i

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

For Renewal of Information Collection Requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

40 CFR Part 6:

Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and 

Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions

Table of Contents

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION............................................ 1

1(a) Title of the Information Collection .................................................................................1

1(b) Abstract ...........................................................................................................................1

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION ................................................................... 3

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection...................................................................................3

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data...................................................................................3

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA..... 3

3(a) Nonduplication ................................................................................................................3

(b) Public Notice Requirement Regarding ICR Submission to OMB ..................................4

3(c) Consultations...................................................................................................................4

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection ................................................................................4

3(e) General Guidelines..........................................................................................................5

3(f) Confidentiality.................................................................................................................5

3(g) Sensitive Questions .........................................................................................................5

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED ..................................... 5

4(a) Respondents.....................................................................................................................5

4(b) Information Required ......................................................................................................8

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED -- AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION 

METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT ................................................... 11

5(a) Agency Activities..........................................................................................................11

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management ...................................................................11

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility .................................................................................................11

5(d) Collection Schedule.......................................................................................................13

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN OF THE COLLECTION .................................................... 13

6(a) Estimated Respondent Burden ......................................................................................14

6(b) Estimated Federal Government Burden ........................................................................22

6(c) Estimated Annual and 3-Year Aggregate Burden.........................................................29

6(d) Burden Statement Summary and Burden Statement .....................................................32

Part B of the Statistical Survey – Statistical Survey ....................................................36
ii

Attachments

Attachment 1: Exemptions from NEPA for Certain EPA Actions and EPA’s Voluntary NEPA 

Policy and Procedures

Attachment 2: Estimates of Hours and Contractor Costs for Applicants and EPA

List of Acronyms

CE Categorical Exclusion

CEQ Regulations Council on Environmental Quality’s Regulations, 40 CFR 1500 – 1508

EA Environmental assessment

EID Environmental information document

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FONSI Finding of no significant impact

FMSD Facilities Management and Services Division

ICR Information collection request

MPRSA Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 – 4347

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

OMB Office of Management and Budget

PRF Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

ROD Record of Decision

SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

STAG State and Tribal Assistance Grants
1

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

For Renewal of Information Collection Requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

40 CFR Part 6:

Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and

Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1(a) Title of the Information Collection: "Procedures for Implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act and Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions” –

i.e., 40 CFR Part 6

1(b) Abstract:

In September 2007, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) amended its 

procedures for implementing the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA). The final rule also includes the Agency’s procedures for implementing Executive Order 

12114, “Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions.”

EPA’s Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act. The 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347 establishes the federal 

government’s national policy for protection of the environment. The Council on Environmental

Quality Regulations (CEQ Regulations) at 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508 establish procedures 

implementing the national policy. The CEQ Regulations (40 CFR 1505.1) require federal 

agencies to adopt and, as needed, revise their own implementing procedures to supplement the 

CEQ Regulations and to ensure their decision-making processes are consistent with NEPA.

EPA amended its procedures for implementing the requirements of the CEQ Regulations 

for NEPA. Specifically, the final rule amended EPA’s NEPA implementing procedures by: (1) 

consolidating and standardizing the procedural provisions and requirements of the Agency’s 

environmental review process under NEPA; (2) clarifying the general procedures associated with 

categorical exclusions, consolidating the categories of actions subject to categorical exclusion, 

amending existing and adding new categorical exclusions, and consolidating and amending 

existing and adding new extraordinary circumstances; (3) consolidating and amending the listing 

of actions that generally require an environmental impact statement; (4) clarifying the procedural 

requirements for consideration of applicable environmental review laws and executive orders; and 

(5) incorporating other revisions consistent with CEQ’s Regulations.

Those subject to the final NEPA rule include EPA officials who must comply with NEPA 
2

and certain grant or permit applicants who must submit environmental information documentation 

to EPA for their proposed projects. The final NEPA regulations consolidate and standardize the 

environmental review process applicable to all EPA actions subject to NEPA, including those 

actions now specifically addressed in the regulations and other actions subject to NEPA but not 

specifically addressed in the regulations (e.g., certain grants awarded for special projects 

authorized by Congress through the Agency’s annual Appropriations Act).1

Compliance with 40 CFR Part 6 is the responsibility of EPA's Responsible Officials. For 

applicant-proposed actions, certain procedures apply to applicants (that is grantees and permit 

applicants) who must submit environmental information to EPA as part of the environmental 

review process. The EPA Responsible Official is responsible for the environmental review 

process, including any categorical exclusion determination or the scope, accuracy, and contents of 

a final environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS) and any

supporting documents. The applicant contributes by submitting environmental information to 

EPA as part of the environmental review process.

For actions subject to NEPA, the Responsible Official may determine that the proposed 

action does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment 

and may, therefore, be categorically excluded from further NEPA review. If the proposed action 

is not categorically excluded, the Responsible Official may prepare an EA in order to determine 

whether to prepare an EIS or a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). If necessary, the 

Responsible Official must prepare an EIS if the proposed action will have a significant effect on 

the human environment. For applicant-proposed actions, the applicant may submit information to 

the Responsible Official regarding the applicability of a categorical exclusion and request a 

determination by the Responsible Official. Unless the applicant-proposed action is categorically 

excluded, the Responsible Official may gather the information and prepare the NEPA documents 

without assistance from the applicant, or have the applicant prepare an environmental information 

document (EID) or a draft EA and supporting documents or implement a third-party contract 

agreement with the applicant.

EPA’s Procedures for Implementing Executive Order 12114. 40 CFR Part 6 also includes 

EPA’s procedures, “Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions,” that 

implement Executive Order 12114, “Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions" 

(see 46 FR 3364). EPA’s Executive Order 12114 procedures further the purpose of NEPA and 

provide that EPA may be guided by its NEPA procedures to the extent they are applicable.2 

 

1

Certain EPA actions are exempt from the procedural requirements of NEPA and the CEQ Regulations. See 

Attachment 1.

2

The courts have determined, and CEQ has issued guidelines, that NEPA does not apply to Federal agency 

actions significantly affecting the environment of the global commons or the environment of a foreign nation not 

participating with the United States and not otherwise involved in the action. The Executive Order is “... solely for 
3

Therefore, when EPA conducts an environmental assessment pursuant to its Executive Order 

12114 procedures, the Agency generally follows its NEPA procedures. Compliance with the 

procedures is the responsibility of EPA’s Responsible Officials and for applicant-proposed 

actions, applicants may be required to provide environmental information to EPA as part of the 

environmental review process. For this Information Collection Request (ICR), applicantproposed projects subject to either NEPA or Executive Order 12114 (and that are not addressed in 

other EPA programs’ ICRs) are addressed through the NEPA process.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection: The CEQ Regulations (40 CFR 1505.1) 

require federal agencies to adopt and, as needed, revise their own implementing procedures to 

supplement the CEQ Regulations. The purpose of 40 CFR Part 6 is to satisfy the procedural 

requirements of the CEQ Regulations for NEPA. Additionally, 40 CFR Part 6 includes EPA's 

environment review procedures implementing Executive Order 12114. EPA is collecting 

information from certain applicants as part of the process of complying with either NEPA or 

Executive Order 12114.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data: EPA’s NEPA regulations apply to the 

actions of EPA that are subject to NEPA in order to ensure that environmental information is 

available to the Agency's decision-makers and the public before decisions are made and before 

actions are taken. This includes actions such as wastewater treatment construction grants under 

Title II of the Clean Water Act, EPA’s issuance of new source National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permits, certain research and development projects, EPA actions 

involving renovations at or new construction of EPA facilities, and certain grants awarded for 

special projects authorized by Congress through the Agency’s annual Appropriations Act. EPA 

actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals may include any of these except 

EPA actions for construction of special purpose facilities or facility renovations of EPA facilities. 

The Part 6 regulations also include EPA’s procedures implementing Executive Order 12114. 

These procedures ensure that environmental information is available to the Agency’s decisionmakers and other appropriate Federal agencies and officials for actions subject to Executive Order 

12114.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION 

CRITERIA

3(a) Nonduplication: For both the NEPA and Executive Order 12114 implementing 

procedures, the information submitted by an applicant does not duplicate information otherwise 

submitted to the government. For an EPA action subject to NEPA that is based on an applicant 

proposal, the applicant (e.g., grantee or permit applicant) would submit information used by the 

 

the purpose of establishing internal procedures for Federal agencies to consider the significant effects of their actions 

on the environment outside the [U.S.], its territories and possessions ...” [Executive 0rder 12114, Section 3-1]
4

Responsible Official during the environmental review process. This one-time submission is 

specific to the applicant's proposed action in order to provide project-specific information 

necessary for the Responsible Official’s environmental review of the proposed action.

3(b) Public Notice Requirement Regarding ICR Submission to OMB: The Office 

of Federal Activities published a Notice in the Federal Register on this ICR renewal requesting 

public comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden 

estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of 

automated collection techniques. EPA established a public docket for this ICR renewal, under 

Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0062. EPA requested that any comments related to the 

ICR renewal be submitted to EPA and OMB. EPA's docket is available for public viewing at the 

Public Reading Room, Room B102, Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information 

Center, EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the 

telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center is (202) 

566-1752. An electronic version of the public docket is available at http://www.regulations.gov. 

The public may use the public docket to obtain a copy of the ICR including the Supporting 

Statement, review public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, 

and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.

3(c) Consultations:

EPA’s NEPA Practitioners: EPA actions subject to NEPA or Executive Order 12114 that are 

based on applicant proposals are one-time only and involve various government jurisdictions and 

businesses rather than repeated requests for information from specific government jurisdictions 

and businesses. EPA relied on information available from its NEPA practitioners and their 

experience working with grantees and permit applicants to prepare the burden estimates in this 

ICR. These are the same EPA practitioners that conduct the assessments of applicant-proposed 

actions subject to NEPA or Executive Order 12114 as further discussed in Section 4(a) of this 

Supporting Statement. As provided for in Executive Order 12114, EPA’s NEPA procedures may

be used for assessing these projects. EPA has, however, requested public comment on this ICR as 

discussed in Section 3(b), above.

