EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

1

ATTACHMENT E

Records of Consultations between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and

Respondents to the Information Collection Request: 

“Certification of Pesticide Applicators”

List of Stakeholders Who Responded:

1. Jasmine LR (Courville) Brown

Company and contact: Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Pesticide Program, PO 

Box 278 Pablo, Montana 59855; jasmineb@cskt.org.

2. Janice Cooney

Company and contact: Cooney Fertilizer, Inc., 1030 26th Road, Walthill, NE 68067; 

jycooney@yahoo.com.

3. Laurie Gordon

Company and contact: Oregon Department of Agriculture, 475 NE Bellevue Dr., Ste. 

110, Bend, OR 97701; lgordon@oda.state.or.us.

4. Andrew Beck

Company and contact: Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, 2301 N. Cameron St., 

Harrisburge, PA 17100; andrbeck@pa.gov.
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

2

Consultations Responses

Response 1.

Jasmine LR (Courville) Brown, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Pesticide Program 

(Government Applicators) - EPA-Administered Program

Questionnaire

(1) Publicly Available Data

• Is the data that the Agency seeks available from any public source, or already collected 

by another office at EPA or by another agency?

• Yes. 

• If yes, where can you find the data? (Does your answer indicate a true duplication, or 

does the input indicate that certain data elements are available, but that they don=t meet 

our data needs very well?)

USEPA and available public databases do not provide a true data duplication. 

Most states have a Department of Agriculture that maintains an online pesticide 

applicator searchable database which provides the public: the applicator’s name; business 

name; license number; license expiration date; licensed category and the business 

location by county for commercial government and private applicators. 

USEPA’s public database for Pesticide Dealers provides the public with detailed 

information the state departments do not provide. This information is supported for the 

public, potential customers/market, and regulators.

(2) Frequency of Collection 

• Can the Agency collect the information less frequently and still produce the same 

outcome? 

No. 

(3) Clarity of Instructions 

The ICR is intended to require that respondents provide certain data so that the Agency can 

utilize them. 

• Based on the instructions (regulations, PR Notices, etc.), is it clear what you are required 

to do and how to submit such data? If not, what suggestions do you have to clarify the 

instructions?
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

3

No: from the website http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-applicator-certification-indiancountry, “How to Apply for Applicator Certification under the EPA Plan” the first bullet 

contains a link “Find the regional office address on page 3 of the instructions for 

completing the application form.” Page 3 of the above-mentioned document was not 

useful until I connected to the link http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa#pane-4 provided on 

page 2 of the Instructions for Completing the Application Form EPA Form 7100-01. I 

strongly suggest providing the address of each regional office on page 3.

• Do you understand that you are required to maintain records?

Yes. 

• Considering that there is no required submission format for Dealers, is it difficult to 

submit information in ways that are clear, logical and easy to complete?

Yes. 

• Are there forms associated with this process? Do you use them? Are they clear, logical, 

and easy to complete?

Sales and purchase records are maintained by businesses. There is no standard form used 

to my knowledge for submitting an annual report containing the name of the RUP 

product; EPA registration number of the RUP product; the special local need number of 

the RUP product, if any and the quantity of the RUP product sold.

(4) Electronic Reporting and Record keeping 

The Government Paperwork Elimination Act requires agencies make available to the public 

electronic reporting alternatives to paper-based submissions by 2003, unless there is a strong 

reason for not doing so. One such reason is that, at the present time, the Agency is unable to 

ensure the security of CBI that might be transmitted over the Internet.

• What do you think about electronic alternatives to paper-based records and data 

submissions? Current electronic reporting alternatives include the use of web 

forms@/XML based submissions via the Agency’s Internet site and magnetic mediabased submissions, e.g., diskette, CD-ROM, etc. Would you be interested in pursuing 

electronic reporting?

Yes.

• Are you keeping your records electronically? If yes, in what format?

I am aware of electronic record storage by manually storing files on the computer hard 

drive and/or keeping the files on the GPS unit and transferring the records from the GPS 

unit to the computer. 
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

4

• Although the Agency does not offer an electronic reporting option because of CBI-related 

security concerns at this time, would you be more inclined to submit CBI on diskette (CD 

or DVD) than on paper? 

