# U.S. ENVIRONMENT **AL PROTECTION**  **AG ENCY** 



# INFORMA

**TION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR**  **REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR BEACH**

**ACT GRANTS (RENEW AL)** 

**EPA ICR No.**  **2048.04 OMB Control No.**  **2040 -**  **0244**

**January 201**  **2**ii 1/24/2012



## Contents
1. Identification of the Information Collection

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

................................ ................................ ............................... 1 1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 1 2. Need for and Use of the Collection

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

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

................................ ................................ ................................ 2 3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

................................ ............................. 2 3(a) Nonduplication

................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 2 3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

................................ ........................... 2 3(c) Consultations

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

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

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

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

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 3 4. The Respondents and the Information Requested

................................ ................................ ................. 3 4(a) Respondents/SIC Codes

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 3 4(b) Information Requested

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 4 5. The Information Collected

-Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 6 5(a) Agency Activities

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 6 5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

................................ ................................ ................... 7 5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 7 5(d) Collection Schedule

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 7 6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

................................ ................................ ................ 7 6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 7 6(b) Estimating Respondent Cost

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 8 6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

................................ ................................ .......................... 13 6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

................................ ............. 14 6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

................................ ................................ .............. 14 6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 15 6(g) Burden Statement

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 15iii 1/24/2012



## Tables Table 1. BEACH Act Grant performance criteria summary

................................ ................................ ......... 4 Table 2. Individual respondent 3

-year state burden hours

................................ ................................ .......... 10 Table 3. Total Agency burden hours per activity over 3 years

................................ ................................ ... 14 Table 4. Annualized respondent burden and co st
................................ ................................ ....................... 14 Table 5. Total annualized respondent and Agency burden and costs

................................ ......................... 15 Table 6. Change in annual state burden for performance criteria tasks

.. **Error! Bookmark not defined.** 141 1/24/2012



# I **NFORMA TION**  

# C **OLLECTION** 

# R **EQUEST 1.**  **Identification of the Information Collection 1(a)**  **Title of the Information Collection** BEACH Act Grant Program 

### 1(b) **Short Characterization/A**  **bstract** The Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act amends the Clean Water Act (CWA) in part and authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to award BEACH Act Program Development and Implementation Grants to coastal and Great Lakes states, tribes, and territories (collectivel y referred to as states) for their beach monitoring and notification programs. The grants will assist those states to develop and implement a consistent approach to monitor recre ational water quality ; assess, manage, and communicate health risks from waterborne microbial contamination; notify the public of pollution occurrences, and post beach advisories and closures to prevent public exposure to microbial pathogens. To qualify fo r a BEACH Act Grant, a state must submit information to EPA documenting that its beach monitoring and notification program is consistent with nine performance criteria outlined in the National Beach Guidance and Performance Criteria for Recreation Waters

. For EPA to award a BEACH Act Implementation Grant, a state must document that its coastal monitoring and notification program includes or will include the following:

• Risk

-based beach evaluation and classification

.

• Sampling design and monitoring implementation plan

.
• Monitoring report submission and delegation

.
• Methods and assessment procedures

.
• Public notification and risk communication plan

.
• Measures to notify

EPA and local governments

.
• Measures to notify

the public

.
• Notification report submissio n and delegation

.
• Public evaluation of program

. All beach program information will be collected by EPA’s Office of Science and Technology , stored in the Beach Database, and displayed on EPA’s Beaches website for use by the public, state environmental and public health agencies, and EPA. The third Information Collection Request ( IC R) approval period expires in January 2012

. Thi s Supporting Statement is for the renewal ICR being submitted to Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) for re

- approval of the Reporting Requirements for BEACH Act Grants information collection

. For the fourth ICR approval period after rule promulgation, EPA estimates that the annual respondent burden for the 37 eligible coastal and Great Lakes states, tribes, and territories will be 88, 8 12 hours and operations and maintenance (O&M) costs of2 1/24/2012



### $3,943,080, f

or a total annual cost of $ 8 ,571,118

. There are no start

-up costs . Because the Agency does not incur any

additional O&M costs, the total annual respondent and Agency burden and cost estim ate is 91,9 57 hours (respondents and Agency) and $ 8,778,500 (which includes the respondent and Agency burden costs and the respondent O&M costs of $3,943,080)

. EPA requests that OMB review and approve this ICR package proposal for 3 years. 

