1,3-Butadiene; Draft Risk Evaluation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) Peer Review; Request for Nominations of ad hoc Peer Reviewers, 76467-76469 [2024-21229]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2024 / Notices
Issued: September 12, 2024.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–21291 Filed 9–16–24; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Project No. 2905–035]
Village of Enosburg Falls, Vermont;
Notice of Reasonable Period of Time
for Water Quality Certification
Application
On September 10, 2024, the Vermont
Department of Environmental
Conservation (Vermont DEC) submitted
to the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission) notice that it
received a request for a Clean Water Act
section 401(a)(1) water quality
certification as defined in 40 CFR 121.5,
from the Village of Enosburg Falls,
Vermont, in conjunction with the above
captioned project on August 30, 2024.
Pursuant to section 4.34(b)(5) of the
Commission’s regulations,1 we hereby
notify Vermont DEC of the following
dates.
Date of Receipt of the Certification
Request: August 30, 2024.
Reasonable Period of Time to Act on
the Certification Request: One year,
August 30, 2025.
If Vermont DEC fails or refuses to act
on the water quality certification request
on or before the above date, then the
certifying authority is deemed waived
pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).
Dated: September 11, 2024.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–21132 Filed 9–17–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL12266–01–OAR]
Clean Air Act Advisory Committee
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of charter renewal.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has determined that, in
accordance with the provisions of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act
SUMMARY:
1
18 CFR 4.34(b)(5).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:11 Sep 17, 2024
Jkt 262001
76467
(FACA), the Clean Air Act Advisory
Committee (CAAAC) is necessary and in
the public interest in connection with
the performance of duties imposed on
the agency by law. Accordingly, CAAAC
will be renewed for an additional twoyear period. The purpose of the CAAAC
is to provide advice and
recommendations to the EPA
Administrator on policy issues
associated with implementation of the
Clean Air Act. Inquiries may be directed
to Lorraine Reddick, CAAAC Designated
Federal Officer, U.S. EPA, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW (6101),
Washington, DC 20460, or by email to
reddick.lorraine@epa.gov.
information whose public disclosure is
restricted by statute. If your nomination
may contain any such information,
please contact the Designated Federal
Official to obtain special instructions
before submitting that information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Designated Federal Official is Alie
Muneer, Mission Support Division
(7602M), Office of Program Support,
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention, Environmental Protection
Agency; telephone number: (202) 564–
6369 or call the main office at (202)
564–8450; email address: muneer.alie@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Joseph Goffman,
Assistant Administrator.
I. General Information
[FR Doc. 2024–21263 Filed 9–17–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2024–0425; FRL–12241–
01–OCSPP]
1,3-Butadiene; Draft Risk Evaluation
Under the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA); Science Advisory
Committee on Chemicals (SACC) Peer
Review; Request for Nominations of ad
hoc Peer Reviewers
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA or the Agency) is seeking
nominations of scientific and technical
experts that EPA can consider for
service as ad hoc peer reviewers
assisting the Science Advisory
Committee on Chemicals (SACC) with
the peer review of the draft risk
evaluation for 1,3-butadiene conducted
under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). To facilitate nominations, this
document provides information about
the SACC, the intended topic for the
planned peer review, the expertise
sought for this peer review, instructions
for submitting nominations to EPA, and
the Agency’s plan for selecting the ad
hoc peer reviewers for this peer review.
EPA is planning to convene a virtual
public meeting of the SACC in early
2025 to review the draft risk evaluation.
DATES: Submit your nominations on or
before October 18, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your nomination via
email to SACC@epa.gov following the
instructions in Unit III. Do not
electronically submit any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
A. What action is the Agency taking?
The Agency is seeking public
nominations of scientific and technical
experts that EPA can consider for
service as ad hoc peer reviewers for the
SACC peer review of the draft risk
evaluation for 1,3-butadiene. EPA will
be soliciting comments from the experts
on the approach and methodologies
utilized in the draft risk evaluation. This
document provides instructions for
submitting such nominations for EPA to
consider for the SACC peer review. EPA
will publish a separate document in the
Federal Register in the fall of 2024 to
announce the availability of the draft
risk evaluation and solicit public
comments. The public comments
received during the public comment
period for the draft risk evaluation
material will be provided to the SACC
and ad hoc peer reviewers.