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ): 40 CFR Part 6 was developed in consultation with 

CEQ (see 40 CFR 1507.3(a)).

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection: Under 40 CFR Part 6, respondents submit 

project-specific information only for EPA actions subject to NEPA or Executive Order 12114 that 

are based on applicant proposals (as further discussed in Section 4(a)). Such actions are generally

one-time requests from EPA for environmental information from applicants requesting grant 

assistance for specific projects subject to NEPA or for new source NPDES permits to be issued by

EPA. There are no ongoing or periodic reporting or recordkeeping requirements.
5

3(e) General Guidelines: The information submitted by applicants would be 

consistent with the guidelines of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 5 CFR 1320.6. 

For an applicant-proposed action, the applicant (e.g., grantee or permit applicant) submits 

information to EPA's Responsible Official as part of the environmental review process. This is a 

one-time submission specific to the applicant's proposed action in order to provide projectspecific information necessary for the environmental review of the proposed action. The 

Responsible Official, however, may ask the applicant to provide additional information if the 

Responsible Official needs it to prepare the EA or EIS. There are no schedule requirements or 

requirements on the number of copies of the documentation to be submitted or requirements for 

ongoing reporting or recordkeeping or to conduct statistical surveys.

3(f) Confidentiality: 40 CFR Part 6 does not require applicants to submit confidential, 

proprietary or trade secret information.

3(g) Sensitive Questions: 40 CFR Part 6 does not require applicant response to 

sensitive questions (e.g., questions concerning sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, or 

other matters usually considered private).

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

4(a) Respondents: Those subject to 40 CFR Part 6 include EPA officials who must 

comply with NEPA or Executive Order 12114, and certain grant or permit applicants who must 

submit environmental information documentation to EPA for their projects. For purposes of 

delineating the information collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq., "applicants" (e.g., grantees or permit applicants) are the respondents (e.g., the 

persons who must generate, maintain, or provide information to or for a Federal agency).

EPA actions generally subject to NEPA include: wastewater treatment construction 

grants, issuance of new source NPDES permits by EPA, certain research and development grants, 

EPA actions for construction of special purpose facilities or facility renovations of EPA facilities, 

and certain grants awarded for projects authorized by Congress through the Agency’s annual 

Appropriations Act. EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals may

include any of these except EPA actions for construction of special purpose facilities or facility

renovations of EPA facilities. The EPA Responsible Official is responsible for the environmental 

review process, including any categorical exclusion determination or the scope, accuracy, and 

contents of a final EA or EIS and any supporting documents. The applicant may contribute by

submitting environmental information to EPA as part of the environmental review process.

EPA actions typically subject to Executive Order 12114 include major EPA actions which 

affect the environment of a foreign nation or the global commons and may include: major 

research or demonstration projects, ocean dumping activities carried out under section 102 of the 

Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) (33U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), major 
6

permitting or licensing of facilities by EPA,3 Wastewater Treatment Construction Grant Program 

under section 201 of the Clean Water Act when activities addressed in the facility plan would 

have environmental effects abroad, and other EPA activities as determined by EPA.

Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants Program facilities or new source NPDES 

permits to be issued by EPA for facilities in the U.S. bordering Mexico or Canada are subject to 

EPA’s NEPA implementing procedures. If these facilities could have significant environmental 

effects abroad, generally they would also be subject to EPA’s procedures implementing Executive 

Order 12114. In addition, EPA has determined that certain grants awarded for special projects 

authorized by Congress through the Agency’s annual Appropriations Act are subject to NEPA. 

STAG special projects in the U.S. bordering Mexico or Canada and that could have significant 

environmental effects abroad generally would also be subject to EPA’s procedures implementing 

Executive Order 12114.

Further, certain actions subject to EPA’s Executive Order 12114 implementing procedures 

are not subject to EPA’s NEPA implementing procedures. As with EPA’s current Part 6 

regulations, EPA’s Executive Order 12114 implementing procedures (with only minor, technical 

amendments) provide that: (a) for ocean dumping activities, the information submitted under 40 

CFR part 221 is sufficient to satisfy the environmental assessment requirements; and (b) for 

permits issued under section 3005 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, section 402 of 

the Clean Water Act, and section 165 of the Clean Air Act, the information submitted by

applicants for such permits or approvals under the applicable consolidated permit regulations (40 

CFR parts 122 and 124) and Prevention of Significant Deterioration regulations (40 CFR part 52) 

satisfy the environmental document requirements of Executive Order 12114.

In summary, the applicant burden for any applicant-proposed actions, including permitting 

or licensing, under these authorities is already addressed under EPA’s ICRs for these programs 

and is not further addressed in this ICR. However, the applicant burden for any EPA action 

subject to NEPA and/or Executive Order 12114 that is based on an applicant proposal, including 

Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants Program facilities, STAG actions subject to NEPA 

and new source NPDES permits issued by EPA, is addressed in this ICR. EPA’s Executive Order 

12114 implementing procedures further the purpose of NEPA and provide that EPA may be 

guided by the CEQ Regulations to the extent they are applicable. Therefore, when EPA conducts 

an environmental assessment pursuant to its Executive Order 12114 procedures, the Agency

generally follows the CEQ Regulations and the procedures in EPA’s NEPA implementing 

regulations. For these reasons, for applicant-proposed actions subject to either NEPA or 

Executive Order 12114 (and that are not addressed in other EPA programs’ ICRs), the remainder 

 

3

This may include such actions as EPA-issued permits for hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal 

facility under section 3005 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6925), NPDES permits under 

section 402 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1342), and prevention of significant deterioration approvals under Part 

C of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7470 et seq.).
7

of this ICR Supporting Statement will evaluate the respondent burden only with regard to EPA’s 

NEPA implementing procedures.

For purposes of this ICR, EPA considers the model respondents to be two types of 

applicants:

 Grant applicants applying to EPA for funding of special projects identified in the STAG 

account authorized by Congress through the Agency’s annual Appropriations Act. These 

applicants are generally governmental jurisdictions.4

 Permit applicants applying to EPA for issuance of new source NPDES permits under §402 

CWA. EPA issues new source NPDES permits only in states and U.S. territories that have 

not assumed authority for this program (i.e., New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Puerto Rico, 

New Mexico, Oklahoma (for concentrated animal feeding operations only), Alaska, and 

Idaho), the District of Columbia, off-shore waters (e.g., the inter-continental shelf for 

Texas, all outer-continental shelf areas, all deep-water port areas), and on federallyrecognized Indian tribal lands. These permit applicants are not limited to a specific 

business sector. EPA has permitted, and anticipates continued permit activity, with 

projects typically involving: oil and gas extraction from off-shore waters, hardrock 

mining (recently gold, silver, lead and zinc, and copper), dairy cattle and milk production, 

seafood processing, and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), including 

poultry, cattle, hogs and pigs.

NAICS Code5

Crude petroleum and natural gas extraction 211111

Hardrock mining

Gold ore mining 212221

Silver ore mining 212222

Lead ore and zinc ore mining 212231

Copper ore and nickel ore mining 212234

Dairy cattle and milk production 112120

Seafood fresh and frozen processing 311712

Poultry and egg production

Chicken egg production 112310

 

4

Approximately 75% of EPA’s grants are under the STAG appropriations account. Certain line items in the 

STAG appropriations account are not subject to NEPA (see Attachment 1). Grantee actions subject to NEPA are 

predominately under the STAG appropriations account (including consideration of the Wastewater Treatment 

Construction Grants Program and other actions subject to NEPA, including those under the Agency’s Environmental 

Programs and Management (EPM) account).

5

North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, NAICS 2002, 

http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/naics.html, and http://www.sba.gov/size/sizetable2002.html. 
8

Broilers and other meat type chicken production 112320

Turkey production 112330

Poultry hatcheries 112340

Cattle feedlots 112112

Hog and pig farming 112210

4(b) Information Required: For EPA actions subject to NEPA, the Responsible 

Official may determine that the proposed action does not individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human environment and may, therefore, be categorically excluded from 

further NEPA review. If the proposed action is not categorically excluded, the Responsible 

Official may prepare an EA in order to determine whether to prepare an EIS or a FONSI. The 

Responsible Official prepares an EIS if the proposed action will have a significant effect on the 

human environment. For EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals, the 

Responsible Official may gather the information and prepare the NEPA documents without 

environmental information submitted by the applicant, or have the applicant prepare an EID, or a 

draft EA and supporting documents, or implement a third-party agreement with the applicant.6

The level of NEPA documentation and the project-specific information the Responsible 

Official needs for decision-making is determined by the potential for environmental impact of the 

action, or the facility to be permitted or the project to be funded by the action rather than the 

dollar amount of the project or whether the applicant is a grantee or permit applicant.7 Table 1 

summarizes the information to be submitted by an applicant for a categorical exclusion (CE) 

determination, an EA and FONSI, and an EIS and Record of Decision (ROD). There are no 

schedule requirements or requirements on the number of copies of the information document to 

be submitted or requirements for ongoing reporting or recordkeeping.

 

6

If an EA or EIS is to be prepared for an action subject to NEPA, the Responsible Official and the applicant 

may enter into an agreement whereby the applicant engages and pays for the services of a third-party contractor to 

prepare an EA or EIS and any supporting documents. The Responsible Official has sole authority for approval and 

modification of the statements, analyses, and conclusions of the EA or EIS and any supporting documents. Because 

EISs are generally more complex than EAs in terms of the issues to be addressed and the associated analyses, it has 

generally been EPA’s experience that grantees and permit applicants will enter into third-party agreements with EPA 

for preparation of the EIS and supporting documents. 

