Notice of Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria, 17215-17218 [2023-05354]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 2023 / Notices docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the internet through the Commission’s Home Page (https:// www.ferc.gov) using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission’s Public Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID–19), issued by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or call toll-free, (886) 208–3676 or TYY, (202) 502–8659. Dated: March 16, 2023. Debbie-Anne A. Reese, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 2023–05857 Filed 3–21–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA–R08–SFUND–2022–0281; FRL–10766– 01–R8] Prospective Lessee Agreement, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited, Agnico Eagle (USA) Limited, Lawrence County, South Dakota Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of proposed agreement; request for public comment. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, of a prospective lessee agreement between the United States, the State of South Dakota, Agnico Eagle Mines Limited, and Agnico Eagle (USA) Limited (collectively ‘‘Agnico’’), at the Gilt Edge Mine Superfund Site in Lawrence County, South Dakota (Agreement). The agreement provides that Agnico will perform a reuse assessment, including surface and subsurface sampling, and pay at least $2.5 million annually to cover the cost of water treatment and site operations at the Gilt Edge Mine Site during the pendency of the Agreement. In exchange, the United States and the State of South Dakota covenant not to lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Mar 21, 2023 Jkt 259001 sue Agnico for Existing Contamination, work (including subsurface and surface sampling) conducted by Agnico, and certain payments as defined in the agreement. Comments must be submitted on or before April 21, 2023. ADDRESSES: The proposed agreement and additional background information relating to the agreement will be available upon request and will be posted at https://www.epa.gov/ superfund/gilt-edge. Comments and requests for an electronic copy of the proposed agreement should be addressed to Anna Copeland, Enforcement Specialist, Superfund and Emergency Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency— Region 8, Mail Code 8SEM–PAC, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202, or telephone number: (303) 312– 6764,or email address: copeland.anna@ epa.gov and should reference the Gilt Edge Mine Superfund Site. You may also send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– SFUND–2022–0281 to https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amelia Piggott, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of Regional Counsel, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mail Code 8 ORC–LEC, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202, telephone number: (303) 312–6410, email address: piggott.amelia@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this document, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the agreement. The Agency will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the agreement if comments received disclose facts or considerations that indicate that the agreement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. DATES: Ben Bielenberg, Acting Division Director, Superfund and Emergency Management Division, Region 8. [FR Doc. 2023–05898 Filed 3–21–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA–HQ–OAR–2017–0430; FRL–10784–01– OAR] Notice of Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air. AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17215 Notice of availability; opening of a 60-day public comment period. ACTION: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seeks input on criteria to help align and ensure consistency across radon service provider credentialing programs operated by certification bodies and states. The criteria reflect stakeholder feedback received in response to a 2017 Federal Register Notice on the same subject and consideration of conformity assessment practices in place across the federal government. The EPA is soliciting comment on these criteria. The comments will inform development of the final version of the criteria. DATES: Comments may be submitted on or before May 22, 2023. ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2017–0430 by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. • Email: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 2017–0430 in the subject line of the message. • U.S. Postal Service Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460. • Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Docket Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket Center’s hours of operations are 8:30 a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except Federal Holidays). Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID No. EPA– HQ–OAR–2017–0430. Comments received may be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katrin Kral, Indoor Environments Division, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air 6609T, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; 202–343– 9454; kral.katrin@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2017–0430, at https://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or the other methods identified in the ADDRESSES section. The SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 17216 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 2023 / Notices KEY QUESTIONS section includes specific areas on which the EPA is seeking comment. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from the docket. 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. 