## 2. **Need for and Use of the Collection**  **2(a) Need/** **Au thorit** **y for the Collection**  The BEACH Act (Public Law 106

- 284) established a grant program to assist states in implementing a uniform monitoring and notification program for their coastal recreational waters. As a condition of receipt of a BEACH Act Grant, states must show evidence of meeting the nine performance criteria and the conditions under the BEACH Act. Therefore, a state applying for a grant must submit information on its programs to its EPA Regional Coordinator to document that its program is consistent with the performance criteria. 

### 2(b) **Practical Utility**

**/Users of the Data** Data will be used b y EP A, state and local environmental and public health agencies, and the public. EPA will use the information submitted by a state to determine whether the state’s program is consistent with the performance criteria and the BEACH Act. State and local environmental and public health agencies will use the data as an indicator of program performance, and the public will use the data as reference to make informed decisions before going to the beach. The information provided b y each state will also be used to report the status of beach monitoring and notification programs nationwide. A state must implement measures to notify EPA of the results of its water quality sampling. Therefore, these data will be used to create and maintain a national database of water quality trends, advisories, and closings. 

## 3. **Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria 3(a)**  **Nonduplication** The information requested from the states is required for receipt of a BEACH Act Grant and is not available from other sources. EPA has made every reasonable attempt to ensure that the beach monitoring and notification data and information requested through the BEACH Act Grant Program is not already available through less burdensome mechanisms. 

### 3(b) **Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB** EPA published the first Federal Register notice for this ICR on September 20, 2011 ( 76 FR 58266 ). EPA requested comment from the public

. EPA received one comment during the comment period, which was not relevant to the information collection

.3 1/24/2012



### 3(c) **Consultations** EPA consulted with the following state beach coordinators , asking them to compare EPA ’s average burden estimates with their experience : Shannon Briggs (Michigan), Jon Dinneen (Connecticut), and Heather Merritt (Maryland). Shannon commented that the numbers were similar to Michigan’s estimates and were therefore reasonable. Jon provided a detailed breakdown of Connecticut’s burden on a task

-by

- task basis, with estimates that were higher in some places and lower in others, resulting in an overall annual burden higher than EPA’s estimates by

476 hours. Heather responded that the burden estimate s seem ed reasonable overall, but noted that Maryland spends more time on sample collection. Based on these responses, EPA feels that the state burden provided in the ICR is a reasonable estimate for an average state. 

### 3(d) **Effects of Less Frequent Collection** The requirement for a state to submit its monitoring and notification data is a statutory requirement under the BEACH Act

. The frequency and format of such submittal is at the Administrator ’ s discretion [ see CWA section 406(b)(B)(3) ]. Since 2003, EPA has required states to submit their monitoring and notification data annually

. However, to provide more up

- to
- date information to the public on the state of their beaches, the Agency is encouraging more frequent reportin g . The Agency

continues to expect state grant performance reports annually

. 

### 3(e) **General Guidelines** The BEACH Act Grant Program will be conducted in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act [Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) section 1320 .5(d)(2)] and will adhere to OMB’s general guidelines for information collections. 

### 3(f) **Confidentiality** Measures to ensure the confidentiality of the collected beach monitoring and notification data are not necessary

because the information submitted by the respondents is public information. 

### 3(g) **Sensitive Questions** No information of sensitive nature will be collected as a result of this ICR.


## 4. **The Respondents and the Information Requested 4(a)**  **Respondents/SIC Codes** In formation collected b y EPA under th e BEACH Act will be submitted by environmental and public health agencies in coastal and Great Lakes states, territories, and tribes. No private industries will be required to submit information, and, therefore, no SIC codes are relevant.4 1/24/2012



### 4(b) **Information Requested**  EPA is requiring states to provide information on how a beach monitoring and notification program is consistent with the following nine performance criteria, developed from the BEACH Act and summarized in Table 1.