7

For example, a grantee action for renovation of an existing wastewater treatment or drinking water supply 

system may be categorically excluded. An EA may be required for a grantee action to construct a new sewage 

treatment system in a small governmental jurisdiction; or to assess a new source NPDES permit for a discharge from 

a confined animal feedlot operation for chickens, cattle, hogs or pigs. An EIS may be required for a grantee action to 

construct a new sewage treatment plant with potential for significant impacts to wetlands, or cultural or 

archaeological features; or to assess a new source NPDES permit for discharges from an oil and gas extraction 

facility, or mining operation, or a confined animal feedlot operation with potential for significant impacts to wetlands, 

or cultural or archaeological features, or threatened or endangered species.
9

Table 1. Summary of Information Submitted by Applicants for CEs, EAs/FONSIs, and 

EISs/RODs

Categorical Exclusion (CE) means a category of actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and have been found by EPA 

to have no such effect. To find that a proposed action is categorically excluded, the 

Responsible Official needs to determine that the proposed action fits within a categorical 

exclusion that is listed in the regulations, and the proposed action does not involve any 

extraordinary circumstances as listed in the regulations. “Extraordinary circumstances” mean

those circumstances in which a normally excluded action may have a significant environmental 

effect. Based on review of information in the applicant’s application and other available 

information, the Responsible Official notifies the applicant if the action is categorically

excluded, or if EPA needs additional information to support the application of a categorical 

exclusion.

Information Submitted by Applicant: The applicant may provide statements or documents to 

the Responsible Official to verify that the proposed action would not involve any of the listed 

extraordinary circumstances.

For example, the applicant might submit information to support a categorical exclusion 

determination for an action that meets the criteria for “Actions in unsewered 

communities relating to the use of proposed wastewater on-site technologies where 

such technologies replace existing systems.” If the project area is known to be near a 

property with nationally significant historic value, the applicant would likely enclose a 

letter from the State Historic Preservation Officer that confirms the proposed project 

will not have a significant environmental effect on the historic property. The applicant 

letter may also verify there are no wetlands in the project area.

Environmental Assessments (EAs) need to include sufficient information and analysis for the 

Responsible Official to determine whether to prepare an EIS or to issue a FONSI.

 

Information Submitted by Applicant: The applicant submits an EID of sufficient scope to 

enable the Responsible Official to prepare an EA, and then determine whether to issue a FONSI 

or prepare an EIS. At the discretion of the Responsible Official, the applicant may prepare a 

draft EA and supporting documents in lieu of an EID.

An EID for an EA, or a draft EA and supporting documents, generally will: (1) 

include brief discussions of the need for the proposed action; the alternatives, including 

the no action alternative; description of the affected environment; and the 

environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives; (2) include a listing or 

summarize any coordination or consultation undertaken with any federal agency, state 

or local government, or federally-recognized Indian tribe, including compliance with 

applicable laws and executive orders; (3) identify and describe any mitigation 

measures that must be considered, including any mitigation measures that must be 

adopted to ensure the action will not have significant impacts; and (4) incorporate 

documents by reference.
10

Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) are generally prepared for major actions that may

significantly affect the quality of the human environment, or when an EA indicates that 

significant impacts may occur that cannot be reduced or eliminated by changes to or mitigation 

of the proposed action. A Record of Decision (ROD) documents the decision of the 

Responsible Official.

Information Submitted by Applicant: The applicant submits an EID of sufficient scope to 

enable the Responsible Official to prepare an EIS and ROD. In lieu of submitting 

documentation, the Responsible Official and the applicant may enter into a third-party contract 

agreement. The information needed for an EIS parallels the information needed for an EA with 

a focus on assessment of significant environmental issues and alternatives.

An EID for an EIS generally will: (1) provide EPA with information the Agency will 

use to prepare an EIS; (2) analyze all reasonable alternatives and the no action 

alternative; (3) describe the potentially affected environment including, as appropriate, 

the size and location of new and existing facilities, land requirements, operation and 

maintenance requirements, auxiliary structures such as pipelines or transmission lines, 

and construction schedules; (4) summarize any coordination or consultation undertaken 

with any federal agency, state or local government, or federally-recognized Indian 

tribe, including compliance with applicable laws and executive orders; (5) the draft EIS 

must summarize any public meetings during the scoping process, and the final EIS 

must summarize the public participation process held after publication of the draft EIS; 

(6) the draft EIS must consider substantive comments received during the scoping 

process, and the final EIS must summarize all comments on the draft EIS and respond 

to any substantive comments and explain any changes to a revised draft EIS or the final 

EIS and the reasons for the changes; and (7) include the names and qualifications of 

the persons primarily responsible for preparing the EIS including significant 

background papers.
11

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED -- AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION 

METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5(a) Agency Activities: Compliance with the regulations is the responsibility of EPA's 

Responsible Officials. For applicant-proposed actions, grantees or permit applicants must submit 

environmental information to EPA as part of the environmental review process unless the 

Responsible Official decides to prepare the NEPA documents without assistance from the 

applicant. As noted in Table 1 above, the Responsible Official may determine that the action is 

categorically excluded, or prepare an EA in order to determine whether to prepare an EIS or issue 

a FONSI, or prepare an EIS and ROD.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management: Whether the NEPA documents are 

based on environmental information developed by the Responsible Official or submitted by the 

applicant, the NEPA review and resulting documents generally rely on the use of existing data 

and information, including data and information from other federal agencies, state or local 

governments, or federally-recognized Indian tribes with jurisdiction by law or special expertise.

Whether the NEPA documents are prepared by the Responsible Official or based on 

environmental information submitted by the applicant, the quality of the information provided by 

an applicant must be sufficient to enable the Responsible Official to make a decision. This is 

accomplished under EPA’s NEPA implementing procedures through: (1) early coordination and 

cooperation with federal agencies, state and local governments, and federally-recognized Indian 

tribes with jurisdiction by law or special expertise (see final rule § 6.202); and (2) the public 

participation process associated with actions other than those categorically excluded8(see final 

rule § 6.203).9 When the environmental information is provided by the applicant, the Responsible 

Official is responsible for the statements, analyses, and conclusions of the EA or EIS and any 

supporting documents.

The information compiled is a one-time submission in narrative text format (see final rule 

§§ 6.205 and 6.207) rather than computerized compilations of data and information. There are no 

forms, checklists, or ongoing reporting, recordkeeping or file-maintenance requirements for 

applicants (see proposed rule Subpart C). EPA maintains file records for each action.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility:

10

 The 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

 

8

Categorical exclusions are subject to notice and comment rulemaking and, thus, public scrutiny.

9

EPA’s Peer Review Guidelines recognize the public review process for NEPA documents. Also, EPA’s 

Quality System may apply to certain information gathering activities undertaken directly by EPA.

10Information, including quoted material, taken from: "ICR Handbook, EPA's Guide to Writing Information 
12

incorporated the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) into it. The RFA requires EPA to prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule that has a "significant economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities." As part of the certification requirement, the EPA must show that the 

collection:

"reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons who shall 

provide information to or for the agency, including with respect to small entities, as 

defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601(6)), the use of such techniques as:

"(1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or 

timetables that take into account the resources available to those who are to 

respond;

"(2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and 

reporting requirements; or

"(3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or any 

part thereof”

The requirements of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) 

of 1996 must also be considered.

The information collected under this ICR is one-time only for applicant-proposed actions; 

e.g., actions proposed by grantees seeking funding assistance from EPA or for an NPDES permit 

application initiated by the permit applicant. In either case, EPA assumes the action will directly 

benefit the applicant (such as a grantee seeking grant funding for renovation of a community

drinking water system, or a permit applicant seeking a new source NPDES permit from EPA to 

further the applicant’s business interests). Nonetheless, if the applicant cannot afford to provide 

the required environmental information to EPA, then EPA would undertake the environmental 

review without input from the applicant.11 Further, grantees may be grant-eligible for certain 

costs associated with providing environmental information to EPA.12 Permit applicants are not 

eligible for EPA financial assistance.

EPA has attempted to reduce the burden on small entities (including businesses and 

government jurisdictions) through the following provisions in the final rule:

 

Collection Requests Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, Regulatory Information Division, revised February 1999.

11Applicants would normally be requested to demonstrate financial hardship, including inability to provide 

the requested environmental information. If so demonstrated, then EPA would undertake the environmental review 

necessary for the grant or permit action.

12Under appropriate grant conditions, grantees generally may use EPA financial assistance to prepare an 

EID but not to prepare a draft EA and supporting documents. Third-party contract costs for an EID may also be 

grant-eligible. For grantee contractor costs to be reimbursable, grantees must meet certain contractor requirements, 

including procurement criteria.
13

 Section 6.300: An EID is not required when the action is categorically excluded, or the 

applicant will prepare a draft EA and supporting documents. The Responsible Official 

may prepare the NEPA documents without environmental information submitted by the 

applicant.

 Section 6.302:

o The Responsible Official may prepare generic guidance for categories of actions 

involving a large number of applicants; and must ensure early involvement of 

applicants, consult with the applicant and provide guidance describing the scope 

and level of environmental information required, and provide guidance on a 

project-by-project basis to any applicant seeking assistance.

o The Responsible Official must consider the extent to which the applicant is 

capable of providing the required information, may not require the applicant to 

gather data or perform analyses that unnecessarily duplicate either existing data or 

the results of existing analyses available to EPA, and must limit the request for 

environmental information to that necessary for the environmental review.

 Section 6.303: An applicant may enter into a third-party agreement with EPA. (For 

grantees, certain third-party contractor costs may be eligible for cost reimbursement; see 

footnote 12. However, new source NPDES permit applicants are not eligible for EPA 

financial assistance.)

