Availability of Draft “Planning Guidance for Recovery Following Biological Incidents”, 41431-41432 [E9-19688]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices
EIS No. 20090280, Draft Supplement,
FHW, TN, Shelby Avenue/
Demonbreun Street (Gateway
Boulevard Corridor, from I–65 North
[I–24 West] to I–40 West in
Downtown Nashville, To Address
Transportation needs in the Study
Area. Davidson County, TN, Comment
Period Ends: 09/28/2009, Contact:
Charles O’Neill 615–781–5770.
EIS No. 20090281, Final EIS, BLM, WY,
South Gillette Area Coal Lease
Applications, WYW172585,
WYW173360,
WYW172657,WYW161248, Proposal
to Lease Four Tracts of Federal Coal
Reserves, Belle Ayr, Coal Creek,
Caballo, and Cordero Rojo Mines,
Wyoming Powder River Basin,
Campbell County, WY, Wait Period
Ends: 09/14/2009, Contact: Teresa
Johnson 307–261–7510.
EIS No. 20090282, Final EIS, FRC, VA,
Smith Mountain Pumped Storage
Project (FERC No. 2210–169).
Application for Hydropower License
to continue Operating the636megawatt Pumped Storage Project,
Roanoke River, Smith Mountain
Pumped Storage Project (FERC No.
2210–169). Application for
Hydropower License to continue
Operating the 636-megawatt Pumped
Storage Project, Roanoke River,
Bedford, Campbell, Franklin and
Pittsylvania Counties, VA, Wait
Period Ends: 09/14/2009, Contact:
Julia Bovey 1–866–208–3372.
EIS No. 20090283, Draft EIS, NPS, WI,
Apostle Islands National Lakeshore
General Management Plan/Wilderness
Management Plan, Implementation,
Bayfield and Ashland Counties, WI,
Comment Period Ends: 10/13/2009,
Contact: Nick Chevance 402–661–
1844.
EIS No. 20090284, Final EIS, ARD, WA,
Adoption—White Pass Expansion
Master Development Plan,
Implementation, Naches Ranger
District, Okanogan-Wenatchee
National Forests and Cowlitz Valley
Ranger District, Gifford Pinchot
National Forest, Yakima and Lewis
Counties, WA, Wait Period Ends: 09/
14/2009, Contact: Frank Mancino
202–720–1827.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Rural Development Program has
adopted the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service’s FEIS
#20070279 filed 06/29/2007. Rural
Development Program was not a
Cooperating Agency on the above FEIS.
Under section 1506.3(b) of the CEQ
Regulations, the FEIS must be
Recirculated for a 30-day Wait Period.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:55 Aug 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
Amended Notices
EIS No. 20090262, Draft EIS, EPA, GU,
Apra Harbor, Guam, Proposed Site
Designation of an Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Site Offshore of
Guam, Comment Period Ends: 10/06/
2009, Contact: Allan Ota 415–972–
3476. Revision to FR Notice Published
07/31/2009: Correction to the
Comment Period from 09/28/2009 to
10/06/2009.
Dated: August 11, 2009.
Ken Mittelholtz,
Environmental Protection Specialist, Office
of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. E9–19557 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY POLICY
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[Docket No. EPA–HQ–ORD–2009–0331;
FRL–8939–6]
Availability of Draft ‘‘Planning
Guidance for Recovery Following
Biological Incidents’’
AGENCIES: White House Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP),
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of availability.
SUMMARY: The Homeland Security Act
of 2002 (Pub. L. 107–296 Section 301)
directs the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, in partnership with
other federal agencies, to develop and
implement countermeasures to prepare
for and respond to chemical, biological,
radiological and nuclear threats. The
White House Office of Science and
Technology Policy (OSTP), U.S.
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) are issuing a
draft guidance document entitled
‘‘Planning Guidance for Recovery
Following Biological Incidents’’ for
federal, state, local, and tribal decision
makers who may find it useful in
planning and responding to a biological
incident.
