CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 1 of 13 January 13 , 20 10 

## 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 I CR Number 2365.0 2 , O MB 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 Integrati on 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 Ches apeake Registry was developed in response to recommendati ons 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 EP A 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 poss ible.” The Chesapeake Registry provides the tool to coordinate activities among Bay partners and stakeholders, both federal and non

federal, in support of the se mandates. Th e 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 l inked 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 s earch the Chesapeake Registry databaseCBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 2 of 13 January 13 , 20 10 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, t he progress being made in key program areas. The dashboards include measures of progress, information about the resources C B P 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 b e $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 organization s is needed to effectively coordinate project activities and funding among partners and stakeholders in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and as a means to pro vide transparency and accountability to the public. Spe cifically, 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 Accountabilit y 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 , 20 10 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) : I dentify 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

. CBP O 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 B ay-wide activities and comprehensive progress reporting , the Chesapeake Registry will help EPA to promote enhanced coordination among the CBP O partners hip a nd 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 th e 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 aCBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 4 of 13 January 13 , 20 10 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 organization s 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 no ne of these agencies maintains or requests information duplicative of the information entered into the Chesapeake Registry reporting system

. O nly 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 Pacifi c 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 duplicati on 

### , specifically 

### , www.baystat.maryland.gov . However, Maryland’s information was not Bay

-wide; it was specific to Maryland and most of the information originates fro m 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 req uired 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 , whic h 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 Cont rol N o. 2003

- 0001 ) , EPA solicit ed comments in the Federal Register for a renewal of the approved IC R 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 usersCBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 5 of 13 January 13 , 20 10 prior to phone consultations with respondents

. Respondents were asked to estimate burden s 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 Participant s b y Type of Organization Nam e Phone Number Affiliation State and Local Governm ent Susan Block (804) 371

- 7486 VA Dept. of Conservation and Rec. Diane Davis (202) 741

- 0847 Distri ct 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 (2 02) 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 Nam e 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 , 20 10



### 3(e) General Guidelines This information collection is consistent with all of OMB’s general gui delines.

 Respondents are asked to report annually;

 Respondents are provided more than 30 days to re spond 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 ; al l is considered public.

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

### 3(f) Confide n tiality 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 IC R include the partners and stakeholders of the Chesapeake Bay Program , which includes federal, state and local agencies (NAICS 924110 and 9241 2 0 ) , non governmental organizations (NAIC S 813312 ) , and other s. . 

### 4(b) Infor mation 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 log ged in to the Chesapeake Registry reporting system, the partners enter data about their activities which are grouped by p artnership 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

. S pecific 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 , 20 10  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 C BP p artners 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 CBP 1 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 f or 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

Revie wing 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 Chesapeak e Registry reporting system are encouraged to provide feedback on the system
. X



### 5. The Information Collected

–Agency Activities, Collection Methodolo gy, and Information Management 5(a) Agency Activities Activities undertaken by CBPO on an annual bas is for this information collection include:

1 Common Business PracticeCBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 8 of 13 January 13 , 20 10  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) Co llection 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 summari zed information available to the public. In preparation for the annual data call, EPA/CBPO will provide detailed guidance about the database to the C BP partners and stakeholders (e.g., organiz e training/workshops , facilitate hands

- on demonstrations as ne cessary). CBPO will also verif y the accuracy of the data entered into the s ystem during and after the data call. Annual updating by the C BP partners and stakeholders will be streamlined in light of the automated nature of compiling the information. T o 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 200 8 data to create and modify a record for 200 9

. 

### 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 inf ormation 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 CBPOCBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 9 of 13 January 13 , 20 10



### 6. Estimating t he 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 e stimates for each type of respondent are provided in table 5

. Table 5 . Annual Burden Estimate Per Respon se Respondent Type Annual Burden Per Respon se 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 cat egory, 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 Respon se for State and Local Government Agencies

Inform ation 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 Revie wing 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 $31.68CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 10 of 13 January 13 , 20 10 Inform ation 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 ag encies, 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 o rganizations . 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 Or

ganizations

Inform ation 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 Revie wing 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 Bu reau of Labor and Statistics and include a benefits multiplier of 1.6.CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 11 of 13 January 13 , 20 10 Table 8. Annual Burden/Cost Estimate Per Response for Federal Agencies

Inform ation Collect Activity Hours Per

Response / Year Labor

Cost Per Response/ Year Capital or

Startup Costs P er 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 Revie wing 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

Inform ation 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 1.6CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A 12 of 13 January 13 , 20 10



### 6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs CBPO estimates that 50 non

- federal organizations and 10 federal agenc ies 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 Organization s 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 Ite m 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 $ 63,041.3 2 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 ann ual 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 , 20 10



### 6(g) Burden Statement The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 64.8 hours per re sponse for state and lo cal 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 dis close or provide information to or for a f ederal 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 vi ewing 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 pub lic 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. Als o, 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.