B. What is the Agency’s authority for
taking this action?
The SACC operates in accordance
with TSCA section 26(o), 15 U.S.C.
2625(o) and the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. 10, to
provide independent advice and expert
consultation with respect to the
scientific and technical aspects of issues
relating to the implementation of TSCA,
15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq., the Pollution
Prevention Act (PPA), 42 U.S.C. 13101
et seq., and other applicable statutes.
C. Does this action apply to me?
This action is directed to the public
in general. This action may, however, be
of interest to those involved in the
manufacture, processing, distribution,
and disposal of chemical substances and
mixtures, and/or those interested in the
assessment of risks involving chemical
substances and mixtures regulated
under TSCA. Since other entities may
also be interested, the Agency has not
attempted to describe all the specific
E:\FR\FM\18SEN1.SGM
18SEN1
76468
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2024 / Notices
entities that may be affected by this
action.
II. Background
A. What is the purpose of the SACC?
The SACC provides independent
advice and recommendations to the EPA
on the scientific and technical aspects of
risk assessments, methodologies, and
pollution prevention measures and
approaches for chemicals regulated
under TSCA. The SACC is comprised of
experts in toxicology; environmental
risk assessment; exposure assessment;
and related sciences (e.g., synthetic
biology, pharmacology, biotechnology,
nanotechnology, biochemistry,
biostatistics, physiologically based
pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling,
computational toxicology,
epidemiology, environmental fate,
environmental engineering and
sustainability). The SACC currently
consists of 20 members. When needed,
the committee will be assisted by ad hoc
peer reviewers with specific expertise in
the topics under consideration.
B. Why is EPA conducting these risk
evaluations?
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
TSCA requires EPA to conduct risk
evaluations on prioritized chemical
substances and identifies the minimum
components EPA must include in all
chemical substance risk evaluations.
The purpose of conducting risk
evaluations is to determine whether a
chemical substance presents an
unreasonable risk to human health or
the environment under the Conditions
of Use (COUs). These evaluations
include assessing unreasonable risks to
relevant potentially exposed or
susceptible subpopulations. As part of
this process EPA: (1) Integrates hazard
and exposure assessments using the best
available science that is reasonably
available to assure decisions are based
on the weight of the scientific evidence,
and (2) Conducts peer review for risk
evaluation approaches that have not
been previously peer reviewed. For
more information about the three stages
of the TSCA risk evaluation process for
existing chemicals (i.e., prioritization,
risk evaluation, and risk management),
go to https://www.epa.gov/assessingand-managing-chemicals-under-tsca.
C. Why is EPA evaluating the risks from
1,3-butadiene?
In December 2019, EPA designated
1,3-butadiene (CASRN 106–99–0) as a
high-priority substance for risk
evaluation following the prioritization
process as required by Section 6(b) of
TSCA and implementing regulations (40
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:11 Sep 17, 2024
Jkt 262001
CFR part 702) (Docket ID: EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2019–0131).
1,3-Butadiene (CASRN 106–99–0) is a
volatile, colorless gas with a total U.S.
production volume between 1 and 5
billion pounds. It is produced in
petrochemical processing and extracted
and further processed as a building
block for several polymers and
elastomers that do not readily
depolymerize. Air is expected to be the
major pathway of exposure for 1,3butadiene in the environment. Although
1,3-butadiene is moderately soluble in
water, monitoring data indicate that it is
not detected in water. Environmental
release data show that more than 98
percent of 1,3-butadiene facility releases
are to air. Once in air, 1,3-butadiene will
not deposit to land or adsorb to organic
matter. Long-range transport in air is not
expected, in part, because 1,3-butadiene
has a short half-life (<8 hours) and will
degrade into formaldehyde and acrolein.
