Notice of Availability: Draft Protective Action Guide (PAG) for Drinking Water After a Radiological Incident, 37589-37592 [2016-13786]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Notices the CAA, on or before December 16, 2016. Under the terms of the proposed consent decree, EPA would expeditiously deliver notice of EPA’s response to the Office of the Federal Register for review and publication following signature of such response. In addition, the proposed consent decree outlines the procedure for the Plaintiffs to request costs of litigation, including attorney fees. For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the proposed consent decree from persons who are not named as parties or intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of Justice determines that consent to this consent decree should be withdrawn, the terms of the consent decree will be affirmed. II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent Decree asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES A. How can I get a copy of the consent decree? The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OGC–2016–0301) contains a copy of the proposed consent decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center 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 OEI Docket is (202) 566–1752. An electronic version of the public docket is available through www.regulations.gov. You may use www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then select ‘‘search.’’ It is important to note that EPA’s policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Jun 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 37589 will be made available for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, confidential business information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not included in the official public docket or in the electronic public docket. EPA’s policy is that copyrighted material, including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed in EPA’s electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket Center. directly to the Docket without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA’s electronic public docket. B. How and to whom do I submit comments? You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not required to consider these late comments. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA’s electronic public docket. 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. Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA’s preferred method for receiving comments. The electronic public docket system is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. In contrast to EPA’s electronic public docket, EPA’s electronic mail (email) system is not an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system. If you send an email comment AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Dated: June 1, 2016. Lorie J. Schmidt, Associate General Counsel. [FR Doc. 2016–13792 Filed 6–9–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0268; FRL–9947–55– OW] Notice of Availability: Draft Protective Action Guide (PAG) for Drinking Water After a Radiological Incident Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of document availability; request for public comment. As part of its mission to protect human health and the environment, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publishes protective action guides to help federal, state, local and tribal emergency response officials make radiation protection decisions during emergencies. EPA, in coordination with a multi-agency working group within the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee, is proposing an addition to the 2013 revised interim Protective Action Guides and Planning Guidance for Radiological Incidents (‘‘2013 revised PAG Manual’’ hereafter) to provide guidance on drinking water. The Draft Protective Action Guide for Drinking Water is now available in the EPA Docket, under ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2007–0268, and EPA is requesting comment on the draft guide. DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 25, 2016. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2007–0268, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\10JNN1.SGM 10JNN1 37590 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Notices comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa M. Christ, Standards and Risk Management Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Mail Code 4607M, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564–8354; fax number: (202) 564–3758; Email: christ.lisa@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1. General Information asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES A. Does this action apply to me? This action does not impose any requirements on anyone. It notifies interested parties of EPA’s proposed, draft drinking water protective action guide (PAG) and requests public comment. The drinking water PAG will help federal, state, local, tribal officials and public water systems make decisions about use of water during radiological emergencies. The drinking water PAG is non-regulatory guidance. B. What authority does EPA have to provide Protective Action Guidance? The historical and legal basis of EPA’s role in the 2013 PAG Manual begins with Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, in which the Administrator of the EPA assumed all the functions of the Federal Radiation Council (FRC), including the charge to ‘‘. . . advise the President with respect to radiation matters, directly or indirectly affecting health, including guidance for all federal agencies in the formulation of radiation standards and in the establishment and execution of programs of cooperation with [s]tates.’’ (Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1970, sec. 2(a)(7), 6(a)(2); § 274.h of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), codified at 42 U.S.C. 2021(h)). Recognizing this role, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) directed EPA, in its Radiological Emergency Planning and Preparedness Regulations, to ‘‘establish Protective Action Guides (PAGs) for all aspects of radiological emergency planning in coordination with VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Jun 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 appropriate federal agencies.’’ (44 CFR 351.22(a)). FEMA also tasked EPA with preparing ‘‘guidance for state and local governments on implementing PAGs, including recommendations on protective actions which can be taken to mitigate the potential radiation dose to the population.’’ (44 CFR 351.22(b)). All of this information was to ‘‘be presented in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ‘Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents.’ ’’(44 CFR 351.22(b)). Additionally, section 2021(h) charged the Administrator with performing ‘‘such other functions as the President may assign to him [or her] by Executive Order.’’ Executive Order 12656 states that the Administrator shall ‘‘[d]evelop, for national security emergencies, guidance on acceptable emergency levels of nuclear radiation. . ..’’ (Executive Order No. 12656, sec. 1601(2)). EPA’s role in PAGs development was reaffirmed by the National Response Framework, Nuclear/Radiological Incident Annex of June 2008. C. What is the PAG Manual: Protective Action Guides and Planning Guidance for Radiological Incidents? In 2013, EPA revised the PAG Manual to provide federal, state and local emergency management officials with guidance for responding to radiological emergencies (78 FR 22257, April 15, 2013). See the 2013 PAG Manual at https://www.epa.gov/radiation/ protective-action-guides-pags. A protective action guide (PAG) is the projected dose to an individual from a release of radioactive material at which a specific protective action to reduce or avoid that dose is recommended. Emergency management officials use PAGs for making decisions regarding actions to protect the public from exposure to radiation during an emergency. Such actions include evacuation, shelter-in-place, temporary relocation, water and food restrictions. The PAGs are based on the following essential principles, which also apply to the selection of any protective action during an incident: • Prevent acute effects. • Balance protection with other important factors and ensure that actions result in more benefit than harm. • Reduce risk of chronic effects. The PAG Manual is not a legally binding regulation or standard and does not supersede any environmental laws; PAGs are not intended to define ‘‘safe’’ or ‘‘unsafe’’ levels of exposure or contamination. As indicated by the use of non-mandatory language such as PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ‘‘may,’’ ‘‘should’’ and ‘‘can,’’ the Manual only provides recommendations and does not confer any legal rights or impose any legally binding requirements upon any member of the public, states or any federal agency. Rather, the PAG Manual provides projected radiation dose levels at which specific actions are recommended in order to reduce or avoid that dose. The 2013 revised interim PAG Manual is designed to provide flexibility to be more or less restrictive as deemed appropriate by decision makers based on the unique characteristics of the incident and the local situation. D. What additional guidance is being proposed for the PAG Manual? The draft drinking water protective action guidance was developed by a multi-agency PAG Subcommittee of the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee and is published by the EPA with concurrence from the Department of Energy, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Department of Health and Human Services, including both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of Labor. A large scale radiation contamination incident could impact the United States, driving the need for a pre-established drinking water PAG. EPA is proposing a two-tiered intermediate phase drinking water PAG of 100 mrem projected dose in the first year for infants, children and pregnant or nursing women and 500 mrem projected dose in the first year for the general population. The proposed PAG is designed to work in concert with the other Protective Action Guides currently in place for other media in the intermediate phase (i.e., the Food and Drug Administration’s 500 mrem PAG for ingestion of food) and provides an additional level of protection for the most sensitive life stages. Authorities have flexibility on how to apply the PAG. In some cases they may find it prudent to use a single PAG (e.g., 100 mrem) as a target for the whole population, while in other circumstances, authorities may find that it makes sense to use both targets simultaneously. For example, emergency managers can use a twotiered approach to focus on protecting the most sensitive population with limited, alternate water resources. Because the water and food PAGs are E:\FR\FM\10JNN1.SGM 10JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES designed to be used in concert, the appropriate protective actions will be influenced by the exposure scenario and factors that influence the viability of alternative approaches to reducing that dose. This proposed, additional draft guidance recommends protective actions when drinking water may be impacted by a radiological or nuclear incident. The two-tier approach seeks to balance the goal of keeping radiation doses as low as possible with the practical and logistical challenges of providing alternative drinking water during the response to a disaster. EPA has included examples of estimated costs for selected drinking water protective actions in the Docket, ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0268. In developing the drinking water PAG, the Agency considered potential cumulative exposure from a radiation incident. Ultimately, a PAG does not represent an ‘‘acceptable’’ routine exposure; a PAG is a dose at which protective action is advised in order to reduce or avoid that dose. Every PAG is developed with the same three