CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 1 of 13 January 13, 2010

ICR SUPPORTING STATEMENT

1. Identification of the Information Collection

1(a) Title of the Information Collection

Chesapeake Registry (previously titled Chesapeake Action Plan/Activity Integration Plan 

(CAP/AIP)) Reporting System (EPA ICR Number 2365.02, OMB Control Number 2003-

0001)

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

In 2008, EPA’s Region 3 Chesapeake Bay Program Office (CBPO) and its partners 

developed the Chesapeake Action Plan (CAP) to strengthen and expand partnerships in the 

watershed, enhance coordination of restoration activities, and increase the collective 

accountability for protecting the Chesapeake Bay. The primary mechanism for input into the 

CAP is the Web-based Chesapeake Registry (previously called Chesapeake Action 

Plan/Activity Integration Plan (CAP/AIP)) reporting system. Through the Chesapeake 

Registry reporting system, partner and stakeholder organizations provide data about the 

activities in which they are engaged to protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay and its 

watershed. The Chesapeake Registry was developed in response to recommendations by the 

Government Accountability Office and directives of the Explanatory Statement of the FY 

2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161). CBPO conducted its first activity data 

call in 2008 that included 10 federal, 7 state, and 2 local partners and stakeholders. 

The ICR supports legislative mandate (P.L. 110-161) and more recently, Executive Order 

(EO) 13508, signed by President Barack Obama on May 12, 2009. Section 203(d) of the EO 

directs EPA to identify the “mechanisms that will ensure that governmental and other 

activities, including data collection and distribution, are coordinated and effective, relying on 

existing mechanisms where appropriate. Section 204 further directs that “Federal actions to 

protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay are closely coordinated with actions by State and 

local agencies in the watershed and the resources, authorities, and expertise of Federal, State, 

and local agencies are used as efficiently as possible.” The Chesapeake Registry provides the 

tool to coordinate activities among Bay partners and stakeholders, both federal and nonfederal, in support of these mandates.

The Web-based application reporting system is available at http://cap.chesapeakebay.net. 

The Chesapeake Registry reporting system includes detailed information about the activities 

and funding conducted by participating organizations. The participants provide project 

information on the nature of the activity, responsible organization, organizational point-of 

contact, resource levels, geographic location, and major milestones on progress towards 

Chesapeake Bay protection and restoration efforts. Funds reported in the Chesapeake 

Registry are linked to an organization’s own resource base so that data associated with a set 

of funds is entered only by the originator of the funding. The information is organized by 

programmatic goal and topic area, which aligns activities to the CAP strategic framework and 

helps to provide an accurate depiction of restoration activities, progress, and results as a 

whole. The information collection, as envisioned, will be conducted annually.

Each reporting organization is assigned a user ID and password. Security measures have 

been established to protect data that have been entered, including maintaining the data on a 

secure server on a secure network, and confirming the data with each reporting organization.

Participants in the information collection are able to search the Chesapeake Registry database 
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 2 of 13 January 13, 2010

and view standard reports. Partners will use the enhanced and expanded data to update 

performance-management dashboards that summarize and synthesize information so the 

program partners can understand, at a glance, the progress being made in key program areas. 

The dashboards include measures of progress, information about the resources CBP partners

and stakeholders have dedicated to their efforts described, and strategic analyses of what 

needs to be done to improve implementation. In addition, CBPO anticipates that some of the 

partners will use the Chesapeake Registry reporting system as a tool for their own 

management and planning efforts.

Pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.13(d) EPA requested a waiver of the Federal Register requirement 

for an emergency ICR and received approval from the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). Upon OMB approval (OMB Control No. 2003-0001), EPA solicited comments in 

the Federal Register for a renewal of the approved ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d) and 

received no comments. The ICR is scheduled to expire on February 28, 2010. Other than 

changing the name of the reporting system the consultation and burden estimates remain the 

same. CBPO estimates the total annual respondent cost and burden to be $63,041.32 (as of 

January 13, 2010). The annual federal cost to administer this information collection is 

estimated to be $36,008.00 (as of January 13, 2010), which results in a total annual cost of 

$99.049.32.

