# Information Collection **Request for the Public Water Sy** **stem Supervision**  **Program Information Collection**  **Request for the Public**iii **TABLE OF CONTENTS** 1 ID ENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

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

................................ ...................... 1 1(b) Short Characterization

................................ ................................ .............................. 1 2 NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

................................ ................................ .. 3 2(a) Need/Authorit y for the Collection

................................ ................................ ............ 3 2(b) Use/Users of the Data

................................ ................................ ............................... 9 3 NON

- DUPLICATION, CONSUL TAT IONS, AND OTHER

................................ .............. 11 COLLECTION CRITERIA

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 11 3(a) Non
- duplication

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 11 3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to I CR Submission to OMB

................................ .... 11 3(c) Consultations

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 11 3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

................................ ................................ ........ 11 3(f) Confidentiality

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 12 3(g) Sensitive Questions

................................ ................................ ................................ . 12 4 RES PONDENTS AND INFORMATION REQUESTED

................................ .................... 13 4(a) Respondents/North American Industry Classification Sy stem (NAICS) Codes

.... 13 4(b) In formation Requested

................................ ................................ ............................ 13 4(b) (i) Data Items

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 13 4(b)(ii) Respondent Activities

................................ ................................ ........................ 23 5 IN FORMAT ION COLLECTED

-- AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

................................ .......... 29 5(a) Agency

Activities

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 29 5(b) Co llection Methodology and Management

................................ ............................. 31 5(c) Small Entity

Flexibility

................................ ................................ ........................... 32 5(d) Collection Schedule

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 34 6 ESTIMATING BURDEN AND COST OF COLLECTION

................................ ................ 35 6(a) Respondent Burden

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 35 6(a)(i) Burden to Public Water Sy stems
................................ ................................ ..... 35 6(a)(ii) Burden to Primacy Agencies

................................ ................................ ............. 40 6(a)(iii) Burden to Laboratories

................................ ................................ .................. 44 6(b) Respondent Costs

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 45 6(b)(i) Cost to Public Water Sy stems
................................ ................................ ........... 45 6(b)(ii) Cost to Primacy

Agencies

................................ ................................ ................ 45 6(b)(iii) Cost to L aboratories

................................ ................................ ........................ 46 6(c) Agency

Burden and Costs

................................ ................................ .............................. 48 6(d) Estimating Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

................................ ...... 50 6(e) Bottom L ine Burden Hours and Costs

................................ ................................ ........... 50 6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

................................ ................................ ....................... 53 6(f)(i) Restructuring Adjustments

................................ ................................ .............. 53 6(f)(ii) Additional Program Adjustments

................................ ................................ .... 54 6(g) Burden Statement

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 57iv **APPENDICES** Appendix A. Federal Register Notice Soliciting Comment on Information Collection Requests Appendix B. Consumer Confidence Rule Spreadsheets Appendix C. Variances and Exemptions Spreadsheets Appendix D
. Capacity

Development Spreadsheets Appendix E
. General State Primacy Spreadsheets Appendix F
. Public Notification Spreadsheets Appendix G

. Operator Certification Spreadsheets Appendix H
. Tribal Operator Certification Spreadsheets Appendix I
. Constructed Conveyance Spreadsheets Appendix J
. Proficiency Testing SpreadsheetsExhibit 1: Structure of OGWDW ICRs

Exhibit 2: PWS Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Exhibit 3: Primacy

Agency Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Exhibit 4: Laboratories Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirement Exhibit 5: PWSS Program Requirements for EPA Regions and Headquarters Exhibit 6: Annual PWS Burden and Cost Exhibit 7: Annual State Burden and Cost Exhibit 8: Annual Laboratory Burden and Cost Exhibit 9: Bottom Line Annual Burden and Cost Exhibit 10: Summary

of Changes in Annual Burden Exhibit 11: Restructuring Adjustments to the Annual Burden Inventory

for the PWSS Program ICR Exhibit 12: Adjustments to PWS Burden from Previous ICR Estimates Exhibit 13: Adjustments to Primacy Agency Burden from Previous ICR Estimates Exhibit 14: Adjustments to Laboratory Burden from Previous ICR Estimates Exhibit 15: Adjustments to Activities Carried Forward from Previous I CRs

v **LIST OF EXHIBITS** Structure of OGWDW ICRs

................................ ................................ PWS Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

................................ Primacy Agency Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

............................ Laboratories Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirement s ................................ PWSS Program Requirements for EPA Regions and Headquarters Annual PWS Burden and Cost (April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015 ) Annual State Burden and Cost (April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015 ) Annual Laboratory

Burden and Cost (April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015 Bottom Line Annual Burden and Cost (April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015 Summary of Changes in Annual Burden

................................ .............................. Restructuring Adjustments to the Annual Burden Inventory for the PWSS Program ICR

................................ ................................ Adjustments to PWS Burden from Previous ICR Estimates

................................ Adjustments to Primacy

Agency Burden from Previous ICR Estimates Adjustments to Laboratory Burden from Previous ICR Estimates

....................... Adjustments to Activities Carried Forward from Previous I CRs

......................... ................................ ................... 5

................................ .............. 14

............................ 17

................................ .. 22 PWSS Program Requirements for EPA Regions and Headquarters

..................... 29 )

...................... 47

...................... 47 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015 )

............ 48 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015 )

.......... 52

.............................. 53

................................ .................. 53

................................ 54 Adjustments to Primacy

Agency Burden from Previous ICR Estimates

.............. 55

....................... 56

......................... 57vi **LIST OF FIGURES** Figure 1: Structure of OGWDW ICRs

............................................................... 4vii **ACRONYMS** AG Attorney General AMWA Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies ASDWA Association of State Drinking Water Administrators AWWA American Water Works Association CCR Consumer Confidence Report CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CFR Code of Federal Regulations CWS Community Water S ys tem DBP Disinfection By product DBPR Disinfectants and Disinfection By products Rule DDBP/Chem/Rads Disinfectant/Disinfection By products , Chemical, and Radionuclides DWI G TSA Drinking Water Infrastructure Grant Tribal Set Aside DWSRF Drinking Water State Revolving Fund EPA Environmental Protection Agency ERP Enforcement Response Policy ETT Enforcement Targeting Tool FR Federal Register FTE Full Time Equivalent GWR Ground Water Rule ICR In formation Collection Request IESWTR Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule LCR Lead and Copper Rule LT1ESWTR Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule LT2ESWTR Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule MCL Maximum Contaminant Level MCL G Maximum Contaminant Level Goal MRDL Maximum Residual Disinfection Level MRDL G Maximum Residual Disinfection Level Goal NAI CS North American Industry Classification Sy stem NAWA Native American Water Association NAWC National Association of Water Companies NCWS Noncommunity Water Sy stem NDWAC National Drinking Water Advisory Council NPDWR National Primary Drinking Water Regulation NRWA National Rural Water Ass ociation NTEC National Tribal Environmental Council NTNCWS Nontransient Noncommunity Water Sy stem O&M Operation and Maintenance OGWDW Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water OMB Office of Management and Budget PC&B Personnel Compensation and Benefits PN Public Notification PRA Paperwork Reduction Act PT Proficiency Testingviii

PWS Public Water Sy stem PWSS Public Water Sy stem Supervision SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act SDWI S Safe Drinking Water Information Sy stem SMCL Secondary Maximum Contaminant L evel SNC Significant Noncompliance or Significant Non

- Compliers SWAP Source Water Assessment Program SWTR Surface Water Treatment Rule TCR Total Coliform Rule TNCWS Tr ansient Noncommunity Water S ys tem UI C Underground Injection Control V/E Variance and ExemptionPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

1 

### 1 **IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1(a)**  **Title and Number of the Information Collection** Title: Public Water Sy stem Supervision Program OMB Control Number: 2040

- 0090 EPA Tracking Number: 0270. 4 5 **1(b) Short Characterization**  The Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) in the Office of Water at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is responsible for managing the Public Water Sy stem Supervision (PWSS) Program, a national program mandated by the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Section 1412 of the SDWA requires EPA to establish National P rimary

Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) for contaminants that may adversel y impact human health. The Act further requires EPA to monitor and enforce these regulations to ensure that the nation’s drinking water dependabl y complies with the maximum contaminant levels (MCL s) and other requirements stipulated in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR p art 141, s ubpart B. Section 1445 of the SDWA stipulates that every drinking water supplier must conduct monitoring, maintain records, and provide su ch information as is needed for EPA to implement its monitoring and enforcement responsibilities with respect to the Act. State 1 governments

—in those states that have assumed primary enforcement responsibility (primacy) for public water sy stems (PWSs) und er SDWA s ection 1413

— ensure that PWSs are complying with these monitoring requirements. Inaddition, under 40 CFR §§ 141.23(k)(3), 141.131(b)(2), 141.28, and 141.24(f)(17), laboratories must successfull y participate in Proficiency Testing (PT) studies each ye ar to be certified to conduct anal ys is of compliance monitoring samples. As part of the PWSS Program, the OGWDW uses the Safe Drinking Water Information Sy stem (SDWI S) to record some of the data collected as a result of NPDWR requirements. SDWI S is a database management s ys tem that assists EPA in tracking and interpreting violation data and other program

- related data. These data assist EPA in fulfilling its SDWA obligations. This Information Collection Request (ICR) was prepared in accordance with the October 2009 version of EPA’s Guide to Writing Information Collection Requests Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (or “ICR Handbook”) prepared b y EPA’s Office of Environmental In formation, Office of In formation Collection, Collection Strategies Division. The ICR Handbook provides the most current instructions for ICR preparation to ensure compliance with the 1995 PRA amendments and Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) implementing guidelines.

1 Throughout this document, the terms “ S tate” or “ S tates” are used to refer to all types of primacy agencies. There are currently 57 primacy entities, including the 50 states, U.S. territories (Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and Northern Marianas), and the Navajo Nation. Though Wyoming and the District of Columbia do not have primacy, the EPA burden for these activities is counted as primacy agency burden.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

2 Many information collection requirements associated with the SDWA and its implementing regulations are associated with rulemakings that address specific contaminants or groups of contaminants. This I CR examines PWS, primacy agency , laboratory , and EPA burden and costs for “cross

- cutting” reco rdkeeping and reporting requirements (i.e., the burden and costs for compl yi ng with drinking water information requirements that are not associated with contaminant

- specific rulemakings). These activities include the following

—

1) Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs) 2) Variance and Exemption Rule (V/E Rule) 3) Capacity

Development Program 4) General State Primacy Activities 5) Public Notification (PN) 6) Operator Certification and Expense Reimbursement Grants Program 7) Tribal Operator Certification Program 8) Constructed C onveyances 9) Proficiency

Testing This I CR updates the burden and cost estimates provided in the 2008 PWSS Program ICR, which expires on March 31, 2012 . The ICR estimates costs for April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015

. The total annual respondent burden asso ciated with this I CR is estimated to be approximately 4.1 million hours per year. T he total annual respondent cost associated with this ICR is estimated to be approximately $ 187.6 million. The distribution of annual burden between PWSs and primacy

agenci es is approximately 2. 4 million hours and 1. 7 million hours, respectivel y. Laboratories conducting Proficiency Testing ( PT ) incur an annual burden of 42,892 hours. The distribution of annual costs between PWSs and primacy agencies is approximately

$ 116 .3 million and $ 67 .8 million, respectivel y. The annual costs for laboratories conducting PT are $ 3.5 million

. The approximate annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for respondents are $ 4 0 million ($ 39 million for PWSs , $ 0.77 million for laboratories, and $0 for primacy agencies ). This represents the “cost burden” as reported in the OMB inventory . Note that these costs are for O&M onl y; there are no capital costs associated with the activities covered by this ICR. The annual EPA burden for this I CR totals 0.5 9 million hours, at a cost of approximately $2 9.1 million; 0. 1 0 million hours (approximately $ 6.5 million) is for Headquarters activities and 0. 48 million hours (approximately $ 21 million) is for EPA Regional office activities. The Agency also i ncurs $ 1.5 million in O&M costs as part of the tribal operator certification program and for EPA contractors to manage and maintain the SDWI S database

. The total number of respondents for this I CR is 1 5 4 , 938 ; 57 of these respondents are primacy agencies , 1 , 902 are laboratories, and the balance (15 2 , 979 ) are PWSs

. The total annual number of responses for these respondents is 1 .0 million ( 382,658 for PWSs , 1 , 902 for laboratories, and 628 , 9 25 for primacy agencies).Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

3 

### 2 **NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2(a)**  **Need/Authority for the Collection** This section identifies the regulatory or statutory

authority for the information collection activities covered in this ICR and explains EPA ’s need for the information. Section 4 of the I CR contains a summary

of the PWSS Program recordkeeping and reporting requirements covered by this I CR. To allow the public to better understand the impact of the recordkeeping and reporting requirements ste mming from the SDWA and 40 CFR p arts 141 and 142, OGWDW has organized its I CRs so that related activities are addressed in the same IC R. Specificall y, there are three primary

I CRs

—the Microbial Rules I CR, the Disinfectants/Disinfection By products, Chemical and Radionuclides Rules (DDBP/Chem/Rads Rules) I CR, and the PWSS Pr ogram ICR. The Microbial Rules I CR includes rules addressing microbial contaminants, such as the Total Coliform Rule (TCR), Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), and the Ground Water Rule ( GWR). The DDBP/Chem/Rads Rules I CR includes rules addressing chemical contaminants such as the Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection By product Rule (Stage 1 DBPR), the Arsenic Rule, and the Lead and Copper Rule (L CR). The PWSS Program ICR includes public notification and rules addressing cross

- cutting requirements that are not associated with contaminant

- specific rule s . The specific regulations and programs addressed in this I CR are

— 1) Consumer Confidence Reports

2) Variance and Exemption Rule 3) Capacity

Development Program 4) General State Primacy Activities 5) Public Notification 6) Operator Certification and Expense Reimbursement Grants Program 7) Tribal Operator Certification Program 8) Constructed Conveyances 9) Proficiency

Testing As EPA publishes new regulations, it will amend the ap propriate ICR to include the new rules. For a graphical depiction of the structure of the OGWDW I CRs, see Figure 1. A complete itemization of the activities included in the three primary I CRs, as well as other drinking water program ICRs, is included as Exhibit 1.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

4Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

5 **Exhibit 1 Structure of OGWDW ICRs** 
**Currently covered To be covered in the future**  **PWSS Program ICR (2040 -**  **0090)** Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs) Variances & Exemptions Capacity Development Program General State Primacy Activities Public Notification (PN) Operator Certification Expense Reimbursement Grants Program Tribal Operator Certification Constructed Conveyances Proficienc y Testing **Microbial Rules ICR (2040 -**  **0205)** Surface Wa ter Treatment Rule, except disinfectant residual monitoring and associated activities 2 Revised Total Coliform Rule Total Coliform Rule Interim Enhanced Surface W ater Treatm ent Rule (IESW TR) Filter Backwash Recycling Rule Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Wa ter Treatment Rule (LT1ESW TR) Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Wa ter Treatment Rule (LT2ESW TR) Ground W ater Rule Aircraft Drinking W ater Rule **Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR (2040 -**  **0204)** Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Disinfectant Residual Monitoring and associated activities under the S WT R Stage 2 DBPR Chemical Phase Rules Radionuclides Rule Arsenic Rule Lead and Copper Rule **Source Water A ssessment Program (SW**  **AP) ICR (2040 -**  **0197)** SW AP **Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program ICR (2040 -**  **0042)** UIC Base Program Activities Class VI Geologic Sequestration Rule

– Under current EPA ICR No. 0370.24 Class V Rule Florida Class I Rule

2 Disinfectant residual monitoring and associated activities are included in the DDBP/Chem/Rads Rules ICR.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