**Table 1. BEA CH A** **ct Grant perfo rmance criteria summary**  **Category Performance** 

**criteria Requirement**  **BEA CH A** **ct section**  **Evaluation and Classification**  1 Risk
- based Beach Evaluation and Classification 406(b)(2)(A)(ii
- iv) 406(c)(1) **Monitoring** 2 Sam pling Design and Monitoring Implementation Plan 406(c)(3) 3 Monitoring Report Submission

and Delegation 406(b)(3)(A), (B) 406(c)(2) 4 Methods and Assessment

Procedures 406(c)(4) **Public Notification and**  **Prompt Risk Communication**  5 Public Notification and Risk Communication Plan 406(c)(7) 6 Measures to Notify EPA and

Local Governments 406(c)(5) 7 Measures to Notify the Public 406(c)(6) 8 Notification Report Submission

and Delegation 406(b)(3)(A), (B) 406(c)(2) **Public Evaluation**  9 Public Evaluation of Program 406(b)(2)(A)(v)


### 1) **Risk -**  **based Beach Evaluation and Classification**  A state must develop a risk

-based beach evaluation and classification plan and appl y it to state coastal recreation waters. A state or tribal program must describe the factors used in its evaluation and classification process and explain how its beaches are ranked as a result of the process. The process must result in the identification of a list of coastal recreation waters in the state, including coastal recreation waters adjacent to beaches or similar points of access used b y the public. **2) Sampling Design and Monitoring Plan**  A state must develop a sampling design and monitoring implementation plan. The plan must adequatel y address the frequency and location of monitoring and assessment of coastal recreation waters according to the periods of recreational use of the waters, the nature and extent of use during certain periods, the proximity of the waters to known point sources and nonpoint sources of pollution, and any

effect of storm events on the waters.5 1/24/2012



### 3) **Monitoring Report Submission and Delegation**  A state must develop a mechanism to collect relevant information , submit timely reports to EPA , and document any delegation of monitoring responsibilities to local governments. Report Submission A state recipient of a grant must submit to the EPA Administrator timely information and reports that describe the data collected as part of the monitoring program and the actions taken to notify the public when water quality standards are exceeded. Delegation If monitoring responsibilitie s are delegated to local governments, the state grant recipient must describe the process b y which the state may delegate to local governments responsibility for implementing the monitoring program. **4) Methods and A** 

**ssessment Procedures** A state must develop detailed methods and assessment procedures. Those procedures must adequatel y address both the methods to be used for detecting levels of pathogens and pathogen indicators that are harmful to human health and the assessment procedures for identifying short

term increases in pathogens and pathogen indicators that are harmful to human health. **5) Public Notification and Risk Communication Plan**  A state must develop an overall public notification and risk communication plan. The plan must describe the state’s public notification efforts and measures to inform the public of the potential risks associated with water contact activities in the coastal recreation waters that do not meet applicable water quality standards. **6) Measures to Notify**  **EPA and Local Governments**  A state must identify

measures for promptly

communicating to EPA and local governments of the occurrence, nature, location, pollutants involved, and extent of any exceeding of, or likelihood of exceeding, applicable water quality standards for pathogens and patho gen indicators. The state must identify how that information will be promptly communicated to EPA and to a designated official of the local government that has jurisdiction over land adjoining the coastal recreation waters for which the failure to meet app licable standards has been identified. **7) Measures to Notify**  **the Public** A state must develop measures to notify the public by

posting signs at beaches or similar points of access or through functionally equivalent communication measures that are sufficient to give notice to the public that the coastal recreation waters are not meeting or are not expected to meet applicable water quality standards for pathogens and pathogen indicators.6 1/24/2012



### 8) **Notification Report Submission and Delegations** A state must develop a mechanism to collect relevant information , submit timely reports to EPA , and document any delegation of notification responsibilities to local governments. Report Submission A state or tribal recipient of a grant must submit to the EPA Administrator timely infor mation and reports that describe data collected as part of the notification program and the actions taken to notify the public when water quality standards are exceeded. Delegation If notification responsibilities are delegated to local governments, the state grant recipient must describe the process b y which the state may delegate to local governments responsibility for implementing the notification program. **9) Public Evaluation of Program**  A state must identify

how to provide the public with an opportunity to review the program through a process that provides for public notice, review, and an opportunity to comment. That can be accomplished through a record of public comments, meetings, forums, or workshops.


