Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2004-0008-0002
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2004-04-30T04:00Z

i
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
1
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
1(
a)
Title
and
Number
of
the
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1(
b)
Short
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
2(
b)
Use/
Users
of
the
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
3
NON­
DUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
3(
a)
Non­
duplication
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
3(
c)
Consultations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
3(
f)
Confidentiality
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
4
RESPONDENTS
AND
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
4(
a)
Respondents/
NAICS
Codes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
4(
b)
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
4(
b)(
i)
Data
Items
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
4(
b)(
ii)
Respondent
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
5
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
­­
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
6
ESTIMATING
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
COLLECTION
6(
a)
Respondent
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
6(
a)(
i)
Burden
to
Public
Water
Systems
and
Laboratories
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
6(
a)(
ii)
Burden
to
Primacy
Agencies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
29
6(
b)
Respondent
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
6(
b)(
i)
Cost
to
Public
Water
Systems
and
Laboratories
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
6(
b)(
ii)
Cost
to
Primacy
Agencies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
32
6(
c)
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
32
6(
d)
Estimating
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
33
6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
33
6(
f)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
34
6(
g)
Burden
Statement
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
39
ii
APPENDICES
Appendix
A.
Federal
Register
Notice
Soliciting
Comments
on
Information
Collection
Requests
Appendix
B.
1993
Information
Collection
Request
for
the
Public
Water
Supply
Program
Appendix
C.
Information
Collection
Request
for
National
Primary
Drinking
Water
Regulations
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
Appendix
D.
Information
Collection
Request
for
the
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
Appendix
E.
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
Spreadsheets
Appendix
F.
Total
Coliform
Rule
Spreadsheets
Appendix
G.
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
Spreadsheets
Appendix
H.
Laboratory
QA
Program
Spreadsheets
iii
LIST
OF
EXHIBITS
Exhibit
1:
New
Structure
of
OGWDW
ICRs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
Exhibit
2:
Collection
Schedule
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
Exhibit
3:
Annual
PWS
and
Laboratory
Burden
and
Cost
2002­
2004
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
30
Exhibit
4:
Annual
Primacy
Agency
Burden
and
Cost
2002­
2004
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
Exhibit
5:
Bottom
Line
Annual
Burden
and
Cost
2002­
2004
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
34
Exhibit
6:
Reasons
for
Change
in
Annual
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
Exhibit
7:
Restructuring
Adjustments
to
the
Annual
Burden
Inventory
for
the
Microbial
ICR
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
36
Exhibit
8:
Program
Changes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
36
Exhibit
9:
Adjustments
to
PWS
Burden
from
Previous
ICR
Estimates
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
37
Exhibit
10:
Adjustments
to
Primacy
Agency
Burden
from
Previous
ICR
Estimates
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
38
Exhibit
11:
Adjustments
to
Annual
Burden
Carried
Forward
from
Previous
ICR
Estimates
.
45
Exhibit
12:
Future
Adjustment
for
Addition
of
FBRR
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
45
LIST
OF
FIGURES
iv
ACRONYMS
ASDWA
Association
of
State
Drinking
Water
Administrators
BLS
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
CCR
Consumer
Confidence
Report
CDC
Centers
for
Disease
Control
and
Prevention
CFE
Combined
Filter
Effluent
CFR
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
CPEs
Comprehensive
Performance
Evaluations
CWS
Community
Water
System
DBP
Disinfection
Byproduct
DBPR
Disinfectants
and
Disinfection
Byproducts
Rule
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads
Disinfectants
and
Disinfection
Byproducts,
Chemical,
and
Radionuclides
DWSRF
Drinking
Water
State
Revolving
Fund
EPA
Environmental
Protection
Agency
FACA
Federal
Advisory
Committees
Act
FBRR
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
FOIA
Freedom
of
Information
Act
FR
Federal
Register
FRDS
Federal
Reporting
Data
System
FTE
Full
Time
Equivalent
FY
Fiscal
Year
GS
General
Schedule
GSA
General
Services
Administration
GWR
Ground
Water
Rule
GWUDI
Ground
Water
Under
the
Direct
Influence
of
Surface
Water
ICR
Information
Collection
Request
ICW
Information
Correction
Worksheet
IESWTR
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
IFA
Individual
Filter
Assessment
IOC
Inorganic
IPT
Initial
Performance
Testing
Lab
QA
Program
Laboratory
Quality
Assurance
Evaluation
Program
for
Analysis
of
Cryptosporidium
in
Water
LCR
Lead
and
Copper
Rule
LT1ESWTR
Long
Term
1
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
LT2ESWTR
Long
Term
2
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
MCL
Maximum
Contaminant
Level
MCLG
Maximum
Contaminant
Level
Goal
M/
DBP
Microbial
Contaminants
and
Disinfection
Byproducts
MOBIS
Management
Organizational
and
Business
Improvement
Services
NAICS
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
NCWS
Noncommunity
Water
System
NPDWRs
National
Primary
Drinking
Water
Regulations
NTNCWS
Nontransient
Noncommunity
Water
System
O&
M
Operation
and
Maintenance
OGWDW
Office
of
Ground
Water
and
Drinking
Water
v
OMB
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
OPR
Ongoing
precision
and
recovery
OPT
Ongoing
Performance
Testing
QA
Quality
Assurance
QC
Quality
Control
PN
Public
Notification
PRA
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
PWS
Public
Water
System
PWSS
Public
Water
System
Supervision
RegNeg
Regulatory
Negotiation
RIA
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis
RFA
Regulatory
Flexibility
Analysis
SBARP
Small
Business
Advocacy
Review
Panel
SBREFA
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
SCADA
Supervisory
Control
and
Data
Acquisition
SDWA
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act
SDWIS
Safe
Drinking
Water
Information
System
SER
Small
Entity
Representative
SIC
Standard
Industrial
Classification
SNC
Significant
Non­
Compliance
SWAP
Source
Water
Assessment
Program
SWTR
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
TCR
Total
Coliform
Rule
TNCWS
Transient
Noncommunity
Water
System
TTHM
Total
Trihalomethane
UCMR
Unregulated
Contaminant
Monitoring
Rule
UIC
Underground
Injection
Program
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
1
Throughout
this
document,
the
terms
"
State"
or
"
States"
are
used
to
refer
to
all
types
of
primacy
agencies.
There
are
currently
57
primacy
agencies,
including
the
50
States,
the
District
of
Columbia,
U.
S.
territories
(
Puerto
Rico,
U.
S.
Virgin
Islands,
Guam,
American
Samoa,
and
Northern
Marianas),
and
Navajo
Nation.

2
SDWIS
replaced
the
Federal
Reporting
Data
System
as
the
national
drinking
water
database
of
record
on
August
15,
1995.

1
1
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
1(
a)
Title
and
Number
of
the
Information
Collection
Title:
Microbial
Information
Collection
Request
OMB
Control
Number:
2040­
0205
EPA
Tracking
Number:
1895.02
1(
b)
Short
Characterization
The
Office
of
Ground
Water
and
Drinking
Water
(
OGWDW)
in
the
Office
of
Water
at
the
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA
or
the
Agency)
is
responsible
for
developing
National
Primary
Drinking
Water
Regulations
(
NPDWRs)
as
mandated
by
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Act
(
SDWA).
Section
1412
of
the
SDWA
requires
EPA
to
establish
NPDWRs
for
contaminants
that
may
adversely
impact
human
health.
The
Act
further
requires
EPA
to
monitor
and
enforce
these
regulations
to
ensure
that
the
nation's
drinking
water
dependably
complies
with
the
maximum
contaminant
levels
(
MCLs)
stipulated
in
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
(
CFR),
40
CFR
Part
141,
Subpart
B.

Section
1445
of
the
SDWA
stipulates
that
every
drinking
water
supplier
must
conduct
monitoring,
maintain
records,
and
provide
such
information
as
is
needed
for
EPA
to
implement
its
monitoring
and
enforcement
responsibilities
with
respect
to
the
Act.
State1
governments
 
in
those
States
that
have
assumed
primary
enforcement
responsibility
(
primacy)
for
public
water
systems
(
PWSs)
under
SDWA
Section
1413
 
ensure
that
PWSs
are
complying
with
these
monitoring
requirements.
As
part
of
the
PWSS
Program,
the
OGWDW
uses
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
Information
System
(
SDWIS)
2
to
record
some
of
the
data
collected
as
a
result
of
NPDWR
requirements.
SDWIS
is
a
database
management
system
that
assists
EPA
in
tracking
and
interpreting
monitoring
data
and
other
program­
related
data.
These
data
assist
EPA
in
fulfilling
its
SDWA
obligations.

This
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
was
prepared
in
accordance
with
the
February
1999
version
of
EPA's
Guide
to
Writing
Information
Collection
Requests
Under
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
PRA)
of
1995
(
or
"
ICR
Handbook")
prepared
by
EPA's
Office
of
Environmental
Information,
Office
of
Information
Collection,
Collection
Strategies
Division.
The
ICR
Handbook
provides
the
most
current
instructions
for
ICR
preparation
to
ensure
compliance
with
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
3
Includes
all
SWTR
components
except
disinfectant
residual
monitoring
and
associated
activities,
which
are
included
in
the
Disinfectants
and
Disinfection
Byproducts,
Chemical,
and
Radionuclides
(
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads)
ICR.
Under
the
SWTR,
systems
disinfecting,
but
not
filtering
their
water,
must
comply
with
monitoring
requirements
for
disinfection
residuals
in
the
distribution
system
and
disinfection
parameters
at
or
near
the
first
customer.
Monitoring
finished
water
for
disinfection
parameters
must
include
the
disinfectant
residual
levels,
disinfectant
contact
time,
pH,
and
water
temperature.
In
addition,
systems
must
identify
the
disinfectant
used
and
must
calculate
the
contact
time
(
CT)
value
on
the
basis
of
the
disinfection
parameters.
The
CT
value
is
used
to
determine
the
operating
efficiency
in
removing
or
inactivating
Giardia
and
viruses.
CT
calculation
burden
is
addressed
in
the
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads
ICR.
All
remaining
SWTR
requirements
are
included
in
this
Microbial
ICR.

4
Currently,
only
descriptions
of
FBRR
activities
are
included
in
this
ICR.
Burden
and
costs
for
the
FBRR
are
described
in
the
Microbial
ICR
to
facilitate
their
inclusion
at
a
future
date.
Until
then,
all
burden
and
cost
values
have
been
zeroed
out
for
FBRR
activities.
The
FBRR
ICR
(
OMB
No.
2040­
0224)
will
be
effective
until
an
Information
Correction
Worksheet
(
ICW)
is
submitted
to
move
the
FBRR
burden
and
costs
into
the
Microbial
ICR.
Evaluation
of
the
FBRR's
potential
impact
on
the
Microbial
ICR
is
included
in
Section
6(
f)(
iv).

2
the
1995
PRA
amendments
and
Office
of
Management
and
Budget's
(
OMB's)
implementing
guidelines.

This
ICR
examines
PWS,
laboratory,
primacy
agency,
and
EPA
burden
and
costs
for
recordkeeping
and
reporting
required
in
support
of
microbial
contaminant­
associated
rulemakings
and
programs.
These
rules
and
programs
include
the
following
 
1)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
SWTR)
3
2)
Total
Coliform
Rule
(
TCR)
3)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
IESWTR)
4)
Laboratory
Quality
Assurance
Evaluation
Program
for
Analysis
of
Cryptosporidium
in
Water
(
Lab
QA
Program)
5)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
(
FBRR)
4
This
ICR
estimates
costs
for
Fiscal
Years
(
FYs)
2002,
2003,
and
2004.
In
addition,
burden
for
future
rules
that
address
microbial
contaminants
(
Long
Term1
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
LT1ESWTR),
Long
Term
2
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
LT2ESWTR),
and
the
Ground
Water
Rule
(
GWR))
will
be
added
to
this
ICR
as
amendments
when
the
regulations
are
finalized.
New
rule
ICRs
explain
the
burden
up
to
the
point
that
a
rule
is
fully
implemented,
which
is
usually
more
then
3
years.
However,
only
the
applicable
burden
which
corresponds
to
the
3­
year
period
covered
in
this
ICR
will
be
amended.
Future
renewals
of
this
ICR
will
include
the
applicable
burden
for
the
new
rules
for
the
entire
3­
year
ICR
renewal
period.
For
example,
if
a
microbial
rule
is
promulgated
in
January
of
2003,
the
Microbial
ICR
will
be
amended
to
add
the
burden
for
the
new
rule
for
2003
and
2004.
For
the
next
renewal
of
the
Microbial
ICR,
the
burden
will
cover
the
new
rule
for
the
entire
3­
year
renewal
period.