6 **Currently covered To be covered in the future**  **Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) Program ICR (2040 -**  **0185)** Drinking W ater State Revolving Fund Program **Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey ICR (2040**  **- 0274)**  2011 Needs Survey **Title VI of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response A ct of 2002:**  **Drinking Water Security and Safety ICR (2040 -**  **0253)** Vulnerability Assessments and Emergency Response Plans for community water systems (C WS s). **Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule ICR (2040 -**  **0270)** Monitoring of Unregulated Contaminants **Laboratory Quality A ssurance Evaluation Program for A**  **nalysis of Cryptosporidium ICR (2040 -**  **0246)** Proficienc y T esting Program for Laboratories Analyzing Cryptosporidium Samples 1) Consumer Confidence Reports Section 114 of the 1996 SDWA amends Section 1414(c) of the Act. The amendments require community

water sy stems (CWSs) to distribute CCRs describing CWS water quality to their customers annually . EPA wrote regulations under s ubpart O of 40 CFR p art 141 to implement this provision. The initial Federal Register (FR) notice containing CCR requirements was published on August 19, 1998 (63 FR 44512). These initial requi rements have since been modified by other rulemaking efforts . However, these other rule makings are assumed to have no effect on the underlying burden. The information on the CCRs submitted to s tates by CWSs is needed b y EPA to ensure compliance with the CCR requirements

. 2) Variance & Exemption Rule The 1996 SDWA Amendments established criteria under which PWSs, especially those serving 10,000 or fewer people, could appl y for a variance or exemption. Variances allow eligible s ys tems to provide drinking water that does not comply with a NPDWR on the condition that the quality

of the drinking water is still protective of public health. Exemptions allow PWSs additional time above that specified in rule requirements to come into compliance. There are two ty pes of variances: g eneral variances are intended for s ys tems that are not able to comply with a NPDWR due to the quality of the source water; small sy stem variances are intended for s ys tems serving 3,300 persons or fewer that cannot afford to comply with a NPDWR (but may be allowed for s ys tems serving up to 10,000 persons). Small sy stem variances are onl y allowed if EPA designates a Small Sy stem Variance Technology . The information required of PWSs seeking general variances, small system variances , or exemptions is needed to determine if the sy stem satisfies SDWA conditions for variances or exemptions.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

7 3) Capacity Development Program Through the 1996 SDWA Amendments, Congress convey ed the importance of efforts to ensure that PWSs maintain the technical, managerial, and financial capacity to compl y with the requirements of the SDWA. To underscore its importance the capacity development program was linked to the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) ; a state is subject to a withholding of 20 percent of the funds to which it is otherwise entitled if its program does not meet EPA’s guidelines. Specificall y, Section 1420(a) of the SDWA explains that a state “shall receive only 80 percent of the allotment that the state is otherwise entitled to receiv e under Section 1452 (relating to state loan funds) unless the state has obtained the legal authority or other means to ensure that all new CWSs and new nontransient noncommunity water s ys tems (NTNCWSs) commencing operation after October 1, 1999, demonstrate technical, managerial, and financial capacity with respect to each NPDWR in effect, or likely to be in effect, on the date of commencement of operations.” In addition, according to Section 1420(c), states incur a graduated withholding, beginning with 1 0 percent in fiscal year 2001, 15 percent in fiscal year 2002, and 20 percent in all subsequent fiscal ye ars, if they do not develop and implement a strategy to assist all PWSs in acquiring and maintaining capacity

. EPA needs the information states submi t on capacity development to ensure that states are implementing appropriate capacity development strategies. 4) General State Primacy Activities To implement its compliance oversight and enforcement responsibilities under the SDWA, EPA requires primacy age ncies to report a specified subset of PWS monitoring and related information in SDWI S. Additionally , primacy agencies must maintain records of anal ys is results and other related activities (e.g., sanitary survey results). Without comprehensive, up

- to
- dat e information on drinking water contamination (as provided by SDWI S), EPA would not be able to assure “ a supply of drinking water which dependabl y complies with such maximum contaminant levels” (SDWA Section 1401(1)(d)). If these reporting requirements we re voluntary , primacy agencies would not receive timely , comprehensive data on contaminant levels and associated acute and long

- term public health risks. Specificall y, voluntary monitoring would not

— 1) Reliably

occur with sufficient frequency

. 2) Follow uniform national standards on quality of sampling, collection, and anal ys is. 3) Ensure that monitoring addresses all contaminants listed in the regulations. 5) Public Notification Section 114 of the 1996 SDWA Amendments required the EPA Administrator to develop and issue new regulations for public notification of PWS failure to comply with applicable national drinking water standards. Regulations mandating the form, manner, frequency, and content of public notification are codified under 40 CFR p art 141, Subpart Q. SectionsPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

8 1414(c)(2)(C)(ii) and 1414(c)(2)(D)(ii) of the 1996 Amendments require that notices provide a clear and understandable explanation of the violation, the potential adverse health effects, steps that the sy stem is taking to correct the violation, and necessit y of seeking alternative water supplies until the violation is corrected. Without the ability

to collect information on public notification, EPA could not ensure that PWSs were notifying the public of violations that could affect their health. 6) Operator Certification and Expense Reimbursement Grants Program Through the 1996 SDWA Amendments, Congress convey ed the importance of properl y trained operators in providing safe drinking water to the public. Congress then established the Operator Certification (OpCert) Program to assure that PWSs were being operated by properl y trained and certified personnel

. As a result, the Expense Reimbursement Grant was created to provide funding for certification and training costs for small drinkin g water sy stems operators. Funding was also used by states to develop data management s ys tems to track OpCert compliance. To underscore the importance of operator certification, the OpCert program was linked to the DWSRF program through a withholding of 20 percent of the funds that a state is otherwise entitled to if its program does not meet EPA’s guidelines. Although the ERG stops providing funding on December 31, 2012, EPA still requires the submission of annual OpCert reports from states. T he info rmation collected under this program will continue to ensure that states are implementing OpCert programs that meet EPA guidelines. 7) Tribal Operator Certification Program The purpose of the Tribal Drinking Water Operator Certification Program is to improv e public health protection by increasing the training and certification opportunities for personnel at drinking water s ys tems in Indian Country . The program guidelines establish seven baseline standards. The guidelines also list requirements for organizations that wish to obtain EPA approval for their certification programs. The statutory

requirement to develop an operator certification program does not apply to Tribes. While there are certain EPA regulations under SDWA that require qualified operators for PWS s, whether located in Indian Country or not (see 40 CFR 141.70(c) and 40 CFR 141.130(c)), this Tribal Drinking Water Operator Certification Program for sy stems in Indian Country is voluntary . However, this information collection is driven by the gr ant eligibility requirements originall y outlined in the Drinking Water Infrastructure Grant Tribal Set

- Aside Program Final Guidelines (published in October 1998) and the Tribal Operator Certification Program Final Guidelines (published in July 2005 ; 70 FR 43868 ). EPA needs the information collected under this program to reimburse tribal sy stems and third

- part y certification providers

. 8) Constructed Conveyances In the 1996 Amendments to the SDWA, Section 1401(4) broadened the definition of “public water s ys tem” to include sy stems that provide water for human consumption and deliver the water via constructed conveyances. Prior to this change, PWSs included only piped waterPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

9 sy stems. This new definition affects the reporting and recordkeeping burdens for both PWSs and states. 9) Proficiency Testing Title XIV of the Public Health Service Act of SDWA requires EPA to specify contaminants that may

adversel y affect public health when present in PWSs, specify maximum contaminant levels for these contaminants, and publish “ criteria and procedures to assure a supply of drinking water which dependably complies with such maximum contaminant levels. ” Participation in the PT studies that relate to drinking water anal ys es is mandated in 40 CFR §§ 141.23(k)(3), 141.24(f)(17), 141.28 , and 141.131(b)(2) for those la boratories that report data to support PWS compliance with the NPDWRs. Under 40 CFR 142.10(b)(3), authority for certifying drinking water laboratories is provided to s tates
. In the PT program, private sector companies (i.e., PT vendors) manufacture and distribute samples of regulated contaminants , also called standards, to the participating laboratories . The vendors know the concentrations of the standards but the laboratories do not. The laboratories determine the concentrations of each anal yt e for which they wish to be certified and then submit their results to the vendors. Assuming the laboratories’ results are accurate, PT vendors certify to the s tate that the laboratories have successfully completed their PT studies. This certification of PT study

c ompletion is then used by the states to support the certification of the laboratories to conduct drinking water compliance anal ys es. EPA, state s, and laboratory personnel will use the results of these studies to identify laboratory

problems for resolution, and thereb y improve the quality of data used to determine regulatory compliance

. **2(b) Use/Users of the Data**  The information described in the previous sections will be collected by EPA and made available to the public upon request, as requi red by the Freedom of Information Act (40 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 2). In some cases, the SDWA requires that the information be provided to the public or the primacy

agency . Primary

users of the data collected under this I CR are OGWDW, PWS managers, and prim acy agencies, which include state regulators, Indian Tribes, and, in some instances, EPA Regional Administrators. Other users include

—

 Laboratory

personnel

 Staff from other EPA programs (such as Superfund, the Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act, and the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance)

 Federal Emergency

Management Administration

 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

 Military

bases

 Farmers Home Administration

 Department of Interior

 Department of Housing and Urban Development

 U.S. Army

Corps of Engineers

 White House Task Forces

 American Water Works Association (AWWA)

 Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA)

 National Rural Water Association (NRWA)Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

10  National Association of Water Companies (NAWC)

 Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA)

 Natural Resources Defense Council

 Consumers Federation of America

 News o rganizations

 Native American Water Association

 Association of American Indian Affairs

 Inter
- tribal Environmental Council

 National Tribal Environme ntal Council

 Other intertribal groupsPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

11 

### 3 **NON -**  **DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA**  **3(a) Non**  **- duplication**  EPA has made an effort to ensure that the data collection efforts associated with this I CR are not duplicated. EPA has cons ulted s tate environmental programs, other f ederal agencies (such as the CDC), and regulated entities (such as PWSs and their representative trade associations). To the best of EPA's knowledge, data currently required b y the SDWA (and its implementing regu lations codified at 40 CFR p arts 141 and 142) are not available from an y other source. **3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB**  To comply

with the 1995 Amendments to the PRA, EPA solicited public comment on this I CR for a 60

- day

perio d before it was submitted to OMB. Specificall y, EPA published a notice in the Federal Register requesting comment on the estimated respondent burden and other aspects of this ICR ( 7 6 FR 3 9092 , see Appendix A). EPA did not receive any comments during the 60

- day

comment period. An additional FR notice will be published prior to submission of this I CR to OMB. The public comment period for this additional notice is 30 day s. **3(c) Consultations**  As part of the revision of the PWSS I CR, in summer 2011 EPA consulted with representatives of PWSs and s tates regarding the accuracy of EPA’s burden estimates. The groups consulted were NAWC, AWWA, AMWA, and ASDWA (NRWA was also consulted but did not submit comments)

. These groups’ comments were incorporated into this I CR to the extent possible

. The consultations revealed that previous estimates for certain categories were too low while others were too high. As such, there were large increases in burden estimates for such things as the Consumer Confidence Repo rts , Operator Certification Guidelines and Expense Reimbursement Grants Program. This was partly offset by a large decrease in burden for Public Notification. Each individual model for the PWSS I CR shown in the appendices to this document contains a tabl e showing how burden estimates have been revised. **3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection**  EPA has considered a wide range of alternatives for frequency of data collection

. The CCR Rule and Capacity

Development Program require annual reporting. Distributing CCRs less frequentl y than annuall y is not allowed under the SDWA. Annual reporting of capacity development information is essential to enable EPA to make withholding determinations on each fiscal year’s funds. Laboratories producing drinking wate r compliance monitoring data are expected to demonstrate adequate analy tical proficiency

once each ye ar for each anal yt e they test. An y decrease in frequency

would not adequatel y support the s tate s ' laboratory certification/evaluation programs.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

12 For oth er information collection activities, EPA has chosen to require the least frequent collection that remains consistent with overall public health preservation objectives. If data are collected less frequentl y, the primacy agencies may

not identify

in a tim el y fashion violations that might threaten the health and safety of drinking water consumers. **3(e) General Guidelines**  This I CR was prepared in accordance with the October 2009 version of IC R Handbook prepared b y EPA ’s Office of Environmental Information, Office of Information Collection, Collection Strategies Division. The I CR Handbook provides the most current instructions for ICR preparation to ensure compliance with the 1995 PRA amendments and OMB’s implementing gu idelines. **3(f) Confidentiality**  No confidential information will be collected as a result of this I CR. **3(g) Sensitive Questions**  No information of a sensitive nature will be collected as a result of this I CR.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

13 

### 4 **RESPONDENTS AND INFORMATION REQUESTED**  **4(a) Respondents/** **North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS**  **) Codes**  Data associated with this ICR are collected and maintained at the PWS, s tate , and federal levels. Respondents include

—

 Owners/operators of PWSs, who must report t o the primacy agency .  Primacy

agencies , which include states , tribes (if they have been authorized to act as primacy

agencies), and EPA Regions that act as primacy agencies in Indian lands and s tates that do not have primacy

.  Laboratories conducting PT to achieve state certification, which permits them to anal yz e samples for compliance with NPDWRs. (PT vendors are not considered respondents because they are paid for their incurred burden and costs via the prices that laboratories pay for the PT standards). The North American Industry Classification S ys tem (NAICS) code for PWSs is 22131. The NAICS code for state agencies that include drinking water programs is 92411 (Administration of Air and Water Resources and Solid Waste Management Programs) or 923312 (Administration of Public Health Programs). Ancillary s ys tems (i.e., those that supplement the function of other establishments like factories, power plants, mobile home parks, etc.) cannot be categorized in a single NAI CS code. For ancillary sy stems, th e NAI CS code is that of the primary establishment or industry

. The c ode for laboratories that include environmental testing is 541380 (Testing Laboratories). Data associated with this ICR are collected and maintained by laboratories seeking Primacy Agency certification for the anal ys is of drinking water samples. **4(b) Information Requested**  **4(b)(i) Data Items** R espondent information collection requirements covered b y the PWSS Program I CR are summarized in Exhibits 2

- 4 below. These reflect cross

- cutti ng recordkeeping and reporting requirements under the PWSS Program (i.e., requirements that are not associated with contaminant

- specific rules). The requirements are discussed following Exhibits 2

- 4

.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

14 **Exhibit 2 PWS Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements**  **Requirement Regulatory Citation**  **Frequency/Retention CCRs**  Mail copies of CCR to customers. 40 CFR 141.155(a) Annually, unless waived per §141.155(g) Announce availability of CCR. 40 CFR 141.155(b) Annually Subm it copy of CCR to primacy agenc y. 40 CFR 141.155(c) Annually Subm it copy of CCR to agencies or clearinghouses identified by the primacy

agenc y. 40 CFR 141.155(d) Annually, as required Make current year’s CCR available to public. 40 CFR 141.155(e) As requested Post current year’s CCR on the Int ernet (for systems serving ≥100,000 people). 40 CFR 141.155(f) Annually Publish CCR in local newspaper, if the mailing requirement has been waived. 40 CFR 141.155(g)(1) Annually, except that systems serving ≤500 can forego per §141.155(g)(2) Retain copy of CCR. 40 CFR 141.155(h) For at least 3 years **VA RIA**  **NCES A ND EXEMPTIONS**  Retain records concerning variance or exemption grants. 40 CFR 141.33 Not less than 5 years after variance/exemption expiration Subm it information supporting request for variance. 40 CFR 142.41 One
- tim e, P WS discretion Subm it information supporting request for exemption. 40 CFR 142.51 One
- tim e, P WS discretion Subm it information supporting request for small system variance. 40 CFR 142.306 One
- tim e, P WS discretion Report on compliance with terms and conditions of the small system variance. 40 CFR 142.307 Quarter ly after granting
**CA PA**  **CITY DEVELOPMENT** Demonstrate capacity (new CW Ss & NTNC WS s). N/A One
- tim e Cooperate with state to dem onstrate continued capacity. N/A As needed **GENER AL**  **ST AT**  **E PRIM ACY ACTIVITIES**  PW Ss are not involved in general state primacy activities. **PUBLIC NOTIFICA**