2. Need for and use of the Collection

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

Collecting information from more than 10 non-federal organizations is needed to effectively 

coordinate project activities and funding among partners and stakeholders in the Chesapeake 

Bay watershed, and as a means to provide transparency and accountability to the public. 

Specifically, in a report entitled, Chesapeake Bay Program: Improved Strategies are Needed 

to Better Assess, Report and Manage Restoration Progress, dated October 2005, the U.S. 

Government Accountability Office (GAO) recommended that CBPO:

 complete efforts to develop and implement an integrated assessment approach;

 revise its reporting approach to improve effectiveness and credibility; and

 develop a comprehensive, coordinated implementation strategy that takes into account 

available resources.

In the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-161), Congress directed EPA to:

 immediately implement all of the recommendations of the 2005 GAO Report;

 submit a report to Congress and to GAO, with supporting evidence, that demonstrates the 

GAO recommendations have been implemented; and

 develop a Chesapeake Action Plan for the remaining years of the Chesapeake 2000 

agreement.

Specifically, Congress stated that the Chesapeake Bay Program must: (1) clearly articulate 

realistic targets the Chesapeake Bay Program expects to achieve in each of the remaining 

years; (2) describe the actual activities the Chesapeake Bay Program will implement in each 

year to achieve these annual targets; (3) identify the amount and source of funding that will 

be used to accomplish each of these activities; and, (4) describe the process the Chesapeake 

Bay Program will use to track and measure the progress of these actions. 
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 3 of 13 January 13, 2010

Consistent with GAO’s recommendations and the Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 

110- 161) of 2008, CBPO and its partners developed the Chesapeake Action Plan (CAP) to 

strengthen and expand partnerships in the watershed, enhance coordination of restoration 

activities, and increase the collective accountability for protecting the Chesapeake Bay. The 

primary mechanism for input into the CAP is the Web-based Chesapeake Registry 

(previously called Chesapeake Action Plan/Activity Integration Plan (CAP/AIP)) reporting 

system. The Chesapeake Registry reporting system provides the tools necessary to support a 

management system that more closely aligns implementation responsibilities with the unique 

capabilities and missions of the CBP partners. 

This collection of information is pursuant to Section 117 of the Clean Water Act, the purpose 

of which is to expand and strengthen cooperative efforts to restore and protect the 

Chesapeake Bay. 

This information collection also is necessary to address the priorities outlined in Presidential 

Executive Order (E.O.) 13508 dated May 12, 2009, titled “Chesapeake Bay Protection and 

Restoration.” The E.O. establishes a new framework for federal leadership, planning, and 

accountability, through a Federal Leadership Committee, chaired by the Administrator of 

EPA. The Committee is required to, among other things, coordinate data information 

mechanisms among federal, state, local, and private partners. Specific sections of the 

Executive Order include:

 Section 203(d): Identify the “mechanisms that will ensure that governmental and other 

activities, including data collection and distribution, are coordinated and effective, 

relying on existing mechanisms where appropriate; and

 Section 204: Ensure that “Federal actions to protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay are 

closely coordinated with actions by State and local agencies in the watershed and the 

resources, authorities, and expertise of Federal, State, and local agencies are used as 

efficiently as possible.” The Chesapeake Registry has been identified as an existing data 

collection mechanism that can aid in improving coordination.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The primary users of the data are EPA and the EPA partners. EPA will use the information 

collection to identify and catalogue CBPO partners’ and stakeholders’ resources and actions

that are associated with efforts to protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay. CBPO partners 

and stakeholders will be able to view each other’s activities across the watershed with details 

such as where the activity is occurring, how much funding the activity has received, and 

which partners are involved. With improved visibility of Bay-wide activities and 

comprehensive progress reporting, the Chesapeake Registry will help EPA to promote 

enhanced coordination among the CBPO partnership and improve their progress in protecting 

and restoring the Bay. 

EPA and its partners will use the Chesapeake Registry reporting system to summarize and 

synthesize information so the program partners can understand, at a glance, the progress 

being made in key program areas. Publically available reports will include measures of 

progress, information about the resources invested, and strategic analyses of actions 

necessary to improve implementation. In addition, CBPO anticipates that some of the 

partners will use the Chesapeake Registry reporting system as tool for their own management 

and planning efforts. Bay restoration and protection efforts will be made transparent and 

maintained in a centralized database to enable the partnership to identify potential activity

overlap and gaps. This will reduce duplication of effort and better target resources. As a 
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 4 of 13 January 13, 2010

whole, the CAP represents an important enhancement to the way the CBP partnership will 

operate.