Reduced fetal body weight and
hematological effects are indicated as
the most sensitive and robust noncancer human health hazards. EPA has
previously classified 1,3-butadiene as a
human carcinogen and epidemiology
studies have demonstrated an
association between 1,3-butadiene
exposure and increased incidence of
leukemia in workers.
EPA will be submitting the draft risk
evaluation of 1,3-butadiene and
associated supporting documents for
external peer review. The draft risk
evaluation will include analyses of
physical-chemical properties, the fate
and transport in the environment,
releases to the environment, exposure to
workers and the general population,
including potentially exposed or
susceptible subpopulations,
environmental risk characterization, and
human health hazard and risk
characterization for workers and the
general population.
D. What is the topic of the planned
SACC peer review?
EPA is focusing its charge to the
SACC on methods and analyses that are
novel and have not been reviewed in
other venues. Methods and analyses
used in this risk evaluation that are not
novel, have been reviewed during
development of the tools, used in
previously reviewed agency work
products, or used in previous TSCA
assessments (e.g., systematic review,
BMDS, etc.) are not included in the
charge questions. Feedback from this
review will be considered in the
development of the final risk evaluation
for 1,3-butadiene under TSCA.
Specifically, EPA will be seeking
comment on the issues below:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• No exposure to aquatic and
terrestrial species is expected due to the
physical and chemical properties of 1,3butadiene, which is primarily released
to air and does not partition, deposit, or
persist in or on water or soil. Monitoring
data indicate that 1,3-butadiene is not
detected in water. Exposure of terrestrial
organisms via ambient air will be brief
due to the reactive nature of 1,3butadiene. EPA will be seeking
comment on the qualitative risk
assessment for ecological taxa for 1,3butadiene.
• 1,3-Butadiene photodegrades with a
half-life ranging from 1.6–2.6 hours to
form formaldehyde and acrolein when it
reacts with hydroxyl radicals in the
atmosphere. Because non-cancer health
effects of formaldehyde and acrolein are
dissimilar to 1,3-butadiene non-cancer
health effects, risks will not be
combined. EPA will be seeking
comment on the preliminary decision
not to combine risk from non-cancer
health effects of 1,3-butadiene and its
transformation products.
• Reduced fetal/neonatal body weight
is observed in both mice and rats,
though there is no evidence that this
effect results from a single dose. No
other candidate acute endpoints were
identified. As such, EPA has not
identified a relevant endpoint for acute,
single-day exposure to 1,3-butadiene.
EPA will be seeking comment on this
preliminary conclusion to forego
establishing an acute point of departure.
• Ovarian atrophy is an adverse effect
observed only in mice and can be
attributed to a specific 1,3-butadiene
metabolite (diepoxybutane) that is less
prevalent in rats and humans. EPA is
conducting an evaluation of the
relevance of ovarian atrophy for
assessing human risk. EPA will be
proposing to use decreased fetal body
weight as the basis for the intermediate
and chronic points of departure for 1,3butadiene. EPA will be seeking
comment on these preliminary
conclusions to establish intermediate
and chronic points of departure based
on reduced fetal body weight instead of
ovarian atrophy.
• OPPT is revising the inhalation unit
risk (IUR) for 1,3-butadiene presented in
the IRIS 2002 assessment to incorporate
updated epidemiological cohort data.
EPA will be seeking comment on the
mathematical approach and new
epidemiological cohort data used in the
revised IUR.
• EPA is conducting a mutagenic
mode of action analysis and evaluating
whether the use of an age-dependent
adjustment factor (ADAF) for leukemia
is appropriate. EPA will be seeking
E:\FR\FM\18SEN1.SGM
18SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2024 / Notices
comment on this analysis and
preliminary conclusion.
