Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2007-0378-0002
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2007-07-11T04:00Z

SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review
under

The Paperwork Reduction Act

1	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

	1(a)	Title and Number of the Information Collection 

		Title:	TSCA Sections 402 and Section 404 Training, Certification,
Accreditation and Standards for Lead-Based Paint Activities

		EPA ICR No.:  1715.09	OMB Control No:   2070-0155

	1(b)	Short Characterization

	This information collection request (ICR) updates existing ICR 1715.06
covering the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of the final
rulemaking addressing lead-based paint activities under the authority of
sections 402 and 404 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15
U.S.C. 2682, 2684; see Attachment 1).  This includes both the reporting
and recordkeeping requirements for lead-based paint professionals
conducting lead-based paint activities, and training programs providing
lead-based paint activities courses, which were promulgated under the
authority of sections 402, 404, and 407 of TSCA, and also the burden
associated with notification provisions promulgated under the final rule
entitled “Lead: Notification Requirements for Lead-based Paint
Activities and Training.”

	The Agency requests a three-year renewal approval for the information
collection requirements contained in the final rule addressing training,
certification, accreditation, standards, and notification for lead-based
paint (LBP) activities in target housing and child-occupied facilities
(hereafter, the “training rule”).  The Agency has promulgated this
rule pursuant to sections 402 and 404 of TSCA.  Section 404 allows any
State that seeks to administer and enforce standards and regulations as
protective as those developed under section 402 to submit an application
to EPA for authorization of a State program (Indian Tribes and Alaskan
Native Villages may also submit such applications).

	The final training, certification, accreditation and standards
regulation requires reporting and/or recordkeeping from four entities: 
States/Tribes/Alaskan Native Villages (hereafter, the term “States”
includes Tribes and Villages); training providers; and firms and
individuals engaged in LBP activities.  The following sections provide a
general overview of the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for
each entity, discussed in more detail in section 4(b).

States.  Under TSCA section 404, EPA must review and assess State
submissions to determine whether to grant authorization to administer a
program addressing training, certification, accreditation and standards
for LBP activities.  A State seeking authorization will need to provide
information to EPA so the Agency may determine whether its program is at
least as protective of human health and the environment as the Federal
program and whether it provides adequate enforcement.  Authorized States
need to provide a report to EPA on their activities.

Training providers.  Training programs seeking to offer training in LBP
activities must receive EPA/State accreditation.  In order for
EPA/States to have the information necessary to evaluate and accredit
the training programs, training providers need to prepare and submit
application packages.  Training programs also must retain certain
records related to their students and training personnel qualifications.
 Training programs must notify the Agency 1) prior to providing
lead-based paint activities training courses, and 2) following
completion of lead-based paint activities training courses.  Training
programs must apply for re-accreditation every four years.  These
notification requirements are necessary to provide EPA compliance
monitoring and enforcement personnel with information necessary to track
compliance activity and to prioritize inspections.

Individuals/Firms.  Individuals and firms seeking to engage in LBP
activities must receive certification from EPA/States.  To gain
certification, an individual must complete an accredited training course
and receive a course completion certificate, pass a third-party
certification exam, meet specific education/experience requirements, and
demonstrate this to EPA/States.  A firm must submit a letter to
EPA/States certifying that it will employ only certified individuals and
conduct LBP activities according to the work practice standards. 
Individuals/firms must apply for re-certification every three years. 
The rule also requires that individuals/firms develop and retain records
of the LBP activities they undertake to demonstrate compliance with
standards and provide a written record for future reference.  Firms must
notify the Agency prior to commencement of lead-based paint abatement
activities.  These notification requirements are necessary to provide
EPA compliance monitoring and enforcement personnel with information
necessary to track compliance activity and to prioritize inspections.