This draft Guidance describes a
general risk management framework for
government and nongovernmental
decision-makers, at all levels, in
planning and executing activities
required for response and recovery from
a biological incident in a domestic,
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
41431
civilian setting. The objective of this
guidance is to provide federal, state,
local, and tribal decision makers with
uniform federal guidance to protect the
public, emergency responders, and
surrounding environments and to
ensure that local and federal first
responders can prepare for an incident
involving biological contamination.
This draft Guidance is not intended to
impact site cleanups occurring under
other statutory authorities such as EPA’s
Superfund Program, or other federal and
state clean-up programs.
This draft guidance is provided for
immediate use, and will be revised as
needed based on comments received
and changes in regulation and
emergency response guidance. The draft
guidance is available at: https://
www.regulations.gov. (Docket no. EPA–
HQ–ORD–2009–0331).
DATES: Comments must be received by
November 16, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Brendan Doyle, Senior Policy Advisor,
National Homeland Security Research
Center, Office of Research and
Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (MC: 8801R), 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Telephone: 202
564–4584 or doyle.brendan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Homeland Security Act of 2002
(Pub. L. 107–296, as amended) directs
DHS, in partnership with other federal
agencies, to develop and implement
countermeasures to prepare for and
respond to chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear threats.
Homeland Security Presidential
Directive—10: Biodefense for the 21st
Century describes the interagency
activity required to meet this charge.
This draft Planning Guidance was
developed by the Biological
Decontamination Standards Working
Group (an interagency working group)
of the White House National Science
and Technology Council (NSTC)
Subcommittee on Decontamination
Standards and Technology (SDST). The
SDST was tasked by the NSTC to
develop risk management guidance for
recovery from an incident involving
biological contamination in a domestic,
civilian setting. The interagency
workgroup included participants from
the Departments of Homeland Security,
Agriculture, Commerce, Defense,
Energy, Labor, Health and Human
Services and Transportation and the
Environmental Protection Agency. This
draft guidance describes a general risk
management framework for government
E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM
17AUN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
41432
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices
and nongovernmental decision-makers,
at all levels, in planning and executing
activities required for response and
recovery from a biological incident in a
domestic, civilian setting. The objective
of this guidance is to provide federal,
state, local, and tribal decision makers
with uniform federal guidance to protect
the public, emergency responders, and
surrounding environments and to
ensure that local and federal first
responders can prepare for an incident
involving biological contamination.
This document follows principles
developed within the context of
Planning Guidance for Protection and
Recovery Following Radiological
Dispersal Device (RDD) and Improvised
Nuclear Device (IND) Incidents—which
was published by the U.S. Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) on August
1, 2008. The RDD/IND document
introduced the overarching concept of
optimization. Optimization is a flexible,
multi-attribute decision process that
seeks to weigh many factors.
Optimization analyses are qualitative
and quantitative assessments applied at
each stage of decision-making process
from evaluation of decontamination
options to implementation of the chosen
alternative.
The subject draft guidance applies to
characterization, decontamination,
clearance, and potential reoccupancy of
a variety of public facilities, drinking
water infrastructure, and open areas.
Principal topics include the unique
characteristics and hazards of biological
agents, a risk management framework
for responding to a biological incident,
and implications for remediation
activities. A process is provided for
making timely and effective decisions
despite incomplete data and
uncertainties associated with potential
risks posed by biological agents. This
decision process includes all actions
required during response to a biological
incident beginning with notification,
screening, and environmental sampling.
Each step in the decision-making
process is described, and the various
actions are explicitly linked to
numbered boxes in a five-page decisiontree flowchart.
An important step in the decision
process is setting clearance (or cleanup)
goals for determining whether a
remediation is successful and how the
treated area may be used. No formula is
available for setting clearance goals for
biological agents. The collective,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:55 Aug 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
professional judgment of experts,
considered within the context of the
concerns of a broad range of local,
regional, and federal stakeholders
should be used to set a clearance goal
appropriate to the site-specific
circumstances. A practical clearance
goal is to reduce residual risk to levels
acceptable by employing an
optimization process. The aim of such a
process is to reduce exposure levels as
low as is reasonable while considering
potential future land uses, technical
feasibility, costs and cost effectiveness,
and public acceptability. After the
remediation is carried out, a clearance
decision is made based on a judgment
whether the decontamination
verification criteria and the clearance
goals have been met. This judgment is
based on a thorough analysis of all
sampling, processes, and other pertinent
data.