principles: prevent acute effects, balance protection with other important factors and ensure that actions result in more benefit than harm, and reduce risk of chronic effects. Emergency management officials should consider all exposure routes when making protective action decisions in an emergency. Under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the Agency has established maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for radiological contaminants in drinking water. The National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) for radionuclides are based on lifetime exposure criteria and assume 70 years of continued exposure to contaminants in drinking water. While the SDWA framework is appropriate for day-to-day normal operations, it may not provide the necessary tools to assist emergency responders with determining the need for an immediate protective action. EPA expects that any drinking water system adversely impacted during a radiation contamination incident will take action to return to compliance with MCLs as soon as practicable. E. How were comments received on the 2013 draft PAG Manual considered in developing this proposal? On April 15, 2013, EPA published a Federal Register notice requesting public comments on the appropriateness of developing and incorporating a drinking water PAG in the revised PAG Manual (78 FR 22257). Regarding the specific issue of drinking water, the Agency received VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Jun 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 about 50 comment letters from members of the public, state and local emergency response and health organizations, environmental advocates, industry associations, organizations opposed to nuclear power, and from national and international radiation protection organizations. Several commenters from state emergency management agencies and radiation control programs expressed an urgent need for EPA to establish a drinking water PAG, pointing out that drinking water is the only media not currently addressed in the PAG Manual. Commenters stated that a drinking water PAG is a critical aspect of a coordinated emergency response after a radiation contamination incident. Commenters representing states agencies from Ohio, Kansas, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Washington suggested that a drinking water PAG should be established at the 500 mrem level, to be consistent with the FDA food PAG and with the DHS guidance 1 for water. While EPA agrees with the need of establishing a drinking water PAG, which is consistent with currently available guidance, it is also important to note that EPA believes that when possible, PAG recommendations should provide an additional level of protection to sensitive life-stages. For short-term incidents, it is appropriate to consider a lower tier PAG level of 100 mrem for sensitive life-stages including pregnant women, nursing women and children 15 years old and under. This approach of setting a two-tier level of protection incorporates suggestions submitted by commenters regarding the adequate consideration of children and sensitive subpopulations. There is an abundant precaution built into the derivation of the drinking water PAG through a variety of assumptions, including amount of water consumed, exposure duration and dose-response modeling, using the dose-response for the most sensitive life stages to derive the PAG for children through age 15 years. Today’s proposal ensures that protective measures are appropriate for all members of the public, including sensitive subpopulations. In contrast, several commenters from environmental protection advocate organizations suggested that a drinking water PAG is not needed, and urged EPA to base any emergency response measures regarding drinking water solely on the NPDWR for Radionuclides MCLs. Some commenters expressed 1 Guidance established by the Department of Homeland Security as an intermediate-level PAG for drinking water interdiction (73 FR 45029, April 1, 2008). PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 37591 concerns that establishing a drinking water PAG would weaken existing environmental standards and regulations. However, the drinking water standards are legal limits designed to prevent health effects from everyday exposure to low levels of radiation over long periods and they are not changing with this proposal. Estimated risk of excess cancer cases for lifetime exposure (70 years) to radioactive contaminants in drinking water at 4 mrem/yr (the MCL) generally falls in a range of risks deemed acceptable by the Agency’s regulations. Estimated risks associated with a shorter (one year) exposure to radioactivity in drinking water at the proposed PAG levels fall within a similar range. Emergency guides are temporary measures to minimize risk while enabling prioritization of limited resources during an emergency response. The PAG levels are guidance for emergency situations; they do not supplant any standards or regulations, nor do they affect the stringency or enforcement of any standards or regulations. The PAG levels are intended to be used only in an emergency when radiation levels have already exceeded environmental standards. EPA expects that any drinking water system adversely impacted during a radiation incident will take action to return to compliance with Safe Drinking Water Act levels as soon as practicable. F. When will the PAG Manual be finalized? Once comments on this proposed, additional draft action have been addressed, EPA will add drinking water guidance to the full PAG Manual, which will then be issued in final form for incorporation into state, local, tribal and federal emergency response plans over a one-year implementation timeframe. G. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA? When submitting comments, remember to: • Identify the rulemaking by docket number, subject heading, Federal Register date and page number. • Follow directions—the EPA may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing the chapter number of the draft action guide • Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. • Describe any assumptions and provide technical information and data that you used. E:\FR\FM\10JNN1.SGM 10JNN1 37592 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Notices Dated: June 3, 2016. Joel Beauvais, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Water. H. What specific comments are being sought? asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow it to be reproduced. • Illustrate your concerns with specific examples and suggest alternatives. • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. • Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564–7146 or https://www2.epa.gov/nepa. Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 05/30/2016 Through 06/03/2016 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. While all comments regarding any aspect of the draft drinking water PAG guidance will be considered, please comment on the following issues specifically: • Please comment on the appropriateness of the drinking water PAG and the guidance for advance planning. • Please comment on what implementation challenges might be associated with the two-tiered approach to the water PAG that EPA should consider, and suggest additional guidance that would be helpful. • Please comment on whether (and if so why) EPA should reconsider using a single-tier drinking water PAG rather than tiered approach proposed in the draft action guide. • Please suggest additional guidance that would aid pre-incident planning and implementation specific to your community’s drinking water systems. • Please comment on how this guidance should be implemented in emergency response and recovery plans at all levels of government, including considerations for public communications during an emergency. In the future, calculations and derived response levels will be provided in the Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) Assessment Manuals. Emergency planners are referred to FRMAC Monitoring and Sampling Methods to assess surface and drinking water impacts from a radiological emergency. See the Assessment and Monitoring & Sampling folders at https:// www.nv.doe.gov/nationalsecurity/ homelandsecurity/frmac/manuals.aspx. After considering public comments, EPA intends to issue a final PAG Manual, which will supersede the 1992 PAG Manual and the 2013 revised PAG Manual. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:02 Jun 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 [FR Doc. 2016–13786 Filed 6–9–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER–FRL–9027–5] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Notice Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA’s comment letters on EISs are available at: https:// www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ eisdata.html. EIS No. 20160124, Final, FERC, AK, Sweetheart Lake Hydroelectric Project, Review Period Ends: 07/11/ 2016, Contact: John Matkowski 202– 502–8576 EIS No. 20160125, Final, BIA, NV, Aiya Solar Project, Review Period Ends: 07/ 11/2016, Contact: Charles Lewis 602– 379–6782 EIS No. 20160126, Draft, USA, AZ, Lone Star Ore Body Development Project, Comment Period Ends: 07/25/2016, Contact: Michael Langley 602–230– 6953 EIS No. 20160127, Final, NPS, CA, Restoration of Native Species in High Elevation Aquatic Ecosystems Plan, Review Period Ends: 07/11/2016, Contact: Woody Smeck 559–565–3100 EIS No. 20160128, Final, USACE, NC, Morehead City Harbor Integrated Dredged Material Management Plan, Review Period Ends: 07/11/2016, Contact: Jennifer Owens 910–251– 4757 EIS No. 20160129, Draft, USFS, CA, Los Padres Tamarisk Removal, Comment Period Ends: 07/25/2016, Contact: Lloyd Simpson 805–646–4348 ex. 316 EIS No. 20160130, Draft, NOAA, TX, Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary Boundary Expansion, Comment Period Ends: 08/19/2016, Contact: Kelly Drinnen 409–621–5151 Ext.105 EIS No. 20160131, Third Final Supplemental, USFS, MT, PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan to comply with District of Mont Court Order, Review Period Ends: 07/20/ 2016, Contact: Jan Bowey 406–842– 5432 EIS No. 20160132, Draft, FHWA, CO, US 50 Corridor East, Comment Period Ends: 07/29/2016, Contact: Patricia Sergeson 720–963–3073 EIS No. 20160133, Final, FTA, VA, Potomac Yard Metrorail Station, Review Period Ends: 07/11/2016, Contact: Dan Koenig 202–219–3528 EIS No. 20160134, Final, TVA, TN, PROGRAMMATIC—Ash Impoundment Closure, Review Period Ends: 07/11/2016, Contact: Ashley Farless 423–751–2361 Dated: June 7, 2016. Dawn Roberts, Management Analyst, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. 2016–13791 Filed 6–9–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [CC Docket No. 92–237; DA 16–599] Next Meeting of the North American Numbering Council Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: In this document, the Commission released a public notice announcing the meeting and agenda of the North American Numbering Council (NANC). The intended effect of this action is to make the public aware of the NANC’s next meeting and agenda. DATES: Thursday, June 30, 2016, 10:00 a.m. SUMMARY: Requests to make an oral statement or provide written comments to the NANC should be sent to Carmell Weathers, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room 5–C162, Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carmell Weathers at (202) 418–2325 or Carmell.Weathers@fcc.gov. The fax number is: (202) 418–1413. The TTY number is: (202) 418–0484. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission’s document in CC Docket No. 92–237, DA 16–599 released May 31, 2016. The complete text in this document is available for public inspection and copying during normal business hours ADDRESSES: E:\FR\FM\10JNN1.SGM 10JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 112 (Friday, June 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37589-37592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13786]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0268; FRL-9947-55-OW]