• The majority of occupational
exposure sampling data points,
collected from OSHA, NIOSH, and
ACC’s report, are not quantifiable values
but are identified as being below the
limit of detection (LOD). For datasets
including exposure data that were
reported as below the LOD, EPA is
estimating exposure concentrations,
following EPA’s Guidelines for
Statistical Analysis of Occupational
Exposure Data. EPA will be seeking
comment on this approach and the
relevance of this dataset for risk
characterization.
• General population exposure to 1,3butadiene is being modeled using the
Human Exposure Model (HEM) to
estimate ambient air concentrations
based on releases reported to the Toxic
Release Inventory (TRI) for years 2016 to
2021. Exposure concentrations are being
modeled at discrete distances from
releasing facilities and surrounding
census blocks. EPA will be seeking
comment on this analysis and
preliminary conclusions.
EPA intends to publish a separate
document in the Federal Register to
announce the availability of and solicit
public comment on the draft risk
evaluation for 1,3-butadiene that will be
submitted to the SACC for peer review,
at which time EPA will provide
instructions for submitting written
comments and registering to provide
oral comments at the peer review
meeting with the SACC that is planned
for early 2025.
III. Nominations of Ad Hoc Peer
Reviewers
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
A. Why is EPA seeking nominations for
ad hoc peer reviewers?
EPA is requesting nominations from
the public and stakeholder communities
for scientific and technical experts who
can serve as prospective candidates for
ad hoc peer reviewers supporting the
SACC. This is part of a broader process
for developing a pool of candidates.
Interested persons or organizations can
nominate qualified individuals by
following the instructions provided in
this document. Individuals are also
welcome to self-nominate.
Those who are selected from the pool
of prospective candidates will be
invited to attend the public meeting and
to participate in the discussion of key
issues and assumptions at the meeting.
In addition, they will be asked to review
and help finalize the meeting minutes.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:11 Sep 17, 2024
Jkt 262001
76469
B. What expertise is sought for this
SACC peer review?
E. How will EPA select the ad hoc peer
reviewers?
Individuals nominated for this ad hoc
peer review should have expertise in
one or more of the following areas:
1. Risk assessment.
2. Ecological risk assessment,
specifically with expertise in physical
chemistry, environmental fate, and
synthetic polymers.
3. Human health assessment,
specifically with expertise in modes of
action, mutagenicity, developmental
and reproductive toxicity, doseresponse, and cancer epidemiology.
4. Exposure assessment, specifically
with expertise in occupational
inhalation monitoring and air exposure
modeling.
Nominees should be scientists who
have sufficient professional
qualifications, including training and
experience, to be capable of providing
expert comments on the scientific issues
for this review.
The selection of scientists to serve as
ad hoc peer reviewers for the SACC is
based on the function of the Committee
and the expertise needed to address the
Agency’s charge to the Committee. No
interested scientists shall be ineligible
to serve by reason of their membership
on any advisory committee to a federal
department or agency or their
employment by a federal department or
agency, except EPA. Other factors
considered during the selection process
include availability of the prospective
candidate to fully participate in the
Committee’s reviews, ability to be hired
as an EPA Special Government
Employee (SGE), absence of any
conflicts of interest or appearance of
loss of impartiality, independence with
respect to the matters under review, and
lack of bias. Although financial conflicts
of interest, the appearance of loss of
impartiality, lack of independence, and
bias may result in non-selection, the
absence of such concerns does not
assure that a candidate will be selected
to serve on the SACC.
Numerous qualified candidates are
often identified for SACC reviews.
Therefore, selection decisions involve
carefully weighing a number of factors
including the candidates’ areas of
expertise and professional qualifications
and achieving an overall balance of
different scientific perspectives across
peer reviewers. The Agency will
consider all nominations of prospective
candidates for service as peer reviewers
that are received on or before the date
listed in the DATES section of this
document. However, the final selection
of peer reviewers is a discretionary
function of the Agency. At this time,
EPA anticipates selecting approximately
8–10 ad hoc peer reviewers for this
SACC peer review.