## 5. **The Information Collected -**  **agency Activities,**  **Collection Methodology** **, and Information Management 5(a)**  **Ag ency** 

**A ctivities**  The BEACH Act Grant Program will be administered b y EPA Headquarters and EPA Regional Offices, which have planned for and allocated resources for the efficient and effective managem ent of the grant program. EPA is conducting the following activities in administering the BEACH Act grants:

• EPA Headquarters is to monitor state programs annually to ensure compliance with the performance criteria.

• EPA Regions are to monitor state programs annually to ensure compliance with the performance criteria.

• EPA Regions and EPA Headquarters are to provide miscellaneous support to the states.

• EPA Regions are to revise work plans and update the Quality Management Plan.

• EPA Regions are to perform technical review of a Quality Assurance Project Plan and Grants Management Plan.

• Regions are to ensure that a Quality Assurance Project Plan is complete before implementation.7 1/24/2012



### 5(b) **Collection Methodology and Management**  The EPA Beach Program encourages states to electronically transmit beach monitoring and notification data directl y to EPA. Electronic reporting is intended to achieve data collection efficiencies and reduce the possibility of data input error. It is the state’s responsibility to conduct ongo ing data anal ys is, including performing data quality assurance/quality

control to check for anomalies in the data that might be related to data entry or laboratory

errors. Data quality

review and anal ys is will include continuous anal ys is of laboratory results, pollution occurrence events, public notification, and review of all program data. The beach monitoring and notification data will be maintained in the e BEACHES data system
. Reporting of beach data to EPA consists of beach program information, notification data, monitoring data, locational data. The data collected under the BEACH Act Grant Program will be used for program performance evaluation to determine if a state program is consistent with the BEACH Guidance and Performance Criteria document, to anal yz e pollution occurrences at beaches across the nation and report to Congress on the status of the nation’s recreation waters. 

### 5(c) **Small Entity**

**Flexibility** Measures to assist small entities are not applicable because the respondents for the BEACH Act Grant Program are state government agencies. However, EPA may make a grant to a local government for implementing a monitoring and notification program onl y if, after the 1

- ye ar period beginning on the date of publication of performance criteria, EPA determines that the state is not implementing a program that meets the performance criteria. 

### 5(d) **Collection Schedule** A state must show evidence documenting its compliance with the nine performance criteria as listed in the Federal Register and the National Bea ch Guidance and Performance Criteria to be eligible for a BEACH Act Grant. 

## 6. **Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection 6(a)**  **Estimating Respondent Burden** The BEACH Act requires states to devote time and resources to implement a monitoring and notif ication program to meet the performance criteria outlined in the National Beach Guidance and Performance Criteria for Recreation Waters . To develop burden estimates, EPA estimated the number of hours that will be required b y states to adhere to the following performance criteria: 1. Risk

-based b each evaluation and c lassification

. 2. Sampling design and monitoring implementation plan

. 3. Monitoring report submission and delegation

. 4. Methods and assessment procedures

. 5. Public notification and risk communication plan

.8 1/24/2012



### 6. Measures to notify EPA and local governments

. 7. Measures to notify

the public

. 8. Notification report submission and delegation

. 9. Public evaluation of program

. The Agency

estimated that implementing a monitoring and notification program in accordance with the nine performance criteria will take an annual average of 88,812 hours and $3,943,080 O&M for all 37 respondents. The following assumptions were made for this ICR on the basis of data collected b y EPA and consultations with respondents listed in s ection 3(c):

• The average beach (monitoring) season was assumed to be 18 weeks.

• The average number of samples collected per week at each monitored beach during the beach season was assumed to be 2 samples.

• The average cost of sample anal ys is was assumed to be $30 per s ample.

• The frequency

of reporting to EPA is assumed to be quarterly

. 

