for 

implementing this change to the 

allocation formula. EPA will also invite 

Territorial representatives to the 

workgroup. 

E. When Would This Change Become 

Effective? 

EPA expects that this change will be 

effective for the awarding of the 2010 

BEACH Act grants. 

Dated: August 7, 2008. 

Benjamin H. Grumbles, 

Assistant Administrator for Water. 

[FR Doc. E8–18739 Filed 8–12–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–Docket ID No. ORD–2008–0597; 

FRL–8703–4] 

Guidance on the Development, 

Evaluation and Application of 

Environmental Models 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of public comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing a 30-day 

public comment period for an external 

review of its Guidance Document on the 


ebenthall on PRODPC60 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 13, 2008 / Notices 47163 

Development, Evaluation and 

Application of Regulatory 

Environmental Models (hereinafter 

Guidance Document). The EPA’s 

Council on Regulatory Environmental 

Modeling (CREM) has developed the 

Guidance Document and its companion 

product, the Models Knowledge Base, to 

improve the quality, consistency and 

transparency of EPA models. These 

products were produced in draft form in 

November 2003 and have undergone a 

rigorous process of internal and external 

peer review. This revised draft of the 

Guidance Document builds on the 

recommendations of the Science 

Advisory Board review panel and the 

National Research Council report on 

Models in Environmental Regulatory 

Decision Making. 

This Federal Register Notice is 

intended to solicit public comment on 

the Guidance Document. EPA is 

releasing this external review draft 

document solely for the purpose of 

public comment under applicable 

information quality guidelines. The 

guidance document has not been 

formally disseminated by EPA. It does 

not represent and should not be 

construed to represent any Agency 

policy or determination. EPA will 

consider any public comments 

submitted in accordance with this 

notice when revising the document. 

DATES: Comments may be submitted in 

writing by September 12, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: The Guidance Document 

may be downloaded from the CREM 

Web site: http://www.epa.gov/crem. 

Submit your comments, identified by 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–ORD–2008–

0597, by one of the following methods: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: ORD.Docket@epa.gov. 

• Mail: ORD Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 28221T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center 

(EPA/DC), Room 3334, EPA West 

Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–ORD–2008–

0597. Deliveries are only accepted from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–ORD–2008–

0597. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected by statute through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA, without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the ORD Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20460. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the ORD Docket is (202) 

566–1752. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Noha Gaber, Council for Regulatory 

Environmental Modeling, Office of the 

Science Advisor, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave, NW., Mail Code: 8105R, 

Washington, DC 20460; by telephone/ 

voice mail at (202) 564–2179; Fax: (202) 

564–2070; or via e-mail at 

gaber.noha@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To 

achieve its mission of protecting human 

health and safeguarding the natural 

environment, the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) often employs 

mathematical models to study 

environmental systems and processes 

and to inform regulatory decision 

making. The EPA established the 

Council for Regulatory Environmental 

Modeling (CREM) in 2000 in an effort to 

improve the quality, consistency and 

transparency of EPA models. At the 

request of the EPA Administrator, the 

CREM developed the Draft Guidance 

Document on the Development, 

Evaluation and Application of 

Regulatory Environmental Models 

(hereinafter Draft Models Guidance, 

http://www.epa.gov/ord/crem/library/

CREM%20Guidance%

20Draft%2012_03.pdf) and the Models 

Knowledge Base (hereinafter Models 

KBase, http://cfpub.epa.gov/crem/ 

knowledge_base/knowbase.cfm) 

While the Draft Models Guidance 

does not impose legally binding 

requirements on EPA or the public, it 

provides recommendations on the 

principles of good modeling practice, 

stressing the importance of model 

quality, documentation and 

transparency with the aim of helping to 

determine when and how a model can 

be used to inform a decision. The Draft 

Models Guidance was developed in 

close collaboration with members of the 

CREM, who represent the different EPA 

program and regional offices, and as 

such, the document represents the 

consensus view among EPA offices. The 

Draft Models Guidance was also 

evaluated and approved by the EPA’s 

Science Policy Council, the Agency’s 

forum for senior level policy 

deliberation and coordination on 

significant science issues. 