5(d) Collection Schedule: Information must be submitted by an applicant only for 

EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals unless EPA will prepare the 

NEPA documents without environmental information submitted by the applicant. The 

information to be submitted is required only when an applicant applies for a grant for an action 

subject to NEPA or a new source NPDES permit to be issued by EPA, a one-time application 

process. The Responsible Official, however, may ask the applicant to provide additional 

information if the Responsible Official needs it to prepare the EA or EIS. There are no schedules 

in the regulations for this collection process.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN OF THE COLLECTION

The content of the environmental information submitted by an applicant for a draft EA 

and supporting documents and an EID for a draft EA and supporting documents is similar. There 

may be a financial difference for grantees in that EPA financial assistance generally may be used 

to prepare an EID but not to prepare a draft EA and supporting documents (see footnote 12). New 

source NPDES permit applicants are not eligible for EPA financial assistance. The applicant may

also enter into a third-party agreement whereby the applicant engages and pays for the services of 

a contractor to prepare the draft EA and supporting documents. EPA’s experience with applicants 
14

has generally been that they contract directly for preparation of an EID or a draft EA and 

supporting documents.13 Therefore, for purposes of estimating the maximum burden, the 

calculations will be based on preparation of a draft EA by a contractor whose services will be paid 

for by the applicant. 

The content of the environmental information submitted by an applicant for a draft EIS 

and supporting documents and an EID for a draft EIS and supporting documents is similar. For 

grantees, third-party contractor costs may be eligible for cost reimbursement (see footnote 12). 

New source NPDES permit applicants are not eligible for EPA financial assistance. Although an 

applicant may contract for preparation of an EID for a draft EIS, because EISs are generally more 

complex than EAs in terms of the issues to be addressed and the associated analyses, it has 

generally been EPA’s experience that applicants will enter into a third-party agreement with EPA 

for preparation of the EIS and supporting documents. Therefore, for purposes of estimating the 

maximum burden for this ICR, EPA assumes the applicant will enter into a third-party agreement 

for the environmental review process and preparation of the documents for the project.14

6(a) Estimated Respondent Burden: For an EPA action subject to NEPA that is 

based on an applicant proposal, the applicant would generally submit information to the EPA 

Responsible Official as part of the environmental review process as delineated in Section 4(b), 

Table 1. As noted above, EPA assumes the applicant will use a contractor to compile and prepare 

the environmental information to be submitted to the Responsible Official. For the applicant, the 

burden15 includes the time and costs needed to:

1. Procure contractor services.

2. Review instructions (such as the regulations and any program-specific guidelines the 

Responsible Official may also provide) and/or meet with the Responsible Official.

3. Research data sources.

 

13It has been EPA’s experience that applicants often use in-house engineering contractors for preparing CEand EA-related environmental documents usually without seeking cost reimbursement.

14EPA believes the calculations for this ICR are representative of most projects. EPA’s experience with a 

limited number of EISs has included one-time costs ranging from nominal for information submitted by letter to 

supplement an existing oil and gas extraction EIS to over a million dollars for new EISs for a mining project and an 

oil and gas extraction project with multiple complex issues. 

15For purposes of this ICR: Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons 

to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 

needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of 

collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and 

providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and 

requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; research data sources; complete and 

review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
15

4. Complete and review the collection of environmental information.

5. Transmit the information to the Responsible Official.

6. Meet with the Responsible Official on the need for any revisions to the environmental 

information, and prepare and submit any necessary revisions to the information.

The applicant would not be required to develop, acquire, install, or utilize technology and

systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and 

maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 

comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; or train personnel to be able 

to respond to a collection of information; nor would there be requirements for ongoing reporting 

or recordkeeping.

In summary, EPA assumes an applicant would expend time and incur contractor costs to 

submit: (1) information to support application of a categorical exclusion with environmental 

information prepared directly by the applicant’s contractor, or (2) a draft EA and supporting 

documents prepared directly by the applicant’s contractor, or (3) a draft and final EIS and 

supporting documents prepared by the applicant’s contractor under a third-party agreement with 

EPA.

Respondents include grant applicants applying to EPA for funding of special projects 

identified in the STAG account authorized by Congress through the Agency’s annual 

Appropriations Act. These applicants are generally governmental jurisdictions. Until recently, 

such grants authorized by Congress, and subsequently awarded by EPA, had generally been 

increasing annually. However, for the 3-year period 2007 through 2009, the number of grants 

awarded stabilized at about 300 annually. Therefore, EPA anticipates that approximately 900 

STAG grants will be awarded during the 3-year life of this ICR, with approximately 300 awarded 

annually. EPA estimated that about 60% of the STAG projects were documented with a CE, and 

about 40% with an EA/FONSI although EPA anticipates that the STAG projects documented with 

a CE may increase 10% to 15%. Thus, based on experience, EPA anticipates there will be 

approximately 300 grantee projects annually with about 75% of these projects documented with a 

CE, and about 25% with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates that one project (less than 

one percent of the total annual grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-

year period of this ICR. EPA estimated contractor costs and hours, and hours for grantees and 

EPA for CE, EA/FONSI and EIS/ROD documentation are summarized in Table 2 (also see 

Section 6(b) for further information on estimates for EPA’s burden).
16

Table 2. Summary of Estimated Contractor Costs and Hours for Grantees and EPA

CE Documents Project

Current 3-Yr ICR Period

EA/FONSI Documents Project

Current 3-Year ICR Period

EIS/ROD Documents Project

Current 3-Yr ICR Period

Grantee $3,000

 5 hrs

$3,000*

5 hrs

$15,000

60 hrs

$19,000*

60 hrs

$300,000

440 hrs

$372,000*

440 hrs

*Contractor: $75/hour(a)

$75/hr x 40 hrs = $3,000

*Contractor: $95/hour

$95/hr x 200 hrs = $19,000

*Contractor: $155/hour

$155/hr x 2400 hrs = $372,000

EPA

$0 $0 $5,000 for

25% of projects

$5,000 for 25%

of projects $0 $0

30 hrs

60%

40 hrs

75%

120 hrs

40%

120 hrs

25%

440 hrs

1 per 3-yrs

530 hrs

1 per 3-yrs

a Contractor cost/hour assumed to include consolidated wages for all personnel working on the project, project 

expenses, overhead and profit.

Respondents also include permit applicants applying to EPA for issuance of new source 

NPDES permits under §402 CWA. EPA issues new source NPDES permits only in states and 

U.S. territories that have not assumed authority for this program (see Section (4(a)). Because 

most states have assumed the NPDES program, few new source NPDES permits are issued by 

EPA. Regions 4, 6 and 10 currently handle the majority of these projects. As presented in 

Section 4(a) of this Supporting Statement, most projects involve oil and gas extraction in offshore waters areas, hardrock mining, concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), dairy

farming, and seafood processing. None of these projects have been documented with a CE and, 

during the 3-year life of this ICR, EPA does not anticipate any projects will be documented 

initially with a CE. Further, for the 3-year life of this ICR, EPA estimates that annually about 11 

projects will be documented with EAs/FONSIs. In addition, EPA estimates one project will have 

an EIS/ROD completed annually. EPA estimated contractor costs and hours, and hours for permit 

applicants and EPA for EA/FONSI and EIS/ROD documentation are summarized in Table 3 (also 

see Section 6(b) for further information on estimates for EPA’s burden).
17

Table 3. Summary of Estimated Contractor Costs and Hours for Permit Applicants and EPA

CE Documents Project

Current 3-Yr ICR Prd

EA/FONSI Documents Project

Current 3-Year ICR Period

EIS/ROD Documents Project

Current 3-Yr ICR Period

Permit 

Applicant

None None

$50,000

60 hrs

$62,000*

60 hrs

$300,000*

440 hrs

$372,000*

440 hrs

* Contractor: $155/houra

$155/hr x 400 hrs = $62,000

*Contractor: $155/hour

$155/hr x 2400 hrs = $372,000

EPA

None None

$10,000 for 

50% of projects $10,000 for 

50% of projects $0 $0

120 hrs

11 projects

120 hrs

11 projects

440 hrs

1 per year

530 hrs

1 per year

a Contractor cost/hour assumed to include consolidated wages for all personnel working on the project, project 

expenses, overhead and profit.

EPA does not anticipate any applicant capital or start up costs.16 Operating and 

maintenance (O&M) costs are the recurring dollar amount of cost associated with O&M or 

purchasing services. EPA assumes the O&M costs associated with the paperwork requirements 

for respondents would be costs for photocopying and mailing the compiled environmental 

information for a CE, EA or EIS. For a CE, EPA assumes up to 20 pages may be copied at 10¢ 

per page, or $2.00. For maximum cost estimate purposes, EPA assumes the documentation is 

express mailed at a cost of $15.00, for a total cost of $17.00 per CE. For an EA, EPA assumes 

100 pages will be submitted at a cost of $10.00 for copying and $30.00 for express mail for a total 

cost of $40.00 per EA. For an EIS, EPA assumes 800 pages will be submitted (4 x 200 pages per 

EIS - preliminary draft EIS, draft EIS, preliminary final EIS, final EIS) at a cost of $80.00 for 

copying and $200.00 for express mail (4 x $50 per document) for a total cost of $280.00 per EIS. 

Based on the above assumptions and estimates for grantees and permit applicants, Tables 

4 and 5 list the estimated one-time, annual and three-year contractor hours and costs, and hours, 

direct labor and O&M costs for grantees and permit applicants (three years represents the 

approval period for this ICR). The direct labor rate, including benefits, for state and local 

government (management and professional) applicants is assumed to be $48; loaded at 25% for 

other non-benefits overhead, this rate is $60. The direct labor rate for federally-recognized Indian 

tribe applicants is assumed to be the same as for state and local government applicants. Grantee 

 

16One-time capital/start-up costs usually include any produced physical good needed to provide the 

necessary information. Start-up capital must be purchased for the specific purpose of satisfying EPA's reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements. Capital goods include computers, machinery, or equipment. Start-up capital costs are 

usually incurred at the beginning of an information collection period and are usually incurred only once.
18

applicants are assumed to be state and local governments and federally-recognized Indian tribes. 