2	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

	2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection

	Under section 402(a)(1) of TSCA, the Agency must “...promulgate final
regulations governing lead-based paint activities to ensure that
individuals engaged in such activities are properly trained; that
training programs are accredited; and that contractors engaged in such
activities are certified.  Such regulations shall contain standards for
performing lead-based paint activities, taking into account reliability,
effectiveness and safety.” 

	Section 402(a)(2) states that “Final regulations promulgated under
[section 402(a)] paragraph (1) shall contain specific requirements for
the accreditation of ... training programs ... including, but not
limited to:

	-	Minimum requirements for the accreditation of training providers;

	-	Minimum training curricula requirements;

	-	Minimum training hour requirements;

	-	Minimum hands-on training requirements;

	-	Minimum training competency and proficiency requirements;

	-	Minimum requirements for training program quality.”

	Section 404(a) of TSCA states that “[a]ny State which seeks to
administer and enforce the standards, regulations, or other requirements
established under section 402 may...develop and submit to the
Administrator an application, in such form as the Administrator shall
require, for authorization of such a State program.”  The Agency shall
approve such an application, if it finds that “...the State program is
at least as protective of human health and the environment as the
Federal program under section 402...and such State program provides
adequate enforcement.”  The statute also requires the Agency to
implement the program in States that do not receive authorization within
two years after the effective date of the rule.

	Section 407 of TSCA states that regulations shall include such
recordkeeping and reporting requirements as may be necessary to ensure
effective implementation.  EPA regulations under Subchapter IV of TSCA
include lead-based paint activities regulations, codified at 40 CFR Part
745 (see Attachment 2).

	The Agency’s final training rule fulfills these statutory mandates.

2(b)	Use/Users of the Data

	EPA

	This information collection will provide EPA with the materials
necessary to authorize State programs for the training rule, as TSCA
Title IV directs, and to serve as the accrediting and certifying body in
States without authorized programs, discussed further below.

	EPA/States

	This collection will enable EPA/States to determine compliance with and
enforce the requirements for training, certification, accreditation, and
work practice standards.  Without this collection, there would be no
meaningful way of ensuring the implementation of the statutory
objective: to ensure that trained individuals perform all LBP activities
to minimize harm to occupants of structures and other parties.  The work
practice standards in the rule rely on reporting and recordkeeping as a
check on proper performance of activities; the Agency chose this
approach over promulgating prescriptive standards for the conduct of LBP
activities.  The rulemaking provides flexibility for individuals
performing the activities, by relying on guidance and training to help
individuals determine the best approaches and on documentation as a
“standard of performance.”  The Agency believes this is the best
method for accommodating a variety of LBP hazards and site-specific
conditions.

	It is the nature of certification and accreditation that an entity
seeking such must provide materials to the certifying or accrediting
body.  The materials the Agency/State requires for these activities are
central to the activity.

	It is also important to note that the re-certification and
re-accreditation requirements for individuals and training programs are
meant to ensure that training programs incorporate new developments and
technologies in their courses, and that individuals receive training in
them.  The Agency believes this ensures that individuals/firms perform
LBP activities in the safest and most effective manner possible.

	The specific data elements in the reports individuals/firms conducting
LBP activities must compile and retain are necessary as a reference for
building owners/residents, EPA or authorized entities.  The records
demonstrate that individuals conducting the activities do so in a safe
and effective manner, according to the minimum work practice standards
established by the rule.  This also assists EPA’s enforcement
activities.

	The notification requirement is necessary to permit the Agency to
target its enforcement activities and to ensure compliance within the
contracting and training community.

3	NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATION AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

	3(a)	Non-Duplication

	The Agency’s collection pursuant to the TSCA 402/404/407 regulations
does not duplicate any other collection.  There is no other model
program for LBP activities or associated State program approval process,
and there are currently no other Federal requirements for the training
and certification of individuals engaged in these activities, for the
accreditation of LBP training programs, or required standards for the
conduct of these activities.