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, remember to: • Identify the notice by docket number, subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number. • Provide a brief description of yourself and your role or organization before addressing the questions. • Identify the question(s) you are responding to from the KEY QUESTIONS section by question number when submitting your comments. You do not need to address every question. • Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. • Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/ or data that you used. • 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. Public Information Session. The EPA will also host a public information session during the comment period. Additional details about timing and the registration process for the information session webinar will be shared on the EPA’s radon website at https:// www.epa.gov/radon/epas-draft-criteriaradon-credentialing-organizations. The VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Mar 21, 2023 Jkt 259001 information session will cover the EPA’s role in overseeing the quality of radon service providers as well as conformity assessment and application of voluntary consensus standards within federal programs, including the proposed criteria. Participants will have an opportunity to ask clarifying questions via the webinar chat function. The EPA will not accept comments on the criteria during the information session. I. Background Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States and responsible for an estimated 21,000 deaths each year. One in 15 U.S. homes is estimated to have elevated radon levels. Radon-induced lung cancer is highly preventable and may be addressed by testing and mitigating homes when necessary. Professionals who provide radon testing and mitigation services play a key role in public health protection efforts. Because of the substantial risk resulting from exposure to radon, a naturally occurring radioactive gas, it is critical for radon service providers to possess the necessary skills to provide quality services, ensure consumer protection, and protect public health. Since 1988, the EPA has administered a non-regulatory program under the Indoor Radon Abatement Act of 1988 (IRAA) 1 to reduce exposure to indoor radon by promoting awareness, testing, installation of radon mitigation systems in existing homes, and the use of radonresistant new construction techniques in new buildings. The EPA works with state and tribal programs, industry, and the public to reduce human exposure to radon, thereby reducing deaths due to lung cancer. Essential to this mission is access to quality service providers who possess the skills required to measure indoor radon levels and conduct mitigation when necessary. Historically, the EPA has played a key role in establishing a standard of quality for radon service providers, including development and maintenance of a provider credentialing program (or provider proficiency program) and a one-time evaluation of two certification bodies in 2001, the National Radon Proficiency Program (NRPP) and the National Radon Safety Board (NRSB). Since then, the EPA has maintained oversight of radon credentialing systems, provided an associated national radon reference, and supported the development of and access to radon 1 Public Law 100–551, Title III—Indoor Radon Abatement, enacted October 28, 1988 (also known as the Indoor Radon Abatement Act of 1988 or ‘‘IRAA’’) (15 U.S.C. 2661, et seq.). PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 measurement and mitigation standards of practice. Taken together, these activities align with the EPA’s authority to operate a proficiency program designed to rate the effectiveness of radon measurement and mitigation service providers and radon measurement devices. An August 2017 Federal Register Notice 2 outlined proposed nonregulatory criteria aimed at establishing consistency across radon credentialing programs. These criteria included a third-party process for accrediting radon professional credentialing organizations to an international standard for certification bodies (International Organization for Standardization/ International Electrotechnical Commission; ISO/IEC 17024:2012). The Agency requested comment on the proposed approach. The Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria document 3,which is the subject of this notice and is included in the docket, reflects stakeholder feedback received through the 2017 Federal Register Notice. The criteria outlined in this document remain grounded in third-party accreditation to ISO/IEC 17024:2012,4 and are intended to support establishment and maintenance of a base level of organizational and program-specific competencies as well as maintain flexibility for state-run programs. The Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria document contains four sections: I—Executive Summary; II—Discussion of Stakeholder Input on 2017 Federal Register Notice and EPA Responses; III—Evaluation Framework; IV—Implementation Approach. The EPA is particularly interested in feedback on Sections III and IV. The Evaluation Framework is grounded in conformity assessment practices designed to promote consistency across credentialing programs operated by certification bodies and states. This is accomplished through specifications for the maintenance of credentialing programs and radon measurement and mitigation service provider job categories, including identification of radon service provider competencies and assessment methods. Service providers who achieve 2 EPA. ‘‘Notice of Intent to Establish Voluntary Criteria for Radon Credentialing Organizations; Notice of Availability; Opening of a 60-Day Public Comment Period.’’ Federal Register (82 FR 39993, August 23, 2017) (FRL–9966–07–OAR). 3 EPA. ‘‘Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria.’’ U.S. EPA, Washington DC, EPA 402/D–22/001, December 2022. Available in the Docket: EPA–HQ– OAR–2017–0430. 4 ISO, IEC. Conformity Assessment—General Requirements for Bodies Operating Certification of Persons. ISO/IEC 17024:2012(E). 2 ed. July 1, 2012. E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 2023 / Notices lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 and maintain credentials from certification bodies and/or state-run programs that meet the Evaluation Framework specifications will have demonstrated and be required to maintain comparable knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform radon services. The Implementation Approach will facilitate identification of qualified radon service providers meeting a standardized set of specifications outlined within the Evaluation Framework. The Implementation Approach outlines the EPA’s planned activities to facilitate adoption of the Evaluation Framework specifications: • Develop and maintain a process by which credentialing organizations (certification bodies and state-run programs) can annually attest that they meet the Evaluation Framework specifications. • Maintain a public list of credentialing organizations and accreditation bodies that meet the framework (see TSCA § 305(a)). • Establish conditions for the State and Tribal Indoor Radon Grants (SIRG) program. It is important to note that IRAA does not provide the EPA with authority to require actions on the part of state or tribal governments. Nonetheless, the EPA may set conditions for receiving funding as part