The direct labor rate, including benefits, for civilian worker (professional) applicants is assumed 

to be $48; loaded at 50% for other non-benefits overhead and including profit, this rate is about 

$72. Permit applicants are assumed to be civilian worker applicants. (Labor rates, including 

benefits, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Employer Costs for Employee Compensation –

March 2010,” http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm )
19

Table 4. One-Time, Annual and 3-Year Total Estimated Costs and Hours for Grant Applicants

Respondent CE Projects EA/FONSI Projects EIS/ROD Projects Totals

GranteeAnnual:

Number of 

Projects

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor 

Costs

Grantee

Hours

Grantee 

Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on 

One-Time 

Proj. Basis

75% x 300 proj = 225 proj

225 proj x 40 hrs/proj = 

9,000 hours

225 proj x $3,000/proj = 

$675,000

225 proj x 5 hrs/proj =

1,125 hours

1,125 hours x $60/hour =

$67,500

225 proj x $17/proj =

$3,825

40 + 5 = 45 hours/project

$3,000 + ($60 x 5) + $17 = 

$3,317/project

25% x 300 proj = 75 proj

75 proj x 200 hrs/proj =

15,000 hours

75 proj x $18,000/proj = 

$1,350,000

75 proj x 60 hrs/proj =

4,500 hours

4,500 hours x $60/hour =

$270,000

75 proj x $40/proj =

$3,000

200 + 60 = 260 hours/proj

$18,000 + ($60 x 60) + 

$40= $21,640/project

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

GranteeAnnual:

300 projects

24,000 hours

$2,025,000

5,625 hours

$337,500

$6,825

Grantee3-Yr Total:

Number of 

Projects

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor 

Costs

Grantee 

Hours

Grantee 

Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on 

One-Time 

Proj. Basis

3 yrs x 225 proj = 675 proj

3 yrs x 9,000 hours =

27,000 hours

3 yrs x $675,000/yr =

$2,025,000

3 yrs x 1,125 hours =

3,375 hours

3 yrs x $67,500/yr =

$202,500

3 yrs x $3,825/yr = $11,475

3 yrs x 75 proj = 225 proj

3 yrs x 15,000 hours =

45,000 hours

3 yrs x $1,350,000/yr =

$4,050,000

3 yrs x 4,500 hours =

13,500 hours

3 yrs x $270,000/yr =

$810,000

3 yrs x $3,000/yr = $9,000

1 project on a 3-year basis

1 proj x 2,400 hours/proj =

2,400 hours

1 proj x $372,000/proj =

$372,000

1 proj x 440 hours/proj =

440 hours

440 hrs x $60/hour =

$26,400

1 proj x $280/proj = $280

2,400 + 440 = 2,840 hours

$372,000 + ($60 x 440) + 

$280 = $398,680

Grantee3-Yr Total:

901 projects

74,400 hours

$6,447,000

17,315 hours

$1,038,900

$ 20,755
20

Table 5. One-Time, Annual and 3-Year Total Estimated Costs and Hours for Permit Applicants

Respondent CE Projects EA/FONSI Projects EIS/ROD Projects Totals

PermiteeAnnual:

Number of 

Projects

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor 

Costs

Permitee 

Hours

Permitee 

Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on 

One-Time 

Proj. Basis

None

None

None

None

None

None

(None)

11 projects/year

11 proj x 400 hrs/proj =

4,400 hours

11 proj x $62,000/proj = 

$682,000

11 proj x 60 hrs/proj =

660 hours

660 hours x $72/hour = 

$47,520

11 proj x $40/proj = $440

400 + 60 = 460 hours

$62,000 + ($72 x 60) + $40 

= $66,360

1 project/year

1 proj x 2,400 hrs/proj =

2,400 hours

1proj x $372,000/proj = 

$372,000

1 proj x 440 hrs/proj =

440 hours

440 hours x $72/hour =

$31,680

1 proj x $280/proj = $280

2,400 + 440 = 2,840 hours

$372,000 + ($72 x 440) + 

$280 = $403,960

PermiteeAnnual:

12 projects

6,800 hours

$1,054,000

1,100 hours

$79,200

$ 720

Permitee3-Yr Total:

Number of 

Projects

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor 

Costs

Permitee 

Hours

Permitee 

Labor Costs

O&M

None

None

None

None

None

None

3 yrs x 11 proj/yr = 33 proj

3 yrs x 4,400 hours =

13,200 hours

3 yrs x $682,000/yr =

$2,046,000

3 yrs x 660 hours =

1,980 hours

3 yrs x $47,520 =

$142,560

3 yrs x $440/yr = $1,320

3 yrs x 1 proj/yr = 3 proj

3 yrs x 2,400 hours =

7,200 hours

3 yrs x $372,000/yr = 

$1,116,000

3 yrs x 440 hrs/yr =

1,320 hours

3 yrs x $31,680 =

$95,040

3 yrs x $280/yr = $840

Permitee3-Yr Total:

36 projects

20,400 hours

$3,162,000

3,300 hours

$237,600

$ 2,160

As discussed in Section 5, the information collected under this ICR is one-time only for 

applicant-proposed actions. Grantees or permit applicants must submit environmental 

information to EPA as part of the environmental review process unless the Responsible Official 

decides to prepare the NEPA documents without assistance from the applicant. If the applicant 

cannot afford to provide the required environmental information to EPA, then EPA would 

undertake the environmental review without input from the applicant (see footnote 11). Further, 

grantees may be grant-eligible for certain costs associated with providing environmental 

information to EPA (see footnote 12); permit applicants are not eligible for EPA financial 
21

assistance. Table 6 summarizes the one-time total estimated applicant costs, including contractor 

hours and costs, applicant hours and direct labor costs, and O&M for documentation to support a 

CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD. Based on EPA experience, under 40 CFR Part 6, EPA 

anticipates that for grantees there will be approximately 300 projects with about 75% of the 

projects documented with a CE, and about 25% with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates 

that one project (less than one percent of the total annual grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD 

completed during the 3-year life of this ICR. For permit applicants, EPA assumes there will be 

approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 of the projects documented with an EA/FONSI. 

In addition, EPA estimates one project will have an EIS/ROD completed annually. None will be 

documented initially with a CE.

Table 6. Summary of Estimated One-Time Total Costs and Hours for Applicants

Respondent One-Time Total Costs and Hours

CE EA/FONSI EIS/ROD

Grant Applicant

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

Total

Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost

40 $3,000 200 $18,000 2,400 $372,000

5 300 60 3,600 440 26,400

 $17 $40 $280

45 $3,317 260 $21,640 2,840 $398,680

 ONE PER 3-YEARS

Permit Applicants

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

Total

Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost

None None 400 $62,000 2,400 $372,000

None None 60 4,320 440 31,680

None None $ 40 $ 280

None None 460 $66,360 2,840 $403,960

The information collected under this ICR is one-time only for EPA actions subject to 

NEPA that are based on applicant proposals (see Section 5). For purposes of this ICR, Table 7 

summarizes the estimated total annual and 3-year applicant costs, including contractor hours and 

costs, applicant hours and direct labor costs, and O&M for the three-year period of this ICR. 

Based on EPA’s experience, EPA anticipates there will be approximately 300 grantee projects 

annually with about 75% of these projects documented with a CE, and about 25% with an 

EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates that one project (less than one percent of the total annual 

grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year life of this ICR. For permit 

applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 of the 

projects documented with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates one project will have an 

EIS/ROD completed annually. None will be documented initially with a CE.
22

Table 7. Summary of Total Estimated Annual and 3-Year Costs and Hours for Applicants

Respondent Annual 3-Year Life of ICR

Grant Applicant

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

 Number of Projects

 Sub-Totals

 Hours Cost

 24,000 $2,025,000

 5,625 337,500

 $6,825

300

300 29,625 $2,369,325

 Hours Cost

 74,400 $6,447,000

 17,315 1,038,900

 $ 20,755

901

901 91,715 $7,506,655

Permit Applicant

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

 Number of Projects

 Sub-Totals

 Hours Cost

 6,800 $1,054,000

 1,100 79,200

 $ 720

12

12 7,900 $1,133,920

Hours Cost

 20,400 $3,162,000

 3,300 237,600

 $ 2,160

36

36 23,700 $3,401,760

Totals 312 47,200 $3,503,245 937 144,440 $10,908,415

6(b) Estimated Federal Government Burden:

17

 For EPA actions subject to NEPA 

that are based on applicant proposals, EPA may: (1) prepare the NEPA documents without 

assistance from the applicant, with or without using EPA contractor support; or (2) prepare the 

NEPA documents based on information submitted by the applicant (and any other supplemental 

information) with or without using EPA contractor support. If an EPA contractor is used, the 

contractor is generally tasked with technical assistance for reviewing any applicant-submitted 

information, gathering any other necessary information, and preparing the EA or EIS and 

supporting documents for EPA’s Responsible Official. EPA generally does not use its contractors 

on projects documented with a CE or for which EPA and the applicant enter into a third-party

agreement.

 For CEs, EPA estimates it prepares CE documentation without assistance from the 

applicant for five STAG projects per year based on the information in a grantee’s grant 

application and supplemental information gathered directly by EPA using about 50 hours 

per project. For CE-documented projects based on grantee-submitted information, EPA 

uses an estimated 40 hours. 

 For EAs, EPA estimates contractor costs for technical assistance with reviewing an 

applicant’s draft EA and supporting documents and subsequent preparation of the EA at 

$5,000, with EPA using an estimated 120 hours. EPA estimates use of a contractor on 

about 25% of the grantee projects and 50% of the permit applicant projects. 