### 6(b) **Estimating Respondent Cost** The annual cost for a state to implement the performance criteria necessary to comply

with the BEACH Act Grant Program are attributed to labor costs and O &M costs. The total cost burden over 3 years for the 37 states and territories is estimated to be $ 25,713,355 , which consists of $ 25,713,355 in labor costs and $11,829,240 in O&M costs.
**Labor Costs** To develop labor costs, EPA multiplied the number of hours that will be required to implement a monitoring and notification plan by the state employee hourl y rate to generate a cost estimate. Because labor rates vary

so widely

among the state government personnel involved in implementing a state monitoring and no tification program, EPA used an average loaded hourl y rate that is representative of the average salary for a managerial and technical state employee as listed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for full

- time state and local government workers in the 2010 N ational Compensation Survey . The managerial salary of $ 82.58 per hour i s calculated as the hourly

rate of $51.61 times an overhead factor of 1.6 . That is, $51.61 x 1.6) = $ 82.58 . The technical salary

of $ 49.74 per hour i s calculated as $31.09 times the 1.6 factor . Table 2 presents an estimate of the burden that state governments will incur to meet each performance criterion outlined in the National Beach Guidance and Grant Performance Criteria for Recreation Waters . The table identifies the activities to be performed b y the state, the associated hours required for each activity, and the labor cost for each activity . Annual totals are presented at the end of Table 2. **Operation and Maintenance Costs** In addition to labor costs, the states and territories incur O&M costs associated with the anal ytical fees and shipping for the water quality s amples. Non

- labor costs for the 37 states and9 1/24/2012



### territories are solel y attributed to the laboratory fees that will be charged for anal ys is and to shipping charges for sending the sample bottles to the appropriate laboratory

.10 1/24/2012

**Table 2. Individual respondent 3 -** **year state burden hours**

**Performance criterion**  **State activity 3**  **- year**  **managerial burden 3**  **- year**  **technical burden**  **Total 3**  **- year burden**  **Total burden**  **per activity**  **(hours) Total labor** 

**cost $134.19/hour**  **(dollars) Total** 

**burden per**  **activity (hours)**  **Total**

**labor cost $80.83/**  **hour (dollars)**  **Total**

**burden per**  **activity (hours)**  **Total labor**

**cost (dollars)**  **1 -**  **Risk -**  **based Beach**  **Evaluation and**  **Classification** Identify coastal

recreation waters 1 $ 83 6 $ 298 7 $ 381 Identify and submit list of mo nitored waters 1 $ 83 6 $ 298 7 $ 381 Collect and submit beach lat/long coordinates (georeference beaches using maps, GPS, etc.) 20 $ 1,652 180 $ 8,954 200 $ 10,605

Identify bathing beaches and submit beach miles 20 $ 1,652 80 $ 3,980 100 $ 5,631 Determine legal authority for administering mo nitoring and notification programs 3 $ 248 6 $ 298 9 $ 546

Review available information 5 $ 413 15 $ 746 20 $ 1,159 Rank beaches 3 $ 248 100 $ 4,974 103 $ 5,222 **Performance Criterion 1 Total**  **53 $**  **4,377 393**  **$ 19,549**  **446 $**  **23,926 2**  **- Sampling**  **Design and Monitoring**  **Implementati on Plan**  Identify sampling plan

(when and where to sam ple, what depth to sam ple, etc.) 3 $ 248 5 $ 249 8 $ 496

Ensure data quality 12 $ 991 100 $ 4,974 112 $ 5,965 Staff monitoring programs 4 $ 330 7 $ 348 11 $ 679 Train monitoring staff 16 $ 1,321 200 $ 9,949 216 $ 11,270 Create database and data submission process 40 $ 3,303 360 $ 17,908 400 $ 21,211 Manage data for beach season 20 $ 1,652 180 $ 8,954 200 $ 10,605 Program implementation and oversight 120 $ 9,909 120 $ 5,969 240 $ 15,878 **Performance Criterion 2 Total**  **215 $**  **17,754 972**  **$ 48,351**  **1,187 $**  **66,105**11 1/24/2012

**Performance criterion**  **State activity 3**  **- year**  **managerial burden 3**  **- year**  **technical burden**  **Total 3**  **- year burden**  **Total burden**  **per activity**  **(hours) Total labor** 

**cost $134.19/hour**  **(dollars) Total** 

**burden per**  **activity (hours)**  **Total**

**labor cost $80.83/**  **hour (dollars)**  **Total**

**burden per**  **activity (hours)**  **Total labor**

**cost (dollars)**  **3 -**  **Monitoring Report**  **Submission and**  **Delegation** Subm it report that

describes data collected and public notification activities 12 $ 991 35 $ 1,741 47 $ 2,732

