**SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR APPROVAL OF** 

**STATE COASTAL NONPOINT POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS**
**1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION**  **1(a) TITLE OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION** Approval of State Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs OMB Control Number 2040

- 0153; EPA I CR Number 1569.0 8 **1(b) SHORT CHARACTERIZATION** This I CR renewal explains reporting requirements that coastal States and Territories (referred to as States) must fulfill in order to obtain final app roval of their Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs (referred to hereafter as “Coastal Nonpoint Programs”) under Section 6217 (Protecting Coastal Waters) of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA)
. This I CR renewal also asses ses whether State program requirements for management measure implementation will impose any

reporting of record

- keeping requirements on affected entities. Section 6217 requires coastal States and Territories with Federal ly

- approved coastal zone management program s (CZMP s ) to develop Coastal Nonpoint Programs
. The Program Development and Approval Guidance for Section 6217 C oastal N onpoint P ollution C ontrol P rograms was prepared b y the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
. The document implements Section 6217, providing guidance to States on the development and content of their Coastal Nonpoint Programs. Section 6217 addresses persistent coastal pollution problems by improving coordinati on of Federal and State CZMP s and water quality programs. In the past, there wa s limited integration of State N onpoint S ource Management P rograms approved by EPA under Section 319 of the C lean Water Act (CWA) and State CZMP s approved by NOAA under Section 306 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
. Section 6217 formalizes coordination of the Section 319 and Section 306 programs b y requiring EPA and NOAA to oversee preparation and review of the State Coastal Nonpoint Programs. The program guidance describes the contents that each coastal State must include in the Coastal Nonpoint Program documentation and the criteria for program approval
. Rather than create an independent program, the Section 6217 program guidance encourages States to implement their Co astal Nonpoint Programs through changes to existing Section 319 and Section 306 programs. States failing to submit satisfactory Coastal Nonpoint Programs face reductions in Federal grants issued under CWA Section 319 and under Section 306 of the CZMA.2 Se ction 6217 requires States with approved coastal management programs to submit Coastal Nonpoint Programs within 30 months of the publication of the final program guidance (January 1993)
. Twenty- nine States and five Territories have submitted their Coastal Nonpoint Programs to the Nonpoint Source Control Branch, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds (OWOW), Office of Water, within EPA, and to the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management within NOAA
. Another State is developing its program for submittal to EPA and NOAA in earl y 2014. The two agencies have jointly reviewed the State Coastal Nonpoint Programs as required by Section 6217. EPA and NOAA have approved programs from 1 7 States and five Territories, and conditionally

approved programs from 1 1 States
. One State with a conditionally approved program withdrew from NOAA’s CZ MP in 201 1, which brought an end to its participation in the Coastal Nonpoint Program under CZARA
. T he conditional approvals require States and Territories to submit additional information in order to obtain final program approval
. CZARA Section 6217 requires States and Territories to obtain final approval of their Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs in order to retain their full share of funding available to them under CWA Section 319 and under Section 306 of the CZMA. **2. NEED FOR**  **AND USE OF THE COLLECTION**  **2(a) NEED/AUTHORITY FOR THE COLLECTION** Section 6217(g)(1) of CZARA required EPA to issue guidance for coastal nonpoint source pollution control: “The Administrator [of EPA], in consultation with the Secretary [of Commerce, overseeing NOAA] and the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and other F ederal agencies, shall publish (and periodicall y r evise thereafter) guidance for specifying management measures for sources of nonpoint pollution in coastal waters.” In response to Section 6217(g)(1), EPA convened a work group to prepare a technical document specifying management measures for controllin g nonpoint source pollution in coastal waters
. The draft technical guidance document was issued in June 1991; the final technical guidance document was issued in January 1993
. EPA and NOAA proposed program guidance in October 1992 for preparing the State C oastal Nonpoint Programs, which document State efforts to implement the management measures described in the technical guidance
. This document was issued in final form in January 1993. EPA and NOAA issued the program guidance to explain how States should3

prepare their Coastal Nonpoint Programs in order to comply with CZARA Section 6217(a): “Not later than 30 months after the date of the publication of final guidance under subsection (g), each State for which a management program has been approved pursuant to Section 306 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 shall prepare and submit to the Secretary and the Administrator a Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program for approval pursuant to this section
. The purpose of the program shall be to develop and implement management measures for nonpoint source pollution to restore and protect coastal waters, working in close conjunction with other State and local authorities.” Section 6217(b) of CZARA specifies the contents of the Coastal Nonpoint Programs, which are incorporated into the program guidance requirements
. Table 1 presents a summary