3. Non duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

3(a) Non duplication

EPA conducted research into other EPA programs and other federal agency programs, and

state agency/department or non-government organizations to determine whether any 

organization had information pertinent to the Chesapeake Registry. Within EPA, it was 

confirmed that only the Chesapeake Bay Program Office had the pertinent information. 

Other Federal agencies investigated include the habitat and restoration agencies within the 

U.S. Departments of Interior and Commerce. EPA confirmed that none of these agencies 

maintains or requests information duplicative of the information entered into the Chesapeake 

Registry reporting system. Only one non-profit organization, Defenders of Wildlife, was 

identified for possible duplicative information, specifically www.conservationregistry.org, 

which is funded through Department of Interior resources. Research concluded that the 

newly developed conservation registry is presently focused on the Pacific Northwest, came 

online after Chesapeake Registry and is uncertain of a sustainable funding base. Hence, no 

information similar to the Chesapeake Registry reporting system was identified.

Within the Chesapeake Bay watershed states, only the State of Maryland was identified for 

possible duplication, specifically, www.baystat.maryland.gov. However, Maryland’s 

information was not Bay-wide; it was specific to Maryland and most of the information

originates from EPA project activity funds. Hence, no information similar to the information 

requested for the Chesapeake Registry reporting system was identified in the state agencies. 

Pursuant to this research, EPA concluded that activity and funding information required in 

the Chesapeake Registry is specific and unique to the Chesapeake Bay's goals of protection 

and habitat restoration. The Chesapeake Registry is the only reporting system used to 

annually collect comprehensive information about funding levels, which allows EPA to align

funding and activities to specific strategic target areas identified in the Chesapeake Action 

Plan.

3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR submission to OMB

Pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.13(d) EPA requested a waiver of the Federal Register requirement 

for an emergency ICR and received approval from the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). Upon OMB approval (OMB Control No. 2003-0001), EPA solicited comments in 

the Federal Register for a renewal of the approved ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d) and 

received no comments. The ICR is scheduled to expire on February 28, 2010. Other than 

changing the name of the reporting system the consultation and burden estimates remain the 

same.

3(c) Consultations

CBPO invited nine non-federal organizations to participate in consultation to estimate their 

annual cost and burden for using the Chesapeake Registry reporting system. The 

consultations are in keeping with ICR guidance to consult with no-more than nine non-federal

organizations. Organizations that did not participate in the 2008 data call were provided a 

questionnaire for new users prior to phone consultations. Those organizations that 

participated in the 2008 data call were provided a questionnaire designed for previous users 
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 5 of 13 January 13, 2010

prior to phone consultations with respondents. Respondents were asked to estimate burdens

for labor costs associated with reporting activities, capital/startup costs, and operations and 

maintenance costs. Table 1 provides a list of organizations asked to participate in 

consultations. Not all chose to participate.

Table 1. Consultation Participants by Type of Organization

Name Phone Number Affiliation

State and Local Government

Susan Block (804) 371-7486 VA Dept. of Conservation and Rec.

Diane Davis (202) 741-0847 District of Columbia

Penny Gross (703) 354-8419 Fairfax County Council

Brenton McCloskey (410) 260-8722 State of Maryland

Patricia Buckley (717) 772-1675 Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection

Private / Non-Government Organizations

Amanda Bassow (202) 595-2476 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

Dr. Jana Davis (410) 974-2941, ext. 101 Chesapeake Bay Trust

Bydon Lidle (717) 238-0425, ext. 317 Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC)

Kirk Mantay (410) 224-6620 Ducks Unlimited

As of January 13, 2010, CBPO has received completed questionnaires from six previous 

users and no new users. CBPO conducted several phone interviews with representatives of 

the participating respondents to clarify responses to the questionnaires.