of the SIRG Program, which is authorized under IRAA, that are consistent with the purpose of the Act. Taken together, the Evaluation Framework and Implementation Approach will help standardize program-specific competencies for credentialing radon service providers and facilitate access to and identification of a skilled and qualified workforce demonstrating a consistent set of competencies to perform radon testing and mitigation. II. Request for Comments Comments will inform development of a final version of the Radon Credentialing Criteria to help align and ensure consistency across credentialing programs operated by certification bodies and states. Widespread adherence to the Evaluation Framework as reinforced by the Implementation Approach will support standardization of quality among radon service provider credentials and credentialing organizations, help maximize the utility of the SIRG program by providing assistance to states in a manner that will facilitate access to—and identification of—radon service providers credentialed by organizations meeting a consistent set of specifications, and support streamlined approaches to addressing provider credentials within VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Mar 21, 2023 Jkt 259001 radon testing/mitigation polices. This in turn may lead to increased consumer confidence in, and demand for, radon service providers, as well as expanded markets for radon service providers. As mentioned previously, the EPA is particularly interested in feedback on Sections III (Evaluation Framework) and IV (Implementation Approach) of the Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria document, which is available in the docket. The KEY QUESTIONS section contains specific information requests on these two sections (III and IV). The Agency is seeking comment from stakeholders working to reduce exposure to indoor radon. This includes stakeholders involved with promoting and/or conducting testing and installation of radon mitigation systems, such as: • Organizations credentialing radon service providers and other building construction and/or maintenance related providers • Radon service providers • Organizations who provide thirdparty accreditation to the ISO/IEC 17024:2012 • Organizations representing state health and environmental programs, green building initiatives, and the radon services industry • State radon programs • Federal agencies who own, influence, or control housing III. Key Questions These questions pertain to Sections III and IV of the Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria document. In addition to responding to specific requests for comments below, commenters are welcome to share any overarching feedback. Key Questions 1–4. These questions address the Evaluation Framework which outlines a set of specifications in three areas (Accreditation, Examination, and Maintenance) that will help promote consistency across credentialing programs operated by certification bodies and states. Service providers who achieve and maintain credentials from certification bodies and/or state-run programs that meet the Evaluation Framework will have demonstrated and be required to maintain comparable knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform radon services. 1. Do you have any general feedback on the Evaluation Framework (Accreditation, Examination and Maintenance)? 2. What features of the Evaluation Framework may positively and/or negatively impact a state’s ability to make any necessary modifications within their organizational structures to PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17217 ensure adherence of the state-run program to the Evaluation Framework specifications? 3. Will creation of certifications and examinations for the measurement and mitigation service provider categories be sufficient for state-run programs seeking to meet the Evaluation Framework? 4. Should independent certification bodies that meet the Evaluation Framework be required to create certifications and examinations for two job categories (measurement and mitigation) and two job sub-types distinguishing roles for an entry-level technician position and a more senior/ supervisory specialist position? Key Questions 5–6. These questions cover the Examination component of the Evaluation Framework which includes specifications and standards that pertain to determining service provider mastery of competencies necessary to perform a specific job. Specifications for state-run programs that embed third-party examinations within their credentialing programs are also included. 5. Is the proposed stakeholder representation on the expert panel adequate? Stakeholders identified to serve on a panel responsible for developing a job task analysis are considered essential to ensure appropriate representation of the entire population of stakeholders that contribute to, and/or participate in, the credentialing of radon service providers. Additional stakeholder groups (e.g., home inspectors, builders) may be included as part of an expert panel at the certification body’s discretion. 6. Should radon service providers be required to complete a device performance test as a requirement to receiving a credential for radon measurement service provider job categories? These performance tests are designed to evaluate a provider’s proficiency using an analytical device. This type of performance test would be incorporated into the Evaluation Framework as part of the ‘‘Examination’’ component. Credentialing organizations would be required to verify and validate how the performance test accurately and reliably assesses the task(s) identified in the job task analysis, as well as how it aligns with the applicable American National Standard which specifies minimum performance criteria and testing procedures for instruments and/or systems designed to quantify the concentration of radon-222 gas in air (MS–PC, Performance Specifications for Instrumentation Systems Designed to Measure Radon Gas in Air). Key Question 7. This question covers the Maintenance component of the E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 17218 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 2023 / Notices Evaluation Framework which includes specifications that help ensure continued adherence by certification bodies to third-party accreditation requirements and consistency across credentialing program requirements. The specifications addressing credentialing program requirements will help assure that radon service providers are equipped with knowledge, skills and competencies necessary to maintain credentials issued by certification bodies and state-run programs. This element also includes a specification for credentialing organizations to verify the use of approved devices and maintenance of a Quality Assurance Plan in accordance with the most current American National Standards. 