of the program contents required by Section 6217(b)
. Additional justification for each reporting item is provided in section 3(b) of this supporting statement. In addition, Section 306( d)(16) of CZARA requires State C oastal Nonpoint Pollution Control P rograms to include enforceable policies and mechanisms to implement the applicable requirements of Section 6217. Subsequent to the publication of the program and tec hnical guidance, EPA and NOAA provided further program clarification in the Final Administrative Changes to the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program Guidance for Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, which the agenc ies issued in October 1998. This updated guidance calls for each state to communicate program priorities by submitting a 15

- ye ar program strategy to EPA and NOAA that briefly describes the State’s overall approach and schedule to ensure implementation of the 6217(g) management measures and improve water quality within 15 years of the date of conditional approval.

At this time, EPA and NOAA have approved programs from 1 7 States and five Territ ories, and conditionally approved programs from 1 1 other States
. One State with a conditionally

approved program withdrew from NOAA’s CZ MP in 2011, which brought an end to its participation in the Coastal Nonpoint Program under CZARA. In order for conditionally

approved programs to gain final approval, certain conditio ns must be met
. Such conditions could include the completion of a particular program element or the development of additional authority to ensure implementation of certain management measures . This ICR renewal is needed so that the remaining States may complete development and obtain final approval of their programs. The ICR is also needed to allow states that have recentl y and voluntarily joined NOAA’s CZMP to develop and submit new Coastal Nonpoint Programs under CZARA to EPA and NOAA. Il linois is the mos t recent State to join the CZMP, and is required to submit its Coastal Nonpoint Program to EPA and NOAA in 2014.4

**2(b) PRACTICAL UTILITY** **/USERS OF THE DATA** EPA and NOAA will use the Coastal Nonpoint Program submittals to determine whether to grant final approval of the State Coastal Nonpoint Programs
. States not receiving final approval may lose a portion of both their CWA Section 319 and CZMA Section 306 funds under the withholding provisions of CZARA
. The requested information will ensure the efficient distribution of Federal funds to States with comprehensive plans for controlling coastal water pollution
. EPA and NOAA will also use the requested information to ensure that State recipients of Federal funds provide adequate opportunities for public partic ipation during program development
. States will use the information requested as part of management measure implementation in conformity

with EPA’s technical guidance. **Table 1 .**  **Statutory Requirements in CZARA §6217 CZARA Citation**  **Statutory Requirements for Coastal**  **Nonpoint Programs** §6217(b) Specify general management measures to protect coastal waters. §6217(b)(1) Id entify land uses which contribute significantly to the degradation of coastal waters. §6217(b)(2) Id entify critical coastal areas adjacent to impaired or threatened coastal waters, where the general management measures will be insufficient to maintain water quality standards and/or designated uses. §6217(b)(3) Id entify additional management measures n eeded to attain or maintain water quality standards under CWA §303 and designated uses in the critical coastal areas identified in §6217(b)(2). §6217(b)(4) Provide technical assistance to local governments and the public for implementing the additional management measures identified in §6217(b)(3). §6217(b)(5) Designate opportunities for public participation in all aspects of the coastal nonpoint program. §6217(b)(6) Establish mechanisms for coordinating State and local agency implementation of the coast al nonpoint programs. §6217(b)(7) Propose modified coastal zone boundary , as the State deems5 necessary , so that the State has adequate geographic jurisdiction to implement the management measures (NOAA reviewed the adequacy

of existing b oundaries for each coastal management program and recommended changes where necessary).
**3 .**  **NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA**  **3 (a)**  **NONDUPLICATION** Under the original ICR, the EPA Assessment and Watershed Protection Division consulted with OPPE Desk Officer Harold Woodley and Masi Okasaki of NOAA to ensure that the information requested in the Section 6217 program guidance could not be acquired from o ther sources
. EPA reviewed existing ICRs prepared b y EPA’s Office of Water and NOAA’s Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management to identify possible duplications of reporting requirements. EPA recentl y (October 2013) found that NOAA has included info rmation on this information collection as part of a larger set of programs authorized under the CZ MP under OMB Control N o . 0648
- 0119
. Inthe future, EPA and NOAA will work to merge these estimates and submit it as a single information collection request since the collection consists of the same set of respondents simultaneously