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

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 	Prior to submission to OMB, this ICR will be made
available to the public for comment through a Federal Register notice. 
The public will have 60 days to provide comments.  Any comments received
will be given consideration when completing the supporting statement
that is submitted to OMB.

	3(c)	Consultations

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 EPA will pursue consultations with interested
parties during the development of the renewal of this collection.

	3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection

	Due to the nature of this regulation and its collection, less frequent
collection is not feasible.  In particular, each individual and firm
must obtain certification and re-certification, each training program
must obtain accreditation and re-accreditation as well as specific
notification and documentation prior to commencement and upon completion
of each lead-based paint activity course, and each LBP activity is a
separate and unique event requiring specific notification and
documentation.  Program approval for States is a one-time activity,
although there is ongoing reporting.

	3(e)	General Guidelines

	This ICR is consistent with OMB’s general guidelines.  The Agency is
requiring that individuals and firms maintain records for three years. 
Authorized States report once a year for the first three years, and
biannually thereafter.

	Training programs must maintain records for three and one-half years. 
This is due to the interim certification period of six months following
an individual completing training, which allows the individual time to
apply to EPA/States to receive official certification.  At such time,
the individual remains certified for three years (or five years for
individuals who have passed a proficiency test as part of their
training) before he or she must obtain refresher training and
re-certification.  EPA wishes training providers to maintain records on
a particular student for as long as the individual is certified
following training.  Therefore, the Agency believes the three and
one-half years is an appropriate period for the retention of such
records.

	3(e)	Confidentiality

	This information collection does not include questions of a
confidential nature.

	3(f)	Sensitive Questions

	This information collection does not include questions of a sensitive
nature.

4	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

	4(a)	Respondents/NAICS Codes

	The respondents to this rule include:

		1) Training providers for LBP activities;

		2) Individuals and firms engaged in LBP activities; and

		3) State agencies.

	Specific NAICS codes include:

		23321  Single Family Housing Construction

		23331  Manufacturing and Industrial Building Construction

		23332  Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

		23521  Painting and Wall Covering Contractors

		23542  Drywall, Plastering, Acoustical, and Insulation Contractors

		23551  Carpentry Contractors

		23561  Roofing, Siding, and Sheet Metal Contractors

		23594  Wrecking and Demolition Contractors

		23599  All Other Special Trade Contractors

		611513  Apprenticeship Training

		611519  Other Technical and Trade Schools

		611699  All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction

		92312  Administration of Public Health Programs

92411  Administration of Air and Water Resource and Solid Waste
Management Programs

		92511  Administration of Housing Programs

	4(b)	Information Requested

Data Items

	In order to obtain authorization from EPA to administer and enforce a
program under section 404, States must prepare:

	-	a notice of intent to seek authorization, and

	-	an application for authorization identifying the agencies responsible
for implementation, administration, and enforcement of the program, and
a description of the authority and responsibilities vested in such
agencies.

	States authorized for the lead-based paint training rule must submit to
EPA a report summarizing implementation and enforcement activities,
including a list of enforcement actions taken and any changes in
content, administration, or enforcement of the State program.

	To gain accreditation, training providers must submit the following
documents to EPA/State:

	-	an accreditation statement that clearly indicates how the training
program meets the minimum requirements for accreditation, and

	-	a quality control plan, which outlines procedures for periodic
revision of training materials and exams, annual review of instructors,
and adequacy of  the training facilities.

	To gain certification, individuals engaged in LBP activities are
required to submit specific materials to EPA/State:

	-	Inspectors, Risk Assessors, Supervisors: accredited training course
completion certificate, statement certifying the individual meets the
education/experience pre-requisites, proof of passage of the third-party
exam;

	-	Project Designers: statement certifying individual meets the
education/experience requirements, accredited training course completion
certificate; and

	-	Workers: accredited training course completion certificate.