N/A

• What benefits would electronic submission bring you in terms of burden reduction or 

greater efficiency in compiling the information? 

Submitting electronically would save time and reduce my cost of printer ink and paper.

(5) Burden and Costs

• Are the labor rates accurate?

No: USEPA is underestimating the number of 10 Dealers in Indian Country throughout 

the U.S. There are an estimated 300 Indian reservations that this ICR might be applicable. 

If a minimum of one quarter of the Indian country has one dealer, it would constitute an 

estimate of 75 dealers. For example, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes have 

five Dealers within the exterior boundaries of the reservation. 

No: USEPA is underestimating the number of 3,240 commercial applicator RUP 

recordkeeping responses. For example, if 3,240 responses are divided by 300 prospective 

reservations it would equal 10.8 responses.

This amount of RUP recordkeeping responses could be done by a single 

commercial/government applicator within the agency within one reservation. For 

instance a government applicator will apply Tordon (RUP) twice or more annually for 

noxious weed management on one project. 

• The Agency assumes there is no capital cost associated with this activity. Is that correct? 

• Bearing in mind that the burden and cost estimates include only burden hours and costs 

associated with the paperwork involved with this ICR (e.g., the ICR does not include 

estimated burden hours and costs for conducting studies), are the estimated burden hours 

and labor rates accurate (Duplicate question)? If you provide burden and cost estimates 

that are substantially different from EPA’s, please provide an explanation of how you 

arrived at your estimates.

I estimate a RUP transaction to take 5 minutes. It is common practice for Dealers to store 

a copy of the person’s license for whom the RUP was made available and it is kept with 

each transaction: this alone may take 3 minutes, followed by printing a receipt and 

assistance with loading or providing additional customer service.

• Are there other costs that should be accounted for that may have been missed?
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

5

Response 2.

Janice Cooney, Cooney Fertilizer, Inc. -

Questionnaire:

(1) Publicly Available Data

• Is the data that the Agency seeks available from any public source, or already collected 

by another office at EPA or by another agency?

•

• The private and commercial Nebraska licenses & expiration dates arc available on line, 

but the federal are not. Likewise the Nebraska dealers' names and addresses are available 

on line.

•

• If yes, where can you find the data? (Does your answer indicate a true duplication, or 

does the input indicate that certain data elements are available, but that they don’t meet 

our data needs very well?)

• The Nebraska data is available on line at Kelly Solutions. (Likewise on line we can see if 

an individual has a federal license, but their license number is not displayed. It would 

very helpful if the license numbers were available as many farmers do not carry their 

billfold in the field.)

(2) Frequency of Collection

• Can the Agency collect the information less frequently and still produce the same 

outcome?

The way I understand it, dealers and farmers only have to submit their info when 

renewing their licenses or when they change addresses. It is nice the dates are the same.

(3) Clarity of Instructions

The ICR is intended to require that respondents provide certain data so that the Agency can 

utilize them.

• Based on the instructions (regulations, PR Notices, etc.), is it clear what you are required 

to do and how to submit such data? If not, what suggestions do you have to clarify the 

instructions?
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

6

The initial certification process was easy as we each received a letter, but I'm not quite

sure how the renewal process will work. Will each private and commercial applicator

receive a letter when their license expires or will we be able to fax/e-mail our state

license to you to get “federally renewed"? The COL drivers have a fax number and an

address where they can send their new medical cards to stay in compliance.

• Do you understand that you are required to maintain records?

I understand that the same kind of RUP sales and application records that we have been

generating and keeping on file will be suffice for you also.

• Considering that there is no required submission format, is it difficult to submit

information in ways that are clear, logical and easy to complete?

I understand the only information you need sent to you is licensing info. As stated before, 

the initial licensing was quick and easy. I'm just wondering about relaying renewal info.

• Are there forms associated with this process? Do you use them? Are they clear, logical,

and easy to complete?

That's what I'm wondering- will growers, applicators, and dealers receive a renewal

form?

(4) Electronic Reporting and Record keeping

The Government Paperwork Elimination Act requires agencies make available to the public 

electronic reporting alternatives to paperMbased submissions by 2003, unless there is a 

strong reason for not doing so. One such reason is that, at the present time, the Agency is 

unable to ensure the secmity of CBI that might be transmitted over the Internet.