submitting the same information to both federal agencies. EPA recognize s similarities between the reporting requirements for the biennial State Section 305(b) reports (under ICR Number 1560.1) and those in the Section 6217 program guidance
. The Section 305(b) program guidance requires States and Territories to s ummarize total impaired estuarine and ocean waters and the sources of impairment in their 305(b) reports
. States are aware that they are able to conduct monitoring activities associated with the Section 6217 program guidance at least partially through thei r existing Section 305(b) processes. **3(b) PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ICR SUBMISSION TO OMB**  EPA will publish a notice in the Federal Register soliciting comments on this draft ICR before it is submitted to OMB for approval
. **3(c) CONSULTATIONS**  Under the original ICR, NOAA and EPA held regional meetings to acquire respondent input during the initial development of the Section 6217 program guidance
. The regional meetings were attended by representatives of State coastal management programs, State water quality control programs, the Coastal States Organization (CSO),6

and the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators (ASIWPCA)
. EPA and NOAA also distributed options papers and requested comments from each of the approv ed State coastal management programs. NOAA and EPA issued proposed program guidance in October 1992 and provided a 60 day

public comment period
. The agencies held a series of focus group meetings with representatives from State coastal management and wat er quality agencies and began a second series of regional meetings with States and EPA regional offices during the summer of 1992
. The State respondents expressed concern about flexibility to tailor their Coastal Nonpoint Programs to specific water quality problems in their coastal zones . EPA and NOAA have provided flexibility by allowing respondents to propose alternative management measures to those included in the technical guidance
. The respondents must document that the alternative management measures are as effective as the pre

- approved management measures in the technical guidance prepared by EPA. The final program guidance was published in January 1993
. In response to State concerns about potential burden requirements, EPA and NOAA made every effor t to integrate components of existing CWA Section 319 and CZMA Section 306 programs into the Coastal Nonpoint Program requirements
. In order to minimize respondent burden, States may

satisfy some reporting requirements contained in Section 6217 by identifying existing program activities that already meet Coastal Nonpoint Program objectives. EPA issued proposed management measures guidance in June 1991 and provided a six

- month comment period on the management measures guidance
. EPA convened technical workgroups composed of Federal and State experts in preparing both the proposed and the final management measures guidance
. In addition, EPA held focus group meetings with various industry groups (agriculture, forestry , and marinas, in particular)
. The final te chnical guidance was published in January 1993. In 1993 and 1994, EPA and NOAA worked closely with States to assist them in developing their programs
. This assistance included highl y detailed reviews of draft State Coastal Nonpoint Programs, as well as extensive meetings with individual States
. Subsequently , on January 6, 1995, EPA and NOAA wrote letters to the State organizations that represent State nonpoint source and coastal zone management agencies to provide increased flexibility to the States with respect to criteria for program approval and schedules for implementation. In April 1997, NOAA, EPA, the States, and other interested parties began discussions regarding the progress made to date in developing and implementing State Coastal Nonpoint Pro grams and the significant impediments to further progress
. Both the States and Federal agencies recognized that while the goals of CZARA remain valid, the program and schedules originall y conceived b y NOAA and EPA were extremely ambitious, and additional flexibility would be needed to enable the States to successfull y7

implement their programs . Based on this understanding, the parties proceeded to discuss in detail the specific aspects of the program that would require modification while maintaining the overall objective that States implement management measures needed to protect coastal waters. Based on these discussions, EPA and NOAA drafted a set of proposed administrative changes the agencies would use to guide future implementation of the CZARA program and made them available for a 60 day public comment period beginning March 11, 1998
. After reviewing and responding to public comments on the proposed changes, NOAA and EPA issued final administrative changes to the program guidance, reflecting the comments received
. In some cases, the administrative changes impacted previous findings and conditions on State Coastal Nonpoint Programs
. Insuch cases, EPA and NOAA reviewed those findings and conditions and made adjustments (including, where appropriate, elimination of conditions). On October 25, 2002 (67 FR 65563), EPA sought comments on a previous renewal of this I CR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d)
. On November 20, 2002 (67 FR 70070), EPA extended the comment period 30 day s . EPA received one comment from NOAA, providing recommendations for increasing the Federal government burden hours to more accuratel y reflect the assessment of hours incurred by the agencies’ review of State programs . EPA incorporated NOAA’s recommendations to adjust the estimate accordingl y (see Table 4). NOAA and EPA have continued to consult with States and public interes t groups throughout the process of formulating strategies for final approval and criteria for fulfilling conditions. Much of this work has been coordinated through the Coastal States Organization (CSO), which has continued from 2011 through 2013 b y way of an ongoing CSO
- led joint state - federal work group. **3(d) EFFECTS OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION** The development and approval of State Coastal Nonpoint Programs is a one