Notice of Availability: Draft Protective Action Guide (PAG) for 
Drinking Water After a Radiological Incident

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of document availability; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: As part of its mission to protect human health and the 
environment, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publishes 
protective action guides to help federal, state, local and tribal 
emergency response officials make radiation protection decisions during 
emergencies. EPA, in coordination with a multi-agency working group 
within the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee, is 
proposing an addition to the 2013 revised interim Protective Action 
Guides and Planning Guidance for Radiological Incidents (``2013 revised 
PAG Manual'' hereafter) to provide guidance on drinking water. The 
Draft Protective Action Guide for Drinking Water is now available in 
the EPA Docket, under ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0268, and EPA is 
requesting comment on the draft guide.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 25, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2007-0268, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The 
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not 
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must 
be accompanied by a written

[[Page 37590]]

comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa M. Christ, Standards and Risk 
Management Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Mail 
Code 4607M, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-8354; fax 
number: (202) 564-3758; Email: christ.lisa@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

1. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action does not impose any requirements on anyone. It notifies 
interested parties of EPA's proposed, draft drinking water protective 
action guide (PAG) and requests public comment. The drinking water PAG 
will help federal, state, local, tribal officials and public water 
systems make decisions about use of water during radiological 
emergencies. The drinking water PAG is non-regulatory guidance.

B. What authority does EPA have to provide Protective Action Guidance?

    The historical and legal basis of EPA's role in the 2013 PAG Manual 
begins with Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, in which the 
Administrator of the EPA assumed all the functions of the Federal 
Radiation Council (FRC), including the charge to ``. . . advise the 
President with respect to radiation matters, directly or indirectly 
affecting health, including guidance for all federal agencies in the 
formulation of radiation standards and in the establishment and 
execution of programs of cooperation with [s]tates.'' (Reorg. Plan No. 
3 of 1970, sec. 2(a)(7), 6(a)(2); Sec.  274.h of the Atomic Energy Act 
of 1954, as amended (AEA), codified at 42 U.S.C. 2021(h)). Recognizing 
this role, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) directed EPA, 
in its Radiological Emergency Planning and Preparedness Regulations, to 
``establish Protective Action Guides (PAGs) for all aspects of 
radiological emergency planning in coordination with appropriate 
federal agencies.'' (44 CFR 351.22(a)). FEMA also tasked EPA with 
preparing ``guidance for state and local governments on implementing 
PAGs, including recommendations on protective actions which can be 
taken to mitigate the potential radiation dose to the population.'' (44 
CFR 351.22(b)). All of this information was to ``be presented in the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) `Manual of Protective Action 
Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents.' ''(44 CFR 
351.22(b)).
    Additionally, section 2021(h) charged the Administrator with 
performing ``such other functions as the President may assign to him 
[or her] by Executive Order.'' Executive Order 12656 states that the 
Administrator shall ``[d]evelop, for national security emergencies, 
guidance on acceptable emergency levels of nuclear radiation. . ..'' 
(Executive Order No. 12656, sec. 1601(2)). EPA's role in PAGs 
development was reaffirmed by the National Response Framework, Nuclear/
Radiological Incident Annex of June 2008.

C. What is the PAG Manual: Protective Action Guides and Planning 
Guidance for Radiological Incidents?

    In 2013, EPA revised the PAG Manual to provide federal, state and 
local emergency management officials with guidance for responding to 
radiological emergencies (78 FR 22257, April 15, 2013). See the 2013 
PAG Manual at https://www.epa.gov/radiation/protective-action-guides-pags. A protective action guide (PAG) is the projected dose to an 
individual from a release of radioactive material at which a specific 
protective action to reduce or avoid that dose is recommended. 
Emergency management officials use PAGs for making decisions regarding 
actions to protect the public from exposure to radiation during an 
emergency. Such actions include evacuation, shelter-in-place, temporary 
relocation, water and food restrictions.
    The PAGs are based on the following essential principles, which 
also apply to the selection of any protective action during an 
incident:
     Prevent acute effects.
     Balance protection with other important factors and ensure 
that actions result in more benefit than harm.
     Reduce risk of chronic effects.
    The PAG Manual is not a legally binding regulation or standard and 
does not supersede any environmental laws; PAGs are not intended to 
define ``safe'' or ``unsafe'' levels of exposure or contamination. As 
indicated by the use of non-mandatory language such as ``may,'' 
``should'' and ``can,'' the Manual only provides recommendations and 
does not confer any legal rights or impose any legally binding 
requirements upon any member of the public, states or any federal 
agency. Rather, the PAG Manual provides projected radiation dose levels 
at which specific actions are recommended in order to reduce or avoid 
that dose. The 2013 revised interim PAG Manual is designed to provide 
flexibility to be more or less restrictive as deemed appropriate by 
decision makers based on the unique characteristics of the incident and 
the local situation.