This draft document focuses on the
decision making framework in response
to a biological event. It is designed to be
consistent with the National Response
Framework (Department of Homeland
Security, January 2008) and our
scientific understanding of the
characteristics of biological agents.
Neither of these areas is static. We
expect both our response planning and
our scientific understanding of the
characteristics of biological agents to
evolve over time.
Response to Comments
Comments will be reviewed by the
White House National Science and
Technology Council before this
guidance is republished.
Availability of the Draft Guidance
Copies of the draft guidance are
available for review through https://
www.regulations.gov, Docket number:
EPA–HQ–ORD–2009–0331.
Dated: July 27, 2009.
James Kohlenberger,
Chief of Staff, Office of Science and
Technology Policy, Executive Office of the
President.
Bradley I. Buswell,
Undersecretary for Science and Technology
(Acting), U.S. Department of Homeland
Security.
Lek G. Kadeli,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Research
and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
[FR Doc. E9–19688 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE U.S.
[Public Notice 123]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request Marketing Fax Back
Response Form
Export-Import Bank of the U.S.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank
invites the general public and other
Federal Agencies to comment on the
proposed information collection, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995. The Marketing Fax Back
Response Form will be used to collect
basic trade information about United
States companies. This information will
be provided to the Export Import Bank’s
finance consultants nationwide to assist
in providing counsel to exporters.
DATES: Electronic comments may be
submitted through Regulations.Gov.
Comments must be received on or
before September 16, 2009 to be
considered.
ADDRESSES: Direct all comments and
requests for additional information to
Office of Management and Budget,
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20038.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title and Form Number: Marketing
Fax Back Response Form EIB 05–01.
OMB Number: 3048-.
Type of Review: Regular.
Need and Use: This form will provide
basic trade information about U.S.
Companies and will provide the Export
Import Bank’s trade finance consultants
nationwide the ability to provide
counsel to exporters.
Affected Public: The form affects
entities involved in the export of U.S.
goods and services.
Estimated Annual Respondents:
1,500.
Estimated Time per Respondent: 5
minutes.
Estimated Annual Burden: 125 hours.
Frequency of Reporting or Use: One
time for registration
Sharon A. Whitt,
Agency Clearance Officer.
BILLING CODE 6690–01–P
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM
17AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 157 (Monday, August 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41431-41432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19688]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[Docket No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2009-0331; FRL-8939-6]
Availability of Draft ``Planning Guidance for Recovery Following
Biological Incidents''
AGENCIES: White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP),
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-296 Section
301) directs the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, in partnership
with other federal agencies, to develop and implement countermeasures
to prepare for and respond to chemical, biological, radiological and
nuclear threats. The White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP), U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are issuing a draft guidance
document entitled ``Planning Guidance for Recovery Following Biological
Incidents'' for federal, state, local, and tribal decision makers who
may find it useful in planning and responding to a biological incident.
This draft Guidance describes a general risk management framework
for government and nongovernmental decision-makers, at all levels, in
planning and executing activities required for response and recovery
from a biological incident in a domestic, civilian setting. The
objective of this guidance is to provide federal, state, local, and
tribal decision makers with uniform federal guidance to protect the
public, emergency responders, and surrounding environments and to
ensure that local and federal first responders can prepare for an
incident involving biological contamination. This draft Guidance is not
intended to impact site cleanups occurring under other statutory
authorities such as EPA's Superfund Program, or other federal and state
clean-up programs.
This draft guidance is provided for immediate use, and will be
revised as needed based on comments received and changes in regulation
and emergency response guidance. The draft guidance is available at:
https://www.regulations.gov. (Docket no. EPA-HQ-ORD-2009-0331).