This
ICR
updates
the
burden
and
cost
estimates
provided
in
the
IESWTR
ICR
dated
September
18,
1998,
which
expires
on
November
30,
2001
(
see
Appendix
C).
The
IESWTR
ICR
is
being
renamed
as
the
Microbial
ICR.
To
encompass
all
drinking
water
regulations
and
programs
that
address
microbial
contaminants,
several
additional
ICR
requirements
stemming
from
the
1996
Amendments
to
SDWA
are
being
updated
and
consolidated
into
this
single
ICR.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
3
The
burden
and
cost
estimates
for
each
rule
or
program
are
discussed
in
greater
detail
in
Section
6
of
this
document.

Continuing
costs
and
burden
for
several
existing
drinking
water
regulations
are
evaluated
in
this
ICR.
The
total
annual
burden
associated
with
this
ICR
is
estimated
to
be
approximately
8.20
million
hours
per
year.
The
total
annual
cost
associated
with
this
ICR
is
estimated
to
be
approximately
$
287.4
million.
The
distribution
of
annual
burden
between
PWSs/
laboratories
and
primacy
agencies
is
approximately
6.62
million
hours
and
1.58
million
hours,
respectively.
Laboratory
burden
accounts
for
only
0.005
million
hours
of
the
total
burden.
The
distribution
of
annual
costs
between
PWSs
/
laboratories
and
primacy
agencies
is
approximately
$
241.8
million
and
$
45.6
million,
respectively.
Laboratory
costs
account
for
only
$
0.3
million
of
the
total
costs.
The
Agency
burden
for
this
ICR
is
estimated
at
5,385
hours
annually,
at
an
annual
cost
of
$
0.34
million.
Section
6(
f)
summarizes
the
change
in
burden.

The
total
number
of
respondents
for
this
ICR
is
167,954;
57
of
these
respondents
are
primacy
agencies,
60
respondents
are
laboratories,
and
the
balance
are
existing
PWSs
(
167,837).
The
total
annual
number
of
responses
for
these
respondents
is
22.6
million.
(
20.5
million
for
PWSs/
laboratories
and
2.1
million
for
primacy
agencies).
Laboratories
account
for
only
200
of
the
22.6
million
responses.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
4
2
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
This
section
identifies
the
regulatory
or
statutory
authority
for
the
information
collection
activities
covered
in
this
ICR
and
describes
why
EPA
needs
the
information.
Section
4
contains
a
summary
of
the
major
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
for
rules
and
programs
covered
by
this
ICR.

To
allow
the
public
to
better
understand
the
impact
of
the
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
stemming
from
the
SDWA
and
40
CFR
Parts
141
and
142,
OGWDW
has
reorganized
its
ICRs
so
that
related
activities
are
addressed
in
the
same
ICR.
Specifically,
three
primary
ICRs
cover
OGWDW
activities
 
the
Microbial
ICR,
the
Disinfectants
and
Disinfection
Byproducts,
Chemical,
and
Radionuclides
(
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads)
ICR,
and
the
PWSS
Program
ICR.
For
a
graphical
depiction
of
the
current
and
proposed
organization
of
the
OGWDW
ICRs,
see
Figures
1
and
2.
A
complete
itemization
of
activities
included
in
each
of
the
three
primary
ICRs,
as
well
as
other
drinking
water
program
ICRs,
follows
in
Exhibit
1.

The
Microbial
ICR
includes
the
following
rules
or
programs
addressing
microbial
contaminants
 
1)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
2)
Total
Coliform
Rule
3)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
4)
Laboratory
Quality
Assurance
Evaluation
Program
for
Analysis
of
Cryptosporidium
in
Water
5)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
As
EPA
publishes
new
regulations
addressing
microbial
contaminants,
EPA
will
amend
the
Microbial
ICR
to
include
these
new
rules.
These
new
regulations
include
LT1ESWTR,
LT2ESWTR,
and
the
GWR.
5
PWSS
Program
ICR
2040­
0090
Cap
Dev
V&
E's
Primacy
Reg
CCRs
State
Primacy
Activities
Stage
1
TTHMs
Chems
LCR
'
76
Rads
'
00
Rads
IESWTR
SWTR
LT1
LT2
FBRR
TCR
GWR
Arsenic
UCMR
Stage
2
Radon
Red
=
Activities
covered
in
stand­
alone
ICRs
Green
=
Activities
covered
by
PWSS
Program
ICR
Purple
=
Activities
not
covered
in
current
ICRs
Gray
=
Future
ICRs
Needs
Survey
Class
V
ICR
Florida
ICR
UIC
Program
ICR
DW
SRF
SWAP
Op
Cert
PN
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
Figure
1.
Previous
Structure
of
OGWDW
ICRs
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
6
PWSS
Program
ICR
2040­
0090
DBP/
Chem/
Rads
ICR
2040­
0204
Cap
Dev
V&
E's
Primacy
Reg
PN
CCRs
State
Primacy
Activities
Stage
1
TTHMs
Chems
LCR
'
76
Rads
'
00
Rads
IESWTR
SWTR
LT1
LT2
Microbial
ICR
2040­
0205
FBRR
TCR
GWR
Arsenic
Stage
2
UCMR
Radon
Yellow
=
Activities
moving
via
ICW
Red
=
Activities
not
moving
between
ICRs
Green
=
Activities
moving
during
restructuring
Blue
=
Activities
moving
out
of
expiring
ICRs
Purple
=
Activities
not
covered
in
current
ICRs
Pink
=
Activities
that
will
move
when
they
expire
Gray
=
Future
amendments
UIC
Program
ICR
2040­
0042
Needs
Survey
2040­
0198
Class
V
Florida
UIC
Program
DW
SRF
2040­
0185
SWAP
2040­
0197
Op
Cert
Lab
QA
Figure
2.
Restructure
of
OGWDW
ICRs
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
5
Disinfectant
residual
monitoring
and
associated
activities
are
included
in
the
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads.
See
Exhibit
1,
page
8.

7
Exhibit
1
New
Structure
of
OGWDW
ICRs
Activity
ICR
in
which
Activity
is
Currently
Covered
Expiration
Date
PWSS
Program
ICR
(
2040­
0090)

Consumer
Confidence
Reports
CCR
ICR,
2040­
0201
9/
30/
01
Operator
Certification
Guidelines
and
Expense
Reimbursement
Grants
Program
ICR
under
OMB
review.
Approx.
9/
30/
03
Primacy
Regulation
Activities
Primacy
Regulation
ICR,
2040­
0195
9/
30/
01
Variances
&
Exemptions
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR,
2040­
0090
(
via
a
1998
Amendment)
9/
30/
01
The
Capacity
Development
Program
New
Activity
N/
A
General
State
Primacy
Activities
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR,
2040­
0090
9/
30/
01
Public
Notification
(
PN)
(
to
be
added
to
the
PWSS
Program
ICR
when
the
PN
ICR
expires)
PN
ICR,
2040­
0209
6/
30/
02
Microbial
ICR
(
2040­
0205)

Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule,
except
disinfectant
residual
monitoring
and
associated
activities5
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR,
2040­
0090
9/
30/
01
Total
Coliform
Rule
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR,
2040­
0090
9/
30/
01
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
IESWTR)
1998
IESWTR
ICR,
2040­
0205
11/
30/
01
Laboratory
QA
Evaluation
Program
New
Activity
N/
A
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
2001
FBRR
ICR,
2040­
0224
8/
31/
04
Long
Term
1
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
LT1ESWTR)
Draft
ICR
under
review
at
OMB.
N/
A
Long
Term
2
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
LT2ESWTR)
Future
addition.
N/
A
Ground
Water
Rule
(
GWR)
Future
addition.
N/
A
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
Activity
ICR
in
which
Activity
is
Currently
Covered
Expiration
Date
8
Disinfectants/
Disinfection
Byproducts,
Chemical,
and
Radionuclides
ICR
(
2040­
0204)

Stage
1
Disinfectants
and
Disinfection
Byproducts
Rule
Stage
1
DBPR
ICR,
2040­
0204
11/
30/
01
Disinfectant
Residual
Monitoring
and
Associated
Activities
under
the
SWTR
PWSS
Program
ICR,
2040­
0090
9/
30/
01
Total
Trihalomethanes
Rule
PWSS
Program
ICR,
2040­
0090
9/
30/
01
Phase
I,
II,
and
V
PWSS
Program
ICR,
2040­
0090
9/
30/
01
1976
IOCs
PWSS
Program
ICR,
2040­
0090
9/
30/
01
Lead
and
Copper
Rule
LCR
ICR,
2040­
0210
9/
30/
02
Arsenic
Rule
Arsenic
ICR,
2040­
0231
1/
31/
04
Radionuclides,
1976
Rule
PWSS
Program
ICR,
2040­
0090
9/
30/
01
Radionuclides,
2000
Rule
Rads
ICR,
2040­
0228
11/
30/
03
Unregulated
Contaminant
Monitoring
Rule
UCMR
ICR,
2040­
0208
12/
31/
03
Stage
2
DBPR
Future
addition.
N/
A
Radon
Future
addition.
N/
A
Source
Water
Assessment
Program
(
SWAP)
ICR
(
2040­
0197)

SWAP
SWAP
ICR,
2040­
0197
12/
30/
00;
Under
OMB
review
Underground
Injection
Control
(
UIC)
Program
ICR
(
2040­
0042)

UIC
Base
Program
Activities
UIC
Program
ICR,
2040­
0042
9/
30/
01
Class
V
Rule
Class
V
ICR,
2040­
0214
11/
30/
02
Florida
Class
I
Rule
None.
N/
A
Drinking
Water
State
Revolving
Fund
ICR
(
2040­
0185)

Drinking
Water
State
Revolving
Fund
(
DWSRF)
Program
DWSRF
ICR,
2040­
0185
6/
30/
03
Needs
Survey
ICR
(
2040­
0198)

1999
Needs
Survey
(
complete)
Needs
Survey
ICR,
2040­
0198
10/
31/
01
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
9
The
EPA
requires
the
information
collected
under
this
ICR
to
carry
out
its
monitoring
and
enforcement
responsibilities
under
the
SDWA.
Without
comprehensive,
up­
to­
date
information
on
drinking
water
contamination,
EPA
would
not
be
able
to
meet
the
SDWA
statutory
requirements
stated
below.

NPDWRs
under
the
SDWA
are
to
include
monitoring
requirements
(
Section
1401
(
1)(
D)).
Specifically,
the
Act
requires
that
 
there
must
be
criteria
and
standards
to
assure
a
supply
of
drinking
water
which
dependably
complies
with
such
maximum
contaminant
levels;
including
quality
control
and
testing
procedures
to
insure
compliance
with
such
levels
and
to
insure
proper
operation
and
maintenance
of
the
system,
...

Section
1445
of
the
SDWA
requires
that
 
every
person
who
is
a
supplier
of
water,
.
.
.
shall
establish
and
maintain
such
records,
make
such
reports,
conduct
such
monitoring,
and
provide
such
information
as
the
Administrator
may
reasonably
require
by
regulation
to
assist
him
in
establishing
regulations,
in
determining
whether
such
person
has
acted
or
is
in
compliance
with
this
title,
...

1)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
The
1986
SDWA
Amendments
require
the
EPA
to
propose
and
promulgate
a
NPDWR
specifying
criteria
under
which
filtration
would
be
required
as
a
treatment
technique
for
public
water
systems
supplied
by
surface
water
sources
(
Section
1412
(
b)(
7)(
C)(
i)).
In
promulgating
this
regulation
and
setting
the
criteria,
EPA
was
required
to
consider
source
water
quality;
protection
afforded
by
watershed
management
programs;
treatment
techniques,
such
as
disinfection
practices
and
length
of
water
storage;
and
other
factors
relevant
to
protection
of
health.
The
requirements
for
the
SWTR
included
in
this
ICR
help
EPA
promote
public
health
through
proper
operation
of
filtration
techniques.
Additional
SWTR
requirements,
such
as
monitoring
and
watershed
control
programs,
promote
protection
of
public
health
in
the
absence
of
filtration.