7. How frequently should providers be required to verify use of approved testing devices (when applicable) and maintenance of a Quality Assurance Plan? Key Questions 8–15. These questions address the Implementation Approach which outlines the EPA’s planned activities to facilitate adoption of the Evaluation Framework and outlines elements for three time periods (while the Evaluation Framework is being finalized, once the Evaluation Framework is finalized and during the 3-year phase-in period, after the 3-year phase-in period): • Annual Attestation Process: Develop and maintain a process by which credentialing organizations (certification bodies and state-run programs) can annually attest they meet the Evaluation Framework specifications. • Public List: Maintain a public list of credentialing organizations and accreditation bodies that meet the Evaluation Framework (see TSCA § 305(a)). • Conditions for the EPA’s SIRG Program. 8. Do you have any general feedback on the Implementation Approach? 9. Will a 3-year phase-in period will be sufficient for certification bodies to prepare for and achieve third-party accreditation and meet the Evaluation Framework and for state-run programs to meet the Evaluation Framework? 10. Do you have feedback on the size and impact of the costs associated with third-party accreditation to ISO/IEC 17024:2012? 11. Do you have feedback regarding the proposed annual attestation process? 12. What reporting mechanisms should the EPA consider for state-run programs to provide annual progress updates and attestations once the Evaluation Framework has been met? VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Mar 21, 2023 Jkt 259001 13. Do you have feedback regarding the proposal for the EPA to maintain a public list? 14. Should the EPA identify on its website the credentialing organizations that have declared their intent, but do not yet meet, the Evaluation Framework? In this case credentialing organizations that do not meet all the requirements at the end of the 3-year phase-in period would be removed from the website until such time as they can demonstrate their ability to meet all the requirements of the Evaluation Framework. 15. Do you have feedback regarding the proposal to establish conditions for the SIRG program? Jonathan D. Edwards, Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air. [FR Doc. 2023–05354 Filed 3–21–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL–10801–01–OA] Notification of Public Meetings of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee Lead Panel Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office announces two public meetings of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Lead Panel. A public meeting will be held for the CASAC Lead Panel to receive a briefing from EPA on the Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead (External Review Draft). A second public meeting will be held for the panel to peer review the ISA and to provide a consultation on the Integrated Review Plan (IRP) for Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead, Volume 3: Planning for Quantitative Exposure/Risk Analyses (External Review Draft). DATES: The briefing from EPA on the Lead ISA will be held on April 11, 2023, from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. The public meeting for the panel to peer review the Lead ISA and provide a consultation on the Lead IRP Volume 3 will be held on Tuesday, June 13, 2023, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Wednesday, June 14, 2023, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. All times listed are in Eastern Time. ADDRESSES: The briefing on April 11, 2023, will be conducted virtually. Please refer to the CASAC website at https://casac.epa.gov for information on SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 how to attend the briefing. The public meeting on June 13, 2023, and June 14, 2023, will be conducted in person (at a location to be determined) and virtually. Please refer to the meeting web page on the CASAC website at https:// casac.epa.gov for the location and details on how to access the meeting. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public wishing further information regarding this notice may contact Mr. Aaron Yeow, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), SAB Staff Office, by telephone at (202) 564–2050 or via email at yeow.aaron@epa.gov. General information concerning the CASAC, as well as any updates concerning the meetings announced in this notice can be found on the CASAC website: https://casac.epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: The CASAC was established pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1977, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7409(d)(2), to review air quality criteria and NAAQS and recommend to the EPA Administrator any new NAAQS and revisions of existing criteria and NAAQS as may be appropriate. The CASAC shall also: advise the EPA Administrator of areas in which additional knowledge is required to appraise the adequacy and basis of existing, new, or revised NAAQS; describe the research efforts necessary to provide the required information; advise the EPA Administrator on the relative contribution to air pollution concentrations of natural as well as anthropogenic activity; and advise the EPA Administrator of any adverse public health, welfare, social, economic, or energy effects which may result from various strategies for attainment and maintenance of such NAAQS. As amended, 5 U.S.C., App. Section 109(d)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that EPA carry out a periodic review and revision, as appropriate, of the air quality criteria and the NAAQS for the six ‘‘criteria’’ air pollutants, including lead. The CASAC is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2, and conducts business in accordance with FACA and related regulations. The CASAC and the CASAC Lead Panel will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that the CASAC Lead Panel will hold a public meeting to receive a briefing from EPA on the Lead ISA and a public meeting for the panel to peer review the Lead E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17215-17218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05354]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0430; FRL-10784-01-OAR]