 Most applicant EISs are prepared under a third-party agreement with EPA directly

 

17EPA actions for construction of special purpose facilities or facility renovations of EPA facilities are 

actions undertaken directly by EPA and do not involve applicants. Therefore, EPA’s burden (contractor costs and 

hours) for these actions is not included in this ICR Supporting Statement.
23

reviewing the third-party contractor-prepared EIS and supporting documents using an 

estimated 530 hours per project. EPA has also, and will likely continue to prepare EISs 

for new source NPDES permit projects in conjunction with other federal agencies. In 

these cases, EPA is usually a Cooperating Agency and either adopts or supplements and 

reissues the lead agency’s EIS. EPA may also supplement and reissue one of its own EISs 

for a project. EPA generally uses a contractor in these cases with contractor costs ranging 

widely with an average of $50,000 per project. For purposes of this ICR and based on 

EPA’s experience with adoption or supplementation of another EIS, EPA estimates that 

for direct preparation of one such EIS/ROD annually, EPA’s contractor costs are 

estimated to be $50,000 with EPA using an estimated 530 hours. 

Estimated contractor costs and hours for EPA for applicant-proposed projects are 

compiled on a document-type basis with the burden assumed to be the same for environmental 

information submitted by either a grantee or permit applicant. The following lists EPA’s tasks 

generally associated with preparation of NEPA documents based on environmental information 

submitted by an applicant and the estimated hours for these tasks:

1. Consult with the applicant as early as possible in the planning process to provide guidance 

with respect to the appropriate level and scope of information that EPA may require; for 

CEs, EPA estimates 10 hours, for EAs 20 hours, and for EISs 40 hours.

2. Review and independently evaluate the applicant-submitted and other project-related 

documents, including the grant or permit application and any appropriate public 

comments, and provide comments or guidance to the applicant about any additional 

information needed. For purposes of this ICR, these cost and hour estimates include using 

EPA contractor technical assistance during the review process for EAs. For CEs, EPA 

estimates 5 hours, for EAs 40 hours, and for EISs 160 hours.

3. Meet with the applicant on the need for any revisions to the environmental information 

and supporting documents, and review any revised documentation; for CEs, EPA 

estimates 5 hours, for EAs 10 hours, and for EISs 40 hours.

4. Consult with the applicant, when appropriate, on a third-party agreement. EPA assumes 

this will generally be done only for an EIS and estimates 20 hours for this task.

5. Complete the required environmental review and NEPA documentation before rendering a 

final decision regarding the applicant’s proposed action; for CEs, EPA estimates 5 hours, 

for EAs 40 hours, and for EISs 160 hours.

6. Maintain files; for CEs, EPA estimates 5 hours, for EAs 10 hours, and for EISs 20 hours.

On occasion, EPA may prepare the NEPA documentation without assistance from the 

applicant for an applicant’s project, using an EPA contractor for technical assistance with 

preparation of EAs/FONSIs and EISs/RODs. EPA tasks, and the estimated hours for these tasks, 

generally include the following:

1. Issue a Statement of Work for the project; for CEs EPA estimates 0 hours, for EAs 15 

hours, and for EISs 40 hours.
24

2. For EPA’s direct consultations for CEs, and for coordination with the contractor and/or for 

direct consultations during EA or EIS preparation, on issues related to consulting with 

federal agencies, states or federally-recognized Indian tribes regarding extraordinary

circumstances and/or potential impacts; for CEs EPA estimates 23 hours, for EAs 20 

hours, and for EISs 60 hours.

3. Review the contractor-prepared documents; for CEs EPA estimates 0 hours, for EAs 40 

hours, and for EISs 160 hours.

4. Complete the required NEPA review and documents; for CEs EPA estimates 15 hours, for 

EAs 35 hours, and for EISs 160 hours.

5. Maintain files; for CEs EPA estimates 2 hours, for EAs 10 hours, and for EISs 20 hours.

There are no one-time capital/start-up costs for EPA, and the O&M hours for maintaining 

files are included in the EPA hours estimate.

For EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals with applicants 

submitting environmental information, EPA’s annual and three-year estimated contractor costs 

and hours are summarized in Table 8 for grantee projects and Table 9 for permit applicant 

projects. Table 10 summarizes EPA’s annual and three-year estimated contractor costs and hours 

for preparation of CE, EA and EIS documentation by EPA without assistance from the applicant 

and with EIS preparation based on adoption of another federal agency’s EIS or supplementation 

of another EIS. For purposes of this Supporting Statement, EPA assumes its contractor rate is 

$75/hour for CE’s, $95/hour for EA/FONSI’s and $155/hour for EIS’s which includes 

consolidated wages for all personnel working on a project, project expenses and profit. EPA’s 

hourly salary rate of about $65 is based on the pay for a GS-12, step 10, with 70% overhead, 

including benefits, O&M and other overhead expenses; see federal wages at: 

http://www.opm.gov. For this Supporting Statement, O&M is listed as a zero line item in the 

tables for ease of comparison to the applicant tables; specific O&M expenses are not included as 

these are included in EPA’s overhead.
25

Table 8. Grantee Projects - Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs and Hours Per Document Type 

for EPA

Respondent CE Projects EA/FONSI Projects EIS/ROD Projects Totals

Grantees -

Annual

Number of 

Projects

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct 

Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on OneTime Project 

Basis

225 projects

0

$0

225 proj x 40 hrs/proj = 

9,000 hours

9,000 hrs x $65/hr = 

$585,000

$0

0hrs + 40hrs = 40 hrs

$0 + (40hrs x $65/hr) + 

$0 = $2,600

75 projects

25% x 75 proj x 70 hrs/proj = 

1,313 hours

25% x 75 proj x $5,000/proj = 

$93,750

75 proj x 120 hrs/proj = 9,000

hours

9,000 hrs x $65/hr =

$585,000

$0

70hrs + 120hrs = 190 hours

$5,000 + (120hrs x $65/hr) + $0 = 

$12,800

(None annually, one on 

a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on 

a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on 

a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on 

a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on 

a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on 

a 3-year basis

300 projects

1,313 hours

$93,750

18,000 hours

$1,170,000

$0

Grantees -

3-Yr Total:

Number of 

Projects

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct 

Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on OneTime Project 

Basis

3 yrs x 225 proj/yr = 675

proj

3 yrs x 0 hours/yr =

0

3 yrs x $0 =$0

3 yrs x 9,000 hrs/yr =

27,000 hours

3 yrs x $585,000/yr = 

$1,755,000

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0

3 yrs x 75 proj/yr = 

225 projects

3 yrs x 1,313 hours/yr =

3,939 hours

3 yrs x $93,750/yr = $281,250

3 yrs x 9,000 hrs/yr =

27,000 hours

3 yrs x $585,000/yr =

$1,755,000

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0

1 project on a 3-yr 

basis

1 proj x 0 hrs/yr =

0 hours

1 proj x $0 = $0

1 proj x 530 hours = 

530 hours

530 hrs x $65/hr = 

$34,450

$0

0 + 530hrs = 530hrs

$0 + $34,450 + $0 = 

$34,450

901 projects

3,939 hours

$218,250

54,530 hours

$3,544,450

$0

a

Project assumed to be under third-party contract with no technical support by EPA’s contractor.
26

Table 9. Permit Applicant Projects - Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs and Hours Per 

Document Type for EPA

Respondent CE Projects EA/FONSI Projects EIS/ROD Projects Totals

Permitees -

Annual

No. Projects

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor 

Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct 

Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on OneTime Project 

Basis

None

None

None

None

None

None

(None)

11 projects/year

50% x 11 proj x 135 hr/proj = 

~740 hours

50% x 11 proj x $10,000/proj = 

$55,000

11 proj x 120 hrs/pr= 1,320 hrs

1,320 hrs x $65/hr = $85,800

$0

135 hrs + 120 hrs = 255 hours

$10,000 + (120 hr x $65/hr) + $0 = 

$17,800

1 project/year

1 proj x 0 hr/proj = 0 hours

1 proj x $0/proj = $0

1 proj x 530hrs/proj = 530 hours

530 hrs x $65/hr = $34,450

$0

0 hrs + 530 hrs = 530 hours

$0 + $34,450 + $0 =

$34,450

12 projects

~740 hours

$55,000

1,850 hours

$120,250

$0

PERMITEES -

3-Yr Total:

No. Projects

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor 

Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct 

Labor Costs

O&M

None

None

None

None

None

None

3 yrs x 11 proj/yr = 33 projects

3 yrs x 740 hrs/yr = 2,220 hours

3 yrs x $55,000/yr = $165,000

3 yrs x 1320 hrs/yr = 3,960 hrs

3 yrs x $85,800/yr = $257,400

3 yrs x $0/yr = 0

3 yrs x 1 proj/yr = 3 proj

3 yrs x 0 hrs/yr = 0 hours

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0

3 yrs x 530 hrs/yr = 1,590 hrs

3 yrs x $34,450/yr = $103,350

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0

36 projects

~2,200 hours

$165,000

5,550 hours

$360,750

$0

a

Project assumed to be under third-party contract with no technical support by EPA’s contractor.
27

Table 10. Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs and Hours by Document Type for Direct 

Preparation of Documents by EPA for Applicant Projects

Respondent CE Projects EA/FONSI Projects EIS/ROD Projects Totals

Annually

No. Projects -

Grantees only

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct 

Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on OneTime Project 

Basis

5 projects

0

$0

5 proj x 50 hrs/proj = 

250 hrs

250 hrs x $65/hr = 

$16,250

$0

0 + 50hrs = 50 hrs

$0 + (50hr x $65/hr) + 

$0 = $3,250

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year 

basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year 

basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year 

basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year 

basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year 

basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year 

basis

5 projects

0

$0

250 hours

$16,250

$0

3-Yr Total

No. Projects

Grantees and 

Permitees

Contractor 

Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct 

Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on OneTime Project 

Basis

3 yrs x 5 proj = 

15 proj

3 yrs x 0 hrs/yr = 

0 hours

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0

3 yrs x 250 hrs/yr = 

750 hours

3 yrs x $16,250/yr = 

$48,750

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0

1 proj/3-yrs = 1 project

1 proj x 670 hours/proj = 

670 hours

1 proj x $62,000/proj = 

$62,000

1 proj x 120 hrs/yr = 

120 hours

120 hrs x $65/hr =

$7,800

$0

670hr + 120hr = 790 hrs

$62,000 + $7,800 + $0 = 

$69,800

1 proj/3-yrs = 1 project

1 proj x 670 hours/proj = 670 

hours

1 proj x $50,000/proj = $50,000 

(adopt/supplement)