2)
Total
Coliform
Rule
The
1986
SDWA
Amendments
required
the
EPA
to
publish
maximum
contaminant
level
goals
(
MCLGs)
and
promulgate
NPDWRs
for
the
83
contaminants
listed
in
the
Advance
Notice
of
Proposed
Rulemaking
at
47
FR
45502
(
March
4,
1982)
and
48
FR
45502
(
October
5,
1983).
EPA
believes
that
promulgation
of
this
regulation
complied
with
the
statutory
requirements
for
regulating
total
coliforms
in
all
PWSs.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
10
3)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
Sections
1401(
1)
and
1412(
a)(
3)
of
the
SDWA
require
that
when
EPA
publishes
an
MCLG,
it
must
also
publish
a
NPDWR
that
specifies
either
a
MCL
or
treatment
technique.
EPA
is
authorized
to
promulgate
a
NPDWR
"
that
requires
the
use
of
a
treatment
technique
in
lieu
of
establishing
an
MCL,"
if
the
Agency
finds
that
"
it
is
not
economically
or
technologically
feasible
to
ascertain
the
level
of
the
contaminant."

To
develop
the
IESWTR,
EPA
instituted
a
formal
regulatory
negotiation
(
RegNeg)
process
in
1992
with
potentially
affected
parties
(
57
FR
53866;
Nov
13,
1992).
This
RegNeg
Committee
included
representatives
from
the
water
industry
and
other
interested
industries,
State
public
health
and
regulatory
agencies,
environmental
groups,
consumer
groups,
and
EPA.
Through
an
extensive
consensus­
building
effort,
the
RegNeg
Committee
agreed
that
EPA
should
propose
three
rules
 
°
An
Information
Collection
Rule
(
ICR)
(
finalized
in
1996).
°
A
staged
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
the
first
stage
was
promulgated
in
December
1998).
°
A
staged
Disinfectants
and
Disinfection
Byproducts
Rule
(
the
first
stage
was
promulgated
concurrently
with
the
IESWTR).
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
11
The
information
collection
will
support
the
Cryptosporidium
data
gathering
activities
that
will
be
required
under
LT2ESWTR.
The
Lab
QA
Program
is
being
implemented
in
advance
of
the
LT2ESWTR
because
the
Cryptosporidium
laboratory
evaluation
programs
must
be
in
place
and
operational
before
the
implementation
of
the
LT2ESWTR.
In
addition,
EPA
plans
to
propose
under
the
LT2ESWTR
that
PWSs
monitoring
their
source
waters
for
Cryptosporidium
prior
to
rule
implementation
may
apply
to
have
these
data
"
grandfathered."
Implementing
the
Lab
QA
Program
as
soon
as
possible
will
help
ensure
that
qualified
laboratories
are
available
to
PWSs
that
are
interested
in
pursuing
this
option.

5)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
SDWA
was
amended
in
August
1996,
resulting
in
the
addition
of
new
sections
that
establish
new
drinking
water
requirements.
SDWA
Section
1412(
b)(
14)
requires
the
Administrator
to
promulgate
a
regulation
to
govern
the
recycling
of
filter
backwash
water
within
the
treatment
process
of
a
PWS.
The
FBRR
satisfies
this
regulatory
requirement.

2(
b)
Use/
Users
of
the
Data
The
information
described
in
Section
4
of
this
ICR
will
be
collected
by
EPA
and
made
available
to
the
public
upon
request,
as
required
by
the
Freedom
of
Information
Act
(
40
CFR,
Chapter
1,
Part
2).
In
some
cases,
SDWA
requires
that
the
information
be
provided
to
the
public
or
the
primacy
agency.
Primary
users
of
the
data
collected
under
this
ICR
are
OGWDW,
PWS
managers,
and
primacy
agencies,
which
include
State
regulators,
Indian
Tribes,
and,
in
some
instances,
EPA
Regional
Administrators.
Other
users
include
the
following
 
$
Staff
from
other
EPA
programs
(
such
as
Superfund,
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act,
and
the
Office
of
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Assurance)

$
The
Federal
Emergency
Management
Administration
$
Centers
for
Disease
Control
and
Prevention
(
CDC)

$
Military
bases
$
Farmers
Home
Administration
$
Department
of
Interior
$
Department
of
Housing
and
Urban
Development
$
U.
S.
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
$
White
House
Task
Forces
$
American
Water
Works
Association
$
Association
of
Metropolitan
Water
Agencies
$
National
Rural
Water
Association
$
National
Association
of
Water
Companies
$
Association
of
State
Drinking
Water
Administrators
°
Natural
Resources
Defense
Council
°
Consumers
Federation
of
America
°
News
Organizations
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
12
Primacy
agencies
maintain
records
compiled
from
PWS
respondents
(
§
142.14)
and
can
use
these
records
to
track
PWS
monitoring,
compliance
violations,
and
enforcement
activities.
The
primacy
agency
can
also
track
schedules
for
PWSs
trying
to
achieve
compliance.
Primacy
agencies
also
report
the
number
of
violations,
which
will
help
them
to
target
systems
for
compliance
and
take
the
necessary
remedial
action.

Primacy
agencies
report
information
on
PWS
violations
to
SDWIS.
This
Federal
information
system
allows
EPA
and
States
to
store
and
retrieve
information
over
time.
Trends
in
compliance
data
can
be
evaluated
at
the
system
level,
at
the
State
level,
and
at
the
national
program
level.
Usually,
these
data
are
used
by
the
Agency
for
maintaining
oversight
and
to
support
Federal
enforcement
actions
in
cases
where
States
fail
to
enforce.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
6
The
FR
notice
references
updates
to
the
PWSS
Program
ICR,
the
original
location
of
many
of
the
microbial
rule
requirements
contained
in
this
ICR.

13
3
NON­
DUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
3(
a)
Non­
duplication
EPA
has
made
an
effort
to
ensure
that
the
data
collection
efforts
associated
with
this
ICR
are
not
duplicated.
EPA
consulted
State
environmental
programs,
other
Federal
agencies
(
such
as
the
CDC),
and
regulated
entities
(
such
as
PWSs
and
their
representative
trade
associations).
To
the
best
of
EPA's
knowledge,
data
currently
required
by
the
SDWA
(
and
its
implementing
regulations
codified
at
40
CFR
Parts
141
and
142)
are
not
available
from
any
other
source.

3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
To
comply
with
the
1995
Amendments
to
the
PRA,
EPA
solicited
public
comment
on
this
ICR
for
a
60­
day
period
before
it
was
submitted
to
OMB.
Specifically,
EPA
published
a
notice
in
the
Federal
Register
requesting
comment
on
the
estimated
respondent
burden
and
other
aspects
of
this
ICR
(
66
Federal
Register
(
FR)
21926).
6
In
addition,
EPA
published
another
FR
notice
(
66
FR
29793)
requesting
comments
on
the
Stage
1
DBPR
and
IESWTR
ICRs.
These
notices
are
included
in
Appendix
A.

3(
c)
Consultations
Throughout
the
development
and
implementation
of
various
microbial
regulations,
OGWDW
has
held
numerous
meetings
with
interested
stakeholders,
including
State
and
EPA
Regional
personnel
and
PWS
representatives,
to
identify
the
value
and
ease
of
collecting
information
needed
to
fulfill
SDWA
obligations.
As
a
standard
regulatory
development
practice
to
promote
public
involvement,
EPA
formally
solicits
public
comment
on
proposed
drinking
water
rules.
Before
any
rule
is
finalized,
EPA
logs
and
evaluates
all
written
comments
on
proposed
rules.
Additionally,
EPA
usually
holds
public
meetings
during
which
any
interested
party
may
provide
oral
testimony
for
Agency
consideration.
Such
meetings
are
typically
announced
in
the
Federal
Register
notice
accompanying
the
proposed
rule.

In
the
initial
phases
of
program
development,
or
to
confirm
assumptions
on
which
rules
or
guidelines
are
based,
EPA
often
augments
formal
meetings
with
other
workshops
or
meetings
to
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
14
gather
information.
The
following
are
specific
examples
of
meetings
and
other
consultations
held
by
EPA
to
address
the
regulations
and
programs
contained
in
this
ICR
 
°
In
1981,
EPA
held
a
workshop
on
drinking
water
microbiology.

°
In
1985,
EPA
held
a
workshop
to
discuss
options
for
regulating
microbial
contaminants.

°
In
1985,
the
Federal
Register
presented
a
discussion
on
the
need
for
mandatory
filtration
and
disinfection
of
surface
water.
This
FR
notice
also
requested
public
comment
on
the
subject.

°
A
FR
notice
was
published
on
May
6,
1988,
to
discuss
additional
alternatives
for
the
proposed
SWTR.

°
The
TCR
was
published
on
June
29,
1989.
A
6­
year
review
for
the
TCR
is
currently
underway.
EPA
is
now
reviewing
preliminary
comments
from
major
stakeholders,
including
EPA
Regions
and
industry
representatives.
Further
public
comment
will
be
solicited
for
any
changes
proposed
as
part
of
the
6­
year
review
process.
If
necessary,
EPA
will
hold
public
meetings
as
the
review
process
continues.

°
In
1992,
EPA
instituted
a
formal
regulatory
negotiation
(
RegNeg)
process
to
discuss
proposed
amendments
to
the
SDWA
with
potentially
affected
parties
(
57
FR
53866;
Nov.
13,
1992).
This
RegNeg
Committee
included
representatives
from
water
utilities
and
other
industries,
State
public
health
and
regulatory
agencies,
environmental
groups,
consumer
groups,
and
EPA.
Following
an
extensive
consensus­
building
effort,
the
RegNeg
Committee
agreed
that
EPA
should
propose
three
rules:
Information
Collection
Rule
(
ICR)
(
finalized
in
1996),
staged
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rules,
and
staged
Disinfectants
and
Disinfection
Byproducts
Rules
(
Stage1
was
promulgated
concurrently
with
IESWTR).

°
A
microbial
contaminants
and
disinfection
byproducts
(
M/
DBP)
advisory
committee,
formed
under
the
authority
of
the
Federal
Advisory
Committees
Act
(
FACA),
convened
in
1997
to
review
the
data
and
assumptions
used
to
support
the
1994
proposed
changes
to
the
SWTR
and
data
that
had
subsequently
been
collected.
In
July
1997,
participants
signed
an
agreement
in
principle,
outlining
the
Committee's
recommendations
to
EPA
on
the
major
components
of
the
IESWTR
and
Stage
1
DBPR.

°
Between
March
and
December
1997,
the
Small
System
Data
Needs
Working
Group
held
six
meetings
to
discuss
availability
of
water
quality
and
financial
data
for
small
systems.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
15
°
Twenty­
four
small
entity
representatives
(
SERs)
were
invited
to
participate
in
a
teleconference
to
discuss
the
FBRR
on
April
28,
1998.
Of
the
24
invited
SERs,
15
participated
in
the
teleconference.

°
On
August
21,
1998,
a
Small
Business
Advocacy
Review
Panel
(
SBARP)
met
to
discuss
the
proposed
FBRR.
Two
additional
meetings
of
the
SBARP
were
held
between
August
21
and
October
19,
1998.

°
In
September
1998,
the
SBARP
distributed
information
on
regulatory
approaches
and
costs
to
the
SERs
for
review
and
comment.

°
The
SBARP
and
SERs
participated
in
a
joint
teleconference
on
September
25,
1998.

3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
EPA
has
considered
a
wide
range
of
alternatives
for
frequency
of
data
collection.
Where
possible,
EPA
has
chosen
to
require
the
least
frequent
collection
that
remains
consistent
with
overall
public
health
protection
objectives.
If
data
are
collected
less
frequently,
the
Primacy
agency
may
not
identify
in
a
timely
fashion
significant
contaminant
concentrations
which
might
threaten
the
health
and
safety
of
drinking
water
consumers.

For
some
microbial
contaminant
regulations,
the
State
has
discretion
in
adjusting
the
monitoring
schedules.
Monitoring
frequencies
are
based
on
regulatory
requirements,
which
vary
based
on
the
number
of
people
served
by
a
system,
contaminants
likely
to
be
found,
and
source
of
raw
water
supply.
The
monitoring
frequency
design
also
considers
that
the
number
of
persons
served
affects
exposure
to
contaminants,
as
well
as
the
resources
available
to
undertake
monitoring
activity.
Monitoring
frequencies
have
been
carefully
devised
based
on
the
following
factors
 
°
Data
quality
needed
for
a
representative
sample.
°
Precision
and
accuracy
needed
from
the
representative
sample.
°
Number
of
people
served
by
the
system.
°
Source
of
the
supply
(
e.
g.,
surface
water
or
ground
water).
°
Contaminants
likely
to
be
found.
°
Historical
variability
in
contaminant
occurrence.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
16
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
This
ICR
was
prepared
in
accordance
with
the
February
1999
version
of
EPA's
Guide
to
Writing
Information
Collection
Requests
Under
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
PRA)
of
1995
(
or
"
ICR
Handbook")
prepared
by
EPA's
Office
of
Environmental
Information,
Office
of
Information
Collection,
Collection
Strategies
Division.
The
ICR
Handbook
provides
the
most
current
instructions
for
ICR
preparation
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
1995
PRA
amendments
and
OMB's
implementing
guidelines.