Federal consultations are not required. However, due to CBP’s unique partnership with 

federal partners, CBPO consulted and estimated the federal partners’ annual burden and cost 

for using the Chesapeake Registry reporting system. See Table 2 below for federal 

consultations. CBP based the estimate on EPA’s experience because it has the most data 

reporting into the Chesapeake Registry and it was the only federal agency to respond. One 

federal respondent stated that they had no experience with the Chesapeake Registry and could 

not provide estimates. 

Table 2. Federal Consultation Participants

Name Phone Number Affiliation

Lori Mackey (410) 267-5715 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Brian Burch (202) 566-0120 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Bob Campbell (410) 267-5747 National Park Service

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

The frequency of this information collection coincides with the federal and state budgetary 

processes. Annual submissions of information are required to accurately align funding 

resources to ongoing restoration and protection activities and to track progress against 

established performance measures. Less frequent reporting would preclude CBPO from 

using the information collection to effectively evaluate and publish the results of program 

activities.
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 6 of 13 January 13, 2010

3(e) General Guidelines

This information collection is consistent with all of OMB’s general guidelines.

 Respondents are asked to report annually;

 Respondents are provided more than 30 days to respond to the data call;

 Respondents are not required to submit more than one copy of original documents;

 This information collection does not use a statistical survey;

 Respondents do not receive a pledge of confidentiality in regard to the information 

collection. No information is confidential or personal; all is considered public.

 Respondents are not asked to submit proprietary or confidential information.

3(f) Confidentiality

Information in the Chesapeake Registry reporting system is not of a confidential nature. The 

Chesapeake Registry is collecting project and funding information with point of contact name 

and all submittals are voluntary.

3(g) Sensitive Questions

None of the requested information is considered to be of a sensitive nature.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes

The respondents for this ICR include the partners and stakeholders of the Chesapeake Bay 

Program, which includes federal, state and local agencies (NAICS 924110 and 924120), nongovernmental organizations (NAICS 813312), and others.. 

4(b) Information Requested

Information from the CAP partners is collected through the web-based Chesapeake Registry 

reporting system. 

(i) Data items, including record keeping requirements

CAP partners provide detailed information about the activities they undertake to restore and 

protect the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed. Once logged in to the Chesapeake Registry 

reporting system, the partners enter data about their activities which are grouped by 

partnership goals and topic areas. Each data item is designated as a reporting item. CBPO 

does not impose additional recordkeeping requirements on any respondent. States and other 

entities may impose their own recordkeeping that is separate from Chesapeake Registry. 

Specific data items entered into the AIP electronic record about each activity include: 

 Activity description;

 Lead organization / Agency;

 Point of contact;

 Source of funding;
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 7 of 13 January 13, 2010

 Status of funding;

 Activity phase;

 Hard dollars allocated to activity;

 Number of FTEs allocated to activity;

 Year of funding;

 Pertinent geography; and

 Pertinent C2K commitment.

Additionally, users have the option of entering other activity-related information, including 

the following:

 Collaborating organization;

 Performance measures/units; and

 Milestones.

(ii) Respondent Activities

CBP partners and stakeholders conduct the following activities to assemble, submit, and store 

the data items identified above. These activities reflect the items of burden mandated by the 

1995 Paperwork Reduction Act. 

Table 3. List of Respondent Activities 

Activity

Record 

Keeping Reporting CBP1

Preparing to Use the System. Detailed instructions for 

entering data are provided in hard copy format and online 

and through training workshops. Gathering and reviewing 

the data to be entered, and organizing it by CBP goal is a

typical activity as part of common business practices. 

X X

Obtaining Access. No special technology or systems are 

required for this collection as the Chesapeake Registry 

reporting system is Web-based. Internet access is a standard 

business tool. EPA establishes user IDs and passwords for 

each reporting organization.

X X

Entering Records. CAP partners will review pre-populated 

system elements, and review data entered by other partners to 

ensure no duplicative data. Records about new activities will 

be entered as appropriate.

X

Reviewing and Verifying Records. Reviewing and verifying 

the accuracy of the data entered into the system is typical of 

standard business practice. 

X X

Feedback and Evaluation. Users of the Chesapeake Registry 

reporting system are encouraged to provide feedback on the 

system. 