**TION RULE** Notify persons served within 24 hours of learning of a violation which requires Tier 1 public notification. 40 CFR 141.202(b)(1) As necessary, within 24 hours
Consult with the primacy agency within 24 hours of learning of a violation or other situation that requires Tier 1 public notification. 40 CFR 141.202(b)(2) As necessary, within 24 hours
Comply with any additional notification requirements for Tier 1. 40 CFR 141.202(b)(3) As necessaryPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

15 **Requirement Regulatory Citation**  **Frequency/Retention** Notify persons served within 30 days of a violation that requires Tier 2 public notification. 40 CFR 141.203(b)(1) As necessary, within 30 days Provide repeat notices for unresolved violations every three mo nths, unless the primacy agenc y determines a different frequency. 40 CFR 141.203(b)(2) As necessary, every 3 months

Consult with the primacy agency if a violation of the turbidity MCL or SW TR/IES WT R treatm ent technique requirements for singl e exceedances of turbidity limits occurs. 40 CFR 141.203(b)(3) As necessary, within 24 hours

Notify persons served within one ye ar of learning of a violation or situation that requires Tier 3 notification. 40 CFR 141.204(b)(1) As necessary, within 1 year
Provide repeat notices annually for unresolved Tier 3 violations/situations. 40 CFR 141.204(b)(1) As necessary, annually
Notify new customers of ongoing violations/situations prior to or at the time service begins. 40 CFR 141.206 As necessary
Notify persons served of the availability of the results of unregulated contaminant mo nitoring. 40 CFR 141.207 As necessary, within 12 months of receiving results Provide special notice to persons served for an exceedance of the fluoride secondary MCL (SMCL). 40 CFR 141.208 As necessary, within 12 months of exceedance Provide repeat notice of a fluoride SMCL exceedance, if unresolved. 40 CFR 141.208 As necessary, annually
Notify persons served by noncommunity water systems ( NCW Ss ) if the primacy agency grants permission to exceed the nitrate MCL. 40 CFR 141.209 As necessary, within 24 hours

Subm it to the state a copy of each notice provided (Tiers 1, 2, and 3 and any repeat notices) and a certification that all PN requirements wer e met. 40 CFR 141.31(d) and 141.201(c)(3) As necessary, within 10 days after completing notification requirements Retain copies of all notices and certifications. 40 CFR 141.33(e) 3 years **OPER AT**  **OR CERTIFICA TION & EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT GRA**  **NTS PROGRA M**  Acquire certified operator(s) per state requirements. N/A As necessary Maintain and renew operator certification(s). N/A As necessary **TRIBA L OPERA** 

**TOR CERTIFICA**

**TION PROGRA M**  Acquire certified tribal water system operator(s) per EPA guidelines. N/A As necessary Apply for “grandparent” certificate. N/A One time, if eligiblePublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

16 **Requirement Regulatory Citation**  **Frequency/Retention CONSTRUCTED CONVEYA**  **NCE S**  Conduct a house
- by
- house survey of water use practices and document efforts to ascertain water uses. SDW A 1401(4)(B)(i) On
- going
Apply for Other Residential Uses Exclusion. One time, if eligible Apply for Alternative W ater Exclusion. One time, if eligible Apply for Treatment Exclusion. One time, if eligible Apply for Certain Piped Irrigation Districts Exclusion SDW A 1401(4)(B)(ii) One time, i f eligible **PROFICIENCY TESTING** PW Ss are not involved in proficiency testing Note: Content requirements for public notices are described in 40 CFR 141.205, 141.207, and 141.208.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

17 **E xhibit 3**  **Primacy A** **gency Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements**  **Requirement Regulatory Citation**  **Report Frequency/Minimum Retention**  **CCRs** Make CCRs available to public. 40 CFR 142.16(f)(2) As requested Retain copies of CCRs and certifications that CCRs were distributed. 40 CFR 142.16(f)(3) CCRs: 5 years Certifications: 1 year Report violations of CCR provisions. 40 CFR 142.16(f)(4) Quarterly **VA RIA**  **NCES A ND EXEMPTIONS**  Issue variances and exemptions (for other than small system variances). 40 CFR 142.20 At primacy agenc y discretion Consider system V/E requests (for other than small system variances). 40 CFR 142.21 Wi thin 90 days of request
Review V/E requests previously granted. 40 CFR 142.22 Wi thin 18 months of new standards Notify EPA of new variances or exemptions granted. 40 CFR 142.15(a)(3) Quarterly Summarize the status of variances or exemptions currently in effect. 40 CFR 142.15(b)(2) Annually Propose small system variances and provide supporting information and responses to comments. 40 CFR 142.311 & 142.312 Wh en s tate proposes to grant a sm all system variance Following notification of EPA’s objections and proposed mo difications to proposed small system variances, respond to EPA. 40 CFR 142.311 Before s tate grants a small community variance to a PW S serving 3,300 or fewer people
Re
- propose small system variances. 40 CFR 142.312 Before s tate grants a small community variance to a PW S serving more than 3,300 and fewer than 10,000 people Review each small system variance to determine if the P WS continues to meet eligibility criteria

. 40 CFR 142.307 Not less than 5 years
Notice of public meeting on proposed small system variances, with supporting information. 40 CFR 142.308 At least 30 days prior to public me eting
**CA PA**  **CITY DEVELOPMENT** Subm it evidence to EPA that s tate has established and continues to implement a Capacity Development Program. N/A Annually

Subm it report to Governor on the status of the Capacity Development Program. SDW A 1420(c)(3) Every three yearsPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

18 **Requirement Regulatory Citation**  **Report Frequency/Minimum Retention**  **GENER AL**  **ST AT**  **E PRIM ACY ACTIVITIES**  Retain s tate records for public inspection. 40 CFR 142.14 Varies Retain quarterly SDW IS reports to EPA, make them available for public inspection. 40 CFR 142.15(d) Upon completion and submittal by state Report any new violation data or enforcement actions. 40 CFR 142.15(a)(1)
- (2) Quarterly Report any new data related to SDW IS elem ents or any revisions to existing data. 40 CFR 142.15(b)(1) Annually
Subm it information required for review of s tate programs, including review of monitoring determinations. 40 CFR 142.1 7
- 142.18 Annually, as requested
Request primacy

treatment for a state or tribal primacy (for Indian tribes). 40 CFR 142.76 One
- tim e
Subm it initial application for primacy

. 40 CFR 142.11 One
- tim e Subm it statutory and regulatory provisions authorizing adm inistrative penalties or dem onstrate that authority does not exist. 40 CFR 142.11(a)(6) One
- tim e

Subm it revised primacy application. 40 CFR 142.12 As needed **PUBLIC NOTIFICA**

**TION** Prim acy agencies may

exercise flexibility in the following areas as long as they establish enforceable procedures: Requiring PW Ss to notify persons served for violations or situations other than those requiring notice under the PN rule. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessary

Allowing PW Ss to limit distribution of a notice to the portion of the distribution system that is out of compliance. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessary
Elevating violations/situations from Tiers 2 or 3 to Tier 1. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessary Requiring additional notification for Tier 1 as a result of the 24
- hour consultation. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessary Requiring or permitting a different form of deliver y than is required in the PN rule for Tiers 1, 2, or 3. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessary Elevating monitoring/testing procedure violations from Tier 3 to Tier 2. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessary Granting extensions for distribution of Tier 2 notices. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessary Allowing less frequent repeat notification for Tier 2. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessaryPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

19 **Requirement Regulatory Citation**  **Report Frequency/Minimum Retention**  Consulting with PW S within 24 hours for exceedance of turbidity lim its. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessary Determining the need for mu ltilingual content in a notice. 40 CFR 142.16(a) If necessary Consult with P WS s within 24 hours for Tier 1 violations/situations. 40 CFR 141.202(b)(2) As necessary, within 24 hours
Consult with P WS s within 24 hours for exceedances of turbidity MCL or violations of turbidity single exceedance lim its. 40 CFR 141.203(b)(3) As necessary, within 24 hours

May give the required public notice on behalf of the PW S. 40 CFR 141.210 If necessary Report violations of the PN Rule to EPA. 40 CFR 142.15(a)(1) Quarterly Retain copies of certification and notices submitted by PW Ss. Also keep records of determinations of alternative requirements made under 40 CFR 142.16. 40 CFR 14 2.14(f) 3 years

**OPER AT**  **OR CERTIFICA TION & EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT GRA**  **NTS PROGRA M**  Subm it a report to EPA describing ongoing im plem entation activities of the state’s operator certification program. N/A Annually

Subm it to EPA a new Attorney General ( AG ) certification and a copy of the state’s regulations (if the state makes changes to its operator certification program) N/A As necessary

Subm it to EPA a report describing ongoing im plem entation activities of the state’s Expense Reimbursement Grant N/A Ann ually, as necessary

**TRIBA L OPERA** 

**TOR CERTIFICA**

**TION PROGRA M**  Prim acy agencies are not affected by the Tribal Operator Certification Program **CONSTRUCTED CONVEYA NCE**  **S** Review data to determine if a constructed conveyance should be considered a P WS

. SDW A 1401(4) As necessary Review applications and make determinations about Other Residential Uses Exclusions. SDW A 1401(4)(B)(i) As necessary Review applications and make determinations about Alternative Wa ter Exclusions. SDW A 1401(4)(B)(i) As necessaryPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

20 **Requirement Regulatory Citation**  **Report Frequency/Minimum Retention**  Review applications and make determinations about Treatment Exclusions. SDW A 1401(4)(B)(i) As necessary Review applications and make determinations about Certain Piped Irrigation Districts Exclusions. SDW A 1401(B)(ii) As necessary

**PROFICIENCY TESTING** States are not involved in the proficiency testing program (they are involved in certification, which is addressed under general state primacy activities)
**Exhibit 4**  **Laboratories Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements Requirement**  **Regulatory Citation Report Frequency/Minimum**  **Retention PROFICIENCY TESTING**  Analyze standards 40 CFR 141.23(k), 141.24(f)(17), 141.132(b)(2) Annually Report results to PT vendor N/A Annually Maintain records N/A Not specified 1) Consumer Confidence Reports CCRs must identify

the source of the water delivered by the CWS, describe whether it is ground water or surface water, and provide the common name and location of bodies of water used as sources. Reports also must define the terms “Maximum Contaminant Lev el (MCL),”
“ Maximum Contaminant L evel Goal (MCLG), ” “ Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL), ” “ Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal (MRDLG), ” “ variance, ” and
“ exemption. ” Reports must contain a table providing data on contaminant levels detected as well as the MCL G and MCL for these contaminants. If contaminants are detected above the MCL or MRDL , health effects information must also be provided. Reports must indicate any violations of the NPDWRs, including monitoring and reporting, treatment techniques, public notification, recordkeeping, special monitoring requirements, and the terms of a variance, exemption, or administrative or judicial order. Reports must explain a ny granted variance or exemption. Reports must contain a brief explanation regarding contaminants that may be found in drinking water. Reports must also display relevant health information concerning drinking water and potential risks from possible contaminants. 2) Variance & Exemption Rule To obtain a variance or exemption, sy stems must submit a request for the variance or exemption that contains supporting information. Systems that are granted a variance or exemption must also provide public notice with in one year after operating under the variance or exemption. They

must also maintain records associated with the granting of the variance or exemption. States must review the information contained in variance/exemption applications

.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

21 3) Capacity Development Program Under SDWA §1420, states are required to submit the following information to EPA

—

 An annual report that describes ongoing implementation activities for both the new s ys tems’ programs (SDWA 1420(a)) and the existing sy stems’ strategies (SDWA 1420( c)). A triennial report to the Governor on the status of the capacit y development program (EPA receives a courtes y copy of each state report). A triennial list of sy stems that are historical significant non

- compliers and, to the extent practicable, the r eason(s) for noncompliance. Sy stems must document their financial, technical, and managerial capacity, as required b y the state. 4) General State Primacy Activities Section 142.14(a) stipulates, “Each state which has primary enforcement responsibility shal l maintain records of tests, measurements, analyses, decisions, and determinations performed on each PWS to determine compliance with applicable provisions of state primary drinking water regulations.” Further, Section 141.14(g) states, “Records required to be kept under this section shall be made available to the Regional Administrator upon request.” Under s ection 142.17, EPA may

request information from a s tate in order to determine compliance of the s tate w ith requirements of 40 CFR 142 s ubpart B. Inf ormation requested may

include s tate determinations made under Section 142.19 and records kept by s tates in accordance with Section 142.14. To implement its compliance oversight and enforcement responsibilities under the SDWA, EPA requires primacy agen cies to report a specified subset of PWS monitoring information in SDWI S. Additionally , primacy agencies must maintain records of anal ys is results and other related activities (e.g., sanitary survey results). Sy stems are not required to submit any data under this program. 5) Public Notification Under the public notification regulations, s ys tems must notify all sy stem users of an y violation of drinking water regulations. The methods and deadlines for notification are based on a three

- tier s ys tem. Tier 1 violations , which require 24

- hour notice, are those that risk serious health effects from short term exposure. Tier 2 violations , which require 30

- day notice, are any violations that pose a health risk that are not Tier 1 violations. Tier 3 violations an d situations are an y not covered under the first two tiers ; they include monitoring violations, exceeding the fluoride secondary

standard, operating under a variance or exemption , and announcing the availability

of unregulated contaminant monitoring result s. Tier 3 public notification must take place within a ye ar of the violation and may be included in the sy stem’s CCR. Sy stems must consult with primacy

agencies within 24 hours of a turbidity violation to determine if the violation is Tier 1 or Tier 2. Primacy agencies must consult with any s ys tems with Tier 1 violations within 24 hours of the violation. They may also decide to elevate certain Tier 2 or Tier 3 violations. Primacy agencies must report all violations to EPA and keep records for three ye ars after the violation.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

22 6) Operator Certification and Expense Reimbursement Grants Program To satisfy §1419 of SDWA (regarding EPA’s Operator Certification Guidelines), states are required to submit the following information to EPA

—

 An annual report that describes ongoing implementation activities of a state’s operator certification program. A new Attorney General (AG) certification and a copy of the state’s regulations if a state makes changes to its operator certification program. An annual report that describes ongoing implementation activities of a state’s Expense Reimbursement Grant (note that the Expense Reimbursement Grant program will end in December 2012)

. Sy stems must document that they have certified operators, and their operators must ma intain certification as required b y the state program. 7) Tribal Operator Certification Program Although this program is voluntary , previously established Drinking Water Infrastructure Grant Tribal Set Aside (DWI G TSA) Final Guidelines (October 1998) stat e that after EPA has developed a Tribal Drinking Water Operator Certification Program for operators of s ys tems in Indian Country , “any

s ys tem to be assisted with TSA funds must be operated by an adequatel y trained and certified operator” in order for a tribe to receive a grant for that sy stem. The program guidelines establish seven baseline standards for the program and list the certification program requirements that must be met for organizations that certify operators of drinking water s ys tems in Indian Country to receive approval from EPA. Any current certification provider or organization interested in establishing an operator certification program in Indian Country may submit programs to EPA for review and approval. EPA will be responsible for impl ementing this voluntary Tribal Drinking Water Operator Certification Program in Indian Country and for tracking the number of water s ys tems with certified operators. Certification providers will be responsible for tracking training taken and operator statu s and for reporting this information to EPA. Sy stem operator s must obtain and renew certifications as required b y the EPA guidelines. 8) Constructed Conveyances In order to compl y with the 1996 SDWA Amendments, sy stems and states must work together to dete rmine if the sy stem meets the new definition of “public water s ys tem.” In addition, Section 1401(4)(B) of the 1996 SDWA Amendments provides several exemption options. I f a sy stem is eligible for one of these exemptions, the sy stem must submit an applicat ion to the state. The state must then review the exemption applications and make determinations. 9) Proficiency Testing In all laboratory

PT studies, laboratories submit the results of analy ses for all contaminants for which they wish to be certified to cond uct drinking water anal ys es .Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

23 **4(b)(ii) Respondent Activities** PWSs and primacy

agencies must complete the activities described in the sections below. **Public Water Systems** 1) Consumer Confidence Reports For CCRs, CWSs must conduct the following activities

—

 Compile the report.

 Mail one report to each customer.