D. What additional guidance is being proposed for the PAG Manual?

    The draft drinking water protective action guidance was developed 
by a multi-agency PAG Subcommittee of the Federal Radiological 
Preparedness Coordinating Committee and is published by the EPA with 
concurrence from the Department of Energy, the Department of Defense, 
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the 
Department of Health and Human Services, including both the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration 
(FDA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of Labor.
    A large scale radiation contamination incident could impact the 
United States, driving the need for a pre-established drinking water 
PAG. EPA is proposing a two-tiered intermediate phase drinking water 
PAG of 100 mrem projected dose in the first year for infants, children 
and pregnant or nursing women and 500 mrem projected dose in the first 
year for the general population. The proposed PAG is designed to work 
in concert with the other Protective Action Guides currently in place 
for other media in the intermediate phase (i.e., the Food and Drug 
Administration's 500 mrem PAG for ingestion of food) and provides an 
additional level of protection for the most sensitive life stages. 
Authorities have flexibility on how to apply the PAG. In some cases 
they may find it prudent to use a single PAG (e.g., 100 mrem) as a 
target for the whole population, while in other circumstances, 
authorities may find that it makes sense to use both targets 
simultaneously. For example, emergency managers can use a two-tiered 
approach to focus on protecting the most sensitive population with 
limited, alternate water resources. Because the water and food PAGs are

[[Page 37591]]

designed to be used in concert, the appropriate protective actions will 
be influenced by the exposure scenario and factors that influence the 
viability of alternative approaches to reducing that dose.
    This proposed, additional draft guidance recommends protective 
actions when drinking water may be impacted by a radiological or 
nuclear incident. The two-tier approach seeks to balance the goal of 
keeping radiation doses as low as possible with the practical and 
logistical challenges of providing alternative drinking water during 
the response to a disaster. EPA has included examples of estimated 
costs for selected drinking water protective actions in the Docket, ID 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0268. In developing the drinking water PAG, the 
Agency considered potential cumulative exposure from a radiation 
incident. Ultimately, a PAG does not represent an ``acceptable'' 
routine exposure; a PAG is a dose at which protective action is advised 
in order to reduce or avoid that dose. Every PAG is developed with the 
same three principles: prevent acute effects, balance protection with 
other important factors and ensure that actions result in more benefit 
than harm, and reduce risk of chronic effects. Emergency management 
officials should consider all exposure routes when making protective 
action decisions in an emergency.
    Under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the Agency has 
established maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for radiological 
contaminants in drinking water. The National Primary Drinking Water 
Regulations (NPDWR) for radionuclides are based on lifetime exposure 
criteria and assume 70 years of continued exposure to contaminants in 
drinking water. While the SDWA framework is appropriate for day-to-day 
normal operations, it may not provide the necessary tools to assist 
emergency responders with determining the need for an immediate 
protective action. EPA expects that any drinking water system adversely 
impacted during a radiation contamination incident will take action to 
return to compliance with MCLs as soon as practicable.