3(
f)
Confidentiality
No
confidential
information
will
be
collected
as
a
result
of
this
ICR.

3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
No
information
of
a
sensitive
nature
will
be
collected
as
a
result
of
this
ICR.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
7
Includes
all
rule
components
except
disinfectant
residual
monitoring
and
associated
activities,
which
are
included
in
the
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads
ICR.
(
See
Footnote
3
for
more
information).

17
4
RESPONDENTS
AND
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
4(
a)
Respondents/
NAICS
Codes
Data
associated
with
this
ICR
are
collected
and
maintained
at
the
PWS,
State,
and
Federal
levels.
Respondents
includeC
$
Owners/
operators
of
PWSs,
who
must
report
to
the
primacy
agency.

$
Primacy
agencies
that
must
report
to
EPA
Headquarters.

$
Regional
EPA
Administrators,
who
must
send
reports
and
notices
to
PWS
owners
and
States.

The
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
code
for
PWSs
is
22131.
The
NAICS
code
for
State
agencies
that
include
drinking
water
programs
are
classified
as
92411
(
Administration
of
Air
and
Water
Resources
and
Solid
Waste
Management
Programs)
or
92312
(
Administration
of
Public
Health
Programs).
Ancillary
systems
(
i.
e.,
those
that
supplement
the
function
of
other
establishments
like
factories,
power
plants,
mobile
home
parks,
etc.)
cannot
be
categorized
in
a
single
NAICS
code.
For
ancillary
systems,
the
NAICS
code
is
that
of
the
primary
establishment
or
industry.

4(
b)
Information
Requested
4(
b)(
i)
Data
Items
1)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule7
Provisions
of
the
SWTR
require
the
following
data
to
be
collected
by
PWSs
 
°
Source
water
coliform
data
for
unfiltered
systems
[
§
141.74(
b)(
1)].
°
Turbidity
data
for
unfiltered
systems
[
§
141.74(
b)(
2)].
°
Combined
filter
effluent
data
for
filtered
systems
[
§
141.74(
c)(
1)].
°
Annual
summary
of
watershed
control
program
for
unfiltered
systems.
°
Annual
report
summarizing
the
results
of
on­
site
inspections
for
unfiltered
systems
°
A
report
to
the
primacy
agency
within
48
hours
following
attribution
of
any
waterborne
disease
outbreak
in
an
unfiltered
system.

In
addition,
primacy
agencies
must
submit
special
reports
as
specified
in
§
142(
15)(
c).
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
8
Subpart
H
systems
include
all
PWSs
using
surface
water
or
ground
water
under
the
direct
influence
of
surface
water
as
a
source
(
40
CFR
§
141.2).

18
2)
Total
Coliform
Rule
The
TCR
requires
PWSs
to
collect
and
report
levels
of
coliform
bacteria
(
as
total
coliform)
in
the
distribution
system
and
data
on
the
presence
or
absence
of
E.
coli
or
fecal
coliform.
Primacy
agencies
must
maintain
results
of
sanitary
surveys
conducted
under
TCR.

3)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
The
IESWTR
requires
individual
filter
monitoring
and
modifies
the
turbidity
levels
specified
in
the
SWTR.
For
records
kept
by
PWSs,
the
IESWTR
requires
the
following
 

Individual
filter
turbidity
measurements
(
§
141.174(
a)).

Exceptions
to
turbidity
performance
for
individual
filters
(
§
141.175).

The
IESWTR
(
in
§
142.14)
requires
primacy
agencies
to
maintain
the
following
items
for
each
PWS
in
the
State
 

List
of
decisions
for
a
system
using
alternative
filtration
technologies
that
has
demonstrated
that
it
can
achieve
99
percent
removal
of
Cryptosporidium
oocysts.

List
of
systems
that
report
turbidity
exceptions.

Records
of
any
other
system­
by­
system
and
case­
by­
case
decisions
made
by
that
State
under
the
rule.

Record
of
PWSs
that
change
their
disinfection
processes.

Additionally,
the
primacy
agency
must
report
the
following
(
per
§
142.15)
 

Subpart
H8
systems
that
have
had
a
sanitary
survey
in
the
last
year.

Evaluation
of
the
State's
program
for
conducting
sanitary
surveys
for
all
Subpart
H
systems.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
19
5)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
FBRR
adds
the
following
requirements
to
PWS
reporting
and
recordkeeping
responsibilities
(
as
itemized
in
§
141.76.)
 

Recycle
notification,
which
includes
plant
schematic,
recycle
flow,
and
plant
flow.

List
of
all
recycle
flows
and
the
frequency
with
which
they
are
returned.

Average
and
maximum
backwash
flow
rates
through
the
filters.

Average
and
maximum
duration
of
the
filter
backwash
process.

Typical
filter
run
length
and
a
written
summary
of
how
filter
run
length
is
determined.

Type
of
treatment
provided
for
the
recycle
flow.

Data
on
the
physical
dimensions
of
the
equalization
and/
or
treatment
units,
typical
and
maximum
hydraulic
loading
rates,
type
of
treatment
chemicals
used,
average
dose
of
treatment
chemicals,
frequency
of
treatment
chemical
use,
and
frequency
at
which
solids
are
removed,
if
applicable.

Alternate
recycle
locations.

4(
b)(
ii)
Respondent
Activities
PWSs,
laboratories,
and
primacy
agencies
must
complete
the
activities
described
in
the
sections
below.

Public
Water
Systems
and
Laboratories
In
general,
each
PWS
is
involved
in
the
following
collection
activities
 

Gathering
information.

Processing,
compiling,
and
reviewing
the
information
collected.

Submitting
reports
and
other
documents.

Recording
and
maintaining
the
information.

For
this
ICR,
these
activities
are
necessary
to
complete
monitoring,
reporting,
and
recordkeeping
requirements
associated
with
microbial
contaminant­
related
regulations.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
9
Includes
all
rule
components
except
disinfectant
residual
monitoring
and
associated
activities,
which
are
included
in
the
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads
ICR.
(
See
Footnote
3
for
more
information).

20
1)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule9
Requirements
for
reporting
under
the
SWTR
are
separated
into
those
for
systems
that
use
filtration
treatment
and
those
for
systems
that
do
not
use
filtration
treatment.
The
reporting
requirements
for
these
types
of
PWSs
are
summarized
in
the
paragraphs
below.

Unfiltered
Systems
°
Monitor
and
report
information
on
the
results
of
source
water
monitoring
for
total
or
fecal
coliforms
and
turbidity.
°
Submit
this
information
each
month
that
the
system
is
in
operation.
°
Summarize
fecal
or
total
coliform
monitoring
by
including
the
number
of
total
or
fecal
coliform
samples
collected;
the
values
obtained
for
each
measurement;
the
number
of
results
less
than
20/
100
ml
for
fecal
coliforms
or
less
than
100/
100
ml
for
total
coliforms
during
the
month;
the
cumulative
number
of
fecal
or
total
coliform
results
obtained
since
the
start
of
the
six
consecutive
month
compliance
period;
and
the
percent
of
samples
less
than
the
respective
performance
standard
for
the
6­
month
compliance
period.
°
Summarize
turbidity
information
to
includes
values
obtained
for
each
measurement
of
CFE;
the
value
and
date
of
each
measurement
that
exceeded
five
NTUs;
and
when
the
system
informed
its
customers
to
boil
their
water.

Filtered
Systems
°
Monitor
and
report
to
the
State
on
a
monthly
basis
information
regarding
CFE
turbidity.
Turbidity
reporting
requirements
vary
according
to
the
filtration
technology
used.

2)
Total
Coliform
Rule
PWSs
must
conduct
the
follwoing
activities
to
comply
with
the
TCR
 
°
Collect
water
samples
at
specified
intervals,
as
defined
in
the
Federal
or
State
regulations.
°
Collect
monitoring
data
on
the
level
of
coliform
bacteria
(
as
total
coliform)
in
the
distribution
system.
°
Collect
data
on
the
presence
or
absence
of
E.
coli
or
fecal
coliform,
following
a
positive
routine
total
coliform
sample.
°
Report
laboratory
results
and
violations
to
the
State
at
frequencies
required
by
Federal
and
State
regulations.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
21
3)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
The
IESWTR
only
applies
to
systems
serving
at
least
10,000
people;
these
PWSs
are
required
to
do
the
following
 
°
Install
and
monitor
individual
filter
turbidimeters
for
each
filter
in
the
system
(
§
§
141.170
and
141.174).
°
Take
individual
filter
turbidimeter
readings
at
the
intervals
specified
by
§
141.174.
°
Report
individual
filter
turbidity
monitoring
results
to
the
State
at
frequencies
specified
in
the
Federal
and
State
regulations.
°
Report
exceptions
to
the
primacy
agency
in
cases
where
the
monitoring
shows
exceedances
of
specific
turbidity
levels.
°
Perform
a
filter
profile,
filter
assessment,
or
a
CPE
if
warranted
(
§
141.175).
°
Provide
a
CPE
report
to
the
State
if
necessary.

5)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
The
FBRR
requires
each
affected
PWS
to
report
recycle
practice
information
to
the
State
and
maintain
records
on
recycle
flows.
In
general,
to
comply
with
FBRR,
PWSs
must
complete
some
additional
collection
activities
 

Mobilization
and
planning
activities.

Meeting
with
the
State
regarding
changes
in
recycling
practices.

Primacy
Agencies
In
general,
primacy
agencies
conduct
the
following
activities
with
regard
to
reporting
and
recordkeeping
 
°
Maintaining
an
inventory
of
PWSs.
°
Compiling
results
of
analyses
of
drinking
water
samples.
°
Analyzing
and
reviewing
PWS
data.
°
Making
determinations
concerning
PWSs.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
22
°
Tracking
PWS
compliance.
°
Listing
systems
not
in
compliance
with
drinking
water
standards.
°
Recordkeeping
such
as
maintaining
State
approval
of
plans
and
specifications,
enforcement
activities,
and
variances
and
exemptions
for
each
PWS.

By
conducting
these
activities,
primacy
agencies
are
able
to
evaluate
PWS
performance
and
to
identify
PWS
needs
and
problem
areas.
They
also
identify
enforcement
targets
and
systems
requiring
remedial
action.
In
addition,
States
serve
as
respondents
when
reporting
compliance
data
to
the
Federal
government.
Some
of
these
activities
are
covered
in
the
PWSS
Program
ICR
as
general
primacy
activities.
Therefore,
only
microbial
contaminant­
specific
recordkeeping
activities
have
been
included
in
this
Microbial
ICR.

1)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
The
SWTR
states
that
primacy
agencies
must
conduct
the
following
 
°
Collect
and
maintain
information
submitted
by
PWSs.
°
Record
which
systems
using
surface
water
are
required
to
provide
filtration
and
which
are
not.
These
records
must
be
kept
indefinitely.
°
Submit
a
special
report
to
the
EPA
Administrator
listing
PWSs
that
are
not
required
to
filter.
°
Retain
the
results
of
microbiological
contaminant
analyses
of
source
water
samples
in
the
same
manner
as
other
microbiological
contaminant
analytical
results.

2)
Total
Coliform
Rule
Primacy
agencies
are
required
by
the
TCR
to
conduct
the
following
activities
 
°
Analyze
monitoring
results
and
identify
systems
not
in
compliance
with
either
MCLs
(
or
performance
criteria)
or
monitoring
and
reporting
frequencies.
°
Provide
in
writing
permission
for
reduced
monitoring
or
monitoring
waivers;
maintain
for
5
years.
°
Submit
to
the
EPA
Administrator
a
special
report
that
lists
PWSs
that
have
received
permission
to
reduce
monitoring
requirements
[
§
142(
15)(
c)].
°
Collect
and
maintain
data
regarding
the
results
of
sanitary
surveys
conducted
under
the
TCR.