 For consumers who do not receive water bills, publish a notice in the news paper indicating how a consumer may obtain a copy

of a CCR.

 Submit one c opy

of the completed report to the primacy agency annually and retain one cop y of the report.

 Submit copy

of CCR to agencies or clearinghouses identified by the primacy agency .  Certify

to the primacy

agency that the report ha s been distributed to customers and that the information is correct

.  Publish the report in a local newspaper rather than mail it , if the s tate Governor allows CWSs serving 10,000 or fewer people to do so.

 Post an annual notice for customers rather than pub lishing or mailing a report, i f the s tate Governor allows CWSs serving fewer than 500 people to do so.

 Post the report to a publicly accessible Internet si te, for CWSs serving 100,000 or more people. 2) Variance & Exemption Rule A PWS that elects to apply for a variance or exemption must either perform the following activities or assist the state in performing these activities

—

 Apply for the variance or exemption and submit any information that the state requires. For small s ys tem variances, a sy stem must demonstrate that it cannot afford to compl y with the NPDWR for which the small sy stem variance is sought, that its source water meets the quality standards for installation of the small sy stem variance technology , that it is financiall y and technicall y capable of installing, operati ng, and maintaining the applicable small sy stem variance technology , and that the terms and conditions of the small sy stem variance would ensure adequate protection of human health.

 Work with the state to hold a public hearing on the proposed variance or e xemption and provide public notice within one year after operating under the variance or exemption.

 Write and submit a quarterly report on compliance with the terms and conditions of the small sy stem variance.

 Retain records associated with the variance o r exemption.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

24 3) Capacity Development Program Under the Capacit y Development Program for new systems, all CWSs and NTNCWSs must demonstrate adequate capacity and compl y with all state capacit y development requirements. All PWS s are asked to cooperate with th e state’s strategy for existing sy stems. This includes achieving, maintaining, and improving capacity

. 4) General State Primacy Activities There are no PWS activities associated with the General State Primacy Activities. 5) Public Notification To comply

wi th the PN regulations, PWSs must complete the following activities

—

 Prepare the notice (§§141.201, 141.205, 141.206, 141.207, and 141.208).

 Distribute the notice to all persons served within the applicable time frame (§§141.202,141.203, and 141.204).

 If the violation or situation requires public notification within 24 hours, consult with primacy

agency within the 24

- hour period to determine subsequent actions (§141.202(b)(2)). Consultation is also required for exceedances of the maximum allowable turbidity level (§141.203(b)(3)).

 If a violation is unresolved, prepare an updated notice for repeat distribution (§§141.205, 141.206, 141.207, and 141.208).

 Distribute the updated notice (§§141.202,141.203, and 141.204).

 Take an y additional actions required b y th e primacy agency (§§141.201 and 141.202).

 Submit certification to the primacy agency along with copies of all public notifications that were distributed.

 Retain records of all notices and certifications. 6) Operator Certification and Expense Reimbursement Grants Program Sy stems are required to comply with the state requirements for operator certification. Sy stems must

—

 Acquire certified operator(s) holding a valid certification equal to or greater than the classification of the system.

 Maintain/renew certification(s) as needed. 7) Tribal Operator Certification Program For the voluntary

Tribal Operator Certification Program, tribal water s ys tems are expected to have a certified operator available. To become certified, a tribal water s ys tem operator must pass an exam and have the appropriate education and/or experience. EPA subsidizes the training and certification of operators in Indian Country

.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

25 8) Constructed Conveyances In order to adhere to the broadened definition of “public water s ys tem” introduce d by the 1996 SDWA Amendments, PWS s may complete the following activities

—

 Conduct a house

- by

- house survey of water use practices and document efforts to ascertain water uses.

 Apply for an Other Residential Uses Exclusion.

 Apply for an Alternative Water E xclusion.

 Apply for a Treatment Exclusion.

 Apply for a Certain Piped Irrigation Districts Exclusion **Primacy Agencies** 1) Consumer Confidence Reports As part of the CCR Rule, primacy agencies must

—

 Review and retain reports and certifications from CWSs.

 Assist in preparation of reports as needed

.  Report compliance to EPA. 2) Variance & Exemption Rule In addition to helping PWSs meet application requirements, states must

—

 Provide EPA with the proposed small sy stem variance, supporting information, and r esponses to public comments.

 Respond to EPA’s objections to a proposed small sy stem variance for a PWS serving 3,300 or fewer persons, if the state chooses to pursue the variance.

 Revise a proposed small sy stems variance as necessary to reflect EPA’s comme nts on variance requests for s ys tems that serve more than 3,300 people and fewer than 10,000 people, if the state chooses to pursue the variance.

 Submit a quarterly

report on violations of increments of progress or any other violated term or condition of a small sy stem variance.

 Conduct a public meeting on a small sy stem variance request, provide notice of the public meeting, and provide supporting information to the public.

 Respond to significant public comments on the proposed variance request.

 Retain re cords associated with a granted variance or exemption not less than five ye ars after its expiration.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

26 3) Capacity Development Program States must

—

 Submit an annual report that describes ongoing implementation activities for both the new s ys tems’ programs ( SDWA 1420(a)) and the existing sy stems’ strategies (SDWA 1420(c))

.  Submit a triennial report to the Governor on the status of the capacity development program (EPA receives a courtes y copy of each state report). Note that S ection 1420(b)(1) of the SDWA requires that “... each state shall prepare, periodically update, and submit to the Administrator a list of community water systems and nontransient, noncommunity water systems that have a history of significant noncompliance... and, to the extent practicable, the reasons for noncompliance.” However, EPAs Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance ( OECA ) released a new enforcement approach in December 2009 , the Enforcement Response Policy

(ERP), replacing the existing contaminant

- by

- contaminant compliance strategy , often referred to as "Significant Non

- Compliers" (SNC) and “Historical Significant Non

- Compliers , ” with a system

- wide approach using the Enforcement Targeting Tool (ETT). The ETT assigns a point value to specific violations for each s ys tem to bring attention to drinking water s ys tems with the most serious and unaddressed violations. In light of this change, EPA will utilize the spreadsheet output generated b y the ETT on a quarterl y basis. Currentl y, as part of the ETT implementation, EPA and stat es meet on a quarterl y basis to discuss the status of public water s ys tems on this list and identify steps to enable s ys tems to return to compliance. EPA believe s that the current approach of establishi ng quarterly meetings with the s tates to discuss the o utput generated b y the ETT is a more proactive approach than the current activity of addressing the reasons for non

compliance onl y every three ye ars. 4) General State Primacy Activities As part of their general primacy activities, primacy

agencies must

—

 Prepare grant packages requesting funding to operate the program in a state.

 Maintain state drinking water data s ys tems.
 Review monthly

violations reports to monitor compliance.

 Maintain records submitted by PWSs regarding results of analy tical tests and other milestones, such as treatment decisions.

 Take timely

and appropriate enforcement actions.

 Review PWS projects regarding design, construction, and treatment modifications.

 Conduct routine inspections to supplement information collected during sanitary survey s.
 Certify

laboratories to analyze drinking water samples for compliance with drinking water regulations.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

27 This I CR assumes that no applications for primacy will be submitted during the next three ye ars. However, since a new primacy application i s a possibility , the following discussion of possible implications is provided. To obtain primacy , the applicant must

—

 Adopt drinking water regulations that are no less stringent than the NPDWRs currentl y in effect. An agency may also be granted primacy for new or revised EPA regulations if they

demonstrate that their approved program has been updated to include regulations no less stringent than those new or revised EPA regulations.

 Adopt adequate procedures for enforcement of these regulations.

 Report these procedures according to EPA's requirements.

 Permit variances and exemptions under conditions no less stringent than those specified b y the regulations.

 Adopt and implement an adequate plan for providing safe drinking water under emergency

circumstanc es. The regulations allow Indian tribes to be granted primacy , although no primacy applications are expected from tribes during the next three years. In order for an Indian tribe to receive primacy , they

must first apply

for and receive designation as a “state.” The tribe may then apply

for a developmental grant to assist it in preparing the necessary infrastructure (e.g., regulations). Once the regulations are in place, the tribe may appl y for primacy

. Under the Indian Primacy Rule promulgated September 26, 1988, an Indian tribe that wish es to apply

for and be designated as a “state” must

—

 Submit evidence that the tribe is recognized b y the Secretary of the Interior.

 Certify

that it is currently “ carrying out substantial governmental duties and powers ” over a defined area. The statement must describe the governmental functions currently

performed by

the tribal governing body , including, but not limited to, the exercise of police power, taxation, and th e exercise of the power of eminent domain. Copies of applicable tribal documents must also be provided.

 Prepare and submit a map or legal description of the area over which the Indian tribe asserts jurisdiction for the purposes of the proposed program.

 Pr ovide copies of applicable tribal codes, ordinances, etc.

 Describe the Indian tribe's capability to administer such a program. 5) Public Notification The PN Rule requires primacy agencies to consult with the violating PWS to determine appropriate follow up actions. Additionally , the primacy agencies must receive and review PN certifications submitted by PWSs. Primacy agencies must submit quarterly reports of PN Rule violations to EPA. Primacy agencies may

give notice on behalf of a PWS (40 CFR 141.210). However, no data is available for estimating how often this occurs . For the purposes of this I CR, the burden for preparing and distributing public notification is assumed to be incurred by the PWS.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

28 6) Operator Certification and Expense Reimbursem ent Grants Program A state complying with the program must

—

 Submit an annual report that describes ongoing implementation activities of a state’s operator certification program.

 Submit a new AG certification and a cop y of the state’s regulations if a s tate makes changes to its operator certification program.

 Submit an annual report that describes ongoing implementation activities associated with the state’s e xpense r eimbursement grant (note that the expense reimbursement grant program will end in Decemb er 2012)

. 7) Tribal Operator Certification Program States are not affected b y the Tribal Operator Certification Program. 8) Constructed Conveyances To comply

with the broadened definition of “public water s ys tem” introduced by the 1996 SDWA Amendments, states may complete the following activities

—

 Review data to determine if a constructed conveyance should be considered a PWS.

 Review applications for Other Residential Uses Exclusions and make determinations about the exemption applications.

 Review appli cations for Alternative Water Exclusions and make determinations about the exemption applications.

 Review applications for Treatment Exclusions and make determinations about the exemption applications.

 Review applications for Certain Piped Irrigation Districts Exclusions and make determinations about the exemption applications. **Laboratories** Proficiency Testing The primary

burden involves anal yz ing and reporting results for relevant study samples according to instructions. Samples may be anal yz ed for inor ganics, disinfection by products and/or organic chemicals. Respondents will participate in the following activities

—

 Read instructions

 Plan activities

 Analyze inorganic chemicals

 Analyze Disinfection Byproducts ( DBPs )

 Analyze organic chemicals

 Report resul ts to the proficiency testing vendor

 Maintain records Laboratories are not subject to an y of the other collections covered in this ICR.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

29 

### 5 **INFORMATION COLLECTED**  **-- AGENCY ACTIVITIES,**  **COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT**  **5(a) Agency**  **Activities** As part of its supervisory responsibility for the PWSS Program, EPA oversees contractors who maintain SDWI S and assist EPA in evaluat ing the data in SDWI S to determine compliance rates
. EPA instructs contractors to reformat, distribute, and store these data for a number of uses, including responding to Congressional and public inquiries. EPA also oversees the state programs, provides technical assistance, and develops policies designed to ensure consistent program i mplementation. EPA also oversees the tribal operator certification program. In addition to its management activities, EPA directly implements the Aircraft Drinking Water Rule (see the microbial ICR for more information). EPA officials serve as respondent s when testifying to Congress on the PWSS Program or in the courts for enforcement actions. EPA’s recordkeeping requirements are outlined in Exhibit 4 above

. **Exhibit 5**  **PWSS Program Requirements for EPA**  **Regions and Headquarters Requirement**  **CFR Citation Report Frequency/Minimum**  **Retention** Review initial and revised applications for primacy

. 40 CFR 142.11
- 142.12 As needed Inform primacy

agency of PW S noncompliance with any NPDW Rs in 40 CFR 141 or with any requirement under SDW A Sections 1415 and 1416. 40 CFR 142.30, 142.15 Quarterly Review existing s tate primacy programs
. 40 CFR 142.17 Annually Review s tate monitoring determinations

. 40 CFR 142.18 As needed Review s tate implementation of LCR

. 40 CFR 142.19 As needed Inform primacy

agency of substantial abuse of discretion in granting variances and exemptions. 40 CFR 142.23 As needed Provide notice of public hearing for states abusing right to grant variances and exemptions. 40 CFR 142.23 As needed Notify primacy

agencies of failure to presc ribe schedules in accordance with SDW A. 40 CFR 142.23 As needed Notify primacy

agencies of repeal of notice or promulgation of any revisions to schedules or revocation of schedules proposed in notice. 40 CFR 142.23 Wi thin 180 days of first notice given to the state; revised schedule or revocation takes effect 90 days after state is notified.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

30 **Requirement CFR Citation**  **Report Frequency/Minimum Retention**  Notify primacy

agencies of objection and proposed mo difications to small system variances proposed by states for PW Ss serving 3,300 or fewer people. 40 CFR 142.311 Wi thin 90 days of receiving proposal
Notify primacy

agencies of deficiencies in state program for granting small system variances. 40 CFR 142.313 As needed Notify PW Ss of noncompliance with any NPDW Rs in 40 CFR 141 or with any requirement under SDW A Sectio ns 1415 and 1416. 40 CFR 142.30, 142.15 Quarterly
Provide PW Ss with copies of Federal Register notice about PW S failure to comply. 40 CFR 142.23 Wi thin 30 days of notice Notify PW Ss of denial or grant of variance (for PW Ss in non
primacy states). 40 CFR 142.42 Wi thin 90 days of request Notify PW Ss of denial or grant of exemption (for P WS s in non
primacy states). 40 CFR 142.52 Wi thin 90 days of request Notify PW Ss of denial or grant of sm all system variance (for P WS s in non
- primacy states). 40 CFR 142.31 1, 142.312 Wi thin 90 days of request Provide notice to P WS s in non
primacy states that are no longer eligible for small system variances. 40 CFR 142.307 As needed Provide public notice of public me eting on proposed small system variances (in non
primacy states), with supporting information. 40 CFR 142.308 At least 30 days prior to public me eting Respond to significant public comments. 40 CFR 142.308 Before proposal Notify public of proposed small system variance (in non
- primacy states), with supporting information. 40 CFR 142.309 No later than 15 days after receiving small system variance proposal. Make D WS RF grant withholding decisions with regard to States’ Capacity Development Programs. SDW A Section 1420(a), (c) 35 CFR 35.3515(b)ii Annually Make DW SRF grant withholding decisions with regards to States’ Operator Certification Programs. SDW A Section 1419(b) Annually Provide state and PW S assistance and training with regard to recordkeeping and reporting requirements covered in this ICR N/A As neede d
Maintain SDW IS

. N/A As neededPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

31 **Requirement CFR Citation**  **Report Frequency/Minimum Retention**  Review data in SD WI S

. N/A Quarterly Implement tribal operator certification program N/A As needed **5(b) Collection Methodology and Management**  Primacy agencies must report data quarterl y to EPA. InW yoming and Indian Country (except for the Navajo Nation, which has primacy), results of s ys tem samples are sent directl y to the EPA Region. Virtually all SDWI S data are reported electronicall y b y the primacy agency. These data include an y new data and revisions or corrections to existing data. This information is maintained in SDWI S, which contains the following

—

 Inventory

data for each PWS

 Violations

 Enforcement actions and some follow

- up activity

 Variances and exemptions

 Lead and Copper Rule information

 Limited sample results On a quarterl y basis, EPA uses the ETT to generate a list of PWSs that are considered “priority s ys tems” for enforcement. Together , the ERP and ETT will help EPA and primacy agencies prioritize and direct enforcement response to sy stems with the most sy stemic noncompliance b y considering all violations incurred by a s ys tem in a comprehensive way

. The policy and tool identify

priority s ys tems for enforcement response ; provide a model to escalate responses to violation s; define timely and appropriate actions; and clarify what constitutes a formal action. If a state has failed to take timel y and appropriate action, EPA may become directly involved in enforcement by issuing an administrative order. If the sy stem does no t comply with the order, EPA may seek an administrative penalt y or court action. EPA may also take action against a PWS before it becomes a priority s ys tem
. EPA also undertake s PWSS f ile r eviews of SDWIS inventory , violation, and enforcement data. The methodology

for the f ile r eviews include s the review of a targeted sample of PWS inventory

. EPA Headquarters and Regional staff , with contractor support, conduct an on

- site verification of each sample sy stem’s data at the offices of the primacy agency . T he team compare s the recorded compliance determined by the f ile r eview process with the information reported to SDWI S and prepare s reports summarizing the differences. The report summarizes the state ’ s compliance determination procedures, observations, an d an y recommendations for improving program management. The primary

purposes of the f

ile r eview program are to assess the accuracy and quality

of data collected and reported by the states and to recommend any necessary

changes in collection or reporting . In addition, the process of verification provides insights into the primacy agency ’s program implementation. During f ile r eview , EPA is able to gain greater understanding of how the primacy

agencies interpret and implement regulations. For example, EP A can perform the following activities

—Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

32  Evaluate procedures used to manage the program.

 Critique implementation methods used for follow

- up activity , in cases of violation.