- time collection activity
. T o date, twenty- two coastal States and Territories have compl eted development and obtained conditional approval of their Coastal Nonpoint Programs, and now need onl y to remove the remaining conditions to obtain final approval. In any given ye ar, a subset of States has made progress to reduce the number of remaining conditions. **3(e) GENERAL GUIDELINES**  The guidance does not include any information collection activities that exceed the PRA

- imposed guidelines contained in 5 CFR 1320.6. **3(f) CONFIDENTIALITY** 8 The information collected under Section 6217 and this I CR renewal will not require States and Territories to collect any c onfidential information. **3(g) SENSITIVE QUESTIONS**  In formation to be reported is not of a sensitive nature. **4 .**  **THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4**  **(a) RESPONDENTS/SIC CODES**  The respondent community consists of the 12 coastal States with approved CZMP s that have not yetsubmitted fully approvable Coastal Nonpoint Programs under CZARA
. The SIC Code for State respondents is 9511 (Administration of Environmental Quality P rograms: Air and Water Resources and Solid Waste Management). **4 (b) INFORMATION REQUESTED**  **(i) Data Items**  **, including Record Keeping Requirements** The respondents have reported on the following items in their Coastal Nonpoint Program submittals under Sec tion 6217
. (The CZARA section requiring each item is listed in brackets
. ) No record keeping requirements are imposed on the respondents. 1. Categories and subcategories of nonpoint sources that generally impair or threaten coastal water quality within the respondent’s jurisdiction [CZARA §6217(b)]. 2. Management measures selected from the CZARA §6217(g) technical guidance to address each significant nonpoint source category and subcategory identified above [CZARA §6217(b)]. 3. Alternative management meas ures and technical documentation
. (This optional item is included to allow the States additional flexibility in designing their Coastal Nonpoint Programs.) 4. Coastal water s not maintaining water quality standards and coastal waters threatened b y increase d pollution from new or expanding uses [§6217(b)(1)]. 5. Land uses that are sources of nonpoint pollution entering impaired or threatened coastal waters [§6217(b)(1)]. 6. Critical coastal areas adjacent to waters not maintaining water quality9 standards [ CZARA §6217(b)(3)]. 7. Additional management measures developed b y the State or Territory to address threats or impairments identified in #5 above and for application in critical coastal areas [§6217(b)(3)]. 8. Plans for revising additional management measures [CZARA §6217(b)(3)]. 9. Plans for providing technical assistance for implementing additional management measures to local governments and the public [CZARA §6217(b)(4) and §6217(b)(5)]. 10. The organization, structure, authority, and resources o f lead agencies selected to implement management measures
. (This information is needed to ensure that i mplementation of the Coastal Nonpoint Program is delegated to agencies with adequate authority and resources.) 11. Schedules for implementation of manag ement measures
. (This information is needed to e valuate State progress towards implementing their Coastal Nonpoint Programs.) 12. Legislative and administrative authorities for implementing management measures . (This information is needed to ensure that the State has the authority to implement the Coastal Nonpoint Program.) 13. Mechanisms for coordinating State agency and local government participation in the Coastal Nonpoint Programs [CZARA §6217(b)(6)]. 14. Procedures to ensure implementation of manag ement measures including operation and maintenance, inspection, and monitoring activities
. (This information is needed to ensure that the State can implement selected management measures in the Coastal Nonpoint Program.) 15. Plans to modify

coastal zone b oundaries [CZARA §6217(b)(6)]. 16. Mechanisms for coordinating Coastal Nonpoint Programs with CWA programs under Section s 208, 303, 319, and 320 [CZARA §6217(a)(2) and §6217(b)(6)]. 17. Provisions for public participation [CZARA §6217(b)(5)]. **(ii) Resp ondent Activities** 10 Section 6217 required each respondent to prepare a one

- time document describing its Coastal Nonpoint Program
. Eleven of the 12 respondents have already performed the following activities and submitted their coastal Nonpoint Programs to NOAA and EPA in compliance with the program and technical guidances:

 Reviewed the program and technical guidance documents describing the contents required in the Coastal Nonpoint Programs and the management measures for controlling nonpoint sources of water quality degradation in coastal areas.