3)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
States
are
required
to
maintain
records
of
State
verification
activities
and
each
determination
made
and
to
report
to
EPA
in
accordance
with
State
reporting
requirements
(
§
142.15)
through
the
SDWIS.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
23
Primacy
agencies
ensure
that
PWSs
are
implementing
IESWTR
(
§
142.16)
properly.
To
meet
these
responsibilities,
States
are
involved
in
the
following
additional
activities
 

Conducting
CPEs
for
PWSs.

Conducting
sanitary
surveys.

4)
Laboratory
Quality
Assurance
Evaluation
Program
for
Analysis
of
Cryptosporidium
in
Water
No
State
activities
are
associated
with
the
Lab
QA
Program.

5)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
For
the
FBRR,
primacy
agencies
incur
a
recordkeeping
requirement
for
maintaining
data
submitted
by
conventional
and
direct
filtration
PWSs
that
recycle.
Primacy
agencies
must
also
maintain
written
approval
for
all
PWSs
with
alternate
recycle
locations
(
§
142.14).

Primacy
agencies
will
ensure
that
PWSs
are
implementing
the
FBRR
properly
(
§
142.16).
To
meet
these
responsibilities
successfully,
EPA
anticipates
that
States
will
engage
in
the
following
additional
activities
 

Training
PWS
and
consultant
staff.

Consulting
with
PWSs
on
changes
in
recycling
practices.

Conducting
follow­
up
inspections.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
24
5
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
­­
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
As
part
of
its
supervisory
responsibility,
EPA
maintains
SDWIS
and
evaluates
SDWIS
data
to
determine
system
compliance.
Agency
personnel
also
reformat,
distribute,
and
store
these
data
for
a
number
of
uses,
including
responding
to
Congressional
and
public
inquiries.
EPA
also
oversees
its
Regional
and
State
programs,
provides
technical
assistance,
and
develops
policies
designed
to
ensure
consistent
program
implementation.
EPA
officials
serve
as
respondents
when
testifying
to
Congress
on
the
PWSS
Program
or
in
the
courts
for
enforcement
actions.

Burden
and
costs
for
these
activities
are
addressed
in
the
PWSS
Program
ICR
(
OMB
No.
2040­
0090).
Section
5(
a)
of
the
PWSS
Program
ICR
contains
additional
detail
regarding
the
activities
supported
by
the
collection
of
SDWIS
data
described
above.

In
addition
to
these
activities,
the
Agency
will
also
assume
the
activities
performed
by
the
State
in
those
States
and
territories
that
do
not
have
primacy.
Specifically,
the
Agency
will
be
involved
in
the
following
activities
related
to
microbial
contaminant
regulations
 
°
Mobilization,
planning,
and
implementation.
°
Training
PWS
and
consultant
staff.
°
Analyzing
and
reviewing
PWS
data.
°
Making
determinations
concerning
PWSs.
°
Conduct
CPEs
and
sanitary
surveys.
°
Meeting
with
PWSs
about
changes
in
recycling
practices.
°
Compliance
tracking.
°
Recordkeeping.

Burden
and
costs
for
these
activities
are
accounted
for
under
the
primacy
agency
burden
(
see
Section
4).
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
10In
the
next
few
years,
EPA
anticipates
a
substantial
reduction
in
the
burden
and
cost
associated
with
reporting
data
because
of
increased
efficiency
of
electronic
reporting
by
PWSs
and
State
agencies.
Laboratories
are
developing
the
ability
to
report
monitoring
data
directly
to
primacy
agencies.

25
5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
Primacy
agencies
must
report
data
quarterly
to
EPA.
These
data
include
any
new
data
and
revisions
or
corrections
to
existing
data.
This
information
is
maintained
in
SDWIS,
which
contains
the
followingC
$
Inventory
data
for
each
PWS.

$
Violations.

$
Enforcement
actions
and
some
follow­
up
activity.

$
Variances
and
exemptions.

Primacy
agencies
transmit
SDWIS
data
to
EPA
both
manually
and
electronically.
In
Wyoming
and
Indian
Lands
(
except
for
the
Navajo
Nation,
which
has
primacy),
results
of
system
samples
are
sent
directly
to
the
EPA
Region.
Virtually
all
SDWIS
data
are
reported
electronically
by
the
primacy
agency.
10
SDWIS
data
support
a
number
of
rule
implementation
and
program
management
activities,
which
include
the
followingC

Tracking
the
status
of
PWSs
that
are
in
significant
non­
compliance
(
SNC).
This
information
is
provided
to
the
Office
of
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Assurance,
as
part
of
the
Reporting
for
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Assurance
Priorities.
These
data
provide
senior
management
with
information
on
trends
in
drinking
water
enforcement.

Supporting
data
verification.
EPA
Regions
undertake
an
extensive
review
of
SDWIS
dataCthe
primary
purposes
of
which
is
to
assess
the
quality
of
data
and
recommend
any
necessary
changes
in
collection
or
reporting
methodologies.

$
Promoting
consistent
national
program
implementation.
The
process
of
data
verification
provides
insights
into
the
primacy
agency's
interpretation
of
regulations.
Such
information
supports
fair
and
consistent
SDWA
implementation
and
enforcement.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
11
These
definitions
were
taken
from
§
601
of
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act.

26
All
costs
for
rule­
related
data
management
activities
are
addressed
in
the
PWSS
Program
ICR
(
OMB
No.
2040­
0090).
Section
5(
b)
of
the
PWSS
Program
ICR
contains
additional
detail
regarding
the
activities
supported
by
the
collection
of
SDWIS
data
described
above.

5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
In
developing
this
ICR,
EPA
considered
the
requirement
of
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
(
SBREFA)
to
minimize
the
burden
of
information
collections
on
small
entities.
Small
entities
include
"
small
businesses,"
"
small
organizations"
and
"
small
government
jurisdictions."
These
terms
are
defined
below.
11

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

A
small
organization
is
any
non­
profit
enterprise
that
is
independently
owned
and
operated
and
not
dominant
in
its
field.

A
small
governmental
jurisdiction
is
the
government
of
a
city,
county,
town,
township,
village,
school
district
or
special
district
that
has
a
population
of
fewer
than
50,000.
This
definition
may
also
include
Indian
Tribes.

The
major
requirement
under
SBREFA
is
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis
(
RFA)
of
all
rules
that
have
a
"
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities."
Since
this
ICR
is
not
currently
associated
with
new
rules,
it
is
not
currently
subject
to
the
SBREFA.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
27
Throughout
the
1992
 
93
negotiated
rulemaking
process
for
the
Stage
1
DBPR,
the
IESWTR,
and
the
July
1994
proposals
for
these
rules,
a
small
PWS
was
defined
as
a
system
serving
fewer
than
10,000
people.
This
definition
reflects
the
original
1979
standard
for
TTHMs
which
applied
only
to
systems
serving
at
least
10,000
people.
The
definition
thus
recognizes
that
the
baseline
conditions
from
which
systems
serving
fewer
than
10,000
people
would
approach
disinfection
byproduct
control
and
simultaneous
control
of
microbial
pathogens
would
be
different
than
those
for
systems
serving
10,000
or
more
people.
Consistent
with
the
1994
proposals,
EPA
is
continuing
to
define
a
"
small
system"
(
for
the
purposes
of
the
microbial
contaminant
regulations)
as
a
PWS
that
serves
fewer
than
10,000
people.
Subsequent
to
the
1994
proposals,
EPA
defined
a
"
small
business"
for
purposes
of
RFA
in
drinking
water
regulations
as
a
PWS
serving
10,000
or
fewer
people.
This
definition
is
consistent
with
the
approach
used
herein
and
that
was
noted
in
the
1996
Congressional
amendments
to
SDWA.

EPA
has
made
significant
efforts
to
minimize
the
burden
for
all
respondents,
particularly
for
small
entities.
In
setting
both
MCLs
and
monitoring
requirements,
EPA
has
been
able
to
minimize
burden
for
small
entities
in
the
following
ways
 
1)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
Only
a
small
percentage
of
small
systems
use
surface
water
supplies;
therefore,
this
rule
does
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
Since
system
size
is
the
key
determinant
of
the
monitoring
frequency
requirements
of
the
SWTR,
systems
serving
fewer
than
3,300
persons
will
have
the
least
stringent
monitoring
requirements.

EPA
will
allow
a
reduction
in
the
frequency
of
turbidity
monitoring
from
six
samples
per
day
to
one
sample
per
day
for
systems
using
slow
sand
filtration
treatment
or
other
eligible
technologies.
Systems
serving
fewer
than
500
people
may
also
reduce
sampling
to
once
per
day
regardless
of
filtration
type.

2)
Total
Coliform
Rule
The
number
of
required
coliform
samples
varies
directly
with
system
size.
Specifically,
for
CWSs,
the
number
of
samples
range
from
a
minimum
of
one
sample
per
month
for
systems
serving
fewer
than
1,000
people
to
480
samples
per
month
for
those
serving
3,960,001
or
more
people.
This
requirement
is
codified
at
40
CFR
§
141.21(
a).
Generally,
quarterly
monitoring
must
be
conducted
at
NCWSs
using
only
ground
water
that
is
not
under
the
direct
influence
of
surface
water
and
serving
1,000
or
fewer
people.
As
provided
for
in
§
141.21(
a)(
3)(
i),
however,
the
primacy
agency
may
reduce
the
quarterly
monitoring
frequency,
as
a
result
of
a
sanitary
survey.

3)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
Except
for
sanitary
survey
requirements,
which
are
carried
out
by
the
primacy
agency,
the
IESWTR
only
applies
to
systems
serving
at
least
10,000
people.
Accordingly,
the
rule
does
not
have
a
significant
impact
on
small
entities.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
28
5)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
The
FBRR
applies
to
both
large
and
small
systems.
Therefore,
the
rule
will
have
an
effect
on
small
entities.
Accordingly,
as
part
of
the
economic
analysis
for
the
rule,
EPA
is
certifying
that
this
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
systems.
As
a
result,
an
RFA
was
not
required
to
be
conducted.

5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
The
collection
schedules
for
each
rule
are
summarized
below.
Additional
information
may
be
obtained
by
consulting
the
individual
rules
for
specific
collection
schedules.

Exhibit
2
Collection
Schedule
Rule
Collection
Commencement
Year
SWTR
1990/
1993
(
depending
on
filtration
status)

TCR
1991
 
coliform
monitoring
1994
 
sanitary
surveys
IEWSTR
2002
­
turbidity
monitoring
2002/
2004
­
sanitary
surveys
(
depending
on
size
and
source
type)

FBRR
2004
Lab
QA
Program
2002
6
ESTIMATING
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
COLLECTION
This
section
estimates
the
burden
and
cost
to
PWSs,
laboratories,
primacy
agencies,
and
EPA
for
complying
with
drinking
water
information
requirements
associated
with
microbial
contaminant
rulemakings
and
related
programs.
These
include
the
following
 
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
12
Includes
all
rule
components
except
disinfectant
residual
monitoring
and
associated
activities,
which
are
included
in
the
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads
ICR.
(
See
footnote
1for
more
information).

13
Currently,
only
descriptions
of
FBRR
activities
are
included
in
this
ICR.
Burden
and
costs
for
the
FBRR
are
described
in
the
Microbial
ICR
to
facilitate
their
inclusion
at
a
future
date.
Until
then,
all
burden
and
cost
values
have
been
zeroed
out
for
FBRR
activities.
Evaluation
of
the
FBRR's
potential
impact
on
the
Microbial
ICR
is
included
in
Section
6(
f)(
iv).

14
The
State
Workload
Model
is
a
spreadsheet
model
used
by
States/
Primacy
Agencies
to
estimate
resource
needs
for
implementation
of
drinking
water
regulations.

15
The
most
recent
frozen
SDWIS
database
pull
is
from
January
2001
and
reflects
data
updated
through
September
2000.

29
46)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
SWTR)
12
47)
Total
Coliform
Rule
(
TCR)
48)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
IESWTR)
49)
Laboratory
Quality
Assurance
Evaluation
Program
for
Analysis
of
Cryptosporidium
in
Water
(
Lab
QA
Program)
50)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
(
FBRR)
13
This
ICR
updates
the
annual
burdens
and
costs
associated
with
these
rulemakings
and
related
programs
for
the
3­
year
ICR
period
2002
through
2004.
This
section
also
discusses
the
assumptions
used
to
estimate
cost
and
burden
and
describes
the
change
in
annual
burden,
as
compared
with
the
current
OMB
annual
burden
inventory.