E. How were comments received on the 2013 draft PAG Manual considered 
in developing this proposal?

    On April 15, 2013, EPA published a Federal Register notice 
requesting public comments on the appropriateness of developing and 
incorporating a drinking water PAG in the revised PAG Manual (78 FR 
22257).
    Regarding the specific issue of drinking water, the Agency received 
about 50 comment letters from members of the public, state and local 
emergency response and health organizations, environmental advocates, 
industry associations, organizations opposed to nuclear power, and from 
national and international radiation protection organizations.
    Several commenters from state emergency management agencies and 
radiation control programs expressed an urgent need for EPA to 
establish a drinking water PAG, pointing out that drinking water is the 
only media not currently addressed in the PAG Manual. Commenters stated 
that a drinking water PAG is a critical aspect of a coordinated 
emergency response after a radiation contamination incident.
    Commenters representing states agencies from Ohio, Kansas, 
Pennsylvania, Illinois and Washington suggested that a drinking water 
PAG should be established at the 500 mrem level, to be consistent with 
the FDA food PAG and with the DHS guidance \1\ for water. While EPA 
agrees with the need of establishing a drinking water PAG, which is 
consistent with currently available guidance, it is also important to 
note that EPA believes that when possible, PAG recommendations should 
provide an additional level of protection to sensitive life-stages. For 
short-term incidents, it is appropriate to consider a lower tier PAG 
level of 100 mrem for sensitive life-stages including pregnant women, 
nursing women and children 15 years old and under. This approach of 
setting a two-tier level of protection incorporates suggestions 
submitted by commenters regarding the adequate consideration of 
children and sensitive subpopulations. There is an abundant precaution 
built into the derivation of the drinking water PAG through a variety 
of assumptions, including amount of water consumed, exposure duration 
and dose-response modeling, using the dose-response for the most 
sensitive life stages to derive the PAG for children through age 15 
years. Today's proposal ensures that protective measures are 
appropriate for all members of the public, including sensitive 
subpopulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Guidance established by the Department of Homeland Security 
as an intermediate-level PAG for drinking water interdiction (73 FR 
45029, April 1, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In contrast, several commenters from environmental protection 
advocate organizations suggested that a drinking water PAG is not 
needed, and urged EPA to base any emergency response measures regarding 
drinking water solely on the NPDWR for Radionuclides MCLs. Some 
commenters expressed concerns that establishing a drinking water PAG 
would weaken existing environmental standards and regulations. However, 
the drinking water standards are legal limits designed to prevent 
health effects from everyday exposure to low levels of radiation over 
long periods and they are not changing with this proposal.
    Estimated risk of excess cancer cases for lifetime exposure (70 
years) to radioactive contaminants in drinking water at 4 mrem/yr (the 
MCL) generally falls in a range of risks deemed acceptable by the 
Agency's regulations. Estimated risks associated with a shorter (one 
year) exposure to radioactivity in drinking water at the proposed PAG 
levels fall within a similar range. Emergency guides are temporary 
measures to minimize risk while enabling prioritization of limited 
resources during an emergency response.
    The PAG levels are guidance for emergency situations; they do not 
supplant any standards or regulations, nor do they affect the 
stringency or enforcement of any standards or regulations. The PAG 
levels are intended to be used only in an emergency when radiation 
levels have already exceeded environmental standards. EPA expects that 
any drinking water system adversely impacted during a radiation 
incident will take action to return to compliance with Safe Drinking 
Water Act levels as soon as practicable.

F. When will the PAG Manual be finalized?

    Once comments on this proposed, additional draft action have been 
addressed, EPA will add drinking water guidance to the full PAG Manual, 
which will then be issued in final form for incorporation into state, 
local, tribal and federal emergency response plans over a one-year 
implementation timeframe.

G. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number, subject heading, 
Federal Register date and page number.
     Follow directions--the EPA may ask you to respond to 
specific questions or organize comments by referencing the chapter 
number of the draft action guide
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide technical information 
and data that you used.

[[Page 37592]]

     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how 
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow it to be 
reproduced.
     Illustrate your concerns with specific examples and 
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

H. What specific comments are being sought?

    While all comments regarding any aspect of the draft drinking water 
PAG guidance will be considered, please comment on the following issues 
specifically:
     Please comment on the appropriateness of the drinking 
water PAG and the guidance for advance planning.
     Please comment on what implementation challenges might be 
associated with the two-tiered approach to the water PAG that EPA 
should consider, and suggest additional guidance that would be helpful.
     Please comment on whether (and if so why) EPA should 
reconsider using a single-tier drinking water PAG rather than tiered 
approach proposed in the draft action guide.
     Please suggest additional guidance that would aid pre-
incident planning and implementation specific to your community's 
drinking water systems.
     Please comment on how this guidance should be implemented 
in emergency response and recovery plans at all levels of government, 
including considerations for public communications during an emergency.
    In the future, calculations and derived response levels will be 
provided in the Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center 
(FRMAC) Assessment Manuals. Emergency planners are referred to FRMAC 
Monitoring and Sampling Methods to assess surface and drinking water 
impacts from a radiological emergency. See the Assessment and 
Monitoring & Sampling folders at https://www.nv.doe.gov/nationalsecurity/homelandsecurity/frmac/manuals.aspx. After considering 
public comments, EPA intends to issue a final PAG Manual, which will 
supersede the 1992 PAG Manual and the 2013 revised PAG Manual.

    Dated: June 3, 2016.
Joel Beauvais,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2016-13786 Filed 6-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.