Describe process by which the state may delegate to local governments the responsibility for im plem enting a mo nitoring program 6 $ 495 18 $ 895 24 $ 1,391

**Performance Criterion 3 Total**  **18 $**  **1,486 53**  **$ 2,636**  **71 $**  **4,123 4**  **- Me**  **thods and Assessment**  **Procedures** Identify laboratories for

analysis 1 $ 83 12 $ 597 13 $ 680 Determine analytical procedures 0 $0 4 $ 199 4 $ 199 Identify sample collection techniques 1 $ 83 6 $ 298 7 $ 381 Collect water sample 0 $0 1 , 350 $ 67,154 1,350 $ 67,154 Determine data validation and verification procedures 2 $ 165 9 $ 448 11 $ 613
Analyze and submit mo nitoring data to EPA 140 $ 11,561 2,600 $ 129,334 2,740 $ 140,895 Identify the use of predictive tools in beach mo nitoring. (If using predictive tools, identify what t yp e of tool, how used, how applicable, etc.) 4 $ 330 20 $ 995 24 $ 1,325

**Performance Criterion 4 Total**  **148 $**  **12,221 4,001**  **$ 199,026**  **4,149 $**  **211,247 5**  **- Public**  **Notification and Risk**  **Communica**   ** tion Plan** Perform a problem

assessment and audience identification 2 $ 165 22 $ 1,094 24 $ 1,260
Determine and develop content and procedures for advisories and closings 4 $ 330 44 $ 2,189 48 $ 2,519

**Performance Criterion**  **5 Total 6**  **$ 495**  **66 $**  **3,283 72**  **$ 3,779** 12 1/24/2012

**Performance criterion**  **State activity 3**  **- year**  **managerial burden 3**  **- year**  **technical burden**  **Total 3**  **- year burden**  **Total burden**  **per activity**  **(hours) Total labor** 

**cost $134.19/hour**  **(dollars) Total** 

**burden per**  **activity (hours)**  **Total**

**labor cost $80.83/**  **hour (dollars)**  **Total**

**burden per**  **activity (hours)**  **Total labor**

**cost (dollars)**  **6 -**  **Me asures to**  **Notify EPA and Local**  **Governments** Determine the

me chanisms for states to notify local governments of advisories and closings, and removal of advisories and closings 3 $ 248 23 $ 1,144 26 $ 1,392

Determine the me chanisms for states to notify EPA of advisories, closings, and removal of advisories and closings 1 $ 83 13 $ 647 14 $ 729

Collect and submit notification data to EPA 4 $ 330 22 $ 1,094 26 $ 1,425 **Performance Criterion 6 Total**  **8 $**  **661 58**  **$ 2,885**  **66 $**  **3,546 7**  **- Me**  **asures to Notify the**  **Public** Determine the

me chanisms for states to notify the public of advisories, closings, and removal of advisories and closings 2 $ 165 20 $ 995 22 $ 1,160

Implement notification program (could include posting signs or functional equivalent) 45 $ 3,716 855 $ 42,531 900 $ 46,247

**Performance Criterion 7 Total**  **47 $**  **3,881 875**  **$ 43,526**  **922 $**  **47,407 8**  **- Notification**  **Report Submission**  **and Delegation**  Subm it report that

describes data collected and the public notification activities 6 $ 495 50 $ 2,487 56 $ 2,983

Describe process by which the state may delegate to local governments the responsibility for im plem enting a notification program 2 $ 165 22 $ 1,094 24 $ 1,260

**Performance Criterion 8 Total**  **8 $**  **661 72**  **$ 3,582**  **80 $**  **4,242**13 1/24/2012

**Performance criterion**  **State activity 3**  **- year**  **managerial burden 3**  **- year**  **technical burden**  **Total 3**  **- year burden**  **Total burden**  **per activity**  **(hours) Total labor** 

**cost $134.19/hour**  **(dollars) Total** 

**burden per**  **activity (hours)**  **Total**

**labor cost $80.83/**  **hour (dollars)**  **Total**

**burden per**  **activity (hours)**  **Total labor**

**cost (dollars)**  **9 -**  **Public Evaluation of**  **Program** Ensure the monitoring

and notification program me ets the needs of the audiences and the objectives of the Agency 8 $ 661 96 $ 4,775 104 $ 5,436