Notice of Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor 
Air.

ACTION: Notice of availability; opening of a 60-day public comment 
period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seeks input on 
criteria to help align and ensure consistency across radon service 
provider credentialing programs operated by certification bodies and 
states. The criteria reflect stakeholder feedback received in response 
to a 2017 Federal Register Notice on the same subject and consideration 
of conformity assessment practices in place across the federal 
government. The EPA is soliciting comment on these criteria. The 
comments will inform development of the final version of the criteria.

DATES: Comments may be submitted on or before May 22, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2017-0430 by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov 
(our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
     Email: [email protected]. Include Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2017-0430 in the subject line of the message.
     U.S. Postal Service Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, EPA Docket Center, Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Docket Center, WJC West 
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. 
The Docket Center's hours of operations are 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m., 
Monday-Friday (except Federal Holidays).
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0430. Comments received may be posted without 
change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal 
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments, 
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katrin Kral, Indoor Environments 
Division, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air 6609T, Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; 
202-343-9454; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Submit your comments, identified by Docket 
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0430, at https://www.regulations.gov (our 
preferred method), or the other methods identified in the ADDRESSES 
section. The

[[Page 17216]]

KEY QUESTIONS section includes specific areas on which the EPA is 
seeking comment.
    Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from the 
docket. 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. 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
     Identify the notice by docket number, subject heading, 
Federal Register date, and page number.
     Provide a brief description of yourself and your role or 
organization before addressing the questions.
     Identify the question(s) you are responding to from the 
KEY QUESTIONS section by question number when submitting your comments. 
You do not need to address every question.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used.
     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.
    Public Information Session. The EPA will also host a public 
information session during the comment period. Additional details about 
timing and the registration process for the information session webinar 
will be shared on the EPA's radon website at https://www.epa.gov/radon/epas-draft-criteria-radon-credentialing-organizations. The information 
session will cover the EPA's role in overseeing the quality of radon 
service providers as well as conformity assessment and application of 
voluntary consensus standards within federal programs, including the 
proposed criteria. Participants will have an opportunity to ask 
clarifying questions via the webinar chat function. The EPA will not 
accept comments on the criteria during the information session.