EPA plans to make a list of candidates
under consideration as prospective peer
reviewers for this SACC review
available for public comment during the
fall of 2024. The list will be available in
the docket at https://
www.regulations.gov (docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPPT–0425) and through the
SACC website at https://www.epa.gov/
tsca-peer-review.
C. How do I make a nomination?
By the deadline indicated under
submit your nomination via
email to the email identified in
ADDRESSES. Each nomination should
include the following: Contact
information for the person or entity
making the nomination; name,
affiliation, and contact information for
the nominee; and the disciplinary and
specific areas of expertise of the
nominee.
DATES,
D. Will ad hoc peer reviewers be
subjected to an ethics review?
SACC members and ad hoc reviewers
are subject to the provisions of the
Standards of Ethical Conduct for
Employees of the Executive Branch at 5
CFR part 2635, conflict of interest
statutes in Title 18 of the United States
Code and related regulations. In
anticipation of this requirement,
prospective candidates for service on
the SACC as ad hoc peer reviewers will
be asked to submit confidential
financial information which shall fully
disclose, among other financial
interests, the candidate’s employment,
stocks and bonds, and where applicable,
sources of research support. EPA will
evaluate the candidates’ financial
disclosure forms to assess whether there
are financial conflicts of interest,
appearance of a loss of impartiality, or
any prior involvement with the
development of the documents under
consideration (including previous
scientific peer review) before the
candidate is considered further for
service.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
Dated: September 12, 2024.
Michal Freedhoff,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2024–21229 Filed 9–17–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\18SEN1.SGM
18SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 18, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76467-76469]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-21229]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2024-0425; FRL-12241-01-OCSPP]
1,3-Butadiene; Draft Risk Evaluation Under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA); Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) Peer
Review; Request for Nominations of ad hoc Peer Reviewers
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
seeking nominations of scientific and technical experts that EPA can
consider for service as ad hoc peer reviewers assisting the Science
Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) with the peer review of the
draft risk evaluation for 1,3-butadiene conducted under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). To facilitate nominations, this document
provides information about the SACC, the intended topic for the planned
peer review, the expertise sought for this peer review, instructions
for submitting nominations to EPA, and the Agency's plan for selecting
the ad hoc peer reviewers for this peer review. EPA is planning to
convene a virtual public meeting of the SACC in early 2025 to review
the draft risk evaluation.
DATES: Submit your nominations on or before October 18, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your nomination via email to [email protected] following
the instructions in Unit III. Do not electronically submit any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute.
If your nomination may contain any such information, please contact the
Designated Federal Official to obtain special instructions before
submitting that information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Designated Federal Official is
Alie Muneer, Mission Support Division (7602M), Office of Program
Support, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention,
Environmental Protection Agency; telephone number: (202) 564-6369 or
call the main office at (202) 564-8450; email address:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. What action is the Agency taking?
The Agency is seeking public nominations of scientific and
technical experts that EPA can consider for service as ad hoc peer
reviewers for the SACC peer review of the draft risk evaluation for
1,3-butadiene. EPA will be soliciting comments from the experts on the
approach and methodologies utilized in the draft risk evaluation. This
document provides instructions for submitting such nominations for EPA
to consider for the SACC peer review. EPA will publish a separate
document in the Federal Register in the fall of 2024 to announce the
availability of the draft risk evaluation and solicit public comments.
The public comments received during the public comment period for the
draft risk evaluation material will be provided to the SACC and ad hoc
peer reviewers.
B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?
The SACC operates in accordance with TSCA section 26(o), 15 U.S.C.
2625(o) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. 10, to
provide independent advice and expert consultation with respect to the
scientific and technical aspects of issues relating to the
implementation of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq., the Pollution
Prevention Act (PPA), 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq., and other applicable
statutes.