Evaluate the monitoring and notification program 8 $ 661 96 $ 4,775 104 $ 5,436 **Performance Criterion 9 Total**  **16 $**  **1,321 192**  **$ 9,551**  **208 $**  **10,872 Total**  **519 $**  **42,857 6,682**  **$ 332,389**  **7,201 $**  **375,246 An**  **nual Total 173**  **$ 14,286**  **2,227 $**  **110,796 2,400**  **$ 125,082** 


### The O&M costs were calculated as an average for the 3,651 coastal and Great Lakes beaches identified in EPA’s 2010 National Beaches Survey (the most recent version available) for the 37 states and territories eligible to participate in the BEACH Act Grant Program. EPA obtained laboratory

fees and shipping costs from testing labs and estimated the cost to be $30 per sample. The cost for each state was calculated using the equation below: 3,651 beaches × 36 samples (twice per week for 18 week season) × $30/ sample = $ 106,570/state 37 states 

### EPA estimates an annual O&M cost of $ 106,570 per state, an annual total O&M cost of $3,943,080 for all 37 states, and a total O&M cost of $11,829,240 for 37 states over 3 years. 

### 6(c) **Estimating A gency**  **Burden and Cost** The BEACH Act requires EPA to devote time and resources to manage the grant program. To develop burden estimates, EPA estimated the number of hours that will be required to administer the program. The Agency estimates that it will take 85 hours per respondent to review and process the applications, monitor respondent programs, and provide miscellaneous support

. When multiplied by 37 respondents, the annual Agency burden is 3,145 hours to administer the program and a total Agency burden of 9,435 hours over 3 years . The Agency used an average hourly salary for Agency employees of $ 65

. 94 , which was calculated using an hourl y rate of $41.21 plus an overhead factor of 6 0% . That is, $41.21 x 1.6 = $ 65.94

. The labor rate was obtained using 2011 salary tables provided by

the Office of Personnel Management

. Table 3 presents an estimate of the burden that EPA will incur to manage the BEACH Act Grant Program for years 1 through 3 of this ICR

. The annual totals are presented at the bottom of the table.14 1/24/2012

**Table 3. Total A gency**  **b urden**  **h ours**  **p er**  **a ctivity**  **over 3 y** **ears**
**Activities Ag**  **ency b**  **urden h**  **ours Ag**  **ency**

**b urden**  **d ollars**  EPA Headquarters to monitor state programs annually to ensure com pliance with the performance criteria. 1,480 $97, 5 91 EPA Regions to monitor state programs annually to ensure com pliance with the performance criteria. 2,035 $134, 18 8 EPA Headquarters and EPA Regions to provide miscellaneous support to states. 1,480 $97, 5 91 EPA Regions to revise work plans and update beach monitoring and notification program procedures. 1,268 $83, 6 12 EPA Regions to perform technical review on Quality Assurance Project Plan and Grants Management Plan, DQOs and SOPs prior to im plem entation. 3,172 $209, 1 62
**Total over 3 years** 9,435 $622, 1 44 **An nual total**  3,145 $207, 3 81 

### 6(d) **Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs** Table 4 presents an estimate of the total respondent burden and costs expected for the BEACH Act Grant Program

. The total annual respondent burden is expected to be 88,8 12 hours and $3,943,080 O&M Costs

. There are no start

-up costs
. **Table 4. A nnual**  **r espondent**  **b urden**  **a nd**  **c ost** 
**Performanc e**  **criteria Respondent** 

**h ou**  **rs/y ea**  **r Respondent** 

**labor cost/y** **ea r**  **O&M**

**cost/y ea**  **r Number of** 

**r espondents/**  **y ea**  **r Total** 

**hou rs/y** **ea r**  **Total**

**cost/y ea**  **r**

***** **1** 14 8.67 $ 7,975 37 5,5 01 $ 295,086 **2** 39 5.67 $ 22,035 37 14,6 40 $ 815,295 **3** 2 3.67 $ 1,374 37 8 76 $ 50,848 **4** 1,383 .00 $ 70,416 37 51,171 $ 2,605,3 80 **5** 2 4 .00 $ 1,2 60 37 888 $ 46,602 **6** 22 .00 $ 1,182 37 814 $ 43,731 **7** 307 .33 $ 15,802 37 11,3 71 $ 584,687 **8** 2 6.67 $ 1,414,06 37 987 $ 52,320 **9** 69 .33 $ 3,624 37 2, 565 $ 134,089 **Total** 2,400 .33 $ 125,082 $3,943,080 37 88, 812 $ 8,571,118 *Values might not add up exactly due to rounding. 