DATES: Comments must be received by November 16, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Brendan Doyle, Senior Policy
Advisor, National Homeland Security Research Center, Office of Research
and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (MC: 8801R), 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, Telephone: 202 564-4584
or doyle.brendan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-296, as amended)
directs DHS, in partnership with other federal agencies, to develop and
implement countermeasures to prepare for and respond to chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear threats. Homeland Security
Presidential Directive--10: Biodefense for the 21st Century describes
the interagency activity required to meet this charge.
This draft Planning Guidance was developed by the Biological
Decontamination Standards Working Group (an interagency working group)
of the White House National Science and Technology Council (NSTC)
Subcommittee on Decontamination Standards and Technology (SDST). The
SDST was tasked by the NSTC to develop risk management guidance for
recovery from an incident involving biological contamination in a
domestic, civilian setting. The interagency workgroup included
participants from the Departments of Homeland Security, Agriculture,
Commerce, Defense, Energy, Labor, Health and Human Services and
Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency. This draft
guidance describes a general risk management framework for government
[[Page 41432]]
and nongovernmental decision-makers, at all levels, in planning and
executing activities required for response and recovery from a
biological incident in a domestic, civilian setting. The objective of
this guidance is to provide federal, state, local, and tribal decision
makers with uniform federal guidance to protect the public, emergency
responders, and surrounding environments and to ensure that local and
federal first responders can prepare for an incident involving
biological contamination.
This document follows principles developed within the context of
Planning Guidance for Protection and Recovery Following Radiological
Dispersal Device (RDD) and Improvised Nuclear Device (IND) Incidents--
which was published by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
on August 1, 2008. The RDD/IND document introduced the overarching
concept of optimization. Optimization is a flexible, multi-attribute
decision process that seeks to weigh many factors. Optimization
analyses are qualitative and quantitative assessments applied at each
stage of decision-making process from evaluation of decontamination
options to implementation of the chosen alternative.
The subject draft guidance applies to characterization,
decontamination, clearance, and potential reoccupancy of a variety of
public facilities, drinking water infrastructure, and open areas.
Principal topics include the unique characteristics and hazards of
biological agents, a risk management framework for responding to a
biological incident, and implications for remediation activities. A
process is provided for making timely and effective decisions despite
incomplete data and uncertainties associated with potential risks posed
by biological agents. This decision process includes all actions
required during response to a biological incident beginning with
notification, screening, and environmental sampling. Each step in the
decision-making process is described, and the various actions are
explicitly linked to numbered boxes in a five-page decision-tree
flowchart.
An important step in the decision process is setting clearance (or
cleanup) goals for determining whether a remediation is successful and
how the treated area may be used. No formula is available for setting
clearance goals for biological agents. The collective, professional
judgment of experts, considered within the context of the concerns of a
broad range of local, regional, and federal stakeholders should be used
to set a clearance goal appropriate to the site-specific circumstances.
A practical clearance goal is to reduce residual risk to levels
acceptable by employing an optimization process. The aim of such a
process is to reduce exposure levels as low as is reasonable while
considering potential future land uses, technical feasibility, costs
and cost effectiveness, and public acceptability. After the remediation
is carried out, a clearance decision is made based on a judgment
whether the decontamination verification criteria and the clearance
goals have been met. This judgment is based on a thorough analysis of
all sampling, processes, and other pertinent data.
This draft document focuses on the decision making framework in
response to a biological event. It is designed to be consistent with
the National Response Framework (Department of Homeland Security,
January 2008) and our scientific understanding of the characteristics
of biological agents. Neither of these areas is static. We expect both
our response planning and our scientific understanding of the
characteristics of biological agents to evolve over time.
Response to Comments
Comments will be reviewed by the White House National Science and
Technology Council before this guidance is republished.
Availability of the Draft Guidance
Copies of the draft guidance are available for review through
https://www.regulations.gov, Docket number: EPA-HQ-ORD-2009-0331.
Dated: July 27, 2009.
James Kohlenberger,
Chief of Staff, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive
Office of the President.
Bradley I. Buswell,
Undersecretary for Science and Technology (Acting), U.S. Department of
Homeland Security.
Lek G. Kadeli,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Research and Development, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
[FR Doc. E9-19688 Filed 8-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P