C. Does this action apply to me?
This action is directed to the public in general. This action may,
however, be of interest to those involved in the manufacture,
processing, distribution, and disposal of chemical substances and
mixtures, and/or those interested in the assessment of risks involving
chemical substances and mixtures regulated under TSCA. Since other
entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to
describe all the specific
[[Page 76468]]
entities that may be affected by this action.
II. Background
A. What is the purpose of the SACC?
The SACC provides independent advice and recommendations to the EPA
on the scientific and technical aspects of risk assessments,
methodologies, and pollution prevention measures and approaches for
chemicals regulated under TSCA. The SACC is comprised of experts in
toxicology; environmental risk assessment; exposure assessment; and
related sciences (e.g., synthetic biology, pharmacology, biotechnology,
nanotechnology, biochemistry, biostatistics, physiologically based
pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling, computational toxicology,
epidemiology, environmental fate, environmental engineering and
sustainability). The SACC currently consists of 20 members. When
needed, the committee will be assisted by ad hoc peer reviewers with
specific expertise in the topics under consideration.
B. Why is EPA conducting these risk evaluations?
TSCA requires EPA to conduct risk evaluations on prioritized
chemical substances and identifies the minimum components EPA must
include in all chemical substance risk evaluations. The purpose of
conducting risk evaluations is to determine whether a chemical
substance presents an unreasonable risk to human health or the
environment under the Conditions of Use (COUs). These evaluations
include assessing unreasonable risks to relevant potentially exposed or
susceptible subpopulations. As part of this process EPA: (1) Integrates
hazard and exposure assessments using the best available science that
is reasonably available to assure decisions are based on the weight of
the scientific evidence, and (2) Conducts peer review for risk
evaluation approaches that have not been previously peer reviewed. For
more information about the three stages of the TSCA risk evaluation
process for existing chemicals (i.e., prioritization, risk evaluation,
and risk management), go to https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca.
C. Why is EPA evaluating the risks from 1,3-butadiene?
In December 2019, EPA designated 1,3-butadiene (CASRN 106-99-0) as
a high-priority substance for risk evaluation following the
prioritization process as required by Section 6(b) of TSCA and
implementing regulations (40 CFR part 702) (Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2019-0131).
1,3-Butadiene (CASRN 106-99-0) is a volatile, colorless gas with a
total U.S. production volume between 1 and 5 billion pounds. It is
produced in petrochemical processing and extracted and further
processed as a building block for several polymers and elastomers that
do not readily depolymerize. Air is expected to be the major pathway of
exposure for 1,3-butadiene in the environment. Although 1,3-butadiene
is moderately soluble in water, monitoring data indicate that it is not
detected in water. Environmental release data show that more than 98
percent of 1,3-butadiene facility releases are to air. Once in air,
1,3-butadiene will not deposit to land or adsorb to organic matter.
Long-range transport in air is not expected, in part, because 1,3-
butadiene has a short half-life (<8 hours) and will degrade into
formaldehyde and acrolein.
Reduced fetal body weight and hematological effects are indicated
as the most sensitive and robust non-cancer human health hazards. EPA
has previously classified 1,3-butadiene as a human carcinogen and
epidemiology studies have demonstrated an association between 1,3-
butadiene exposure and increased incidence of leukemia in workers.
EPA will be submitting the draft risk evaluation of 1,3-butadiene
and associated supporting documents for external peer review. The draft
risk evaluation will include analyses of physical-chemical properties,
the fate and transport in the environment, releases to the environment,
exposure to workers and the general population, including potentially
exposed or susceptible subpopulations, environmental risk
characterization, and human health hazard and risk characterization for
workers and the general population.
D. What is the topic of the planned SACC peer review?
EPA is focusing its charge to the SACC on methods and analyses that
are novel and have not been reviewed in other venues. Methods and
analyses used in this risk evaluation that are not novel, have been
reviewed during development of the tools, used in previously reviewed
agency work products, or used in previous TSCA assessments (e.g.,
systematic review, BMDS, etc.) are not included in the charge
questions. Feedback from this review will be considered in the
development of the final risk evaluation for 1,3-butadiene under TSCA.