I. Background

    Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United 
States and responsible for an estimated 21,000 deaths each year. One in 
15 U.S. homes is estimated to have elevated radon levels. Radon-induced 
lung cancer is highly preventable and may be addressed by testing and 
mitigating homes when necessary. Professionals who provide radon 
testing and mitigation services play a key role in public health 
protection efforts. Because of the substantial risk resulting from 
exposure to radon, a naturally occurring radioactive gas, it is 
critical for radon service providers to possess the necessary skills to 
provide quality services, ensure consumer protection, and protect 
public health.
    Since 1988, the EPA has administered a non-regulatory program under 
the Indoor Radon Abatement Act of 1988 (IRAA) \1\ to reduce exposure to 
indoor radon by promoting awareness, testing, installation of radon 
mitigation systems in existing homes, and the use of radon-resistant 
new construction techniques in new buildings. The EPA works with state 
and tribal programs, industry, and the public to reduce human exposure 
to radon, thereby reducing deaths due to lung cancer. Essential to this 
mission is access to quality service providers who possess the skills 
required to measure indoor radon levels and conduct mitigation when 
necessary. Historically, the EPA has played a key role in establishing 
a standard of quality for radon service providers, including 
development and maintenance of a provider credentialing program (or 
provider proficiency program) and a one-time evaluation of two 
certification bodies in 2001, the National Radon Proficiency Program 
(NRPP) and the National Radon Safety Board (NRSB). Since then, the EPA 
has maintained oversight of radon credentialing systems, provided an 
associated national radon reference, and supported the development of 
and access to radon measurement and mitigation standards of practice. 
Taken together, these activities align with the EPA's authority to 
operate a proficiency program designed to rate the effectiveness of 
radon measurement and mitigation service providers and radon 
measurement devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 100-551, Title III--Indoor Radon Abatement, 
enacted October 28, 1988 (also known as the Indoor Radon Abatement 
Act of 1988 or ``IRAA'') (15 U.S.C. 2661, et seq.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An August 2017 Federal Register Notice \2\ outlined proposed non-
regulatory criteria aimed at establishing consistency across radon 
credentialing programs. These criteria included a third-party process 
for accrediting radon professional credentialing organizations to an 
international standard for certification bodies (International 
Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical 
Commission; ISO/IEC 17024:2012). The Agency requested comment on the 
proposed approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA. ``Notice of Intent to Establish Voluntary Criteria for 
Radon Credentialing Organizations; Notice of Availability; Opening 
of a 60-Day Public Comment Period.'' Federal Register (82 FR 39993, 
August 23, 2017) (FRL-9966-07-OAR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria document \3\,which is the 
subject of this notice and is included in the docket, reflects 
stakeholder feedback received through the 2017 Federal Register Notice. 
The criteria outlined in this document remain grounded in third-party 
accreditation to ISO/IEC 17024:2012,\4\ and are intended to support 
establishment and maintenance of a base level of organizational and 
program-specific competencies as well as maintain flexibility for 
state-run programs. The Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria document 
contains four sections: I--Executive Summary; II--Discussion of 
Stakeholder Input on 2017 Federal Register Notice and EPA Responses; 
III--Evaluation Framework; IV--Implementation Approach. The EPA is 
particularly interested in feedback on Sections III and IV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA. ``Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria.'' U.S. EPA, 
Washington DC, EPA 402/D-22/001, December 2022. Available in the 
Docket: EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0430.
    \4\ ISO, IEC. Conformity Assessment--General Requirements for 
Bodies Operating Certification of Persons. ISO/IEC 17024:2012(E). 2 
ed. July 1, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Evaluation Framework is grounded in conformity assessment 
practices designed to promote consistency across credentialing programs 
operated by certification bodies and states. This is accomplished 
through specifications for the maintenance of credentialing programs 
and radon measurement and mitigation service provider job categories, 
including identification of radon service provider competencies and 
assessment methods. Service providers who achieve