1 proj x 530 hrs/proj = 

530 hrs

530 hours x $65/hr =

$34,450

$0

670hrs + 530hrs = 1,200 hrs

$50,000 + $34,450 + $0 = 

$84,450

17 projects

1,340

$112,000

1,400 hours

$91,000

$0

As discussed in Section 5, the information collected under this ICR is one-time only for 

EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals. Grantees or permit 

applicants submit environmental information to EPA as part of the environmental review process 

unless the Responsible Official decides to prepare the NEPA documents without assistance from 

the applicant. Table 11 summarizes the one-time total estimated EPA costs, including contractor 
28

hours and costs and EPA hours and direct labor costs for preparation of a CE, or an EA/FONSI, 

or an EIS/ROD. For this Supporting Statement, O&M is listed as a zero line item in the table for 

ease of comparison to the applicant tables; specific O&M expenses are not included as these are 

included in EPA’s overhead. Based on EPA’s experience,EPA anticipates that for grantees there 

will be approximately 300 projects with about 75% of the projects documented with a CE, and 

about 25% with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates one project (less than one percent of 

the total annual grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year life of this 

ICR. For permit applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects annually with 

about 11 of the projects documented with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates one project 

will have an EIS/ROD completed annually. None will be documented initially with a CE.

Table 11. Summary of Estimated One-Time Total Costs and Hours for EPA

Respondent One-Time Total Costs and Hours

CE EA/FONSI EIS/ROD

Grant Applicant Projects

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

Total

Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost

 0 $ 0 70 $ 5,000 0 $ 0

40 2,600 120 7,800 530 34,450

 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0

40 $2,600 190 $12,800 530 $34,450

Permit Applicant Projects

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

Total

Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost

None None 135 $10,000 0 $ 0

None None 120 7,800 530 34,450

None None $ 0 $ 0

None None 255 $17,800 530 $34,450

Prepared Directly by EPA

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

Total

Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost

 0 $ 0 670 $62,000 670 $50,000

50 3,250 120 7,800 530 34,450

 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0

50 $3,250 790 $69,800 1,200 $84,450

The information collected under this ICR is one-time only for EPA actions subject to 

NEPA that are based on applicant proposals (see Section 5). For purposes of this ICR, Table 12 

summarizes the total annual and 3-year estimated EPA costs, including contractor hours and costs 

and EPA hours and direct labor costs for the three-year period of this ICR. For this Supporting 

Statement, O&M is listed as a zero line item in the table for ease of comparison to the applicant 

tables; specific O&M expenses are not included as these are included in EPA’s overhead. Based 

on EPA’s experience, under the final rule, EPA anticipates there will be approximately 300 

grantee projects annually with about 75% of these projects documented with a CE, and about 25% 

with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates that one project (less than one percent of the total 

annual grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year life of this ICR. For 

permit applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 of 

the projects documented with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates one project will have an 

EIS/ROD completed annually. None will be documented initially with a CE.
29

Table 12. Summary of Total Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs and Hours for EPA for 

Applicant-Proposed Projects

Respondent Annual 3-Year

Grant Applicant Projects

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

 Number of Projects

 Sub-Totals

 Hours Cost

 1,313 $ 93,750

 18,000 1,170,000

 $ 0

300

300 19,313 $1,263,750

 Hours Cost

 3,939 $ 218,250

 54,530 3,544,450

 $ 0

901

901 58,469 $3,762,700

Permit Applicant Projects

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

 Number of Projects

 Sub-Totals

 Hours Cost

 740 $ 55,000

 1,850 120,250

 $ 0

 12

 12 2,590 $175,250

 Hours Cost

 2,200 $165,000

 5,550 360,750

 $ 0

 36

 36 7,750 $525,750

Prepared Directly by EPA

 Contractor Hrs/Cost

 Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

 O&M

 Number of Projects

 Sub-Totals

 Hours Cost

 0 $ 0

 250 16,250

 $ 0

 5

 5 250 $ 16,250

 Hours Cost

 1,340 $ 112,000

 1,400 91,000

 $ 0

 17

 17 2,740 $ 203,000

Totals 317 22,153 $1,455,250 954 68,959 $4,491,450

6(c) Estimated Annual and 3-Year Aggregate Burden: As discussed in Sections 5, 

6(a) and 6(b), the information collected under this ICR is one-time only for EPA actions subject 

to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals. Grantees or permit applicants must submit 

environmental information to EPA as part of the environmental review process unless the 

Responsible Official decides to prepare the NEPA documents without assistance from the 

applicant. If the applicant cannot afford to provide the required environmental information to 

EPA, then EPA would undertake the environmental review without input from the applicant (see 

footnote 11). Further, grantees may be grant-eligible for certain costs associated with providing 

environmental information to EPA (see footnote 12); permit applicants are not eligible for EPA 

financial assistance. Table 13 summarizes the aggregate one-time total estimated applicant and 

EPA costs, including contractor hours and costs, direct labor hours and costs, and O&M for 

documentation to support a CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD. For any specific project, only 

one of these levels of documentation is generally prepared. Based on experience, EPA anticipates 

that for grantees there will be approximately 300 projects with about 75% documented with a CE, 

and about 25% with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates that one project (less than one 

percent of the total annual grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year 

life of this ICR. For permit applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects 

annually with about 11 of the projects documented with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA 

estimates one project will have an EIS/ROD completed annually. None will be documented 

initially with a CE.
30

Table 13. Summary of Aggregate One-Time Estimated Costs and Hours for Applicants and EPA

One-Time Total Costs and Hours

CE EA/FONSI EIS/ROD

Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost

Grant Applicants

Permit Applicants

EPA

 Grant Applicant Projects

 Permit Applicant Projects

 Prepared Directly by EPA

45 $3,317 260 $21,640 2,840 $398,680

 One per 3-years

None None 460 $66,360 2,840 $403,960

 One annually

40 $2,600 190 $12,800 530 $ 34,450

 One per 3-years

None None 255 $17,800 530 $ 34,450

 One annually

50 $3,250 790 $69,800 1,200 $ 84,450

Totals 135 $9,167 1,955 $188,400 7,940 $955,990

 “Third-Year” calculation represents

 maximum hours/costs in a year

The information collected under this ICR is one-time only on a per-project basis for EPA 

actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals. Grantees or permit applicants 

submit environmental information to EPA as part of the environmental review process unless the 

Responsible Official decides to prepare the NEPA documents without assistance from the 

applicant. The NEPA review for a project may result in a CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD. 

For any specific project, only one of these levels of documentation is generally prepared. Based 

on EPA’s experience, under the final rule, EPA anticipates there will be approximately 300 

grantee projects annually with about 75% of these projects documented with a CE, and about 25% 

with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates that one project (less than one percent of the total 

annual grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year life of this ICR. For 

permit applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 of 

the projects documented with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates one project will have an 

EIS/ROD completed annually. None will be documented initially with a CE. Table 14 

summarizes the aggregate total annual and 3-year estimated applicant and EPA hours and costs, 

including contractor hours and costs, direct labor hours and costs, and O&M for documentation to 

support a CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD.
31

Table 14. Summary of Aggregate Total Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs and Hours for 

Applicants and EPA

Respondents and EPA Annual

Projects Hours Cost

3-Year

Projects Hours Costs

Grant Applicants

Permit Applicants

Sub-Totals

300 30,572 $2,369,325

12 7,900 1,133,920

312 38,472 $3,503,245

901 91,715 $7,506,655

36 23,700 3,401,760

937 115,415 $10,908,415

EPA

 Grant Applicant Projects

 Permit Applicant Projects

 Prepared Directly by EPA

Sub-Totals

300 19,313 $1,263,750

12 2,590 175,250

 5 250 16,250

317 22,153 $1,455,250

901 58,469 $ 3,762,700

 36 7,750 525,750

 17 2,740 203,000

954 68,959 $ 4,491,450

Totals 629 60,625 $4,958,495 1,891 184,374 $15,399,865

6(d) Change in Burden:

Currently 

Approved 

Hours

Requested 

Hours

Change Currently 

Approved 

Costsa

Requested 

Costs

Change

Grant 

Applicants-CE

8,100 10,125 +2,025 $3,060.00 $3,825 +$765

Grant 

Applicants-EA

31,200 19,500 -11,700 $4,800.00 $3,000 -$1,800

Grant 

ApplicantsEISb

947 947 0 $93.34c $93.34 $0

Permit 

Applicants-EA

5,060 5,060 0 $440.00 $440 $0

Permit 

Applicants-EIS

2,840 2,840 0 $280.00 $280 $0

Total 48,147 38,472 -9,675 $8,673.34 $7,638.34 -$1,035

a

The costs only include O&M.

bApproximately 1 EIS is completed every three years; for this table, the cost and hour estimates have been annualized.

cThis is an adjustment from the previous burden, where the cost of an EIS had not been annualized. The other changes in burden 

are due to program changes, based on the regulation changes.

The reduction in burden is achieved by increasing the number of projects that are 

documented with a categorical exclusion (CE) rather than an environmental assessment (EA). 