• What do you think about electronic alternatives to paper-based records and data submissions? 

Current electronic reporting alternatives include the use of web forms@/XML based submissions 

via the Agency's Internet site and magnetic mediabased submissions, e.g., diskette, CD-ROM, 

etc. Would you be interested in pursuing electronic reporting?

I would like to renew licenses and change addresses via the internet just like we pay taxes, file tax 

forms, do e-verify, etc.

• Are you keeping your records electronically? If yes, in what format?

Yes, we keep records of EPA licenses, sales, and ct1stom applications on the computer. We also 

keep hard copies of custom applications.
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

7

• Although the Agency does not offer an electronic reporting option because of CBI-related

security concerns at this time, would you be more inclined to submit CBI on diskette (CD or 

DVD) than on paper?

If we can't us.U:he internet I would probably use paper do to the time and cost. We are located in 

the country and it would take a trip to the post office to mail the diskette.

• What benefits would electronic submission bring you in terms of burden reduction or greater 

efficiency in compiling the information?

Reporting via the internet would save time and money. I don't understand your security concerns 

-people fi le tax returns, buy merchandize, bank, etc. on line all the time.

(5) Burden and Costs

• Are the labor rates accurate?

The rates seem a little on the high side, but I know the cost of employees is a Jot more than the 

amount on the paycheck.

• The Agency assumes there is no capital cost associated with this activity. Is that correct?

We use computers and a copy machine to generate and maintain records so there are costs other 

than labor.

• Bearing in mind that the burden and cost estimates include only burden hours and costs 

associated with the paperwork involved with this ICR (e.g., the ICR does not include estimated 

burden hours and costs for conducting studies), are the estimated burden hours and labor rates 

accurate? If you provide burden and cost estimates that are substantially different from EPA's, 

please provide an explanation of how you arrived at your estimates.

In general you had estimated most things fairly well. However, I feel Table 3 doesn't reflect the 

time we spend on recording RUP applications. Keep in mind, we are just a small, family-owned 

business, but this year we made approx. 400 RUP applications. We figure it takes at least 15 

minutes/application to complete a record- formulating, mapping, recording weather conditions, 

naming target pests, recording applicator and machine info, etc. When the application is complete 

the actual quantities must be entered in the computer and if any product is left over it must be 

stated where it went.

• Are there other costs that should be accounted for that may have been missed?

None that come to mind
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

8

Response 3.

Laurie Gordon, Oregon Department of Agriculture – “Authorized” Agency

Questionnaire

(1) Publicly Available Data

• Is the data that the Agency seeks available from any public source, or already collected by 

another office at EPA or by another agency?

* Pesticide Dealers, pesticide applicators, and pesticide application businesses and

holding a current, valid license can be looked up on the Oregon Department of

Agriculture’s (ODA) website under license search. License categories can also be

searched from the website as well.

http://oda.state.or.us/dbs/licenses/search.lasso?&division=pest

* An applicators training history for the current certification period can be viewed

online with the person’s pesticide applicator license number.

* Courses can be searched online, but the course title does not necessarily reflect the

course content. That information can is available by contacting the ODA licensing

staff.

* Recordkeeping requirements can be found online. Results of recordkeeping

inspections can be made as a Public Records Request to the ODA Pesticides

Program.

* How to register a pesticide and registered pesticide(s) (current, inactive, 25b

products) can be found on the ODA website.

http://www.oregon.gov/ODA/programs/Pesticides/PesticideProductInformation/Pages/HowtoRegiste

r.aspx

http://oda.state.or.us/dbs/pest_productsL2K/search.lasso

If yes, where can you find the data? (Does your answer indicate a true duplication, or does the 

input indicate that certain data elements are available, but that they don’t meet our data needs 

very well?)

See web links above. Website is currently undergoing changes.

* Electronic labels for some products are available via the website.
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

9

* Specific data elements for 24c SLN and section 18 requests are not online, but

could be requested through the Public Records Request process unless some or all of

the information is Confidential Business Information (CBI).

(2) Frequency of Collection

• Can the Agency collect the information less frequently and still produce the same outcome?

* Possibly depending on the information is being used for and whether it is being 

collected for funding purposes.