X

5. The Information Collected–Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and 

Information Management

5(a) Agency Activities 

Activities undertaken by CBPO on an annual basis for this information collection include:

 

1 Common Business Practice
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 8 of 13 January 13, 2010

 Update reporting guidance and system instructions;

 Notify system users of data call;

 Conduct training;

 Update Web site;

 Solicit and compile feedback from users; and

 Respond to user comments and questions.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

The Chesapeake Bay Program Office will use the Web-based Chesapeake Registry reporting 

system available at: http://cap.chesapeakebay.net to collect data from the CAP partners. 

Each reporting organization will be assigned a user ID and password. Security measures 

have been established to protect data that have been entered, including maintaining the data 

on a secure server on a secure network, confirming the data with each reporting organization, 

and making only summarized information available to the public. 

In preparation for the annual data call, EPA/CBPO will provide detailed guidance about the 

database to the CBP partners and stakeholders (e.g., organize training/workshops, facilitate 

hands-on demonstrations as necessary). CBPO will also verify the accuracy of the data 

entered into the system during and after the data call. Annual updating by the CBP partners

and stakeholders will be streamlined in light of the automated nature of compiling the 

information. To improve the efficiency of entering data, a cloning button is available during 

data entry that allows users to make a copy of the data for the next fiscal year, i.e., clone the 

2008 data to create and modify a record for 2009.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

EPA expects that small entities such as non-profit organizations (e.g., National Fish and 

Wildlife Association), local environmental community associations (e.g., River Keeper 

Organizations), and local governments (e.g., Fairfax County) will participate in the

Chesapeake Registry. EPA has designed its information collections to minimize respondent 

burden while obtaining sufficient and accurate information. For example, EPA has tailored 

the Chesapeake Registry system so that it requests only the minimum information needed to 

establish contact with small entities. Providing information to the AIP is not a regulatory 

requirement and is voluntary on the part of participants. EPA has established several 

methods for participating in the Chesapeake Registry and is fully prepared to help small 

entities (e.g., training, workshops, conference calls, hands-on assistance, etc.). 

5(d) Collection Schedule

The information collection is based on an annual collection of data on the activities of the 

CBP partners and stakeholders. A typical annual schedule is as follows:

Table 4. Collection Schedule 

DATE ACTIVITY 

September/October Outreach to Bay-wide Partnership

Conduct workshops / feedback sessions 

November/December Data call sent to CAP partners 

January Data entry complete 

February Cross-functional QA and analysis by CBPO
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 9 of 13 January 13, 2010

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

The consultations to determine the annual cost and burden estimates for using the Chesapeake 

Registry reporting system are ongoing and incomplete. EPA will complete the consultations 

and provide a final estimate for the burden and cost of the collection before submitting the 

renewal ICR.

6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

Burden hour estimates are based on the responses to the consultation questionnaires and 

follow-up discussions where needed with respondents. The respondents include state and 

local government agencies and non-governmental organizations identified in Section 3(c). 

Additionally, federal burden is included on using the database by consulting with EPA, a 

large user of the system as identified in Section 3(c). Annual estimates for each type of 

respondent are provided in table 5.

Table 5. Annual Burden Estimate Per Response

Respondent Type Annual Burden Per Response

State and Local Government Agencies 64.8 hours

Non-governmental Organizations 11.5 hours

Federal Partner Agencies 9 hours

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

(i) Estimating Labor Costs

Table 6 presents the annual respondent burden/cost estimate for state and local government 

respondents. Labor rates were derived from information published by the Bureau of Labor 

and Statistics and include a benefits multiplier of 1.6. Labor rates were also increased by 17 

percent to account for overhead. For each labor category, the labor rate is the average of a 

calculated rate for state employees and a calculated rate for local government agency staff. 