 Verify

the flow of information through the state to ensure that the data reflect a ctual state experience.

 Observe how the program is implemented in various primacy agencies. The f ile r eview process also enables EPA to educate states abo ut the SDWA regulations and to standardize interpretations and implementation procedures. For example, a state's definition of compliance with the f ederal regulations may

differ from the official definition. These discrepancies become evident during the f ile r eview process and can be corrected b y EPA and state staff. Thus, the f ile r eview process play s a role in standardizing state implementation of the SDWA. **5(c) Small Entity Flexibility**  In developing this I CR, EPA considered the requirement of the Small Business Regulatory

Enfo rcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) to minimize the burden of information collections on small entities. Small entities include “small businesses,” “small organizations” and “small government jurisdictions.” These terms are defined below. 3

 A **small business** is any business that is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field as defined b y the Small Business Administration regulations under Section 3 of the Small Business Act.

 A **small organization** is any non - profit enterprise that is independe ntly owned and operated and not dominant in its field.

 A **small governmental** jurisdiction is the government of a cit y, count y, town, township, village, school district , or special district that has a population of fewer than 50,000. This definition may al so include Indian Tribes. The major requirement under SBREFA is a regulatory flexibility

anal ys is of all new rules that have a “significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.” This I CR is not associated with new rules. Therefore, this ICR is not subject to the SBREFA. However, EPA has made significant efforts to minimize the burden fo r all respondents, particularl y for small entities. In setting both MCLs and monitoring requirements, EPA has been able to minimize burden for small entities as detailed below. 1) Consumer Confidence Reports EPA’s regulations allow sy stems serving fewer than 10,000 people to publish a newspaper notice in lieu of sending reports to customers. Under 40 CFR 141.155(g)(2), CWSs serving 500 or fewer people may forego the notice

- publishing requirement, provided they give notice at least annually

to their custom ers b y mail, door

- to
- door delivery , or posting in an

3 These definitions were taken from Section 601 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

33 appropriate location that the CCR is available upon request. In addition, only very large s ys tems (those serving more than 100,000 people) must provide CCR information on the Internet. 2) Variance & Exem ption Rule The V/E Rule includes procedures and conditions under which the primacy agency (or the EPA Administrator in non

- primacy states) may

issue variances or exemptions to PWS s. The V/E Rule is intended to provide regulatory relief, while still prot ecting public health. Specificall y, it permits primacy agencies to issue variances to PWSs that cannot comply with the national primary

drinking water standards due to source water qualit y or affordability. These variances generall y allow a system to pro vide drinking water that may be above the MCLif the drinking water qualit y is still protective of public health. Duration of small system variances generall y coincides with the life of the technology. Exemptions are intended to allow a small sy stem with compelling circumstances additional time to comply with applicable SDWA requirements. An exemption is generally limited to three years after the initial compliance date stated in the regulations. 3) Capacity Development Program EPA’s guidelines provide s tates with maximum flexibility in developing and implementing the capacity development program. As mentioned above, EPA published a document entitled, Small Sy stem Regulatory Requirements Under the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, which, among other things, explains the requirements of the Capacit y Development Program. In addition, EPA published a Handbook for Capacity Development: Developing Water Sy stem Capacity Under the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 and is working on several other tools to help small sy stems compl y. 4) General State Primacy Activities There are no PWS activities associated with the General State Primacy Activities. 5) Public Notification EPA allows sy stems serving fewer than 10,000 persons several options for delivering public notices, such as hand delivery and posting in a prominent location. 6) Operator Certification and Expense Reimbursement Grants Program EPA’s Guidelines provide states with maximum flexibility in developing and implementing their operator certification programs. Furthermore, funding is available for training and certification expenses of small sy stem operators through the Expense Reimbursement Grants program, and EPA’s Guidelines permit the use of circuit riders (certified operators who are responsible for multiple sy stems) as determined to be appropriate by the state. Note that the Expense Reimbursement Grants program will be ending in December 2012. 7) Tribal Operator Certification Program Since the Tribal Operator Certification Program is voluntary , the program provides tribes with maximum flexibility in seeking operator certification. Water sy stem operators in Indian Country can decide if they

would like to be certified by an EPA

- approved tribal certificationPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

34 provider or b y a state pro gram. Furthermore, EPA subsidizes the training and certification of tribal water s ys tem operators in Indian Country

. Additionally , certification providers have flexibility in developing and implementing their tribal operator certification programs. 8) Constructed Conveyances The broadened definition of “public water s ys tem” could financiall y a ffect small constructed conveyance sy stems that would now be considered PWSs. Consequently , the 1996 SDWA Amendments provided several exemption options. Examples of these exclusions include

—

 If water provided b y a supplier is used exclusively for purposes other than

residential uses (drinking, bathing, cooking, and similar uses), then a s ys tem may apply for an “ Other T han Residential Uses” e xclusion.

 If a water s upplier provides adequate health protection through means specified in section 1401(4)(B)(i)(II) and (III), then the s ys tem may apply for an “Alternative Water Treatment” Exclusion.

 If the water suppl y will be used for drinking, cooking, or bathing, then the water must be treated either centrally or at the point

- of

- entry at each connection. To receive a “Treatment” Exclusion, a sy stem must demonstrate that this treatment is occurring.

 If an irrigation district existed prior to May 18, 1994, and if the district provides primarily agricultural service through piped water sy stems (with incidental residential use), the s ys tem may be eligible for a “Certain Piped Irrigation Districts” Exclusion. 9) Proficiency Testing The proficiency

testing program is not part of a rule, so it is not subject to the requirements of SBREFA. The PT program applies only to those laboratories that wish to be certified to conduct drinking water analy ses. **5(d) Collection Schedule**  Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 of this document contain summarie s of the collection schedules for each rule. Additional information may be obtained by

consulting the individual rules for specific collection schedules.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

35 

### 6 **ESTIMATING BURDEN AND COST OF COLLECTION** This section estimates the burden and cost to PWSs, primacy agencies, and EPA for complying with drinking water information requirements that are not associated with contaminant

- specific rulemakings. These activities include the following

— 1) Consumer Confidence Reports 2) Variance and Exemption Rule 3) Capacity Development Program 4) General State Primacy Activities 5) Public Notification 6) Operator Certification and Expense Reimbursement Grants Program 7) Tribal Operator Certification Program 8) Constructed Conveyances 9) Proficiency

Testing This section also discusses the assumptions used to estimate costs and burden and describes the change in burden, as compared with the 2008 PWSS Program I CR. Note that the burden incorporates the results of consultations with representatives of states and PWSs. **6(a) Respondent Burden**  **6(a)(i) Burden to Public Water Systems**  The annual PWS burden for April 1, 2012 , to March 31 , 2015 , is estimated to be approximately 2. 4 million hours. Exhibit 6 shows the breakdown of the annual burden hours on an activity

- specific basis. The bases fo r the burden estimates are detailed below. 1) Consumer Confidence Reports CCR regulations require, at a minimum, that each CWS mail to each of its customers an annual report on the level of contaminants in the drinking water purveyed by that sy stem. EPA es timates that CCR requirements will affect approximately 51,460 PWSs, all of which are CWSs, during the course of this I CR period. Activities associated with the preparation and delivery of CCRs account for 963,561 burden hours per ye ar, which includes burden for both CCR development and distribution for PWSs

. Appendix B summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the CCR burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations. The assumptions used to calculate the CCR burden are based largely

on assumptions from the 2008 PWSS Program ICR. For the PWSS Program ICR renewal, these assumptions have been augmented or supplanted where updated data were available. Section 6(f) describes the reasons for changes in burden and shows the effects of any new ass umptions on the CCR burden estimates. Report Development Preparation of a CCR includes assembling data, writing the report, ensuring that the notice meets regulatory

requirements, and printing the document. Burden estimates range from 4 hours for CWSs serving 500 or fewer people to 160 hours for CWSs serving 10 0 ,000 people orPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

36 more . After completion of CCR preparation activities, all CWSs, regardless of size, are assumed to have the same burden (0. 5 hours) for submitting to the state a cop y of the CCR distributed to customers. Certification that the reports were, in fact, distributed is also required along with the report. Finally , all CWSs, regardless of size, are assumed to have the same burden ( 0.25 hours) for maintaining a cop y of the CCR and making it publicly available, if requested. Report Delivery The burden estimate for CCR delivery includes the following activities and assumptions

—

 Except for CWSs serving 500 or fewer people, all CWSs incur a burden for publishing a notice about obtaining a CCR. The burden per s ys tem for this activity is 0.25 hours. For s ys tems serving at least 10,000 people, publication is in addition to report de livery

to customers. For sy stems serving fewer than 10,000 people, this I CR assumes that 50 percent of sy stems will publish a notice in lieu of sending reports to customers.

 Under 40 CFR 141.155(g)(2), CWSs serving 500 or fewer people may forego the not ice

- publishing requirement, provided they give notice at least annually to their customers b y mail, door

- to
- door delivery , or posting in an appropriate location that the CCR is available upon request. This ICR assumes that 50 percent of these CWSs post th e report and 50 percent deliver the report to their customers as part of their standard water bill. Those that post the CCR are estimated to incur a burden of 0.12 hours for this activity

.

 Regardless of CWS size category , this ICR assumes a burden of 1 0 hour s per s ys tem for coordinating delivery of the CCR as a bill stuffer. CWSs serving 10,000 or more people must deliver the CCR to all service connections. However, CWSs serving fewer than 10,000 people may apply to the s tate Governor (or Tribal Leader) for a waiver of th e requirement to deliver a CCR to each customer. This I CR assumes that half of such CWSs will receive a waiver. For CWSs serving 500 or fewer people, the 50 percent without a waiver are assumed to include the CCR along with the normal water bill (instead of sending the CCR in a separate mailing). For CWSs serving between 501 and 10,000 people, half of the sy stems without a waiver (or 25 percent of the total number of CWSs in this size category) are assumed to include the CCR as a bill stuffer, and the remaining s ys tems will mail the CCR separatel y.

 Under §141.155(f), CWSs serving at least 100,000 people must post a copy of the current CCR on a publicly accessible Internet site. This burden is estimated at 2 hours per s ys tem. 2) Varia nce and Exemption Rule In the 2012 PWSS Program I CR, data for exemptions are carried forward from the 2008 OMB approved ICR, which was derived from April 2008 EPA data on the total number of actual exemptions applied for under the Arsenic Rule (286 sy stem s). The number of sy stems appl yi ng for variances, however, is carried forward from the 1998 V/E ICR, and the number of s ys temsPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

37 completing each task is based on the percentages of sy stems completing each task in the 1998 V/E I CR (assuming a total of 411 sy s tems in 1998). Based on the above estimates, it is estimated that the average annual burden to PWSs will be approximately 9,066 hours. Appendix C summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the Variances and Exemptions Rule burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations. 3) Capacity Development EPA estimates that capacity development will affect approximately 14,109 PWSs, including CWSs, NTNCWSs, and transient noncommunity water s ys tems (TNCWSs), during the course of this ICR period , as expl ained below . The Capacit y Development Program consists of two major components

—

1) Implementation of a program to ensure that all new CWSs and NTNCWSs demonstrate the capacit y to comply with NPDWRs. 2) Implementation of a strategy to assist existing PWSs in acquiring and maintaining capacit y to comply with the SDWA. The burden estimate associated with new and existing capacity development efforts is based on expert opinions, including opinions provid ed by members of the NDWAC Small Sy stems Workgroup, and consultations with drinking water industry representatives. Specificall y, the burden estimate includes the following activities and assumptions

—

 New s ys tems must demonstrate capacity in order to obt ain approval. Each new sy stem appl yi ng for approval will require 40 hours to prepare and submit new s ys tem approval materials to the state. This burden estimate does not include compliance with state technical requirements since these were generall y unaf fected b y the capacity development provisions. EPA estimates that there will be an average of 8 new s ys tems per state per year.

 Some new sy stems must improve capacity in order to obtain approval. An estimated 20 percent of new s ys tems applying for appr oval will be required to submit supplemental materials before approval is granted by the state. To develop and submit these materials, it is estimated that each s ystem denied initial approval will require an additional 40 hours. As with the approval appl ication, it is estimated that there will be 8 new s ys tems per state per ye ar (20 percent of which will be required to submit supplemental materials) and that the burden estimate does not include the time needed to compl y with technical requirements.

 Some existing sy stems will incur burden for complying with state capacit y development strategies. Each ye ar, EPA estimates that 20 percent of CWSs, 7 percent of NTNCWSs, and 2.5 percent of TNCWSs will incur a burden to comply with state capacity

development s trategy

efforts. EPA estimates that these sy stems will spend, on average, 8 hours per ye ar participating in capacity development strategy activities (primarily

consultations with states).Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

38 Based on these assumptions, EPA estimates that the average annual burden to PWSs will be approximately 131,114 hours for capacit y development activities. Appendix D summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the Capacit y Development Program burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations. 4) General State Primacy There is no PWS burden associated with general state primacy activities. 5) Public Notification Only PWSs with one or more violation s during the year incur a burden. (PWSs with no violations have no requirements under this rule.) The information collection burden for s ys tems that do experience a violation is estimated to average 7
. 6 hours per violation per year ( 1.0 million hours divided by 136,789 violations). This estimate includes time for preparing, cop yi ng, mailing, submitting, or posting public notices, as well as time for maintaining records of PN activities. In preparing this ICR, EPA assumed that each PWS will deliver a public notice to persons served. A “person served” is defined as an individual who normally receives water provided b y the PWS. Under the statute, PWSs are required to reach persons served, including those who ordinaril y do not receive water bills (e.g., residents of apartment buildings, students and staff at schools, etc.). Under the PN Rule, CWSs providing a Tier 1 notice are expected either to hand deliver the notice to all residences or to contact all media outlets serving the affected community , including television and radio stations, and submit a press release to them. Burden for distribution of Tier 1 notices is estimated at 12 hours for posting and hand delivery and/or use of mass media. NCWSs providing a Tier 1 notice are likely to post the notice or hand deliver the notice to customers. All water s ys tems are requir ed to take other reasonably calculated steps to ensure all the persons served by the sy stem receive the notice. Although the rule does not specify such actions, PWSs are assumed to place telephone calls to centers of sensitive populations, such as hospita ls, nursing homes, and schools. Finally , water sy stems are expected to prepare a notice suitable for posting in rest areas, government