Specifically, EPA will be seeking comment on the issues below:
No exposure to aquatic and terrestrial species is expected
due to the physical and chemical properties of 1,3-butadiene, which is
primarily released to air and does not partition, deposit, or persist
in or on water or soil. Monitoring data indicate that 1,3-butadiene is
not detected in water. Exposure of terrestrial organisms via ambient
air will be brief due to the reactive nature of 1,3-butadiene. EPA will
be seeking comment on the qualitative risk assessment for ecological
taxa for 1,3-butadiene.
1,3-Butadiene photodegrades with a half-life ranging from
1.6-2.6 hours to form formaldehyde and acrolein when it reacts with
hydroxyl radicals in the atmosphere. Because non-cancer health effects
of formaldehyde and acrolein are dissimilar to 1,3-butadiene non-cancer
health effects, risks will not be combined. EPA will be seeking comment
on the preliminary decision not to combine risk from non-cancer health
effects of 1,3-butadiene and its transformation products.
Reduced fetal/neonatal body weight is observed in both
mice and rats, though there is no evidence that this effect results
from a single dose. No other candidate acute endpoints were identified.
As such, EPA has not identified a relevant endpoint for acute, single-
day exposure to 1,3-butadiene. EPA will be seeking comment on this
preliminary conclusion to forego establishing an acute point of
departure.
Ovarian atrophy is an adverse effect observed only in mice
and can be attributed to a specific 1,3-butadiene metabolite
(diepoxybutane) that is less prevalent in rats and humans. EPA is
conducting an evaluation of the relevance of ovarian atrophy for
assessing human risk. EPA will be proposing to use decreased fetal body
weight as the basis for the intermediate and chronic points of
departure for 1,3-butadiene. EPA will be seeking comment on these
preliminary conclusions to establish intermediate and chronic points of
departure based on reduced fetal body weight instead of ovarian
atrophy.
OPPT is revising the inhalation unit risk (IUR) for 1,3-
butadiene presented in the IRIS 2002 assessment to incorporate updated
epidemiological cohort data. EPA will be seeking comment on the
mathematical approach and new epidemiological cohort data used in the
revised IUR.
EPA is conducting a mutagenic mode of action analysis and
evaluating whether the use of an age-dependent adjustment factor (ADAF)
for leukemia is appropriate. EPA will be seeking
[[Page 76469]]
comment on this analysis and preliminary conclusion.
The majority of occupational exposure sampling data
points, collected from OSHA, NIOSH, and ACC's report, are not
quantifiable values but are identified as being below the limit of
detection (LOD). For datasets including exposure data that were
reported as below the LOD, EPA is estimating exposure concentrations,
following EPA's Guidelines for Statistical Analysis of Occupational
Exposure Data. EPA will be seeking comment on this approach and the
relevance of this dataset for risk characterization.
General population exposure to 1,3-butadiene is being
modeled using the Human Exposure Model (HEM) to estimate ambient air
concentrations based on releases reported to the Toxic Release
Inventory (TRI) for years 2016 to 2021. Exposure concentrations are
being modeled at discrete distances from releasing facilities and
surrounding census blocks. EPA will be seeking comment on this analysis
and preliminary conclusions.
EPA intends to publish a separate document in the Federal Register
to announce the availability of and solicit public comment on the draft
risk evaluation for 1,3-butadiene that will be submitted to the SACC
for peer review, at which time EPA will provide instructions for
submitting written comments and registering to provide oral comments at
the peer review meeting with the SACC that is planned for early 2025.
III. Nominations of Ad Hoc Peer Reviewers
A. Why is EPA seeking nominations for ad hoc peer reviewers?
EPA is requesting nominations from the public and stakeholder
communities for scientific and technical experts who can serve as
prospective candidates for ad hoc peer reviewers supporting the SACC.