 Planned activities (i.e., delegate collection tasks, plan interagency meetings, establish reviewers, and delegate writing activities) to complete development of the Coastal Nonpoint Program.

 Collected informati on relevant to the data items listed above (e.g., lists of impaired coastal waters, lists of management measures to be adopted, legal and geographical jurisdiction of agencies implementing management measures)
. The States acquired all of the information from existing sources.

 Analyzed the information and constructed the Coastal Nonpoint Program, including revising coastal zone boundaries and planning new or modified State and local regulations to implement the Coastal Nonpoint Program.

 Wrote draft and fin al Coastal Nonpoint Programs, provided notice and opportunity

for public comment on their programs, and submitted the programs to EPA and NOAA for approval. Under this I CR renewal , States that have received conditional approval for their Coastal Nonpoint Programs will be required to submit additional information to obtain final program approval. **5 .**  **THE INFORMATION COLLECTED**

**— A**  **GENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT**  **5 (a)**  **AGENCY ACTIVITIES** EPA and NOAA activities under this IC R renewal will consist of the review of Coastal Nonpoint Program amendments and/or informational updates submitted by States to fulfill specified conditional approval requirements necessary to obtain final program approval s , as well as review of initial Coastal Nonpoint Program submittals by new State program entrants
. **5 (b)**  **COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT**11 The States will submit amendments to their Coastal Nonpoint Programs when such amendments are required to fulfill and therefore remove the con ditions set out in the conditional approval and obtain final program approval. New State program entrants will submit initial Coastal Nonpoint Programs for review b y EPA and NOAA. **5 (c)**  **SMALL ENTITY FLEXIBILITY** This section is not applicable because respondents are States and Territories , and are not small businesses or organizations as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility

Act, 5 U.S.C. Sections 601(3) and (4). **5 (d)**  **COLLECTION SCHEDULE** There is no uniform schedule for the submission of State amen dments to Coastal Nonpoint Programs when such amendments are required to fulfill conditions established in conditional approval s . Rathe r, EPA and NOAA have set forth specific schedule s for completion of conditions tailored to each State’s program
. **6. ESTI**  **MATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6(a)**  **ESTIMATING RESPONDENT BURDEN** The burden hour estimates for the original ICR were based upon discussions with Regional NOAA and EPA personnel who have direct contact with State respondents and past experience with Coastal Nonpoint Program submittal procedures
. Burden estimates for specific elements were also acquired from a small sample of State respondents (Wisconsin, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington)
. The detailed breakdown of burden estimates for each activity is presented in Table 2. Based on our analy ses of State Coastal Nonpoint Programs that have been submitted to EPA and NOAA under Section 6217, we have estimated that the collection burden under this ICR renewal for the conditionally approve d p rograms will be approximately 41 percent of the burden estimated in the original IC R (12 respondents in 2013 versus 29 original respondents)
. This estimate is based on States’ successful completion of the majority of program elements, the additional wor k already underway by many States to complete program elements that require further development , and the entrant of a new State Coastal Nonpoint Program in 2014
. Inaddition, while States will submit information under this I CR renewal more than once to address different aspects of their Coastal Nonpoint Program s that require additional work specified under a conditional approval, other States may not submit any

information under this I CR renewal because the conditions in their conditional approval s may be resolved through State rulemaking or legislative processes as a result of other forces at work or as a result of investigations conducted for other reasons that support exemptions to existing conditions
. Therefore, the estimate of the collection burden under this ICR renewal is an12

approximate prediction. **6(b) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT COSTS**  The associated collection under this I CR renewal will have a moderate financial impact on the respondents. **(i) Estimating Labor Costs**  This respondent labor cost es timate under the original I CR was based upon an average hourly rate and benefits comparable to a Federal GS Grade 10, Step 7
. The total hourly rate, including benefits, was estimated in the original I CR to be $33

. For this I CR renewal , the estimated hourly rate was increased to $3 7 t o account for inflation
. Table 2 present s a detailed breakdown of the labor cost estimates for each activity. **TABLE 2. ESTIMATE OF BURDEN TO STATE RESPONDENTS WITH** 

**CONDITIONALLY APPROVED PROGRAMS , LABOR COSTS** 

Collection Activity - A
- Burden hours per respondent - B
Number of respondents - C
Person
hours C = A x B - D
Cost in Dollars D = C x $3 7 1. Review documents a. Program guidance b. Technical guidance 1 4 1 2