- owned buildings, libraries, and other facilities served b y the water s ys tem. Sy stems providing a Tier 2 or Tier 3 noti ce must mail or otherwise directly deliver one notice to each billing customer. The PN Rule also permits NCWSs to post the notice in lieu of direct delivery

or mailing. All water s ys tems must also take other reasonably calculated steps to reach other per sons not reached by mail, direct delivery , or routine posting. Estimated burden hours for delivering Tier 2 notices are 9 hours for CWSs under 500 in si ze, and 30 hours for larger CWS s. NTNCWS and TNCWS are estimated to incur 9 burden hours per s ys tem. The burden estimate for mailing assumes that half the CWSs bill their customers less frequentl y than every month or use postcards rather than envelopes to send bills. Therefore, if a CWS experiences a violation requiring a Tier 2 notice more than 30 day s prior to a regular billing date, that CWS is required to send a separate mailing specificall y for the public notice. Water sy stems that bill on a monthly basis and do not use postcards, or those sending out otherPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

39 mailings to the customers, including annual CCRs, will be able to incorporate the notice as a stuffer in one of the s ys tem’s other mailings. Because the mailing alone will not reach all persons served, the burden estimate includes other methods of information dissemination to ensure all persons served receive the notice. The burden for preparation of these notices was calculated separatel y from the burden for delivering the notices. For Tier 1 s ys tems serving up to 10,000 customers, the burden estimate per s ys tem is 15 hours. Sy stems over 10, 000 customers can expect a burden of 30 hours per sy stem. Sy stems with T ier 2 notices have an estimated burden of 3.5 hours, regardless of size, while CWSs with Tier 3 notices have an estimated burden of 3 hour s and NTNCWSs and TNCWSs have an estimated 3.5 burden hours

. If repeated notices are necessary , the estimated PWS respondent burden for developing and distributing repeat public notification is 3 hours per s ys tem. Based on the above estimates, it is estimated that the average annual burden to PW Ss will be approximately 1.0 million hours. Appendix F summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the PN Rule burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations. 6) Operator Certification Guidelines and Expense Reimbursement Grant Program EPA estimates that 33,031 CWSs and NTNCWSs will be affected annually by the Operator Certification Program. The burden for PWSs involves operators renewing their certifications. The burden is estimated to be 263, 018 hours annuall y for PWSs. Specifically , it is estimated that for sy stems the burden hours per operator will be 8.0 hours

. Appendix G summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the Operator Certification Program burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations. 7) Tribal Operator Certif ication Program Burden for tribal PWSs involves obtaining and renewing certification of their operators. Th e total burden for all three ye ars is estimated to be 14,216 hours. Annually that is an average burden of 4,739 hours. Itis estimated that tribal systems will require 40 hours for new L evel 1 certifications, 26 hours for new L evel 2 certifications and 26 hours for new L evel 3 certifications. Other activities include 40 hours for certification renewals, and 0.5 hours to complete paperwork for r eimbursement of certification costs. Appendix H summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the Tribal Operator Certification burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

40 8) Constructed Conveyances Certain PWSs may

incur burden to adhere to the broadened definition of “public water sy stem” introduced by

the 1996 SDWA Amendments. It is estimated that, on average, up to 371 PWSs may

complete one or more of the following activities annually

—

 Conduct a house

- by

- house survey of water use prac tices and document efforts to ascertain water uses.

 Apply for exclusions.

 Communicat e with the primacy agency .  Recordkeeping. The total annual burden to carry out these activities is estimated to be 7,496 hours. It is estimated that survey s and data collection will require 20 hours per PWS. Each of four exclusion applications available (other residential uses, alternative water, treatment, and certain piped irrigation districts) will take 10 hours each per s ystem. Communication with the primacy agency is estimated to take 10 hours and recordkeeping is estimated at 1 hour per system. Appendix I summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the burden for adherence to the constructed conveyance requirements under the revised PWS definition and provides de tailed burden and cost calculations. **6(a)(ii) Burden to Primacy Agencies** The annual burden for state primacy agencies for April 1, 2012 , to March 31 , 2015 , is estimated to be approximately 1. 7 million hours. Exhibit 7 shows the annual burden on an a ctivity

- specific basis. The following briefl y describes the bases for the burden estimates

– 1) Consumer Confidence Reports Primacy agencies are expected to incur a burden for information collection activities associated with preparation assistance, revie w, and filing of CCRs. The total annual state burden is estimated at 75,698 hours. Assisting in the preparation of reports for small CWSs is estimated at 2 hours per s ys tem. State recordkeeping activities , including receiving and reviewing CWS reports and filing reports , are estimated at 0. 50 hours and 0.10 hours, respectively . Appendix B contains detailed burden and cost assumptions and calculations for primacy agencies. 2) Variance and Exemption Rule The burden for s tates is based on the number of s ystem s applying for variances and exemptions. In the 2012 PWSS Program ICR, data for exemptions are carried forward from the 2008 OMB approved ICR, which was derived from April 2008 EPA data on the total number of actual exemptions applied for under the Arsenic Rule. The number of s ys tems applying for variances, however, is carried forward from 1998 V/E I CR, and the number of s ys tems completing each task is bas ed on percentages of s ystems completing each task in the 1998 V/E ICR. Based on the above estimates, it is estimated that the average annual burden to p rimacy a gencies will be approximately 76,293 hours. Appendix C summarizes the assumptions used toPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

41 calc ulate the Variances and Exemptions Rule burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations. 3) Capacity Development Program As discussed in Section 6(a)(i), the Capacity Development Program, which was added pursuant to the 1996 SDWA Amendments, is a state effort to help drinking water s ys tems improve their finances, management, infrastructure, and operations so they can provide safe drinking water consistently , reliabl y, and cost

- effectively . The program consists of two major components

— 1) Implement ation of a program to ensure that all new CWSs and NTNCWSs

demonstrate the capacit y to comply with NPDWRs. 2) Implementation of a strategy to assist existing PWSs in acquiring and maintaining capacit y to comply with the SDWA. The burden estimate associated with new and existing capacit y development efforts is based on expert opinions, including opinions provided by members of the NDWAC Small Sy stems Workgroup, and consultations with drinking water industry representatives. Specificall y, the burden estim ate assumes that

—

 States must review and approve applications for new s ys tems. This I CR assumes that, on average, there will be 8 new s ys tems per state per year. It will take state personnel an estimated 100 hours per s ys tem to review new s ys tem documentation and information.

 Some applications for new sy stems will require state follow up. Upon initial review, all new s ys tems likely

will not meet states’ capacity criteria. An estimated 20 percent of new s ys tems appl yi ng for approval each year will be required to submit supplemental materials. It is estimated that a state will need 8 hours per s ys tem to review these materials.

 States must provide capacity development assistance to some existing sy stems. One element that states must consider in their capacit y development strategies is how to identify and prioritize the PWSs most in need of improving capacit y. In estimating this burden, EPA assumed that states will assist 20 percent of CWSs, 7 percent of NTNCWSs, and 2.5 percent of TNCWSs each year. EPA estimates that, on average, a state will dedicate 4 hours of assistance to each of these existing systems.

 Every three years, the primacy

agen cy must submit a report to the s tate's Governor on the progress and success of its strategy . It will take an estimated 40 hours to coordinate and prepare this report, for an average annual burden of 13.3 hours per state. In total, the average annual state burden for capacity development efforts is 103, 983 hours per ye ar. Appendix D summarizes the assumptio ns used to calculate the Capacit y Development Program burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

42 4) General State Primacy Activities As illustrated in Exhibit 7, approximately 75 percent of the state burden

— or 1, 242,199 hours

—is for activities that cannot be associated with specific drinking water rules or programs. These “general primacy

activities” include

—

 Submission of grant applications. Primacy agencies are eligible to receive program grants from EPA to implement their PWSS p rograms. To receive the grants they must prepare program plans describing their planned activities and use of the grant funds. Primacy

agencies must apply

for the grants on an annual basis. This activity is estimated to re quire 1,040 hours annuall y per s tate.

 File management (recordkeeping). Each primacy agency is required to maintain records of tests, measurements, analy ses, decisions, and determinations performed on each PWS to assess compliance with the provisions of the state’s primary drinking wat er regulations. File management is estimated to take 1,040 hours annually per s tate.

 Maintenance of data s ys tems is estimated to re quire 1,040 hours annually per s tate. Each primacy

agency must develop a method of storing all PWS inventory , compliance, an d enforcement information that it uses to operate its PWSS oversight program. While EPA does not prescribe a storage method, states generally store this information electronically because of the volume of data involved. States must routinely enter new inventory , compliance, and enforcement data into their data sy stems. States must also modify their data s ys tems as necessary
.

 Submission of ongoing violation reports is estimated to require 1,040 hours annua lly per s tate. Each primacy

a gency must provide EPA with information regarding all violations of the state drinking water regulations and with other selected water sy stem information that is necessary to determine compliance with the drinking water requirements. States must also provide new and updated water s ys tem inventory information on an annual basis.

 Laboratory

certifications are estimated to require 728 hours annuall y per s tate. The state PWSS programs require that water sy stems conduct routine monitoring of water quality to ensure that the wat er produced meets all regulatory standards. States must have some method of ensuring that the laboratories conducting these analyses are qualified and capable of performing the tests. As a result, states must establish and maintain a program for certifyi ng laboratories that may conduct the required compliance monitoring for PWSs.

 Plan and project reviews. Primacy agencies must establish and maintain a program that assures the design and construction of new or modified water s ys tem facilities that are ca

pable of complyingwith the s tate primary dri nking water regulations. Most s tates achieve this assurance b y requiring state review and approval of plans and specifications for drinking water facility construction. Reviewing plans for major projects for s y stems with more than 10,000 customers, between 3,301 and 10,000, and less than 3,300 customers is estimated to require 312 , 416, and 5, 200 hoursPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

43 annually per s tate, respectively . Reviewing plans for minor projects for s ys tems greater than 500 customers and fewer than 500 customers is estimated to require 1,040 and 2, 600 hours annually per s tate, respectively . Routine inspections are estimated to require 832 burden hours annually per s tate.

 Over sight of compliance monitoring ( including issuing notices of violation and ensuring appropriate follow

- up activities ) . States must ensure that water systems monitor in accordance with the regulations. Where monitoring does not occur, states must take action to ensure that sy stems monitor so that the quality of wate r is known and so that an y appropriate actions can be taken. Where violations occur and are not expeditiously

corrected, states must take appropriate enforcement follow

- up actions. States must maintain administrative penalty authority and the right to sue to ensure the effectiveness of their enforcement programs. These programs require an estimated average of 2,309 hours annually per state
.

 Training activities. Primacy agencies conduct rule training for both state staff and for PWS owners and operators. Training is ongoing for all program components (for new staff and owners/operators). Training accounts for 338 hours annuall y per state
. Appendix E summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the General State Primacy Activities burden and provides deta iled burden and cost calculations. 5) Public Notification The burden to primacy

agencies for the Public Notification Rule results from consulting with PWSs, reviewing the PWS compliance certification and notice copies, preparing quarterl y reports to EPA, and filing and maintaining the PN records. The burden for primacy agencies for these activities is estimated to be 107,175 hours annually . This amounts to 1 , 880 hours per primacy agency . Tier 1 consultation activities require an estimated 3.0 hours annual ly per s ys tem in violation , Tier 2 consultation requires an average of 1.1 hours and Tier 3 requires 0. 5 hours. The burden for receiving/reviewing PN certification is 0.2 hours and filing reports is 0.1 hours. Appendix F summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the Public Notification burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations. 6) Operator Certification Guidelines and Expense Reimbursement Grants Program The burden to primacy

agencies for implementing an EPA

- approved Operator Certification Program includes the ongoing certification of operators and tracking fulfillment of operator certification requirements. It is assumed that 95 percent of states will op t to contract with third parties to provide group training to small sy stem operators and that 5 percent will opt to reimburse individual operators for training. The burden to primacy agencies also includes annual reporting to EPA on program implementation for operator certification and expense reimbursement grants. Note that the grant reimbursement program is ending in December 2012. The total annual burden estimated for primacy agencies is 3,565 hours. It is estimated that submitting a yearl y report on the status of implementation will require 16 hours per state

. D ocumenting the actual uses of previous fiscal year ’s allotment will require 8 hours, and administering grants will require 520 hours annually per state ; however, the burden for these two activit ies will be incurred only during the first ye ar of this I CR period, as the expense reimbursement grant program will end in December 2012

. In addition, a subset of states willPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

44 complete tasks associated with the grant program during this ICR period, since so me states have already received and used all their grant money

. Appendix G summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the Operator Certification Program burden and provides detailed burden and cost calculations. 7) Tribal Operator Certification Program There is no burden to primacy agencies for the Tribal Operator Certification Program. 8) Constructed Conveyances Primacy agencies incur burden to adhere to the broadened definition of “public water sy stem” introduced by

the 1996 SDWA Amendments for oversight of PWS activities. These activities include

—

 Review of survey

results: estimated at 150 hours per PWS.

 Reviewing applications for exclusions: estimated at 10 hours for each of four ty pes of exclusions (other residential uses, alternative water, treatme nt, and certain piped irrigation districts exclusions).

 Communications with PWSs: estimated at 10 hours per PWS.

 Recordkeeping: estimated at 60 hours per PWS. The total annual burden associated with these activities is estimated to be 44,175 hours. Appendix H summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the burden for primacy agencies and provides detailed burden and cost calculations. **6(a)(iii) Burden to Laboratories**  The annual l aboratory

burden for April 1, 2012 , to March 31 , 2015 , is estimated to be approximately 42 , 892 hours. Exhibit 8 shows the annual burden to laboratories associated with Proficiency

Testing. The bases for the burden estimate are detailed below. 1) Proficiency Testing This section describes the estimated average annual burden and costs for the information collection activities for Proficiency Testing (PT) studies that will be conducted by drinking water laboratories. There is no burden for PT vendors or p rimacy a gencie s. The burden for laboratories for these activities is estimated to be 42 , 892 hours annuall y. This estimate includes burden for participating laboratories to read instructions, plan activities, analyze samples, submit data to the PT vendors, and maintain records. EPA assumes that the respondent burden will be divided among three labor categories: manager, chemist, and records clerk. The labor associated with each of the ICR activities is discussed in more detail below.

 Read i nstructions: EPA assum es that each of the 1 , 902 respondents will require 4 .0 hour s to read the instructions provided by the vendor. The burden will be evenly divided between a manager and chemist.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

45  Plan a ctivities: EPA assumes that the manager of each laboratory will require 1.5 hours to plan activities associated with the PT studies.

 Analyze inorganic c hemicals: EPA assumes that 871 laboratories will require approximately 16 hours to anal yz e PT standards for 29 inorganic chemicals. All hours will be incurred b y a chemist.

 Analyze DBPs: Chemists in 701 laboratories are assumed to require 8 .0 hours to anal yz e PT standards for 9 DBPs.

 Analyze organic c hemicals: Chemists in 330 laboratories are assumed to require 16.0 hours to anal yz e PT standards for 52 organic chemicals.

 Report r esults: EPA assumes that each of the 1 , 902 respondents will require 2 .0 hour s to report the results of the study to the PT vendor. The burden will be divided between a manager and records clerk.