Under the current ICR, approximately 60% of the annual 300 grant projects were documented 

with a CE, and 40% with an EA. Under the renewal ICR, however, we estimate that out of the 

300 annual grant projects, 75% will be documented with a CE and 25% will be documented with 

an EA. Annually, then, the burden would shift to 10,125 hours and $3,825 for CE documentation, 

and 19,500 hours and $3,000 for EA documentation. With the current ICR, the total annual 

burden is 48,147 hours and $8,673.34. Under the renewal ICR, the total annual burden is 38,472

hours and $7,638.34. The renewal ICR reduces the total annual burden by 9,675 hours and 

$1,035.
32

6(e) Burden Statement Summary and Burden Statement: EPA is collecting 

information from certain applicants as part of the process of complying with either NEPA or 

Executive Order 12114. EPA’s procedures further the purpose of NEPA and provide that EPA 

may be guided by these procedures to the extent they are applicable. Therefore, when EPA 

conducts an environmental assessment pursuant to its Executive Order 12114 procedures, the 

Agency generally follows its NEPA procedures. For this ICR, applicant-proposed projects 

subject to either NEPA or Executive Order 12114 (and that are not addressed in other EPA 

programs’ ICRs), are addressed through the NEPA assessment process.

Those subject to 40 CFR Part 6 include EPA officials who must comply with NEPA and 

certain grant and permit applicants who must submit environmental information to EPA for their 

proposed projects. The EPA Responsible Official is responsible for the environmental review 

process, including any categorical exclusion determination or the scope, accuracy, and contents of 

an EA or EIS and any supporting documents. The applicant contributes by submitting 

environmental information to EPA as part of the environmental review process. The information 

collected from grant or permit applicants is one-time only on a per-project basis for EPA actions 

subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals. Grantees (primarily grants for special 

projects identified in EPA’s annual Appropriations Act) or permit applicants (for new source 

NPDES permits issued by EPA) are required to provide environmental information to EPA as part 

of the environmental review process unless the EPA Responsible Official decides to prepare the 

NEPA documents without assistance from the applicant. If the applicant cannot afford to provide 

the required environmental information to EPA, then EPA would undertake the environmental 

review without input from the applicant. Further, certain grantees may be grant-eligible for 

certain costs associated with providing environmental information to EPA; permit applicants are 

not eligible for EPA financial assistance.

The NEPA review for a project may result in a categorical exclusion (CE), or an EA 

documented with a FONSI, or an EIS documented with a record of decision (EIS/ROD). (EPA 

assumes a project may be documented with a CE only for grantee-proposed projects. EPA does 

not anticipate that an initial new source NPDES permit application would be documented with a 

CE.) For any specific project, only one of these levels of documentation is generally prepared. 

Applicants may submit an environmental information document (EID) to EPA as part of the 

environmental review process. Alternately, an applicant may submit a draft EA or a draft EIS and 

supporting documents. Applicants may prepare and submit the information directly, or may enter 

a third-party contract agreement with EPA for preparation of an EA or EIS and supporting 

documentation. For purposes of determining the maximum costs to applicants for this ICR, EPA 

assumed that grant and permit applicants would expend time and contractor costs to submit: (1) 

information to support application of a CE with environmental information prepared directly by

the applicant’s contractor; or (2) a draft EA and supporting documents prepared directly by the 

applicant’s contractor; or (3) a draft and final EIS and supporting documents prepared by the 

applicant’s contractor under a third-party contract agreement with EPA.

Based on experience, EPA anticipates there will be approximately 300 grantee projects 
33

annually with about 75% of these projects documented with a CE, and about 25% with an 

EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates that one project (less than one percent of the total annual 

grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year period of this ICR. For 

permit applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 of 

the projects documented with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates one project will have an 

EIS/ROD completed annually. None will be documented initially with a CE. EPA estimated the 

one-time costs for applicants to prepare the environmental documentation by including contractor 

hours and costs, direct labor hours and costs, and O&M for documentation submitted to EPA to 

support a CE determination, or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD. For a grantee, EPA estimates an 

applicant’s one-time costs for submitting environmental information will be: 45 hours and $3,317 

for CE documentation, or 260 hours and $21,640 for EA/FONSI documentation, or 2,840 hours 

and $398,680 for EIS/ROD documentation. For a permit applicant, EPA estimates an applicant’s 

one-time costs for submitting environmental information will be: 460 hours and $66,360 for 

EA/FONSI documentation, or 2,840 hours and $403,960 for EIS/ROD documentation. These 

figures may vary depending on the complexity of issues associated with the project and the 

availability of relevant information, particularly for EISs. (For example, EPA’s experience with a 

limited number of EISs has included one-time costs ranging from nominal for information 

submitted by letter to supplement an existing oil and gas extraction EIS to over a million dollars 

for new EISs for a mining project and an oil and gas extraction project with multiple complex 

issues.) EPA believes the calculations for this ICR are representative of most projects.

Burden Statement: The total annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this 

collection of information is estimated at 38,472 hours and $3,503,245 for contractor hours and 

costs, direct labor hours and costs, and O&M costs. This burden reflects an annual one-time 

submission of documentation for an anticipated 312 applicant-proposed projects that may be 

documented with a CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD. Under the ICR renewal, EPA assumes 

there will be approximately 300 grantee projects annually with about 75% of these projects 

documented with a CE, and about 25% with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates that one 

project will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year period of this ICR. For permit 

applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 

documented with an EA/FONSI. In addition, EPA estimates one project will have an EIS/ROD 

completed annually. None will be documented initially with a CE. Over the 3-year period of this 

ICR, EPA anticipates 937 applicant-proposed projects with a 3-year total burden estimate of 

115,415 hours and $10,908,415. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 

expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a 

Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, 

and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying 

information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; 

adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 

train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; research data sources; 

complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the 

information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 

collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB 
34

control numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQOECA-2005-0062, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person 

viewing at Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket 

Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 

20004. 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 Enforcement and Compliance Docket 

and Information Center is (202) 566-1752. An electronic version of the public docket is available 

at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to view public comments, access the index listing 

of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are 

available electronically. When in the system, select “search,” then key in the Docket ID Number 

identified above. 
35

PART B OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

STATISTICAL SURVEY

This collection of information does not use or is otherwise based on a statistical survey.
36

ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Exemptions from NEPA for Certain EPA Actions and

EPA’s Voluntary NEPA Policy and Procedures

Exemptions from NEPA for Certain EPA Actions

Certain EPA actions are exempt from the procedural requirements of NEPA, including the 

CEQ Regulations. Congress has provided specific statutory exemptions for certain EPA actions 

taken under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and all EPA actions taken under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). Specifically, under CWA Section 511(c)(1), EPA is exempt from preparing EISs for all 

actions taken under the CWA except for issuance of NPDES permits under CWA Section 402 for 

“new sources” as defined in Section 306, and for Federal financial assistance provided for 

assisting construction of publicly owned treatment works under CWA Section 201 (33 U.S.C. 

1371(c)). Under the Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 

793(c)(1)), all actions taken under the CAA are deemed not to be major federal actions 

significantly affecting the environment.

Further, the courts have exempted certain EPA actions from the procedural requirements 

of NEPA through the functional equivalence doctrine. Under the functional equivalence doctrine, 

courts have found EPA to be exempt from the procedural requirements of NEPA for certain 

actions under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Safe 

Drinking Water Act (SDWA), and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act 

(MPRSA). The courts reasoned that EPA actions under these statutes are functionally equivalent 

to the analysis required under NEPA because they are undertaken with full consideration of 

environmental impacts and opportunities for public involvement. See, e.g., EDF v. EPA, 489 

F.2d 1247 (D.C. Cir. 1973) (FIFRA); State of Alabama v. EPA, 911 F. 2d 499 (11th Cir. 1990) 

(RCRA); Warren County v. North Carolina, 528 F. Supp. 276 (E.D. N.C. 1981) (TSCA); Western 

Nebraska Resources Council v. US EPA, 943 F.2d 867 (8th Cir. 1991) (SDWA); Maryland v. 

Train, 415 F. Supp. 116 (D. Md. 1976) (MPRSA).

Agency actions exempt from the requirements of NEPA remain exempt under this final 

rule. If a question arises regarding the applicability of the NEPA requirements to certain actions, 

the Responsible Official should consult with the NEPA Official and the Office of General 

Counsel.

EPA's Voluntary NEPA Policy and Procedures

In 1974, EPA Administrator Russell Train determined that the Agency could voluntarily

prepare EISs for certain regulatory activities that were exempt from NEPA. In 1998, 

Administrator Carol Browner amended this policy to permit the preparation of non-EIS NEPA 
37

documents for certain EPA regulatory actions. The Agency’s current "Notice of Policy and 

Procedures for Voluntary Preparation of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Documents" 

(see 63 FR 58045) sets out the policy and procedures EPA uses when preparing environmental 

review documents under the Voluntary NEPA Policy. This final rule does not make any changes 

to the voluntary NEPA policy and procedures. However, the final rule can serve as a framework 

for the preparation of voluntary NEPA documents.
38

ATTACHMENT 2 TO THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

List of Tables

Table 1-1. Summary of STAG Awards by Region for the 3-Year Period 2002 Through 

2004

Table 1-2. Estimated Hours for Applicants and EPA for Preparation of NEPA 

Documentation
39

Table 1-1. Summary of STAG Awards by Region for the 5-Year Period 2005

Through 2009

Region

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 HQ Total

2005 34 43 32 61 75 40 29 18 61 20 1 414

2006 48 26 61 108 104 49 23 46 75 50 6 596

2007 44 6 35 84 58 20 15 9 29 10 1 311

2008 10 3 34 29 27 3 11 11 10 12 1 151

2009 30 16 36 61 37 8 10 17 18 12 2 247

Table 1-2. Estimated Hours for Applicants and EPA for Preparation of NEPA 

Documentation

CE Documents Project EA/FONSI Documents Project EIS/ROD Documents Project

Applicants assume 5 hours 120 hrs for EPA/2 = 60 hours Same as EPA = 440 hours

EPA Applicant submits info: 40 hours

Direct preparation: 50 hours

Applicant submits info: 120 hours

Direct preparation: 170 hours

Applicant submits info: 530 hours

Direct preparation: 570 hours