	In the performance of LBP activities, the firms and/or individuals must
complete and retain a number of reports (contingent on the activity
conducted), including:

	-	an inspection report describing the surfaces sampled for LBP and the
sampling results;

	-	a lead hazard screen report, which includes an accounting of any
paint or dust sampling results;

	-	a risk assessment report, which includes an accounting of paint,
dust, or soil sampling results and existing hazards;

	-	an occupant protection plan identifying the measures that will be
taken to protect building occupants from LBP hazards, and

	-	an abatement report detailing the activities undertaken to eliminate
the hazard.

	Prior to giving a lead-based paint activity training course, training
providers must provide notification to the Agency, using either the
sample form entitled “Lead-Based Paint Activities Training Course
Schedule” or a similar form containing the required information. 
Training providers may provide electronic submissions using the
Agency’s Central Data Exchange (CDX) (secure internet based electronic
submission of data).  The initial notice must include the following:

	-	Notification type (Original, Updated, Cancellation);

	-	Training program name, EPA accreditation number, address, and phone
number;

	-	Course discipline, type (initial/refresher), and the language in
which instruction will be given;

	-	Date(s) and time(s) of training;

	-	Training location(s) phone number, and street address;

	-	Principal instructor’s name; and

	-	Training manager’s name and signature.

	Training providers must update the Agency regarding any changes to
training dates, course locations, course cancellations, or other changes
made to the original notice.

	Following completion of lead-based paint activities courses, training
providers must provide notice using either the sample form, entitled
“Lead-Based Paint Activities Training Course Follow-Up” or a similar
form containing the required information.  Training providers may
provide electronic submissions using the Agency’s CDX.  The notice
must include the following:

	-	Training program name, EPA accreditation number, address, and phone
number;

	-	Course discipline and type (initial/refresher);

	-	Date(s) of training;

	-	The following information for each student who took the course:

		-	Name

		-	Address

		-	Date of birth

		-	Course completion certificate number

		-	Student test score; and

		-	Training manager’s name and signature.

	Certified firms must notify EPA prior to beginning lead-based paint
abatement activities (except in emergency situations) and provide an
updated notice if needed, using either the sample form entitled
“Notification of Lead-Based Paint Abatement Activities” or a similar
form containing the required information.  Certified firms may provide
electronic submissions using the Agency’s CDX.  Notices should include
the following information:



	-	Notification type (Original, Updated, Cancellation);



	-	Date when lead-based paint abatement activities will start;



	-	Date when lead-based paint abatement activities will end
(approximation using best professional judgment);



	-	Firm’s name, EPA certification number, address, and phone number;



	-	Type of building (e.g. single family dwelling, multi-family dwelling,
child-occupied facilities) on/in which abatement work will be performed;



	-	Property name (if applicable);



	-	Property address including apartment or unit number (if applicable)
for abatement work;



	-	Documentation showing evidence of an EBL determination or a copy of
the Federal/State/Tribal/Local emergency abatement order, if applicable;

	-	Name and EPA certification number of the project supervisor;

	-	Approximate square footage/acreage to be abated; 

	-	Brief description of abatement activities to be performed; and 

	-	Name, title, and signature of the representative of the certified
firm who prepared the notification.



Respondent Activities.

	The rule specifies reporting and recordkeeping for authorized States,
training providers, and individuals/firms undertaking LBP activities. 
The rule does not require specific forms or applications for
submissions.

	States seeking authorization for the training rule perform the
following activities:

	-	read the regulations;

	-	compare any existing State program requirements to the minimum
requirements of the Federal regulation;

	-	develop and adopt new legislation as necessary;

	-	develop and promulgate new regulations as necessary;

	-	publish a notice of intent to seek authorization and provide an
opportunity for public hearing;

	-	prepare and submit to EPA an application for program approval;

	-	maintain program application availability for public inspection for
up to one year after submission; and

	-	submit an annual report to EPA.