 Maintain r ecords: EPA assumes that a records clerk and manager in each of the 1,902 laboratories will require 1.0 hour each to maintain the files from the PT study

. **6(b) Respondent Costs**  **6(b)(i) Cost to Public Water Systems**  Exhibit 6 shows the total costs for PWSs over the 3

- ye ar IC R period. Annual costs are estimated at approximately $ 116 million, which consists of $ 77 million in labor costs and $ 3 9 million in O&M costs

. Labor costs are bas ed on the number of burden hours times the average hourly wage rate, including overhead. In addition to the labor costs, there are O&M costs associated with the CCR, the Public Notification Rule, and Operator Certification Programs and the Tribal Operator Certification Program. For the CCR, these costs reflect non

- labor costs associated with printing, delivery , posting, and publishing CCRs. These costs were carried forward from the previous ICRs, updated with current cost information (e.g., postage rates ), and adjusted for inflation. CCR O&M costs and associated calculations are presented in greater detail in Appendix B. For the Public Notification Rule these costs reflect non

- labor costs to print and distribute notices of violation. These costs were c arried forward from the 2008 PWSS Program I CR. Appendix F shows the costs for the Public Notification Rule in more detail. For the Operator Certification Program and Tribal Operator Certification , O&M costs reflect renewal fees paid by operators to renew their certifications. These costs were carried forward from the 2008 ICR and are shown in more detail in Appendices G and H, respectivel y. There are no capital costs associated with this I CR. **6(b)(ii) Cost to Primacy Agencies** Exhibit 7 shows that the annual costs to primacy agencies are estimated at approximately $ 6 8 million. All costs incurred b y primacy agencies are labor costs. Labor costs are based on the number of burden hours times the average hourly wage rate, including overhead. Labor ratesPublic Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

46 in 2010 dollars are used and are loaded with a 60 percent overhead factor. A loaded labor rate of $43.79 per hour in 2010 dollars was used for state labor. **6(b)(ii i**  **) Cost to Laboratories** Exhibit 8 shows the total costs for laboratories over the three

- year ICR period. Annual costs are estimated at approximately $ 3

. 5 million, which consists of $ 0.8 million in O&M costs (fees for PT standards) and $ 2.8 million in labor costs (numbers may not add due to rounding)

. Labor costs are based on the number of burden hours times the average hourly wage rate, including overhead. Labor rates in 2010 dollars are used and are loaded with a 60 percent overhead factor . Loaded hourly labor rates in 20 10 dollars for the three labor categories include a manager at an hourly

rate of $ 99.47 , a data entry clerical person at an hourly rate of $ 28.80 , and a skilled technician or chemist to conduct the measurements at an hourly rate of $ 56.34

. O&M costs for laboratories are all costs related to providing personnel wi th the space, equipment, and materials necessary to perform the tasks required for PT studies. Since laboratories are driven by their compliance monitoring requirements to purchase the anal yt ical instrumentation and computers and not by PT requirements, n o capital costs can be considered associated with PT studies. Only the cost associated with purchasing the PT standards is appropriate for consideration in this category

. Laboratories may

participate in the PT studies for some or all of the regulated c ontaminants. Because EPA does not have sufficient information to estimate how many anal yt es are contained in the PT samples sent to each laboratory , EPA has estimated a "worst case" scenario b y assuming that a single PT s et contains standards for each pos sible regulated anal yt e. Therefore, laboratories participating in the inorganic PT study are assumed to receive and run anal ys es for 29 anal yt es. Similarly , those participating in the PT study for DBPs and/or organic chemicals will receive samples for ea ch of 9 anal ytes and/or each of 52 analy tes, respectivel y. EPA estimates the costs of each PT standard to be $ 15.73 (i.e., $ 15.73 per anal yt e).Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

47 **Exhibit 6 An**  **nual PWS Burden and Cost Ap**  **ril 1,**  **2012 to**  **March 31 ,**  **2015**

**Exhibit 7 An**  **nual State Burden and Cost**  **Ap ril**  **1, 2012**  **to March 31**  **, 2015**  **Annual L**  **ab**

**or Cos**  **t ($ K)**  **Annual O&M** 

**Cos t ($**  **K) Total**  **Annual**

**Cos t ($**  **K) Cons**  **um er**  **Confi de**  **nc e**  **Re po**  **rt s**  963,561 $ 31,204 $18,129 $ 49,333 210,453 **Var ia** **nc e**  **and**

**E xe**  **mpt io**  **ns** 9,066 $ 294 $ - $ 294 286 **Cap ac**  **it y De**  **ve lo**  **pm ent**  131,114 $ 4,246 $ - $ 4,246 14,200 **Ge ne**  **ra l**  **St ate**  **P rim** **ac y**  - $- $ - $ - - **Pub lic**  **Noti fi**  **ca**

**ti on**  1,038,435 $ 33,629 $9,617 $ 43,245 136,789 **Op era** **tor Ce**  **rt if** 

**ica ti**  **on** 263,018 $ 7,291 $11,507 $ 18,798 19,726 **Tr ib**  **al Op**  **era tor**  **Ce rt** **if ica**  **ti on**  4,739 $ 153 $0 $ 154 234 **Cons tr**  **uc te**  **d Conv** 

**ey anc**  **es** 7,496 $ 243 $ - $ 243 969 **Pro fi**  **cien cy** 

**T es**  **ti ng**  - $- $ - $ - - **TO TAL**  **2 ,4**  **17, 427**  **$ 7**  **7, 059**  **$ 3**  **9, 252**  **$ 1**  **16, 312**  **3 82,**  **658** Not e: D et ail may not add ex act ly t o t ot als due t o rounding . **Ac ti**  **vi ty**  **Annual B**  **ur de**  **n Ho**  **ur s**  **Annual R**  **es po**  **ns es**  **Cos t** 

**Lab or**  **Cos t ($**  **K) O&M** 

**Cos t ($**  **K) Total**  **Co st** 

**($ K)**  **Cons um**  **er Confi**  **de nc**  **e Re**  **po rt**  **s** 75,698 $ 3,315 $ - $ 3,315 125 ,331 **Var ia** **nc e**  **and Ex** **em pt**  **io ns**  76,293 $ 3,341 $ - $ 3,341 2 ,393 **Cap ac**  **it y De**  **ve lo** **pm en**  **t** 103,983 $ 4,554 $ - $ 4,554 14 ,200 **Ge ne**  **ra l**  **St ate**  **P rim** 

**ac y**  1 ,242,199 $ 54,398 $ - $ 5 4,398 152 ,979 **Pu bl**  **ic No** **ti fi**  **ca**

**ti on**  107,175 $ 107 $ - $ 107 313 ,326 **Op era**  **tor Ce**  **rt if**  **ica ti**  **on** 3,565 $ 156 $ - $ 156 19 ,726 **Tr ib**  **al Op**  **era tor**  **Ce rt**  **if ica**  **ti on**  - $ - $ - $ - - **Cons tr**  **uc te**  **d Conv**  **ey anc**  **es** 44,175 $ 1,935 $ - $ 1,935 969 **Pro fi**  **cien cy** 

**Te st** **in g**  - $ - $ - $ - - **TO TA** **L 1**  **,6 53,**  **088 $**  **6 7,**  **806 $**  **- $**  **6 7,**  **806 6**  **28, 925**  No te : D et ail may not add ex act ly t o t ot als due t o rounding

. **Annual Re**  **sp ons**  **es Ac**  **ti vi**  **ty Annual**  **B ur**  **de n**  **Ho ur**  **s Annual**  **Cos t** Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

48 **Exhibit 8 An**  **nual Laboratory Burden and Cost Ap**  **ril 1,**  **2012 to**  **March 31, 2015**

**6(c) Agency Burden and Costs**  EPA’s drinking water program incurs burden both at Headquarters and r egion al offices to assist states in implementing drinking water regulations. In previous I CRs for the PWSS Program, burden associated with EPA’s enforcement and compliance activities at Headquarters and the Regions w as also included in the Agency ’s burden and cost estimates. With the i mplementation of the Government Performance and Results Act in Federal Fiscal Year 1999, it has become difficult to isolate the resources ( full time equivalents ( FTEs ) and dollars) for drinking water enforcement and compliance activities from the overall O ffice of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance operating plan. Thus, this section presents only the burden and costs incurred b y EPA’s water program, especiall y drinking water protection, at Headquarters and in Regions. It is important to note that the burden and costs presented below cover ongoing activities for all EPA drinking water programs (not just those listed in this ICR), including rule development activities. **Lab or**  **Cos t ($**  **K) O&M** 

**Cos t ($**  **K) Total**  **Co st** 

**($ K)**  **Cons um**  **er Confi**  **de nc**  **e Re**  **po rt**  **s -**  **- -**  **-** - **Var ia** **nc e**  **and Ex** **em pt**  **io ns**  **- -**  **- -**  - **Cap ac**  **it y De**  **ve lo** **pm en**  **t -**  **- -**  **-** - **Ge ne**  **ra l**  **St ate**  **P rim** **ac y**  **- -**  **- -**  - **Pu bl**  **ic No** **ti fi**  **ca**

**ti on**  **- -**  **- -**  - **Op era**  **tor Ce**  **rt if**  **ica ti**  **on -**  **- -**  **-** - **Tr ib**  **al Op**  **era tor**  **Ce rt**  **if ica**  **ti on**  **- -**  **- -**  - **Cons tr**  **uc te**  **d Conv**  **ey anc**  **es -**  **- -**  **-** - **Pro fi**  **cien cy** 

**Te st** **in g**  **42, 892**  **$2, 763**  **$767 $3,**  **529 1,**  **902 TO**  **TA L**  **42, 892**  **$2, 763**  **$767 $3,**  **529 1,**  **902** No te : D et ail may not add ex act ly t o t ot als due t o rounding

. **Ac ti**  **vi ty**  **Annual B**  **ur de**  **n Ho**  **ur s**  **Annual Re**  **sp ons**  **es Annual**  **Cos t** Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

49 **EPA Headquarters** There are 49.7 Headquarters FTEs dedicated to drinking water protection implementation activities. The following assumptions were used to develop a cost estimate for Headquarters

—

 The average salary

and benefits (i.e., personnel compensation and benefits (PC&B)) of th e 49.7 FTEs is at the GS 13, Step 5 level of $ 129,968 4

.  An FTE is 2,080 hours/ year . Given these assumptions, the following calculations yield the annual labor cost for Headquarters

—

 The 49.7 FTEs equal 103,376 hours ( 49.7 *2,080).

 The labor cost of 49.7 F TEs is $ 6,459,410 ( 49.7 *$ 129,968 ). For most of the programs and regulations covered in the PWSS I CR, there are no O&M costs. However, EPA incurs O&M costs for the tribal operator certification program and for EPA contractors to manage the SDWI S database. The O&M costs for the tribal operator certification program are associated with reimbursing providers for training courses and reimbursing PWS operators for travel costs associated with training. Regions are assumed to incur 93 percent of these costs an d Headquarters incurs 7 percent. The annual tribal operator certification O&M cost for Headquarters is $ 9 , 371 (see Appendix H). As stated above, the O&M costs associated with SDWI S/state and SDWIS/FED are for EPA contractors to manage the SDWI S database

. These O&M costs are directly related to the collection of the information discussed in thi s I CR and include SDWI S/state and SDWI S/FED maintenance and user support for the s ys tem. The SDWI S O&M cost for Headquarters is $1,313,464 5

. Note that because th e EPA burden and labor costs calculated above address burden for all drinking water programs, including tribal operator certification, the EPA burden and labor costs calculated for tribal operator certification in Appendix H were not added to the labor bur den discussed in this section.

4 Base salary, United States Office of Personnel Management ( http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/html/gs.asp ). 2010 pay schedule. Loaded with a 60 percent loading factor. 5 SDWIS O&M costs based on comments received from EPA COR, Matthew Reed (11/16/2011)Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

50 **EPA Regional Offices** There are 231

. 9 Regional FTEs dedicated to drinking water protection implementation activities. 6 The following assumptions are used to develop a cost estimate for the Regions

—

 The average salary

and benefits (i.e., PC&B) of the 231

. 9 FTEs is at the GS 11, Step 5 level of $ 91,186 7

.  An FTE is 2,080 hours/ year. Given these assumptions, the following calculations yield the annual labor cost for the 10 EPA Regional offices

—

 The 231

. 9 FTEs equal 482 , 352 hours ( 231

. 9 *2,080).

 The labor cost of 231

. 9 FTEs is $ 21 , 14 5,941 ( 231

. 9 *$ 91,186 ). The annual Agency

O&M cost to the Regions associated with tribal operator certification is $ 133, 867

. The total cost to the f

ederal government is the sum of the labor cost to Headquarters ($ 6,459,410 ), the labor cost to EPA Regional offices ($ 21,145,941 ) , O&M cost to Headquarters ($ 1,32 2 , 835 ), and the O&M cost to EPA Regional offices ($ 133, 867 ) for a total of $ 2 9 , 062 , 053

. Similarly , the total burden to the f ederal government (H eadquarters and Regions) is 585 , 728 hours for 281

. 6 FTEs. **6(d) Estimating Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs**  Respondents for this I CR include PWSs, laboratories, and states or other primacy agencies. This ICR estimates the number of PWS respondents at 152,979 . Not every PWS is necessarily

subject to each of the information collection requirements contained in this I CR. The regulations associated with each ICR will identify the ty p es of PWSs that are subject to each particular drinking water regulation. In addition to the PWS respondents, this I CR assumes 57 primacy agencies (50 states plus the District of Columbia , U.S. territories, and the Navajo Nation) 8 , and 1 , 902 laboratori es. Therefore, the total number of respondents is 15 4 , 938

. The total costs and burden for these respondents are summarized in Exhibits 6

– 8

. Agency costs and burden are detailed in Section 6(c). **6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs**  The bottom line burden hours and costs are presented in Exhibit 9. The total annual respondent burden associated with this I CR is estimated to be approximately 4.1 million burden hours. The corresponding total annual respondent costs are estimated to be $ 187.6 million. The

6 FTE figures based on e

- ma il correspondence from EPA COR, Matthe w Reed (09/23/2011). 7 Base salary, United States Office of Personnel Management ( http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/html/gs.asp ). 2010 pay schedule. Loaded with a 60 percent loading factor. 8 This is a simplifying assumption. Primacy activities for Wyoming and the District of Co lum bia are actually carried out by the respective EPA Regional offices.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

51 total national burden, including respondent burden and EPA burden, is estimated to be 4.7 million hours annually . The total national cost, for respondents and EPA, is estimated to be $ 217 million annually

.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

52 **Exhibit 9 Bottom**  **Line A nnual Burden and Cost**  **Ap ril**  **1, 2012**  **to March 31, 2015** 

**154, 938**  (=) 152,979 (+) Ex

is ti ng PW Ss 57 (+) Pri

ma cy agencies 1,902 Laborator

ie s **1, 013,**  **485** (=) 382,658 (+) PW S re sp ons es (s ee E xh ib it 6) 628,925 (+) Pri

ma cy agency re sp onse s (s ee Ex hi bi t 7) 1,902 Laborator

y res ponses (s ee Ex

hi bi t 8) **6. 5**  (=) 1, 013,485 (/ ) Total

a nnual re spons es fro m above 154,938 Total

n um be r o f re sp ondents fro m above **4, 113,**  **408** (=) 2, 417,427 (+) PW S h ours (s ee E xh ib it 6) 1, 653,088 (+) Pri

ma cy agency hours (s ee Ex hi bi t 7) 42,892 Laborator

y hours (s ee Ex

hi bi t 8) **4. 06**  (=) 4, 113,408 (/ ) Total

a nnual re sponde nt hours fro m above 1, 013,485 Total

a nnual re spons es fro m above **$40, 019**  (=) $39,252 (+) Total

PW S O&M co st s (s ee E xh ib it 6) $0 (+) Total

p rim acy agency O&M c os ts (s ee Ex hi bi t 7) $767 Total

laborator y O&M c os ts (s ee Ex

hi bi t 8) **$187, 647**  (=) $116,312 (+) Fo r PW Ss (s ee Ex hi bi t 6) $67,806 (+) Fo r p ri

ma cy ag encies (s ee Ex

hi bi t 7) $3,529 Fo r laborator ie s (s ee Ex

hi bi t 8) **Total Annual**  **H**

**our s**  **(res p.** **p**

**lu s**  **Ag en**  **cy**

**) 4,**  **699, 136**  (=)

4, 113,408 (+) Total

re sponde nt hours 585,728 (+) Total

E PA h ours **Total Annual**  **Cos t (r**  **es p.** **p lu**  **s Ag**  **ency**

**) ($ K)**  **$216, 709**  (=)

$187,647 (+) Total

re sponde nt co st $29,062 Total

E PA Co st No te : D et ail may not add ex act ly t o t ot als due t o rounding

.