1 2 12

48 444

1,776 2. Plan activities 16 1 2 192 710413

3. Collect information a. Identify

general NPS categories and identify

general management measures b. Technical documentation for alternatives c. Identify

impaired coastal waters d. I dentify

land uses e. Identify

critical coastal areas f. Identify supplemental management measures g. Identify

lead agencies h. Schedule i. L egislative/administrative authority j. Coordination mechanisms k. Operation & maint. procedures l. Inspection procedures m. Monitoring procedures n. Coastal zone boundaries o. Technical assistance options p. Public participation mechanisms 70
10 4 24 10 16 4 12 15 15 8 8 26 4 4 4 1 2

1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 840

120 48 288 120 192 48 144 180 180 96 96 312 48 48 48 31,080

4,440 1,776 10,656 4,440 7,104 1,776 5,328 6,660 6,660 3,552 3,552 11,544 1,776 1,776 1,776 4. Compile, review and analyze information a. Develop State and local regulations b. Revise coastal zone boundaries c. Other anal ys is 60 5 30 1 2

1 2 1 2 720

60 360 26,640

2,220 13,320 5. Write Coastal Nonpoint Program a. Draft program report b. Final program report 10 15 1 2

1 2 120

180 4,440

6,660 6. Recordkeeping requirements Not applicable - - - TOTAL : ALL BURDEN I TEMS 375 1 2 4,5 00 $ 166,500 **(i i** **) Estimating**  **Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs**  No capital costs or operation and maintenance costs are associated with this ICR renewal
. **(i ii** **) Capital/Start**  **- up Operations and Maintenance**  **Costs** No capital/start

- up operation and maintenance costs are associated with this ICR renewal
.14

**(i v** **) Annualizing Capital Costs**  As there are no capital costs associated with this ICR renewal , this section is not applicable. **6(c) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST**  The agency

burden in the original ICR was based on discussions with EPA Regional 319 Coordinators and NOAA Regional personnel
. The cost was based upon an average hourl y rate of $33, which included salary and benefits for a Federal employee Grade 10, Step 7
. The total number of burden hours in the original ICR to the Federal government was estimated to be 13,240, and the total cost was estimated to be $ 436,920
. Based on comments received from NOAA in 2003, these figures were later determined to be underestimates. Under this I CR renewal , the Federal government burden will include the burden associated with EPA and NOAA review of amendments submitted by States to fulfill conditional approval requirements
. Altogether since CZARA passed into law in 1990, 34 States and Territories have developed and submitted coastal nonpoint programs to EPA and NOAA for approval, and that number will increase to 35 b y 2014. The F ede ral burden for this ICR accounts for review of the remaining elements of the 12 State coastal Nonpoint Programs that remain not yet fully approved. To calculate the Federal government burden, the estimated hourly rate was increased to $3 7 to account for in flatio n . Table 3 presents a breakdown of the burden and cost estimates for each agency
. **TABLE 3. ESTIMATE OF BURDEN TO FEDERAL GOVERNMENT**  Collection Activity
- A
- Burden hours (person

hours) - B
Personnel Costs A x $37 .00 - C
Other direct costs - D
Total Dollars B + C 1. EPA review of State Coastal Nonpoint Program s ubmittals 9,692 $ 358,604
- $ 358,604 2. NOAA review of State Coastal Nonpoint Program s ubmittals 12,000 444,000
- 444,600

TOTAL 24,191 $ 802,604
- $ 802,604 **6(d) ESTIMATING THE**  **RESPONDENT UNIVERSE AND TOTAL BURDEN AND COSTS** 15 The universe of respondents is precisely known to be comprised of the 1 1 States that remain conditionally approved with regard to their Coastal Nonpoint Programs and one (1) new State program entrant in 2014
. The total burden and costs for these 1 2 respondents are summarized in 6(e)(i), with detail provided in Table 2
. **6(e )**  **BOTTOM LINE BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS/MASTER TABLES (i)**  **The Respondent Tally States**  The one

- time total burden to the respondents is : Total hours ( 375) X Number of Respondents (1 2 ) = 4,5 00 hours The one

- time total cost to the respondents is: Total cost (4,875 X $3 7 /hour) = $ 166,500 EPA assumes the respondents will perform the burden items over the three