Table 6. Annual Burden/Cost Estimate Per Response for State and Local Government Agencies

Information 

Collect 

Activity

Hours Per Response/ Year* Labor 

Cost Per 

Response/ 

Year

Capital 

or 

Startup 

Costs Per 

Response/ 

Year

O&M 

Cost Per 

Response/ 

Year

Total Hours and 

Costs Per 

Response

Managerial 

($67.18/

hour)

Technical 

($49.60/

hour)

Clerical 

($31.68/

hour)

Total 

Hours/ 

Year

Total 

Costs/ 

Year

Preparing to 

Use the 

System

4.7 18.0 9.7 $1,512.55 $0.00 $0.00 32.3 $1,512.55

Obtaining 

Access 0.0 0.3 0.5 $32.37 $0.00 $0.00 0.8 $32.37

Entering 

Records 3.7 12.0 6.7 $1,052.73 $0.00 $0.00 22.3 $1,052.73

Reviewing 

and 

Verifying

Records

1.3 2.0 2.7 $273.25 $0.00 $0.00 6.0 $273.25

Feedback 

and 

Evaluation

0.0 0.0 1.0 $31.68 $0.00 $0.00 1.0 $31.68
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 10 of 13 January 13, 2010

Information 

Collect 

Activity

Hours Per Response/ Year* Labor 

Cost Per 

Response/ 

Year

Capital 

or 

Startup 

Costs Per 

Response/ 

Year

O&M 

Cost Per 

Response/ 

Year

Total Hours and 

Costs Per 

Response

Managerial 

($67.18/

hour)

Technical 

($49.60/

hour)

Clerical 

($31.68/

hour)

Total 

Hours/ 

Year

Total 

Costs/ 

Year

Other 

Activities 0.0 0.0 2.3 $73.92 $0.00 $0.00 2.3 $73.92

Total 9.7 32.3 22.8 $2,976.50 $0.00 $0.00 64.8 $2,976.50

*Source: State agencies, http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/naics4_999200.htm

Local government agencies, http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/naics4_999300.htm

Table 7 presents the annual respondent burden/cost estimate for non-governmental 

organizations. Labor rates were derived from information published by the Bureau of Labor 

and Statistics and include a benefits multiplier of 1.6. Labor rates were also increased by 17 

percent to account for overhead.

Table 7. Annual Burden/Cost Estimate Per Response for Non-governmental Organizations

Information 

Collect 

Activity

Hours Per Response/ Year*

Labor 

Cost Per 

Response/ 

Year

Capital 

or 

Startup 

Costs Per 

Response/ 

Year

O&M 

Cost Per 

Response/ 

Year

Total Hours and 

Costs Per 

Response

Managerial 

($67.18/

hour)

Technical 

($49.60/

hour)

Clerical 

($31.68/

hour)

Total 

Hours/ 

Year

Total 

Costs/ 

Year

Preparing to 

Use the 

System

4.0 0.0 0.0 $272.68 $0.00 $0.00 4.0 $272.68

Obtaining 

Access 1.0 0.0 0.0 $68.17 $0.00 $0.00 1.0 $68.17

Entering 

Records 4.0 0.0 0.0 $272.68 $0.00 $0.00 4.0 $272.68

Reviewing 

and Verifying 

Records

1.5 0.0 0.0 $102.26 $0.00 $0.00 1.5 $102.26

Feedback and 

Evaluation 1.0 0.0 0.0 $68.17 $0.00 $0.00 1.0 $68.17

Other 

Activities 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.0 $0.00

Total 11.5 0.0 0.0 $783.96 $0.00 $0.00 11.5 $783.96

*Source: http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/

Table 8 presents the annual respondent burden/cost estimate for federal respondents. The 

federal labor rates were derived from information published by the Bureau of Labor and 

Statistics and include a benefits multiplier of 1.6. 
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 11 of 13 January 13, 2010

Table 8. Annual Burden/Cost Estimate Per Response for Federal Agencies

Information 

Collect Activity

Hours Per 

Response/ Year Labor 

Cost Per 

Response/

Year

Capital or 

Startup 

Costs Per 

Response/

Year

O&M 

Cost Per 

Response/

Year

Total Hours and Costs

Per Response

GS14 GS13 Total 

Hours/

Year

Total 

Costs/

Year

($72.51/ 

hour)

($61.36/

hour)

Preparing to Use 

the System 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00

Obtaining Access 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00

Entering Records 6 2 $527.11 $0.00 $0.00 8 $527.11

Reviewing and 

Verifying Records 1 1 $103.19 $0.00 $0.00 2 $103.19

Feedback and 

Evaluation 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00

Other Activities 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00

Total 7.0 2.0 $630.30 $0.00 $0.00 9.0 $630.30

*Source: http://www.opm.gov/oca/09tables/html/gs_h.asp (step 5); rates include a benefits multiplier of 1.6

(ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs

Respondents will not incur capital or operations and maintenance costs for this information 

collection.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

As shown in Table 9, the estimated annual cost to the federal government for administering 

this collection of information is $36,008.00.