[[Page 17217]]

and maintain credentials from certification bodies and/or state-run 
programs that meet the Evaluation Framework specifications will have 
demonstrated and be required to maintain comparable knowledge, skills, 
and abilities to perform radon services.
    The Implementation Approach will facilitate identification of 
qualified radon service providers meeting a standardized set of 
specifications outlined within the Evaluation Framework. The 
Implementation Approach outlines the EPA's planned activities to 
facilitate adoption of the Evaluation Framework specifications:
     Develop and maintain a process by which credentialing 
organizations (certification bodies and state-run programs) can 
annually attest that they meet the Evaluation Framework specifications.
     Maintain a public list of credentialing organizations and 
accreditation bodies that meet the framework (see TSCA Sec.  305(a)).
     Establish conditions for the State and Tribal Indoor Radon 
Grants (SIRG) program. It is important to note that IRAA does not 
provide the EPA with authority to require actions on the part of state 
or tribal governments. Nonetheless, the EPA may set conditions for 
receiving funding as part of the SIRG Program, which is authorized 
under IRAA, that are consistent with the purpose of the Act.
    Taken together, the Evaluation Framework and Implementation 
Approach will help standardize program-specific competencies for 
credentialing radon service providers and facilitate access to and 
identification of a skilled and qualified workforce demonstrating a 
consistent set of competencies to perform radon testing and mitigation.

II. Request for Comments

    Comments will inform development of a final version of the Radon 
Credentialing Criteria to help align and ensure consistency across 
credentialing programs operated by certification bodies and states. 
Widespread adherence to the Evaluation Framework as reinforced by the 
Implementation Approach will support standardization of quality among 
radon service provider credentials and credentialing organizations, 
help maximize the utility of the SIRG program by providing assistance 
to states in a manner that will facilitate access to--and 
identification of--radon service providers credentialed by 
organizations meeting a consistent set of specifications, and support 
streamlined approaches to addressing provider credentials within radon 
testing/mitigation polices. This in turn may lead to increased consumer 
confidence in, and demand for, radon service providers, as well as 
expanded markets for radon service providers.
    As mentioned previously, the EPA is particularly interested in 
feedback on Sections III (Evaluation Framework) and IV (Implementation 
Approach) of the Proposed Radon Credentialing Criteria document, which 
is available in the docket. The KEY QUESTIONS section contains specific 
information requests on these two sections (III and IV).
    The Agency is seeking comment from stakeholders working to reduce 
exposure to indoor radon. This includes stakeholders involved with 
promoting and/or conducting testing and installation of radon 
mitigation systems, such as:

 Organizations credentialing radon service providers and other 
building construction and/or maintenance related providers
 Radon service providers
 Organizations who provide third-party accreditation to the 
ISO/IEC 17024:2012
 Organizations representing state health and environmental 
programs, green building initiatives, and the radon services industry
 State radon programs
 Federal agencies who own, influence, or control housing