- ye ar ICR renewal period
. Thus, the average annual burden/cost is equivalent to the total one

time burden/cost divided by three ye ars: Total burden ( 4,5 00 hours)/3 years = 1,5 00 hours/year Total cost ($ 1 66 ,5 00 )/3 years = $ 55 , 5 00 /year (for all respondents) Total cost per respond ent per year = $ 55 ,5 00 /1 2 respondents = $4,625 The master table for respondent burden and costs is :

Total Burden Total Hours Costs Bottom Line 4,5 00 hours $ 1 66 ,5 00 **(ii) The Agency Tally**  The total cost to the Federal government is estimated at 21,692 hours, or $ 802,604
. EPA assumes the Federal g overnment will perform the c ollection activities over the three

- ye ar period of this I CR renewal
. EPA burden hours are estimated at approximately 3,231 hours per ye ar over three ye ars, resulting in a total burden of 9,692 hours. NOAA burden hours are estimated at approximately 4,000 hours per year over three ye ars, resulting in a total burden of 1 2 ,000 hours.16 Total Federal Agency

Hours = 9,692 (EPA) + 1 2 , 000 (NOAA) = 21,692 The average annual burden/ cost is equivalent to the total burden/cost divided by three ye ars: Total burden ( 21,692 hours)/3 years = 7,231 hours/year Total cost at $3 7 /hour = ($ 802,604 )/3 years = $ 267,535 The master table for agency burden and costs is : Total Burden Total Hours Costs Bottom Line 21,692 hours $ 802,604 **(iii) Variations in the Annual Bottom Line**  For many reasons, variations for State respondents and for Federal agencies are problematic to estimate
. Some of the factors that affect these variations are described in section 6(a)
. In general, activities associated with Federal approvals of State Coastal Nonpoint Programs have decrease d over time, both for State respondents and for Federal agencies, as more S tates have achieve d full program approvals
. Indeed, during the first several ye ars of the Coastal Nonpoint Program development period, there were comparativel y high er levels of activity among both the Federal partners (who developed program guidance and co nduct ed “threshold reviews” of initial State program submittals) and the State respondents (who submitted materials for most or all 56 management measures specified in statutorily mandated program guidance, as well as information on State enforceable polic ies and mechanisms)
. Since that initial start

- up period, activity has dec line d
. However, activity levels for CZARA remain moderate among both State respondents and Federal agencies
. Two factors seem to account for this: 1) Five States joined the Coastal Nonp oint Program as late entrants: Georgia, Minnesota, Ohio, Texas and Indiana , and a sixth state (I llinois) will come onboard in 2014
. Minnesota’s program was approved in July 2006
. 2) Among the 29 original participating States and Territories , the 7 States

that remain conditionally approved have challenging and unique obstacles that account for their continued conditionally approved status, and these States , along with the Federal partners (NOAA and EPA) , are working to overcome the more difficult hurdles that remain
. So while the number of conditions per State has greatl y decreased, the few conditions that remain are the most challenging to resolve, and thus require disproportionately greater efforts that were not originall y anticipated
. **6(f )**  **REASO NS FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN** 17 The respondent burden in the original IC R is is a net reduction under this ICR renewal because States have already completed most activities in this one

- time CZARA Section 6217 requirement and because EPA and NOAA full y approved New Jersey’s Coastal Nonpoint Program in late 2009 (since the previous I CR was published)
. Additionally , one State that was conditionally approved (Alaska) ceased its participation in this program in 2011 by choosin g not to participate in the NOAA

- admninistered CZMP
. This reduction was partiall y offset b y the anticipated addition of Illinois as a new program entrant in 2014. **6( g**  **) BURDEN STATEMENT**  The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this colle ction of information is estimated to average 375 hours per response
. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended b y persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency . This 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 way s to comply with an y previously

applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information
. An agency

may not conduct or 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 liste d 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 techniqu es, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA
- HQ
- OW
- 200 6
- 0 394 , which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov , or in

- person viewing at the Office of Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency , Public Reading Room, Room 3334 , EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave ., NW, Washington, DC 20004
. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday , excluding legal holiday s . The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202
- 566
- 1744, and the telephone number for the Water Docket is 202

- 566
- 2426
. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov
. This site can be used to submit or view 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
. Once in the sy stem, se lect “search,” then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. **B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYIN**  **G STATISTICAL METHODS** 18 This section is not applicable because no statistical procedures are emplo ye d for the data collection.