For
this
update,
many
assumptions
were
revised
based
on
program
changes
and
welldocumented
changes
in
some
data.
EPA
is
committed
to
accurately
characterizing
the
burden
and
costs
of
rules
it
promulgates.
Consequently,
it
has
maintained
communication
with
interested
stakeholders.
Based
on
the
information
gathered
during
consultations
with
these
stakeholders,
EPA
has
refined
some
of
the
assumptions
for
calculating
the
burden
and
costs
associated
with
implementing
the
drinking
water
regulations
and
programs
contained
in
this
ICR.

Specifically,
EPA
noted
several
inconsistencies
in
assumptions
used
to
estimate
burden
and
costs
in
previous
ICRs.
To
provide
a
comparable
basis
on
which
to
calculate
the
requirements
addressed
by
the
Microbial
ICR
and
to
address
inconsistencies,
EPA
applied
uniform
assumptions
to
all
rules
and
programs.
The
categories
of
assumptions
are
listed
below.

$
Labor
ratesCfor
PWSs,
a
mean
hourly
rate
of
$
15.02
with
an
overhead
rate
of
60
percent;
for
States,
the
hourly
rate
from
the
most
recent
State
Workload
Model.
14
$
PWS
inventory
figures
from
the
most
recent
frozen
SDWIS
database
pull.
15
$
Number
of
entry
pointsCderived
from
the
1993
ASDWA
survey
(
surface
water)
and
1995
Community
Water
System
Survey
(
ground
water).

$
Number
of
plantsCdata
from
the
1995
Community
Water
System
Survey
(
CWSS).

6(
a)
Respondent
Burden
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
30
6(
a)(
i)
Burden
to
Public
Water
Systems
and
Laboratories
The
annual
PWS
and
laboratory
burden
for
FYs
2002
through
2004
is
estimated
to
be
approximately
6.62
million
hours.
Exhibit
3
(
at
the
end
of
Section
6(
b))
shows
the
breakdown
of
the
annual
burden
hours
on
rule­
or
program­
specific
bases.
Wherever
possible,
activity­
level
burden
assumptions
were
carried
forward
from
previous
ICRs.
However,
if
updated
data
were
available
(
e.
g.,
system
inventories),
the
data
were
used
in
burden
calculations.
Appendices
E
through
H
show
the
assumptions
and
detailed
burden
calculations
for
each
rule
or
program.
The
following
further
describes
the
bases
for
the
burden
estimates
for
each
rule
or
program.

1)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
Activities
associated
with
the
SWTR
account
for
0.76
million
annual
burden
hours.
The
assumptions
used
to
calculate
the
SWTR
burden
are
based
largely
on
assumptions
from
the
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR,
which
maintained
the
assumptions
and
burden
estimates
from
the
February
1989
Information
Collection
Request
for:
National
Primary
Drinking
Water
Regulations
for
the
Final
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule.
This
ICR
includes
burden
estimates
for
all
components
of
the
SWTR
except
disinfectant
residual
monitoring
and
associated
activities,
which
are
included
in
the
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads
ICR.
For
unfiltered
systems,
burden
estimates
include
raw
water
sampling
for
coliforms,
on­
site
inspections,
watershed
management,
and
raw
water
turbidity
monitoring.
The
burden
for
filtered
systems
includes
only
finished
water
turbidity
monitoring.
Section
6(
f)
describes
the
reasons
for
changes
between
the
burden
reported
in
the
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR
and
the
Microbial
ICR.
Detailed
burden
and
cost
calculations
for
the
SWTR
are
provided
in
Appendix
E.

2)
Total
Coliform
Rule
Activities
associated
with
the
TCR
account
for
a
burden
of
2.22
million
hours
per
year.
The
burden
estimates
include
routine
total
coliform
monitoring
and
repeat
sampling
for
E.
coli
or
fecal
coliform.
The
assumptions
used
to
calculate
the
TCR
burden
are
based
largely
on
assumptions
from
the
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR,
which
maintained
the
assumptions
and
burden
estimates
from
the
March
1989
Information
Collection
Request
for:
National
Primary
Drinking
Water
Regulations
for
the
Total
Coliform
Rule.
Section
6(
f)
describes
the
reasons
for
changes
between
the
burden
reported
in
the
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR
and
the
Microbial
ICR.
Appendix
F
summarizes
the
assumptions
used
to
calculate
the
TCR
burden
and
provides
the
detailed
burden
and
cost
calculations.

3)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
Total
annual
burden
for
PWSs
for
the
IESWTR
is
estimated
to
be
3.63
million
hours.
Included
in
this
burden
is
individual
filter
turbidity
monitoring,
turbidity
exceptions
reporting,
and
conducting
individual
filter
self­
assessments
(
IFAs).
Activity­
level
burden
assumptions
for
this
ICR
were
carried
forward
from
the
September
1998
Information
Collection
Request
for
the
National
Primary
Drinking
Water
Regulations:
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
(
IESWTR
ICR).
Reasons
for
changes
in
burden
between
the
IESWTR
ICR
and
the
Microbial
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
31
ICR
are
summarized
in
Section
6(
f).
Detailed
information
about
assumptions,
burden,
and
calculations
are
provided
in
Appendix
G.

4)
Laboratory
Quality
Assurance
Evaluation
Program
for
Analysis
of
Cryptosporidium
in
Drinking
Water
The
Lab
QA
Program
is
a
new
program
for
laboratories
wishing
to
perform
Cryptosporidium
analyses
for
PWSs
under
the
upcoming
LT2ESWTR.
Any
burden
incurred
under
this
program
is
voluntary.
The
burden
for
the
Lab
QA
Program
is
incurred
by
laboratories,
not
PWSs.
To
estimate
burden
hours,
EPA
consulted
with
fewer
than
nine
respondents
from
the
community
of
laboratories
that
may
voluntarily
apply
for
EPA
recognition
of
laboratory
capability
to
perform
Cryptosporidium
analyses
using
EPA
Method
1622
and
EPA
Method
1623.
Total
annual
burden
for
laboratories
under
the
Lab
QA
Program
is
estimated
to
be
0.005
million
hours.
Detailed
information
about
assumptions,
burden,
and
calculations
are
provided
in
Appendix
H.

5)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
Implementation
of
the
FBRR
is
expected
to
result
in
burden
hours
for
activities
related
to
startup,
recycle
notification,
recycle
flow
information
requirements,
and
alternative
location
requests.
This
ICR
will
incorporate
assumptions
from
the
2001
Information
Collection
Request
for
the
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
(
FBRR
ICR).
These
burden
hours
will
be
incorporated
via
an
ICW
after
final
publication
of
the
Microbial
ICR.
Section
6(
f)(
iv)
includes
a
discussion
of
the
impact
of
these
burden
hours.

6(
a)(
ii)
Burden
to
Primacy
Agencies
The
annual
burden
for
primacy
agencies
for
FYs
2002
through
2004
is
estimated
to
be
approximately
1.58
million
hours.
Exhibit
4
(
at
the
end
of
Section
6(
b))
shows
the
annual
burden
hours
on
a
rule­
or
program­
specific
basis.
Many
other
primacy
agency
activities,
such
as
compliance
assurance
and
data
management,
cannot
be
divided
among
specific
rules
and
are
included
in
the
2001
PWSS
Program
ICR
as
general
primacy
activities.
The
following
briefly
describes
the
bases
for
the
burden
estimates
included
in
this
ICRC
1)
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
The
annual
State
burden
for
the
SWTR
is
expected
to
be
0.17
million
hours.
All
of
this
burden
is
associated
with
review
of
CFE
turbidity
monitoring
results.
Detailed
calculations
for
burden
and
cost
are
shown
in
Appendix
E.

2)
Total
Coliform
Rule
For
primacy
agencies,
the
annual
burden
associated
with
the
TCR
is
estimated
to
be
approximately
0.80
million
hours.
This
reflects
burden
to
monitor
TCR­
related
activities
and
to
conduct
sanitary
surveys
on
systems
serving
fewer
than
4,100
people.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
32
In
the
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR,
burden
for
sanitary
surveys
was
attributed
to
PWSs.
The
rationale
for
this
assumption
is
drawn
from
the
1989
TCR
ICR,
which
states
 
...
although
the
rule
requires
that
sanitary
surveys
be
conducted
by
the
State
or
an
agent
of
the
State,
States
will
most
likely
offset
the
significant
costs
associated
with
conducting
the
surveys
by
charging
user
fees
or
requiring
systems
to
pay
outside
contractors
to
conduct
the
surveys
as
agents
of
the
State.
Therefore,
costs
and
burdens
associated
with
sanitary
surveys
were
attributed
to
public
water
systems...

However,
since
the
rule
clearly
requires
the
State
(
or
an
agent
of
the
State)
to
conduct
sanitary
surveys,
this
ICR
attributes
burden
for
sanitary
surveys
to
the
States.
Appendix
F
shows
detailed
burden
and
cost
calculations.

3)
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule
Primacy
agencies
are
expected
to
expend
0.60
million
annual
burden
hours
implementing
requirements
of
the
IESWTR.
The
activities
include
review
of
turbidity
monitoring
results
and
exceptions
reports.
Additionally,
States
conduct
CPEs
and
sanitary
surveys
for
all
surface
water
systems.
Detailed
cost
and
burden
calculations
are
included
in
Appendix
G.

4)
Laboratory
Quality
Assurance
Evaluation
Program
for
Analysis
of
Cryptosporidium
in
Water
There
is
no
primacy
agency
burden
associated
with
the
Lab
QA
Program.

5)
Filter
Backwash
Recycling
Rule
As
with
PWS
respondents,
implementation
of
the
FBRR
is
expected
to
result
in
burden
hours
related
to
startup
activities,
recycle
notification,
and
alternative
location
requests.
This
ICR
will
incorporate
assumptions
from
the
2001
FBRR
ICR.
These
burden
hours
will
be
incorporated
via
an
ICW
after
final
publication
of
the
Microbial
ICR.
Section
6(
f)(
iv)
includes
a
discussion
of
the
impact
of
these
burden
hours.

6(
b)
Respondent
Costs
6(
b)(
i)
Cost
to
Public
Water
Systems
and
Laboratories
Exhibit
3
shows
the
annual
costs
for
PWSs
and
laboratories
over
the
3­
year
ICR
period.
Annual
costs
are
estimated
at
approximately
$
241.8
million,
which
consists
of
$
159.1
million
in
labor
costs,
$
64.3
million
in
O&
M
costs,
and
$
18.4
million
in
capital
costs.

PWS
labor
costs
are
based
on
the
number
of
burden
hours
times
the
average
hourly
wage
rate,
including
overhead.
The
average
hourly
wage
rate
is
the
rate
quoted
by
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
BLS)
for
SIC
Code
51­
8031,
"
Local
Government
 
Water
and
Liquid
Waste
Treatment
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
33
Plant
and
System
Operators."
The
quoted
rate
was
$
14.69
in
1999
dollars
(
see
http://
stats.
bls.
gov/
oes/
1999/
oesi3_
903.
htm).
For
consistency,
this
rate
has
been
inflated
to
September
2000
dollars
using
the
Employment
Cost
Index.
The
inflated
rate
is
$
15.02.
In
addition,
60
percent
overhead
was
assumed,
bringing
the
loaded
rate
to
$
24.03
in
September
2000
dollars.

Laboratory
labor
rates
used
to
calculate
Lab
QA
Program
labor
costs
are
also
based
on
the
number
of
burden
hours
times
the
average
hourly
wage
rate,
including
overhead.
Laboratory
labor
rates
were
obtained
through
verbal
consultation
with
five
laboratories
that
would
likely
be
participating
in
the
Lab
QA
Program.