1 No c ap it al co sts are ass oc iat ed w it h t hePW SS ICR in t hi s evaluat io n p er io d. To tal annual EP A hours a nd cos t reflect t hecombined burden and cos t for H eadquart ers st aff (ap pr ox imat ely 50 FT Es ) and regi onal s taff (a ppr ox imat ely 232 F TE s) . Cost s als o i nc lu deO &M cos ts incurred for T ri bal Op erat or Cert if

icat io n ($143,238) and for EPA co nt ract ors to man ag e th e SDWISdat ab as e ($1,313,464). **Total Annual**  **Re sp** 

**on de**  **nt Co st** 

**(L ab**  **or , Cap**  **it al**  **, and**  **O&M ) ($**  **K) Num**  **be r o** **f Re sp** 

**ond ents** 

**Num be**  **r o f Re**  **sp**

**ons es**  **p er**  **Re sp**  **on de**  **nt**

**Hou rs**  **p er**  **Res po**  **ns e** 

**Annual Re**  **sp**

**ond en** **t O& M**  **an d**  **Cap**

**it al**  **Co st**  **($ K)**  **1 Total**  **Re sp** 

**ond ent H**  **ou rs**  **Total Annual**  **Re sp** 

**on se**  **s**Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

53 **6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden**  This section presents the change in burden and explains the reasons for the change in burden. The discussion is divided into two parts

—

 Section 6(f)(i) summarizes the differences between the burden estimated in the 2008 PWSS Program ICR and the current OMB inventory for the PWSS Program I CR. See Exhibit 11.

 Section 6(f)(ii) summarizes other adjustments to the annual burden estimates associated with each rule in the PWSS Program ICR. See Exhibits 12

- 14. Exhibit 10 summarizes how each of these changes has affected the overall burden inventory for the PWSS Program I CR. **Exhibit 10**

**Summary**

**of Changes in A nnual Burden**  **(Inclu des PWS,**  **Primacy A** **gency , and L**  **aboratory Burden)** 

**6(f)(i) Restructuring Adjustments**  No restructuring adjustments are being made for the addition of new stand

- alone ICRs to the PWSS I CR , as shown in Exhibit 11 . In the next revision to the PWSS ICR , burden from relevant standalone ICRs that have expired will be newly incorporated into the PWSS I CR.
**Exhibit 11 Restructuring A** **djustments to the An**  **nual Burden Inventory for the PWSS Program ICR**  **(Includes PWS, Primacy Ag**  **ency , and Laboratory**  **Burden) Typ**  **e of Chang**  **e Bu**  **rd en (hour**  **s) Ru**  **nni ng**  **T otal**  **Comm en**  **t** Bu rd en E st im ated in t he 2008 PW SS Pro gram

ICR 3,913,544 3,913,544 Th is b urden se rv es a s the bas elin e fo r t he 2012 PW SS Pro gram ICR.

Re st ru cturin g Adj ust me nts–s ee Se ction 6(f)(i) 0 3,913,544 2012 PW SS Pro gram ICR is n ot ap pended wit h burden fro m any new ICRs
.

Ot her A dj us tm ents t o Bu rd en –s ee Se ction 6(f)(ii) 199,864 4,113,408 Bu rd en fo r wh ic h EP A se eks ap proval in t hi s ICR. Not e: D et ail may not add ex act ly t o t ot als due t o rounding .

**Ac ti**  **on Annual**  **B urd**  **en H our**  **s Brief** 

**E xp**  **la na**  **ti on**  N/ A 3,913,544 In ventor y fo r t he 2 008 PW SS Pro gram ICR car rie d fo rwa rd a s the ba se lin e fo r 2012 PW SS Pro gram

ICR. Add 0 2012 P WS S Pro gram ICR is n ot ap pended wit h burden fro m any new ICRs
. **Total 3,**  **913, 544**  **PWS S**  **Pro gra** **m IC**  **R i nv**  **ento ry**  **b as**  **ed on c**  **ur rent** 

**b ur**  **de n i**  **nv ento**  **ries .** Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

54 **6(f)(ii) Additional Program Adjustments**  The remaining changes in burden consist of program adjustments for activities that were carried forward from existing ICRs to this PWSS Program I CR renewal. Changes in calculated burden are a result of updati ng relevant baseline information for each rule with the most current and accurate information on activity compliance. Exhibits 12

- 14 summarize reasons for these changes and quantify

the changes b y activity . Burden adjustments associated with PWS activiti es resulted in a burden increase of 235,959 hours and are shown in Exhibit 12. Burden adjustments for primacy

agencies resulted in a de c rease of 61 , 697 hours per year, as shown in Exhibit 13. Burden adjustments for laboratories resulted in a burden incre ase of 25,601 hours , as shown in Exhibit 14.
**Exhibit 12**

**Ad justments to PWS Burden from Previous ICR Estimates** 

**Ac ti**  **vi ty**  **Prev io**  **us Annual**  **Burd en E**  **st im**  **ate (H**  **our s)**  **2012 Annual** 

**Burd en E**  **st im**  **ate (H**  **our s)**  **Annual Chang**  **e i n** 

**Burd en**  **(H our**  **s) Re**  **as on for**  **Chang e in Burd**  **en Cons**  **um er C**  **onfi de**  **nce Re**  **po rts**  527,168 963,561 436,393 The change in b ur den re su lt s fro m the in cor poration of

con sul tation res ul

ts
. **Var ia** **nce a nd** 

**E xe**  **mpt io**  **ns** 9,066 9,066 - Be caus e n o updated in fo rm ation was av ailable o n the num ber of variances and ex em ptions applie d fo r and granted, t he as su mp tions fro m the pr evious ICR we re us ed. **Cap ac**  **it y De**  **ve lo**  **pme nt**  130,939 131,114 175 The change in b ur den re su lt s fro m the in cor poration of

con sul tation res ul

ts
. **Ge ne**  **ra l**  **St ate**  **Prim ac**  **y** - - - N/ A

**Pub lic**  **Noti fi**  **ca**

**ti on**  1,422,405 1,038,435 (383,970) The change in b ur den re su lt s fro m a ch ange i n the way events t hat trig ger noti ce u nder

t he Gr ound Water

Ru le ar e calculated, fro m in creas es in t he num ber o f v io la tions in SDW IS b etween 2007 a nd 2010 (SDW IS d ata fro m 2010 wa s us ed to calcul ate the public n otific ation bur den fo r t hi s ICR) a nd fro m the in cor

poration of

con sul tation res ul

ts
. **Op era** **tor Certifica** 

**ti on**  **Gu id**  **elin es**  **and**

**E xp**  **ens e**  **Re im**  **bu rs**  **em en** **t G**

**ra nts**  **Pro gra** **m** 79,682 263,018 183,336 Ch ange in b ur den is d ue to the in cor

por ation of c onsul tation res ults
. **Tr ib**  **al Op** **era tor**  **Ce rt**  **if ica**  **ti on Prog**  **ra m**  4,712 4,739 27 The change in b ur den is d ue to a s lig ht in cr eas e i n the num

ber o f t rib al syst em s.
**Cons tructed** 

**Conv ey** **anc es**  7,496 7,496 (1) Be caus e n o updated in fo rm ation was av ailable o n the num ber of new pu blic wa ter s ys tem s id entifie d as m

eeti ng the rev is ed PW S d efi

ni tion, th e as sum ptions fro m the pr

evious ICR we re u se d. **Pro fi**  **ciency**

**Te st**  **in g**  - - - N/ A **TO TAL**  **2, 181,**  **468 2,**  **417, 427**  **235, 959**  **PWS chang**  **e in b urd**  **en a fte**  **r ad** 

**jus tm**  **en ts**  **.** Note : Det ail may not a

dd ex act ly t o t ot als due t o rounding

.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

55 **Exhibit 13 Ad**  **justments to Primacy A** **gency Burden**  **from Previous ICR Estimates**

**Ac ti**  **vi ty**  **Prev**

**io us**  **Annual Bu**  **rd en** **E st**  **im ate**  **(H our**  **s) 2012**  **Annual**

**Bu rd**  **en E**  **st im** **ate (H**  **our s)**  **Annual Chang**  **e**

**in B**  **ur de**  **n (H**  **our s)**  **Re as**  **on for**  **Chang e i**  **n B ur**  **de n** 
**Cons um**  **er Confi**  **de nce**  **Re po**  **rt s**  106,831 75,698 (31,133) Th e change in b urde n re sul ts fro m the in cor

poration of c ons ul tation re su lt s.
**Var ia** **nce a nd** 

**E xe**  **mp ti**  **on s**  89,231 76,293 (12,938) Th e change in b urde n re sul ts fro m the re mo val

o f burde n fo r re gulation ad option; st ates a re a ssum ed to have co mp le ted ad opti ng V/ E re gulations d urin g prev io us ICR

p er io ds

. **Cap ac**  **it y De**  **ve lo** **pm**

**en t**  104,503 103,983 (520) Th e change in b urde n re sul ts fro m the re mo val

o f t he burde n fo r c om

pila tion of

a l is t of s ig nific an t noncom pl ie rs . Th is b urde n wa s re mo ved becaus e E PA ha s de vel oped a n ew

en fo rc em

ent track in g sy st em

. **Ge ne**  **ra l**  **St ate**  **P rim** **ac y**  1,204,022 1,242,199 38,177 Th e change in b urde n is b as ed on updates t o and QA o f t he mo del

fo r thi s program

.

**Pub lic**  **Noti fi**  **ca**

**ti on**  143,790 107,175 (36,615) Pri ma cy ag en cy burden is b as ed on the num be r o f violations re qui

rin g publ ic n otific ation. Th e ch an ge in s ys tem b urden re sul

ts fro m changes in t he way events t hat tr

ig ger n otice under

t he Ground Wa ter Ru le are c al

culated,ch an ges in t he num be r o f violations in SDW IS b etween 2007 and 2010 (SDW IS da ta fro m 2010 wa s us ed to calcu la te the public notification burden fo r thi s ICR). In ad di tion, t his mo del in co rp or ates co ns ul

tation re sul

ts
. **Op era**  **tor Ce**  **rt if** 

**ica ti**  **on Gu**  **id elin**  **es and** 

**E xp**  **en se**  **Re im**  **bu rs**  **em en** **t G**

**ra nts**  **Pr og**  **ra m**  22,233 3,565 (18,668) Th e change in b urde n is d ue t o the re mo va l o f m ost of t he b urden fo r t he e xp ens e re im burse me nt gran ts program fro m ye ars 2 and 3 and par t of y ear 1 o f t hi s ICR p er io d; the grant program

wi ll b e en di ng in De cem be r 2012. **Tr ib** **al Op** 

**era tor**  **Ce rt** **if ica**  **ti on** **P ro**  **gr am**  - - - N/ A **Cons tr**  **uc te**  **d Conv** 

**ey an**  **ces** 44,175 44,175 - N/ A **Pr ofi**  **cien cy** 

**T es**  **ti ng**  - - - N/ A **TO TAL**  **1, 714,**  **785 1,**  **653, 088**  **(6 1,**  **697) Ad**  **jus te**  **d Prim** **ac y Ag**  **ency**

**B ur**  **de n**  No te: De tai

l m ay not add ex

actl y to total s due to ro undi

ng.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

56 **Exhibit 14 Ad**  **justments to Laboratory Burden**  **from Previous ICR Estimates**

Exhibit 15 shows the e ffect of these adjustments on the bottom line burden. Adding 235 , 959 hours to account for the adjustment for the PWS burden , subtracting 61 , 697 hours to account for the adjustment for the primacy agency burden , and adding 25 , 601 hours to account for the adjustment to the laboratory burden yi elds 4, 113 , 408 hours. **Ac ti**  **vi ty**  **Prev**

**io us**  **Annual Bu**  **rd en** **E st** **im ate**  **(H our**  **s) 2012**  **Annual**

**Bu rd**  **en E**  **st im** **ate (H**  **our s)**  **Annual Chang**  **e in** 

**Bu rd**  **en (H our**  **s) Re**  **as on** **for Chang**  **e in** **B ur**  **de n** 

**Cons um**  **er Confi**  **de nc**  **e Re**  **po rt**  **s** - **- -**  N/ A

**Var ia** **nc e**  **an d**  **Ex em**  **pt io**  **ns** - **- -**  N/ A

**Cap ac**  **it y De**  **ve lo** **pm en**  **t** - **- -**  N/ A

**Ge nera**  **l St**  **ate Pr**  **im ac**  **y** - **- -**  N/ A

**Pu bl**  **ic Noti**  **fi ca** 

**ti on**  - **- -**  N/ A **Op era**  **tor Ce**  **rt if**  **ica ti**  **on Gu**  **id elin**  **es and**  **Ex pe**  **ns e**  **Re im**  **bu rs**  **em en**  **t Gr**  **an ts**  **Pro gra** **m** - **- -**  N/ A

**Tr ib**  **al Op**  **era tor**  **Ce rt** **if ica**  **ti on P**  **ro gra** **m** - **- -**  N/ A

**Cons tr**  **uc te**  **d Conv**  **ey an**  **ces** - **- -**  N/ A

**Pro fi**  **cien cy** 

**T es**  **ti ng**  17,291 42,892 25,601 Th e change in b urden is d ue t o in cor poration of cons ul tation re su lt s and a change in t he num be r o f cer ti fie d laboratorie s. **TO TAL**  **1 7,**  **291 4**  **2, 892**  **2 5,**  **601 Ad**  **jus te**  **d Lab** 

**or ator**  **y B ur**  **de n**  Not e: Detail may not add exact ly t o t ot als due t o rounding

.Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

57 **Exhibit 15 Ad**  **justments to Ac**  **tivities Carried Forward from Previous ICRs (Includes**  **PW S**  **, Primacy Ag**  **ency , and Laboratory**  **Burden)**

**6(g) Burden Statement**  The public reporting burden for collections included in this I CR is detailed in Exhibit 15 above. The annual respondent burden is estimated to average approximately 4.1 million hours, of which 2. 4 million hours are attributable to PWSs, 1. 7 million hours to primacy agencies, and 0.0 4 million hours to laboratories. These estimates include time for gathering information as well as developing and maintaining records. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended b y people to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide information to or for a f ederal agency . This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology , and sy stems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing way s to comply with an y 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 transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or spons or, and a person is not required to respond to, a request for information collection unless it display s a currentl y valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s re gulations are listed in 40 CFR p art 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 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 I CR under D ocket ID Number EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 2011

- 0443 , which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov , or in person 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 holiday s. The telephone number for the Reading R oom is (202) 566

- 1744, and the telephone number for the Water Doc ket is (202) 566

- 2426. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov . This site can be used to submit or view **Ac ti**  **on Annual**  **B ur**  **de n H**  **our s**  **Brief**

**E xp**  **la nati**  **on** No ne 3,913,544 In ventor y af ter re st ru ctur

in g adj us tm

ents , a nd other

a dj us tm ents t o bur

den (s ee Ex hi bi t 11) Ad d 235, 959 Adj us tm ents fo r PW S a cti

vi ties c ar rie d fo rwa rd fro m previous ICR s (s ee Ex hi bi t 12) Ad d (61,697) Adj us tm ent fo r p rim

acy agency acti

vi ties carr ie d fo rwa rd fro m previous IC Rs (s ee Ex hi bi t 13) Ad d 25,601 Adj us tm ent fo r laborat or

y acti vi ties c ar rie d fo rwa rd fro m previous ICR s (s ee Ex hi bi t 14) **Total 4,**  **113, 408**  **Eq ual**  **s hour**  **s req** 

**ue st** **ed i**  **n 2 012**  **PWS S**  **Pro gra** **m IC**  **R. (S ee**  **Ex hi**  **bi t 9**  **)** No te : D et ail may not add ex act ly t o t ot als due t o rounding

. **Adj us**  **tm en**  **ts t**  **o A ctivitie**  **s Ca**  **rri ed** 

**F or**  **wa rd**  **fr om**  **P re**  **vi ou** **s IC**  **Rs (In** **cl ude**  **s PWS**  **, P ri** **ma cy A** **ge nc** **y, an d**  **La bo**  **ra tor**  **y Bu rde**  **n)**Public Water Systems Supervision Program ICR December 2011

58 public comments, to access the index listing of the contents of the publ ic docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronicall y. When in the sy stem, select “search,” then key

in the D ocket ID Number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office r for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number ( EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 2011

- 0443 ) and the OMB Control Number 2040

- 0090 in an y correspondence.