	Training providers perform the following activities:

	-	read the regulation;

	-	prepare and submit an accreditation application to accrediting
entity;

-	submit an initial and, if needed, amended notification of courses to
be given;

-	provide notice of completion of all lead-based paint activities
courses offered; 

	-	retain records; and

	-	provide accrediting entity access to records as requested.

	Individuals seeking certification perform the following activities:

	-	read the regulation;

	-	submit a proof of passage of third-party exam and/or course
completion certificate, and statement certifying individual meets
education/experience requirements; and 

	-	retain records, if individual is incorporated or acting as a firm.

	Firms perform the following activities:

	-	read the regulation;

	-	submit an application for certification; 

	-	submit notification of abatement work, and

	-	retain records.

5	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED - AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY
AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

	5(a)	Agency Activities

	EPA performs the following activities in order to authorize States:

	-	receives applications;

	-	reviews applications and compares them with the Federal program at 40
CFR part 745;

	-	provides applicants with letters of approval/disapproval.

	EPA performs the following activities in response to notifications: 

	-	Receives, reviews and files initial notices and updates received from
training providers;

	-	Receives, reviews and files course completion notices received from
training providers; and

	-	Receives, reviews and files notices of abatement activities from lead
abatement firms.

	5(b)	Collection Methodology and Management

	This section details the data elements for each type of respondent and
for each reporting or recordkeeping activity.  Note that EPA is cited as
the accrediting and certifying body, as State programs may not
necessarily adopt a program requiring the submission or retention of
exactly the same materials as in the Federal program.  For the purposes
of estimating burden in Section 6 of this ICR, however, the Agency
assumes that States adopt the Federal program requirements for reporting
and recordkeeping.  In States without authorized programs, EPA is the
accrediting and certifying body.

	The rule provides general instructions to States seeking EPA
authorization under this regulation.  A State may submit an application
to EPA any time.  The elements necessary for application are as follows:

	-	a public notice of intent to seek authorization, with an opportunity
for public hearing;

	-	a transmittal letter from the Governor or Tribal equivalent
requesting program approval;

	-	an Attorney General or Tribal equivalent statement certifying the
adequacy of the State’s program authority;

	-	copies of all applicable State statutes and regulations;

	-	the name of the primary agency that is or will be responsible for
administering and enforcing the program and functions of any other
agencies involved in administering the program;

	-	a description of the program elements and an analysis of how these
elements relate to the Federal program elements under section 402; and

	-	a description of the resources the State intends to devote to the
administration and enforcement of the program.

	States authorized for this rule will need to provide a report (or
separate reports) to EPA describing any significant changes in the
programs and enforcement activities.

	The rule instructs training programs seeking accreditation for initial
training programs to submit a one-time application to EPA covering the
following elements:

	-	the training program’s name, address, and telephone number;

	-	a list of courses for which it is applying for accreditation;

	-	a statement, signed by the training program manager, that certifies
that the training program meets the minimum requirements  (e.g.,
training hours) established in the rule;

	-	a copy of the test blueprint, which describes the proportion of test
questions devoted to each major course topic;

	-	a detailed description of the facilities and equipment available for
lecture and hands-on training;

	-	a detailed description of the procedures for conducting the
assessment of hands-on skills;

	-	a copy of the program’s quality control plan; and

	-	for programs that do not adopt the EPA model curriculum, the program
must submit, in addition to the above materials, a copy of the student
manuals and instructor notebooks to be used for each course, and a copy
of the course agenda, which includes the time allocated for each course
topic.

	Training programs must submit the following information to seek
accreditation for refresher training courses (note that applications for
refresher training may be simultaneously submitted with applications for
full-length training programs):

	-	the training program’s name, address, and telephone number;

	-	a list of refresher courses for which it is seeking accreditation;

	-	a copy of student manuals and instructor notebooks; and

	-	a statement signed by the training manager certifying compliance with
rule provisions.