Both the Draft Models Guidance and 

the Models KBase were issued in draft 

form in November 2003. By providing 

access to its tools and methods, the EPA 

increases transparency and can improve 

the public’s understanding of how 

sound science is used to make 

environmental decisions. In short, these 

products are intended to help foster a 

culture of transparency in developing 

models. 

In addition to internal review within 

Agency offices and regions, the CREM 

products have undergone an external 

review process. EPA’s Science Advisory 

Board (SAB) formed a CREM Guidance 

Advisory Panel (hereinafter ‘‘the Panel’’) 

to review the Draft Models Guidance 

and the Models KBase. Specifically, the 

Panel was given seven charge questions 

(which can be found at this URL: 

http://www.epa.gov/fedreg/EPA-SAB/ 

2003/August/Day-06/sab20034.htm). 

The Panel concluded its review in 2006 


ebenthall on PRODPC60 with NOTICES
47164 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 13, 2008 / Notices 

(the report may be found at http:// 

www.epa.gov/sab/panels/ 

cremgacpanel.html). 

The CREM also commissioned the 

National Academy of Science (NAS) to 

assess evolving scientific and technical 

issues related to the selection and use of 

computational and statistical models in 

decision making processes at the EPA. 

The NAS report which provides advice 

on the management, evaluation and use 

of models at the EPA was released in 

2007 (the report may be found at 

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?

record_id=11972). 

This revised draft of the Guidance 

Document builds on the 

recommendations of the Science 

Advisory Board review panel and the 

National Research Council report on 

Models in Environmental Regulatory 

Decision Making. 

Dated: August 6, 2008. 

George Gray, 

EPA Science Advisor. 

[FR Doc. E8–18740 Filed 8–12–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–8703–6] 

Notice of Correction to Notice of Data 

Availability; Information Concerning 

the Destruction of Ozone-Depleting 

Substances in the United States 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of Correction. 

SUMMARY: On July 17, 2008, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

published a notice of data availability 

(NODA) in the Federal Register (73 FR 

41076) regarding information 

concerning the destruction of ozonedepleting substances (ODSs) in the 

United States, which inadvertently 

printed an incorrect docket 

identification number. This document 

corrects the error made in the 

identification of the docket. The correct 

docket identification number is EPA–

HQ–OAR–2006–1030. 

DATES: EPA will accept comments on 

the report through September 15, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–

OAR–2006–1030, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax comments to (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: Submit comments to U.S. EPA 

Docket Center, EPA West Room 3334, 

MC 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, and 

Phone: (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kirsten Cappel, Office of Atmospheric 

Programs, Stratospheric Protection 

Division, Mail Code 6205 J, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20460; telephone 

number: (202) 343–9556; fax number: 

(202) 343–2338; e-mail address: 

cappel.kirsten@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 

17, 2008, EPA published a NODA in the 

Federal Register (73 FR 41076) which 

contained an error in the docket 

identification number. The correct 

docket for submitting comments on the 

NODA concerning the destruction of 

ozone-depleting substances in the 

United States is EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–

1030. The report that the Agency is 

seeking comment on can be found in the 

docket and on the Stratospheric Ozone 

Protection Program Web site at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ozone/title6/ 

destruction.html. 

Dated: August 4, 2008. 

Brian McLean, 

Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 

Office of Air and Radiation. 

[FR Doc. E8–18741 Filed 8–12–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0609; FRL–8377–9] 

Notice of Receipt of a Pesticide 

Petition Filed for Residues of Pesticide 

Chemicals in or on Various 

Commodities 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

initial filing of a pesticide petition 

proposing the establishment or 

modification of regulations for residues 

of pesticide chemicals in or on various 

commodities. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 12, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0609 and 

the pesticide petition number (PP) 

7F7250, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–

0609. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the docket 

without change and may be made 

available on-line at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov website is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

regulations.gov, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the docket and made available 

on the Internet. If you submit an 

electronic comment, EPA recommends 

that you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD-ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the docket index available 

at http://www.regulations.gov. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either in the 


ebenthall on PRODPC60 with NOTICES