* EPA Region 10 usually comes down once a year for programs reviews and ODA

staff goes to EPA Region 10 each year to meet with EPA staff.

* ODA conducts routine and complaint driven Dealer, Applicator, and

Recordkeeping inspections. That information can be received via the records 

request. It is also summarized to EPA in the CPARD report and Year End Reports

to EPA.

(3) Clarity of Instructions

The ICR is intended to require that respondents provide certain data so that the Agency can

utilize them.

• Based on the instructions (regulations, PR Notices, etc.), is it clear what you are required to do 

and how to submit such data? If not, what suggestions do you have to clarify the instructions?

* Usually. This report could have had better instructions as to the specific

information being sought.

• Do you understand that you are required to maintain records?

* Yes.

• Considering that there is no required submission format, is it difficult to submit information in 

ways that are clear, logical and easy to complete?

* Sometimes, however it seems it would be more difficult for the person trying to

compile or analyze the data. Having a specific submission format helps to reduce

possible errors or not supplying the information requested.

• Are there forms associated with this process? Do you use them? Are they clear, logical, and 

easy to complete?

* Investigative staff uses a variety of forms for inspections, sampling, sample

tracking, Attestations, Detainment, and Chain of Custody, etc.
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

10

* People requesting an Experimental Use Permit must complete a request form and

supply specific information.

* People requesting continuing education credits for a course must submit a request

form and specific information about the course.

(4) Electronic Reporting and Record keeping

The Government Paperwork Elimination Act requires agencies make available to the public

electronic reporting alternatives to paper-based submissions by 2003, unless there is a strong

reason for not doing so. One such reason is that, at the present time, the Agency is unable to

ensure the security of CBI that might be transmitted over the Internet.

• What do you think about electronic alternatives to paper-based records and data submissions? 

Current electronic reporting alternatives include the use of web

forms@/XML based submissions via the Agency’s Internet site and magnetic mediabased

submissions, e.g., diskette, CD-ROM, etc. Would you be interested in pursuing electronic 

reporting?

* Yes.

• Are you keeping your records electronically? If yes, in what format?

* Yes. Filemaker- recertification courses and investigations, L2k (licensing module).

• Although the Agency does not offer an electronic reporting option because of CBI-related

security concerns at this time, would you be more inclined to submit CBI on diskette (CD or 

DVD) than on paper?

* It depends on the information. Sending a CD would require an electronic version

being backed up on the server where paper would not.

• What benefits would electronic submission bring you in terms of burden reduction or greater 

efficiency in compiling the information?

* Electronic submissions is usually less time consuming than handwritten

submissions. Since most records are already kept electronically, being able to

import or export those to an electronic file for submission can be faster and more

efficient.

(5) Burden and Costs

• Are the labor rates accurate?

*Unknown.
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

11

• The Agency assumes there is no capital cost associated with this activity. Is that correct?

* Unknown.

• Bearing in mind that the burden and cost estimates include only burden hours and costs

associated with the paperwork involved with this ICR (e.g., the ICR does not include estimated 

burden hours and costs for conducting studies), are the estimated burden hours and labor rates 

accurate? If you provide burden and cost estimates that are substantially different from EPA’s, 

please provide an explanation of how you arrived at your estimates.

• Are there other costs that should be accounted for that may have been missed?

* Due to internal security or restricted access to certain databases, it sometimes

requires having the IT or other program area staff to run reports for Pesticides 

Program staff to be able to submit.
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

12

Response 4. Andrew Beck, Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture - Authorized Agency

Questionnaire

(1) Publicly Available Data

• Is the data that the Agency seeks available from any public source, or already collected 

by another office at EPA or by another agency? No

• If yes, where can you find the data? (Does your answer indicate a true duplication, or 

does the input indicate that certain data elements are available, but that they don=t meet 

our data needs very well?)

(2) Frequency of Collection 

• Can the Agency collect the information less frequently and still produce the same 

outcome? 

Yes, once per year, preferably with the year-end report.

(3) Clarity of Instructions 

The ICR is intended to require that respondents provide certain data so that the Agency can 

utilize them. 