	Training programs must also seek re-accreditation from EPA every four
years.  In order to receive re-accreditation, the training program must
submit:

	-	the training program’s name, address, and telephone number;

	-	a list of courses for which it is applying for re-accreditation;

	-	a description of any changes or updates to the training facility or
equipment that would adversely affect a student’s ability to learn,
since its last application was approved; and

	-	a statement from the training program manager that the training
program complies at all times with all rule requirements.

	The rule specifies that training programs must retain the following
records for three years and six months and make them available upon EPA
request:

	-	qualifications of training managers and work practice instructors;

	-	current curriculum/course materials, and documents reflecting any
changes made to these materials;

	-	the course test blueprint;

	-	information on how the hands-on assessment is conducted;

	-	the quality control plan;

	-	results of the students’ hands-on skills assessments and course
tests, and a copy of each student’s course completion certificate; and

	-	any other material the program submitted to EPA as part of its
accreditation application.

	The rule provides general instructions to individuals seeking
certification to perform LBP activities.  Individuals must submit a
one-time application to EPA, including the following elements:

	-	proof of training (for all individuals);

	-	evidence that the individual meets the education or experience
prerequisites (applicable to all but workers and inspectors); and

	-	proof of completing the standardized certification exam (applicable
to all but workers and project designers).

	Under the rule’s provisions, individuals must seek re-certification
every three years (5 years for individuals who have passed a proficiency
test as part of their training), submitting to EPA a copy of the
refresher course completion certificate.

	The rule provides specific requirements for firms seeking
certification.  A firm must submit to EPA a letter indicating that the
firm will employ only certified individuals to conduct LBP activities
and follow the work practice standards.

	The rule requires that individuals/firms prepare reports during the
conduct of LBP activities and maintain the reports for no fewer than
three years.  The requirements are specific to the disciplines.

	Following the conduct of an inspection, the inspector must prepare a
report documenting the following:

	-	date of inspection;

	-	address of building and units;

	-	date of construction of building and units;

	-	unit numbers (if applicable);

	-	name, address, and telephone number of the owner of building and
units;

	-	name, signature, and certification number of each certified inspector
and/or risk assessor conducting testing;

	-	name, address and telephone of the certified firm employing the
individual (if applicable);

	-	each testing method and device and/or sampling procedure employed,
including quality control data, and, if used, the serial number of the
XRF device;

	-	specific locations of each painted component tested for LBP; and

	-	result of the inspection expressed according to the particular
sampling method.

	For a risk assessment:

	-	date of risk assessment;

	-	address of residences and buildings;

	-	date of construction of residences and buildings;

	-	unit numbers (if applicable);

	-	name, address and telephone number of the owner of residences and
buildings;

	-	name, signature, and certification number of risk assessor conducting
the assessment,

	-	name, address, and telephone number of certified firm employing the
risk assessor (if applicable);

	-	results of visual inspection;

	-	name, address, and telephone of each recognized laboratory conducting
analyses of samples;

	-	testing methods and sampling procedures for paint analysis employed;

	-	specific locations of each painted component tested for the presence
of LBP;

	-	all data collected from on-site testing;

	-	all results of laboratory analyses on samples;

	-	any other sampling results;

	-	any background information collected prior to the activity;

	-	an evaluation of any previous inspections, analyses, or assessments
of LBP, if applicable;

	-	description of the location and type of identified LBP hazards; and

	-	description of options for addressing any LBP hazards.

	For a lead hazard screen:

	-	first 15 items on the risk assessment list above; and

	-	recommendations concerning desirability of follow-up risk assessment.

	For all abatements, the individual/firm must first submit to EPA prior
notification of abatement activities.

	Before an abatement, the individual/firm must prepare an occupant
protection plan describing the measures that the individual/firm will
take during the abatement to protect building occupants from exposure to
lead-contaminated dust and debris.