In
addition
to
the
labor
costs,
there
are
O&
M
costs
associated
with
the
SWTR,
TCR,
IESWTR,
and
the
Lab
QA
Program.
For
the
SWTR,
these
O&
M
costs
reflect
non­
labor
costs
associated
with
coliform
analysis
(
unfiltered
systems)
and
turbidity
analysis
(
unfiltered
and
filtered
systems).
Coliform
analysis
O&
M
costs
are
based
on
analysis
costs
as
listed
in
the
1996
Information
Collection
Rule
ICR,
updated
for
inflation.
Turbidity
analysis
O&
M
costs
are
based
on
vendor
quotes
regarding
calibration
materials
needed
to
perform
turbidity
analyses.
TCR
O&
M
costs
reflect
non­
labor
costs
associated
with
coliform
and
E.
coli
analysis.
These
analysis
O&
M
costs
are
also
based
on
the
1996
Information
Collection
Rule
ICR,
updated
for
inflation.
IESWTR
O&
M
costs
reflect
non­
labor
costs
associated
with
turbidity
analysis
for
individual
filters.
For
the
IESWTR,
turbidity
analysis
costs
are
based
on
O&
M
cost
equations
for
operating
an
integrated
Supervisory
Control
and
Data
Acquisition
(
SCADA)
system.
These
cost
equations
are
carried
forward
from
the
IESWTR
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis
(
RIA).
Lastly,
Lab
QA
Program
O&
M
costs
reflect
the
analysis
costs
required
during
the
evaluation
process.
These
costs
were
obtained
through
verbal
consultation
with
five
laboratories
that
would
likely
be
participating
in
the
Lab
QA
Program.

The
SWTR
and
IESWTR
also
include
capital
costs
for
turbidity
monitoring
equipment.
For
the
SWTR,
capital
costs
are
estimated
based
on
vendor
estimates
for
in­
line
and
bench­
top
turbidimeters
needed
to
comply
with
CFE
monitoring
requirements.
IESWTR
capital
costs
are
based
on
equipment
cost
equations
developed
for
the
IESWTR
RIA,
and
reflect
the
annualized
(
at
7%
cost
of
capital)
cost
for
installation
of
a
SCADA
system
to
monitor
individual
filter
turbidity.
For
both
the
SWTR
and
the
IESWTR,
the
replacement
period
for
turbidity
analysis
equipment
is
estimated
to
be
7
years.

Further
detail
on
the
O&
M
and
capital
costs
for
the
SWTR,
TCR,
IESWTR,
and
Lab
QA
Program
can
be
found
in
Appendices
E,
F,
G,
and
H,
respectively.

6(
b)(
ii)
Cost
to
Primacy
Agencies
Exhibit
4
shows
that
the
annual
costs
to
primacy
agencies
are
estimated
at
approximately
$
45.6
million
in
labor
costs.
The
labor
costs
are
based
on
an
average
FTE
cost
of
$
60,086
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
16
According
to
the
ICR
Handbook:
EPA's
Guide
to
Writing
Information
Collection
Requests
Under
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
of
1995­
Revised
2/
99,
an
employee
works
an
average
of
2,080
hours
in
one
year.

17
FBRR
burden
and
costs
will
be
moved
into
the
Microbial
ICR
via
an
ICW
after
the
Microbial
ICR
is
finalized.

34
including
overhead,
which
equates
to
approximately
$
28.89
per
hour.
16
This
rate,
which
has
been
inflated
to
year
2000
dollars,
is
based
on
the
rate
($
55,000)
suggested
by
the
workgroup
that
developed
the
State
Workload
Model
in
1997.

There
are
no
O&
M
or
capital
costs
for
primacy
agencies
under
this
ICR.

Exhibit
3
Annual
PWS
and
Laboratory
Burden
and
Cost
2002­
2004
Activity
Annual
Burden
Hours
Cost
Annual
Respons
es
Annual
Labor
Cost
($
K)
Annual
O&
M
Cost
($
K)
Annual
Capital
Cost
($
K)
Total
Annual
Cost
($
K)

SWTR
761,516
$
18,296
$
3,720
$
1,704
$
23,720
16,221,7
TCR
2,220,329
$
53,345
$
57,735
$
0
$
111,080
886,812
IESWTR
3,634,114
$
87,312
$
2,711
$
16,694
$
106,717
3,356,87
Lab
QA
5,217
$
132
$
143
$
0
$
275
200
FBRR17
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
0
TOTAL
6,621,176
$
159,085
$
64,309
$
18,398
$
241,792
20,465,6
21
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
18
FBRR
burden
and
costs
will
be
moved
into
the
Microbial
ICR
via
an
ICW
after
the
Microbial
ICR
is
finalized.

35
Exhibit
4
Annual
Primacy
Agency
Burden
and
Cost
2002­
2004
Activity
Annual
Burden
Hours
Cost
Annual
Respons
es
Annual
Labor
Cost
($
K)
Annual
O&
M
Cost
($
K)
Annual
Capital
Cost
($
K)
Total
Annual
Cost
($
K)

SWTR
168,007
$
4,853
$
0
$
0
$
4,853
66,719
TCR
804,996
$
23,256
$
0
$
0
$
23,256
2,005,89
IESWTR
604,238
$
17,455
$
0
$
0
$
17,455
63,986
Lab
QA
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
FBRR18
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
0
TOTAL
1,577,241
$
45,564
$
0
$
0
$
45,564
2,136,60
1
6(
c)
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
Burden
and
costs
to
the
Federal
government
are
incurred
by
EPA's
drinking
water
program
at
Headquarters
and
EPA
Regions
to
assist
primacy
agencies
in
implementing
drinking
water
regulations.
EPA
burden
and
costs
for
on­
going
general
activities
for
all
EPA
drinking
water
regulations
(
not
just
those
listed
in
this
ICR)
Burden
and
costs
included
in
the
PWSS
Program
ICR
cover
all
cross­
cutting
(
non­
rule
specific)
regulatory
activities
associated
with
compliance
tracking,
regulatory
enforcement,
and
rule
development
activities.
There
are
no
rule­
specific
activities
expected
for
EPA
under
any
of
the
rules
or
programs
covered
by
this
ICR.
However,
EPA
is
expected
to
incur
burden
and
costs
under
the
Lab
QA
Program.

EPA
burden
and
costs
specific
to
the
Lab
QA
Program
are
included
in
this
ICR
and
are
based
on
activities
completed
by
both
EPA
and
supporting
contractors.
Burden
hours
are
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
19
For
several
of
these
entities,
primacy
activities
are
actually
implemented
by
EPA
Regional
offices.
However,
as
a
simplifying
assumption,
they
are
included
with
the
States
for
respondent
calculations
under
this
ICR.

36
estimated
at
5,385
annually
at
an
annual
cost
of
$
0.34
million.
Labor
costs
are
calculated
by
multiplying
the
number
of
annual
burden
hours
by
applicable
labor
rates.
For
EPA
personnel,
labor
rates
are
based
on
the
2001
General
Schedule
(
GS)
for
the
Washington
DC/
Baltimore
area
and
the
standard
government
benefits
multiplication
factor
of
1.6.
EPA
estimates
an
average
hourly
cost
of
$
67.36/
hour
for
Agency
legal
staff,
$
57.25/
hour
for
Agency
management
staff,
$
34.00/
hour
for
Agency
technical
staff,
and
$
14.77/
hour
for
Agency
clerical
staff.
Contractor
labor
rates
are
based
on
the
standard
labor
rates
under
the
General
Services
Administration
(
GSA)
Management
Organizational
and
Business
Improvement
Services
(
MOBIS)
time
and
materials
contract
vehicle
under
which
Lab
QA
Program
work
will
be
performed.
As
a
time
and
materials
contract,
the
labor
rates
are
already
loaded
and
require
no
additional
adjustment
factors.
Loaded
labor
rates
for
contractor
burden
hours
were
estimated
at
$
132.50/
hour
for
expert
staff,
$
69.08/
hour
for
management
staff,
$
58.32/
hour
for
technical
staff,
and
$
23.44/
hour
for
intern
staff.

The
Agency
will
also
incur
O&
M
and
capital
costs
associated
with
the
Lab
QA
Program.
Annual
Lab
QA
Program
O&
M
and
capital
costs
are
estimated
at
$
0.07
million
and
$
0.02
million,
respectively,
and
reflect
costs
for
analyses
and
related
equipment
required
during
the
evaluation
process.
These
costs
were
obtained
through
verbal
consultation
with
five
laboratories
that
would
likely
be
participating
in
the
Lab
QA
Program.

Detail
regarding
Agency
burden
and
costs
calculations
for
the
Lab
QA
Program
can
be
found
in
Appendix
H.

6(
d)
Estimating
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
and
Costs
Respondents
for
this
ICR
include
PWSs,
laboratories,
and
primacy
agencies.
This
ICR
estimates
that
the
number
of
PWS
respondents
is
167,837
existing
PWSs.
All
PWSs
are
not
necessarily
subject
to
each
of
the
information
collection
requirements
contained
in
this
ICR.
Each
rule
or
program
associated
with
this
ICR
identifies
the
types
of
PWSs
that
are
subject
to
that
particular
requirement.
The
numbers,
by
type,
of
PWSs
affected
for
each
rule
or
program
are
identified
in
the
appendices.
Under
the
Lab
QA
Program,
this
ICR
estimates
a
total
of
60
laboratory
respondents.

In
addition
to
the
PWS
and
laboratory
respondents,
this
ICR
assumes
57
primacy
agencies
(
50
States
plus
DC,
U.
S.
Territories,
and
Indian
Nations).
19
Therefore,
the
total
number
of
respondents
is
167,954.

The
total
costs
and
burden
for
these
respondents
are
summarized
in
Exhibits
3
and
4.

6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Costs
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
37
The
bottom
line
burden
hours
and
costs
for
this
ICR
appear
in
Exhibit
5.
The
total
annual
respondent
burden
associated
with
this
ICR,
which
includes
burden
for
PWSs,
laboratories,
and
primacy
agencies,
is
estimated
to
be
approximately
8.20
million
burden
hours.
The
corresponding
total
annual
respondent
costs
are
estimated
to
be
$
287.4
million.
Accounting
for
the
annual
EPA
burden
and
cost
is
estimated
to
add
5,385
hours
and
$
0.43
million
to
the
respondent
totals.

Exhibit
5
Bottom
Line
Annual
Burden
and
Cost
2002­
2004
Number
of
Annual
Respondents
167,954
=
167,837
+
60
+
57
Existing
PWSs
Laboratories
Primacy
agencies
Total
Annual
Responses
22,602,222
=
20,465,621
+
2,136,601
PWS
and
Lab
responses
(
see
Exhibit
3)
Primacy
agency
responses
(
see
Exhibit
4)

Number
of
Responses
per
Respondent
134.6
=
22,602,222
/
167,954
Total
annual
responses
from
above
Total
number
of
respondents
from
above
Total
Annual
Respondent
Burden
Hours
8,198,417
=
6,621,176
+
1,577,241
PWS
and
Lab
hours
(
see
Exhibit
3)
Primacy
agency
hours
(
see
Exhibit
4)

Hours
per
Response
0.36
=
8,198,417
/
22,602,222
Total
respondent
burden
hours
from
above
Total
annual
responses
from
above
Total
Annual
Respondent
Cost
$
287,356k
=
$
241,792k
+
$
45,564k
For
PWSs
and
Labs
(
see
Exhibit
3)
For
primacy
agencies
(
see
Exhibit
4)

Total
Annual
Hours
(
resp.
plus
Agency)
8,203,802
=
8,198,417
+
5,385
Total
respondent
hours
from
above
Total
EPA
hours
Total
Annual
Cost
(
resp.
plus
Agency)
$
287,788k
=
$
287,356k
+$
432k
Total
respondent
cost
from
above
Total
EPA
cost
6(
f)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
This
section
presents
the
change
in
burden
and
explains
the
reasons
for
the
change
in
burden.
The
discussion
is
divided
into
four
partsC
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
38

Section
6(
f)(
i)
summarizes
the
restructuring
adjustments
being
made
to
consolidate
the
burden
for
each
of
the
regulations
being
incorporated
into
the
Microbial
ICR.
See
Exhibit
7.

Section
6(
f)(
ii)
summarizes
program
changes
for
new
activities
to
be
added
to
the
Microbial
ICR.
See
Exhibit
8.

Section
6(
f)(
iii)
summarizes
other
adjustments
to
the
annual
burden
estimates
associated
with
each
rule
or
program
incorporated
into
the
Microbial
ICR.
See
Exhibits
9
through
11.

Section
6(
f)(
iv)
summarizes
the
expected
impact
on
burden
from
the
addition
of
FBRR
activities.
This
section
is
provided
based
on
the
expected
addition
of
FBRR
burden
via
an
ICW
after
finalization
of
the
Microbial
ICR.
This
burden
is
presented
solely
for
information
purposes
and
is
not
included
in
the
burden
inventory
currently
being
requested
under
the
Microbial
ICR.
See
Exhibit
12.

Exhibit
6
summarizes
how
each
of
these
changes
(
with
the
exception
of
the
FBRR
changes)
affects
the
overall
burden
inventory
for
the
Microbial
ICR.