### 6(e) **Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables** Table 5 presents an estimate of the total annual State and Agency burden and costs expected for the BEACH Act Grant Program

. As shown in Table 5, the annual burden for the Agency and 37 states, tribes, and territories with coastal recreation waters is 91,957 hours and $ 8,778,500 including O&M costs.15 1/24/2012

**T able 5. Total**  **a nnual**  **r espondent and A** **gency b**  **urden and c**  **osts Burden**  **( h**  **ours) Burden**  **c ost**  ***** **O&M c**  **ost Total**  **c ost** ***** **37 States**  88,8 12 $ 4,628,038 $3,943,080 $ 8,571,118 **Ag ency**  3, 145 $ 207 , 3 81 $0 $ 207,3 81 **Total 91,9**  **57 $**  **4,835,420 $3,**  **943,080 $**  **8,778,500** *Values might not add up exactly due to rounding. 

### 6(f) **Reasons for Change in Burden** The respondent average annual burden increased from the 2008 level of 2,374 hours to 2,400 hours for the total number of 37 respondents . The Agency annual burden decreased from the 2008 level of 3,200 hours to 3, 145 hours

. EPA used 37 for the number of respondents (37 currentl y receive BEACH Act grants) compared to 40 respondents used in the 2008 ICR . EPA used 40 for the number of respondents in the 2008 ICR because the Agency expected additional tribes to apply

for BEACH Act grants that had not done so during the original ICR period

. However, no additional tribes applied for grants. Therefore , for this ICR renewal EPA used the actual number (37) of states, territories, and tribes that currentl y receive BEACH Act grants. The increase in respondent burden is because EPA is encouraging states to voluntarily report monitoring and notification data more frequently, up to four times each ye ar . The increase in burden i s minimized , however, because respondents have become more efficient in their reporting of data and information over the past several ye ars and EPA has made improvements to the eBEACHES data s ys tem. The annual O&M costs for all respondents also increased from $3,938, 760 to $3,943,080 for all states

. Th at is because the estimated number of beaches monitored by

grant recipients increased slightl y from 3,647 (estimated from EPA’s 2007 National List of Beaches) to 3,651 (estimated from the 2010 Annual Swimming Season Report)

. Relative to the 2008 ICR, EPA maintained its estimate of two samples collected each week per monitored beach with a beach season length of 18 weeks and sample cost of $30 per sample, according to data that EPA collected and comments received from several state Beach Program contacts and testing labs

. EPA also revised the labor rates, which increased from $47.00 to 51.61 for a m anagerial employee and decreased from $31.25 to $31.09 for a technical emplo yee according to the average Bureau of Labor Statistics salaries for managerial and technical employees in state and local governments as shown in its 2010 National Compensation Survey Table

. 

### 6(g) **Burden Statement** The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 2,400 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended b y persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a f

ederal agency

. Th at includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and u s e 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; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and tran smit or otherwise disclose the information

. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of16 1/24/2012



### information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number

. The OMB control numbers for EPA ’ s regulations are listed in 40 CFR P art 9 and 48 CFR Part 15

. To 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 has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket IDNo. EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 2008

- 0357 , which is available for public viewing at the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC

. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday

through Friday, excluding legal holidays . The telephone number for the Water Docket is (202) 566

- 2426. An electronic version of the public docket is avail able through Regulations.gov at http://www.regulations.gov/

. T o submit or 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, use the Regulations.gov website. Once there, click **search** , then key in the docket ID number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of In formation and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 7 25 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 2008

- 0357 and OMB control number 2040

- 0244 in any correspondence.