III. Key Questions

    These questions pertain to Sections III and IV of the Proposed 
Radon Credentialing Criteria document. In addition to responding to 
specific requests for comments below, commenters are welcome to share 
any overarching feedback.
    Key Questions 1-4. These questions address the Evaluation Framework 
which outlines a set of specifications in three areas (Accreditation, 
Examination, and Maintenance) that will help promote consistency across 
credentialing programs operated by certification bodies and states. 
Service providers who achieve and maintain credentials from 
certification bodies and/or state-run programs that meet the Evaluation 
Framework will have demonstrated and be required to maintain comparable 
knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform radon services.
    1. Do you have any general feedback on the Evaluation Framework 
(Accreditation, Examination and Maintenance)?
    2. What features of the Evaluation Framework may positively and/or 
negatively impact a state's ability to make any necessary modifications 
within their organizational structures to ensure adherence of the 
state-run program to the Evaluation Framework specifications?
    3. Will creation of certifications and examinations for the 
measurement and mitigation service provider categories be sufficient 
for state-run programs seeking to meet the Evaluation Framework?
    4. Should independent certification bodies that meet the Evaluation 
Framework be required to create certifications and examinations for two 
job categories (measurement and mitigation) and two job sub-types 
distinguishing roles for an entry-level technician position and a more 
senior/supervisory specialist position?
    Key Questions 5-6. These questions cover the Examination component 
of the Evaluation Framework which includes specifications and standards 
that pertain to determining service provider mastery of competencies 
necessary to perform a specific job. Specifications for state-run 
programs that embed third-party examinations within their credentialing 
programs are also included.
    5. Is the proposed stakeholder representation on the expert panel 
adequate? Stakeholders identified to serve on a panel responsible for 
developing a job task analysis are considered essential to ensure 
appropriate representation of the entire population of stakeholders 
that contribute to, and/or participate in, the credentialing of radon 
service providers. Additional stakeholder groups (e.g., home 
inspectors, builders) may be included as part of an expert panel at the 
certification body's discretion.
    6. Should radon service providers be required to complete a device 
performance test as a requirement to receiving a credential for radon 
measurement service provider job categories?
    These performance tests are designed to evaluate a provider's 
proficiency using an analytical device. This type of performance test 
would be incorporated into the Evaluation Framework as part of the 
``Examination'' component. Credentialing organizations would be 
required to verify and validate how the performance test accurately and 
reliably assesses the task(s) identified in the job task analysis, as 
well as how it aligns with the applicable American National Standard 
which specifies minimum performance criteria and testing procedures for 
instruments and/or systems designed to quantify the concentration of 
radon-222 gas in air (MS-PC, Performance Specifications for 
Instrumentation Systems Designed to Measure Radon Gas in Air).
    Key Question 7. This question covers the Maintenance component of 
the

[[Page 17218]]

Evaluation Framework which includes specifications that help ensure 
continued adherence by certification bodies to third-party 
accreditation requirements and consistency across credentialing program 
requirements. The specifications addressing credentialing program 
requirements will help assure that radon service providers are equipped 
with knowledge, skills and competencies necessary to maintain 
credentials issued by certification bodies and state-run programs. This 
element also includes a specification for credentialing organizations 
to verify the use of approved devices and maintenance of a Quality 
Assurance Plan in accordance with the most current American National 
Standards.
    7. How frequently should providers be required to verify use of 
approved testing devices (when applicable) and maintenance of a Quality 
Assurance Plan?
    Key Questions 8-15. These questions address the Implementation 
Approach which outlines the EPA's planned activities to facilitate 
adoption of the Evaluation Framework and outlines elements for three 
time periods (while the Evaluation Framework is being finalized, once 
the Evaluation Framework is finalized and during the 3-year phase-in 
period, after the 3-year phase-in period):
     Annual Attestation Process: Develop and maintain a process 
by which credentialing organizations (certification bodies and state-
run programs) can annually attest they meet the Evaluation Framework 
specifications.
     Public List: Maintain a public list of credentialing 
organizations and accreditation bodies that meet the Evaluation 
Framework (see TSCA Sec.  305(a)).
     Conditions for the EPA's SIRG Program.
    8. Do you have any general feedback on the Implementation Approach?
    9. Will a 3-year phase-in period will be sufficient for 
certification bodies to prepare for and achieve third-party 
accreditation and meet the Evaluation Framework and for state-run 
programs to meet the Evaluation Framework?
    10. Do you have feedback on the size and impact of the costs 
associated with third-party accreditation to ISO/IEC 17024:2012?
    11. Do you have feedback regarding the proposed annual attestation 
process?
    12. What reporting mechanisms should the EPA consider for state-run 
programs to provide annual progress updates and attestations once the 
Evaluation Framework has been met?
    13. Do you have feedback regarding the proposal for the EPA to 
maintain a public list?
    14. Should the EPA identify on its website the credentialing 
organizations that have declared their intent, but do not yet meet, the 
Evaluation Framework? In this case credentialing organizations that do 
not meet all the requirements at the end of the 3-year phase-in period 
would be removed from the website until such time as they can 
demonstrate their ability to meet all the requirements of the 
Evaluation Framework.
    15. Do you have feedback regarding the proposal to establish 
conditions for the SIRG program?

Jonathan D. Edwards,
Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air.
[FR Doc. 2023-05354 Filed 3-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.