Based on the instructions (regulations, PR Notices, etc.), is it clear what you are required 

to do and how to submit such data? If not, what suggestions do you have to clarify the 

instructions? On the 5700 form, the required “total number of applicators re-certified” is 

cumbersome to calculate. We suggest removing this requirement.

We have 27 categories of licensing, Maine has approximately 41. If you were to 

compare our 5700 data under the column labeled agriculture plant, we had 642 “total 

applicators,” to Maine’s data, are you really getting an accurate comparison? Due to 

category overlap, how many times is one applicator counted and how does that impact 

data reported from state to state?

• Do you understand that you are required to maintain records?

Yes

• Considering that there is no required submission format, is it difficult to submit 

information in ways that are clear, logical and easy to complete?

We consider CPARD and the 5700 the required format. The forms are fairly clear, some 

information is confusing, such as the “total number of applicators re-certified.”
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

13

• Are there forms associated with this process? Do you use them? Are they clear, logical, 

and easy to complete?

What is the purpose of gathering the information and how is it being used?

(4) Electronic Reporting and Record keeping 

The Government Paperwork Elimination Act requires agencies make available to the public 

electronic reporting alternatives to paper-based submissions by 2003, unless there is a strong 

reason for not doing so. One such reason is that, at the present time, the Agency is unable to 

ensure the security of CBI that might be transmitted over the Internet.

• What do you think about electronic alternatives to paper-based records and data 

submissions? Current electronic reporting alternatives include the use of web 

forms@/XML based submissions via the Agency’s Internet site and magnetic mediabased submissions, e.g., diskette, CD-ROM, etc. Would you be interested in pursuing 

electronic reporting? We prefer electronic filing. Filling out the form whether paper or 

electronic is not the issue. Having a clear and concise reporting form is the most 

important.

• Are you keeping your records electronically? If yes, in what format?

Yes and no. Our records are produced in part by a web-based program, PaPlants (also 

known as USA Plants), saved in word and excel documents.

• Although the Agency does not offer an electronic reporting option because of CBI-related 

security concerns at this time, would you be more inclined to submit CBI on diskette (CD 

or DVD) than on paper? Our reports are currently submitted via email. Our report does 

not contain CBI information.

• What benefits would electronic submission bring you in terms of burden reduction or 

greater efficiency in compiling the information? 

None

(5) Burden and Costs

• Are the labor rates accurate? Yes

• The Agency assumes there is no capital cost associated with this activity. Is that correct? 

 Yes

• Bearing in mind that the burden and cost estimates include only burden hours and costs 

associated with the paperwork involved with this ICR (e.g., the ICR does not include 

estimated burden hours and costs for conducting studies), are the estimated burden hours 

and labor rates accurate? If you provide burden and cost estimates that are substantially 
EPA ICR No. 0155.12 OMB Control No. 2070-0029

14

different from EPA’s, please provide an explanation of how you arrived at your 

estimates.

Below are our suggested adjustments to table 1. 

Table 1. Average Annual Respondent Burden and Cost Estimates to 

Authorized Agencies for Annual Reports on Certification and 

Training Programs

Collection Activities

Annual Burden Hours 

Per Respondent TOTALS

Tech.

$59.17/hr

Clerical

$40.81/hr

Hour

s

Cost

$

Read/hear rule or any 

collection instrument 

instruction (incl. compliance 

determination)

10.25 0 0.25 14.79 

Create information 5 0 5

 

295.85 

Gather information 85 0 5 295.85 

Process, compile, review info 

for accuracy 1 0 1 59.17 

Complete written forms or 

other instruments 0.52 0.5 1

 

49.99 

Record, disclose, display, or 

report the information 20 45 65 3,019.85 

Store, file, or maintain the 

information 0 0.1 0.1 4.08 

TOTAL 31.75 45.6 77.3

5

3,739.58

TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN: 77.35 hrs/respondent x 57 respondents = 

4,409 hrs.

TOTAL ANNUAL COST: $3,739.58/respondent x 57 respondents = 

$213,156.06

NAICS codes

State government: 999200

Technical, Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations:

19-0000

Clerical, Office and Administrative Support Occupations: 

43-0000

• Are there other costs that should be accounted for that may have been missed?

The program developed to help retrieve the requested data, PaPlants (also known as USA 

Plants) incurred a cost of $20,000