This is part of a broader process for developing a pool of candidates.
Interested persons or organizations can nominate qualified individuals
by following the instructions provided in this document. Individuals
are also welcome to self-nominate.
Those who are selected from the pool of prospective candidates will
be invited to attend the public meeting and to participate in the
discussion of key issues and assumptions at the meeting. In addition,
they will be asked to review and help finalize the meeting minutes.
B. What expertise is sought for this SACC peer review?
Individuals nominated for this ad hoc peer review should have
expertise in one or more of the following areas:
1. Risk assessment.
2. Ecological risk assessment, specifically with expertise in
physical chemistry, environmental fate, and synthetic polymers.
3. Human health assessment, specifically with expertise in modes of
action, mutagenicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, dose-
response, and cancer epidemiology.
4. Exposure assessment, specifically with expertise in occupational
inhalation monitoring and air exposure modeling.
Nominees should be scientists who have sufficient professional
qualifications, including training and experience, to be capable of
providing expert comments on the scientific issues for this review.
C. How do I make a nomination?
By the deadline indicated under DATES, submit your nomination via
email to the email identified in ADDRESSES. Each nomination should
include the following: Contact information for the person or entity
making the nomination; name, affiliation, and contact information for
the nominee; and the disciplinary and specific areas of expertise of
the nominee.
D. Will ad hoc peer reviewers be subjected to an ethics review?
SACC members and ad hoc reviewers are subject to the provisions of
the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch
at 5 CFR part 2635, conflict of interest statutes in Title 18 of the
United States Code and related regulations. In anticipation of this
requirement, prospective candidates for service on the SACC as ad hoc
peer reviewers will be asked to submit confidential financial
information which shall fully disclose, among other financial
interests, the candidate's employment, stocks and bonds, and where
applicable, sources of research support. EPA will evaluate the
candidates' financial disclosure forms to assess whether there are
financial conflicts of interest, appearance of a loss of impartiality,
or any prior involvement with the development of the documents under
consideration (including previous scientific peer review) before the
candidate is considered further for service.
E. How will EPA select the ad hoc peer reviewers?
The selection of scientists to serve as ad hoc peer reviewers for
the SACC is based on the function of the Committee and the expertise
needed to address the Agency's charge to the Committee. No interested
scientists shall be ineligible to serve by reason of their membership
on any advisory committee to a federal department or agency or their
employment by a federal department or agency, except EPA. Other factors
considered during the selection process include availability of the
prospective candidate to fully participate in the Committee's reviews,
ability to be hired as an EPA Special Government Employee (SGE),
absence of any conflicts of interest or appearance of loss of
impartiality, independence with respect to the matters under review,
and lack of bias. Although financial conflicts of interest, the
appearance of loss of impartiality, lack of independence, and bias may
result in non-selection, the absence of such concerns does not assure
that a candidate will be selected to serve on the SACC.
Numerous qualified candidates are often identified for SACC
reviews. Therefore, selection decisions involve carefully weighing a
number of factors including the candidates' areas of expertise and
professional qualifications and achieving an overall balance of
different scientific perspectives across peer reviewers. The Agency
will consider all nominations of prospective candidates for service as
peer reviewers that are received on or before the date listed in the
DATES section of this document. However, the final selection of peer
reviewers is a discretionary function of the Agency. At this time, EPA
anticipates selecting approximately 8-10 ad hoc peer reviewers for this
SACC peer review.
EPA plans to make a list of candidates under consideration as
prospective peer reviewers for this SACC review available for public
comment during the fall of 2024. The list will be available in the
docket at https://www.regulations.gov (docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-
0425) and through the SACC website at https://www.epa.gov/tsca-peer-review.
Dated: September 12, 2024.
Michal Freedhoff,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2024-21229 Filed 9-17-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P