Table 9. Total Annual Federal Administrative Burden/Cost Estimate

Information Collect 

Activity

Hours / Year*

Labor 

Cost/

Year

O&M 

Cost/

Year

Total Hours and Costs

GS14 GS13 GS12 Total 

Hours/

Year

Total 

Costs/

Year

$72.51/

hour

$61.36/

hour

$51.87/

hour

Update Reporting 

Guidance and 

System Instructions

24 0 0 $1,740.29 $0.00 24 $1,740.29

Notify System Users 

of Data Call 24 0 0 $1,740.29 $0.00 24 $1,740.29

Conduct Training 40 0 0 $2,900.48 $0.00 40 $2,900.48

Update Web Site 0 12 16 $1,566.27 $0.00 28 $1,566.27

Solicit and Compile 

Feedback from 

Users

16 0 0 $1,160.19 $0.00 16 $1,160.19

Respond to User 

Comments and 

Questions

40 0 0 $2,900.48 $0.00 40 $2,900.48

Contractor support $24,000.00 $24,000.00

Total 

Administrative 

Burden

144 12 16 $12,008.00 $24,000.00 172 $36,008.00

*Source: http://www.opm.gov/oca/09tables/html/gs_h.asp (step 5); rates include a benefits multiplier of 1.6
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 12 of 13 January 13, 2010

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

CBPO estimates that 50 non-federal organizations and 10 federal agencies are likely to 

participate in the annual data call for the Chesapeake Registry. CBPO’s intent is to increase 

the number of participants over time to better coordinate activities and resources in keeping 

with E.O. 13508. The total burden and costs are summarized in Table 10.

Table 10. Annual Burden Estimate*

Respondent Type

Hours Per 

Response

Cost Per 

Response

Number of 

Responses

Per Year Total Annual Cost

State and Local Government 

Agencies 

64.8 $2,976.50 8 $23,812.00

Non-governmental 

Organizations

11.5 $783.96 42 $32,926.32

Federal Agencies 9 $630.30 10 $6,303.00

Total Varies Varies 60 $63,041.32

*Note: Respondents will not incur capital or operations and maintenance costs for this information collection

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

As of January 13, 2010, the non Federal Government total annual burden is 1,001 hours and 

the total annual cost is estimated to be $56,738.32. This is identical to the estimate contained 

in the emergency ICR dated August 6, 2009. The bottom line burden hours and costs for each 

respondent group, federal administrative hours, and operations and maintenance costs are 

listed in Table 11.

Table 11. Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs

Line Item

Hours Per 

Response

Cost Per 

Response

Number of 

Responses 

Per Year Total Cost

State and Local Government 

Agency Responses

64.8 $2,976.50 8 $23,812.00

Non-governmental Organization 

Responses

11.5 $783.96 42 $32,926.32

Federal Agency Responses 9 $630.30 10 $6,303.00

Total Respondent Cost Varies Varies 60 $63,041.32

Federal Administrative Hours 2.87 $200.13 60 $12,008.00

Federal Operations and 

Maintenance (Contractor 

Support)

$24,000.00

Total 60 $99,049.32

(iii) Variations in the Annual Bottom Line

CBPO does not anticipate significant variations in the annual bottom line.

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

There is no change in burden.
CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 13 of 13 January 13, 2010

6(g) Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is 

estimated to average 64.8 hours per response for state and local government agencies, 11.5

hours per response for non-government organizations, and 9 hours per response for federal 

agencies. Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by 

persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a federal 

agency. This estimate includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, 

install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 

verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing 

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

and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search 

data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise 

disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 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 ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-R03-CBP-2009-0500, which is 

available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the EPA 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W., 

Washington, D.C. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 

a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the 

Enforcement and Compliance Docket is (202) 566-1752. An electronic version of the 

public docket is available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit or 

view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, 

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

When in the system, select “search,” then key in the Docket 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, D.C. 

20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number 

EPA-R03-CBP-2009-0500 and OMB Control Number 2003-0001 in any 

correspondence.