Exhibit
6
Reasons
for
Change
in
Annual
Burden
Type
of
Change
Change
Running
Total
Comment
Burden
Estimated
in
the
1998
IESWTR
ICR.
150,557
150,557
This
burden
serves
as
the
baseline
for
the
Microbial
ICR.

Restructuring
AdjustmentsCsee
Section
6(
f)(
i)
4,498,781
4,649,338
Microbial
ICR
inventory
based
on
cumulative
OMB
inventory
for
current
rule­
specific
ICRs.

Program
changesCsee
Section
6(
f)(
ii)
5,217
4,654,555
Burden
after
adding
new
program
(
Lab
QA
Program).

Other
Adjustments
to
BurdensCsee
Section
6(
f)(
iii)
3,543,862
8,198,417
Burden
for
which
EPA
seeks
approval
in
this
ICR.

6(
f)(
i)
Restructuring
Adjustments
Several
restructuring
adjustments
are
being
made
to
consolidate
the
burden
for
each
of
the
regulations
being
incorporated
into
the
Microbial
ICR.
These
adjustments
are
discussed
below
and
summarized
in
Exhibit
7.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
39

Burden
associated
with
the
Interim
Enhanced
Surface
Water
Treatment
Rule.
The
annual
burden
estimated
in
the
1998
IESWTR
ICR
is
150,557
hours.
This
includes
94,258
annual
burden
hours
for
PWSs
and
56,299
annual
burden
hours
for
States
(
Figure
2
of
the
1998
IESWTR
ICR).
This
burden
serves
as
the
baseline
burden
for
the
Microbial
ICR.
The
IESWTR
ICR
is
being
renamed
the
Microbial
ICR.
The
Microbial
ICR
will
retain
the
control
number
from
the
IESWTR
ICR
(
OMB
No.
2040­
0205).

rules,
EPA
is
requesting
that
all
these
hours,
except
those
associated
with
disinfection
residual
monitoring
and
associated
activities,
be
moved
to
the
Microbial
ICR
(
OMB
No.
2040­
0205).
Since
the
burden
associated
with
disinfection
residual
monitoring
is
estimated
to
be
719,098
hours,
the
remaining
948,983
hours
will
be
moved
to
the
Microbial
ICR.

Burden
associated
with
the
Total
Coliform
Rule.
The
1993
PWSS
ICR
includes
a
total
of
3,549,798
hours
per
year
for
TCR
activities.
This
includes
1,037,585
hours
for
NCWSs
(
Exhibit
8
of
the
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR),
1,988,213
hours
for
CWSs
(
also
Exhibit
8),
and
524,000
hours
for
State
primacy
agencies
(
Exhibit
7
of
the
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR).
In
order
to
consolidate
microbial
contaminant­
related
rules,
EPA
is
requesting
that
these
hours
be
moved
to
the
Microbial
ICR
(
OMB
No.
2040­
0205).

Exhibit
7
Restructuring
Adjustments
to
the
Annual
Burden
Inventory
for
the
Microbial
ICR
(
Includes
both
PWS
and
Primacy
Agency
Burden)

Action
Annual
Burden
Hours
Brief
Explanation
N/
A
150,557
Opening
Inventory
from
1998
IESWTR
carried
forward
as
the
baseline
Microbial
ICR
inventory.

Add
948,983
This
represents
the
current
SWTR
burden
inventory
associated
with
microbial
contaminant­
related
activities.
This
inventory
is
being
moved
from
the
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR
(
2040­
0090)
and
into
the
Microbial
ICR.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
40
Add
3,549,798
This
represents
the
current
TCR
burden
inventory.
This
inventory
is
being
moved
from
the
1993
PWSS
Program
ICR
(
2040­
0090)
and
into
the
Microbial
ICR.

Total
4,649,338
Microbial
ICR
inventory
based
on
current
burden
inventories
6(
f)(
ii)
Program
Changes
This
ICR
includes
one
program
changeCthe
addition
of
the
burden
associated
with
the
EPA's
Lab
QA
Program.
EPA
developed
this
voluntary
program
based
on
anticipated
laboratory
evaluation
needs
for
the
LT2ESWTR.
The
estimated
respondent
burden
for
laboratory
quality
assurance
evaluation
activities
is
5,217
hours
per
year
for
participating
laboratories.
Exhibit
8
shows
the
affect
of
this
program
change.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
41
Exhibit
8
Program
Changes
Action
Annual
Burden
Hours
Brief
Explanation
None
4,649,338
Microbial
ICR
inventory
based
on
current
burden
inventories
(
see
Exhibit
7).

Add
5,217
Lab
QA
Program.

Total
4,654,555
Inventory
after
restructuring
adjustments
and
adding
program
changes.

6(
f)(
iii)
Other
Burden
Adjustments
The
remaining
changes
in
burden
are
a
result
of
adjustments
to
individual
rule
burden
calculations.
Changes
in
calculated
burden
are
a
result
of
updating
relevant
baseline
information
for
each
rule
or
program
with
the
most
current
and
accurate
information
available
(
e.
g,
PWS
inventories).
Estimated
violation
rates
have
also
been
updated
to
reflect
current
information
on
rule
compliance
(
this
affects
TCR
predicted
burden).
For
the
IESWTR,
a
large
increase
in
annual
burden
reflects
movement
from
startup
activities
to
the
actual
monitoring
compliance
period.
For
primacy
agency
activities,
changes
in
the
levels
of
rule­
specific
activity
tend
to
mirror
the
changes
in
PWS
activities.
Exhibits
9
and
10
summarize
reasons
for
these
changes
and
quantify
the
changes,
by
rule.
Burden
adjustments
associated
with
PWS
activities
resulted
in
a
burden
increase
of
2,787,224
hours
and
are
detailed
in
Exhibit
9.
Burden
adjustments
for
primacy
agencies
result
in
an
increase
of
756,638
hours
per
year,
as
shown
in
Exhibit
10.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
42
Exhibit
9
Adjustments
to
PWS
Burden
from
Previous
ICR
Estimates
Activity
Previous
Estimate
2001
Burden
Estimate
Change
in
Burden
Reason
for
Change
in
Burden
SWTR
708,679
761,516
52,837
The
increase
in
burden
results
from
an
increase
in
the
number
of
systems
affected
by
the
rule.

TCR
3,025,798
2,220,329
(
805,469)
The
decrease
in
burden
is
driven
by
three
major
factors:
1)
Use
of
actual
violation
rates
compiled
after
rule
implementation.
Actual
violation
rates
were
found
to
be
lower
than
those
estimated
in
the
initial
ICR
estimates.
2)
Sanitary
surveys
for
small
surface
water
and
GWUDI
systems
are
now
covered
under
the
IESWTR.
3)
Sanitary
surveys
for
small
ground
water
systems
are
the
responsibility
of
the
primacy
agency.
This
burden
was
incorrectly
counted
as
a
PWS
burden
in
the
previous
ICR
and
has
been
moved
to
the
primacy
agency
burden.

IESWTR
94,258
3,634,114
3,539,856
The
large
increase
in
burden
hours
is
the
result
of
the
commencement
of
monitoring
activities
under
the
IESWTR.
The
previous
ICR
included
only
startup
activities.

TOTAL
3,828,735
6,615,959
2,787,224
Adjusted
PWS
Burden
Note:
Detail
may
not
add
exactly
to
total
due
to
independent
rounding.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
43
Exhibit
10
Adjustments
to
Primacy
Agency
Burden
from
Previous
ICR
Estimates
Activity
Previous
Estimate
2001
Burden
Estimate
Change
in
Burden
Reason
for
Change
in
Burden
SWTR
240,304
168,007
(
72,297)
Because
primacy
agency
burden
is
derived
from
the
State
Workload
Model,
a
single
burden
value
is
given
for
the
SWTR.
Therefore,
primacy
agency
burden
hours
must
be
apportioned
between
discrete
activities
based
on
the
relative
proportion
of
burden
hours
for
each
activity.
The
decrease
in
burden
listed
here
results
from
a
decrease
in
the
number
of
burden
hours
accounted
for
in
this
ICR
relative
to
those
counted
elsewhere
(
hours
for
disinfectant
residuals
monitoring
and
associated
activities
are
counted
under
the
DDBP/
Chem/
Rads
ICR).

TCR
524,000
804,996
280,996
The
increase
in
burden
is
due
to
incorporation
of
sanitary
surveys
into
primacy
agency
estimates.
This
burden
was
incorrectly
counted
as
a
PWS
burden
in
the
previous
ICR.

IESWTR
56,299
604,238
547,939
The
large
increase
in
burden
hours
is
the
result
of
the
commencement
of
monitoring
activities
under
the
IESWTR.
The
previous
ICR
included
only
startup
activities.

TOTAL
820,603
1,577,241
756,638
Adjusted
Primacy
Agency
Burden
Exhibit
11
shows
the
effects
of
these
adjustments
on
the
bottom
line
burden.
Exhibit
8
shows
an
annual
burden
of
4,654,555
hours
after
the
restructuring
adjustments
and
adding
program
changes.
Adding
2,787,224
hours
to
account
for
the
adjustment
for
the
PWS
burden
and
756,638
hours
to
account
for
the
upward
adjustment
for
the
primacy
burden
yields
8,198,417
hours.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
44
Exhibit
11
Adjustments
to
Annual
Burden
Carried
Forward
from
Previous
ICR
Estimates
(
Includes
both
PWS
and
Primacy
Agency
Burden)

Action
Annual
Burden
Hours
Brief
Explanation
None
4,654,555
Inventory
after
restructuring
adjustments
and
adding
program
changes.

Add
2,787,224
Adjustment
to
PWS
activities
carried
forward
from
previous
ICRs
(
see
Exhibit
9).

Add
756,638
Adjustment
to
primacy
agency
activities
carried
forward
from
previous
ICRs
(
see
Exhibit
10).

Total
8,198,417
Equals
hours
requested
in
2001
Microbial
ICR
(
See
Exhibit
5).

6(
f)(
iv)
Addition
of
FBRR
Burden
This
section
summarizes
the
expected
impact
on
burden
from
the
addition
of
FBRR
activities.
This
burden
calculation
is
not
included
in
the
burden
inventory
currently
being
requested
under
the
Microbial
ICR.
In
the
future,
in
order
to
consolidate
microbial
contaminantrelated
rules,
EPA
will
move
these
hours
into
Microbial
ICR
(
OMB
No.
2040­
0205)
via
an
Information
Correction
Worksheet.
The
2001
FBRR
ICR
includes
a
total
of
66,363
hours
per
year
for
FBRR
activities.
This
includes
60,514
hours
for
PWSs
and
5,849
hours
for
primacy
agencies
(
Figure
11
of
the
2001
FBRR
ICR).
Exhibit
12
summarizes
the
impact
of
this
adjustment.
Microbial
ICR
August
16,
2001
45
Exhibit
12
Future
Adjustment
for
Addition
of
FBRR
Burden
(
Includes
both
PWS
and
Primacy
Agency
Burden)

Action
Annual
Burden
Hours
Brief
Explanation
None
8,198,417
Inventory
of
hours
requested
in
the
2001
Microbial
ICR
(
see
Exhibit
10).

Add
66,363
FBRR
inventory
to
be
moved
into
the
2001
Microbial
ICR
via
an
ICW.

Total
8,264,780
Inventory
of
hours
in
the
2001
Microbial
ICR
after
inclusion
of
FBRR
hours.

Note:
This
exhibit
is
provided
for
informational
purposes
only.
Burden
presented
here
does
not
represent
the
burden
currently
being
requested
under
this
ICR.

6(
g)
Burden
Statement
The
public
reporting
burden
for
collections
included
in
this
ICR
is
detailed
above.
The
total
annual
burden
(
3­
year
average
for
FYs
2002
through
2004)
imposed
by
these
collections
is
estimated
to
be
8.20
million
hours,
of
which
6.62
million
hours
are
attributable
to
PWSs
and
laboratories
and
1.58
million
hours
to
primacy
agencies.
These
estimates
include
time
for
gathering
information
as
well
as
developing
and
maintaining
records.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
people
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
disclose,
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions,
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements,
train
personnel
to
respond
to
the
information
collection
request,
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
request
for
information
collection
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.

Please
send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
accuracy
of
the
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
Director,
Office
of
Environmental
Information,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822),
Ariel
Rios
Building,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
N.
W.,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Please
include
the
EPA
ICR
number
(
1895.02)
and
OMB
control
number
(
2040­
0205)
in
any
correspondence.