	Following the abatement, the individual or supervisor must prepare a
report detailing the following:

	-	start and completion dates;

	-	name and address of each individual or firm conducting the
abatement(s) and each supervisor assigned to the project;

	-	the occupant protection plan;

	-	name, address, and signature of each certified risk assessor or
inspector conducting sampling and the date of clearance testing;

	-	results of clearance testing and all soil analyses, and name of
laboratory conducting them; and

	-	a detailed description of the abatement, including method employed,
locations of rooms and/or components, reasons for selecting abatement
methods for particular components.

	The Agency will make use of existing technology to simplify the
lead-based paint abatement and training notification process. 
Therefore, in addition to the more traditional notification methods
(mail, commercial delivery service, or hand delivery) the Agency will
allow fax, and internet based submission of notifications via the
Agency’s Central Data Exchange (CDX).

	The Environmental Protection Agency is establishing a single portal on
the Web for environmental data entering called CDX.  The Agency accepts
abatement and training program notifications through this system.  CDX
offers a faster, easier, more secure reporting option. CDX provides
built-in data quality checks, web forms, standard file formats, and a
user-friendly approach to reporting data.

	CDX helps reporting entities by:

	-	Reducing their reporting burden and associated costs. 

	-	Enabling automated, machine-to-machine transactions eliminating
tedious paper forms and redundant data entry. 

	-	Ensuring a secure electronic environment. 

	-	Improving data quality through built-in edit and data quality checks.

	-	Offering faster, easier click-and-send reporting with one consistent
point of entry for reporting, one streamlined set of procedures, and one
password. 

	-	Confirming EPA’s receipt of their data. 

	-	Translating and distributing incoming data to the appropriate data
system. 

	CDX helps EPA by:

	-	Centralizing receipt, security, user authentication, archiving,
translation, distribution and related user support services for incoming
data. 

	-	Eliminating redundant infrastructure and its associated cost. 

	-	Enabling the Agency to streamline and simplify compliance reporting
for everyone. 

	The Agency also considered telephone notification and found it
inappropriate because it would increase administrative burden, and would
be less reliable due to inherent problems associated with transcribing
verbal information.  Therefore, the Agency does not allow telephone
notification.

	5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility

	The Agency has attempted to ensure that its regulatory requirements do
not unduly burden small business.  The certification requirements are
very simple.  A firm need only certify to the accrediting authority that
it is employing certified individuals and that it will comply with the
required standards.  Individuals must take a refresher training course
every three years, or five years for individuals who have passed a
proficiency test as part of their training.  The Agency also permits
flexibility in the way information is prepared and presented (e.g.,
there are no forms to complete).  Post-certification and accreditation,
firms and training providers need only notify the Agency that it is
commencing lead-based paint abatement activities or providing a
lead-based paint activity training course (with relevant information),
and that it will comply with the required standards.

	5(d)	Collection Schedule

	For authorization, certification and accreditation, collection
activities will occur according to the following schedule:

	-	States/Tribes may submit an application for program authorization at
any time;

	-	training programs may apply to become accredited at any time;

	-	training programs must seek re-accreditation at four-year intervals
following initial accreditation;

	-	individuals and firms may apply for certification at any time;

	-	individuals and firms must seek re-certification at three-year
intervals (five-year intervals for individuals who have passed a
proficiency test as part of their training) following initial
certification.

	The Agency believes that receipt of notification five and seven
business days respectively prior to conducting lead-based paint
abatement activities or training courses is necessary to facilitate the
inspection of abatement and training locations.  The regulation also
includes provisions for updating the original notification.  The Agency
determined that the time periods for initial notification will also
apply to a change in course location, or if the course is to be
presented earlier than described in the original notification.  Other
changes, including cancellation of courses or abatement projects, need
only be received by the Agency at least two business days before a
training course is scheduled to begin, or by the start date of an
abatement activity.  Such notification periods are appropriate to allow
proper allocation of EPA compliance monitoring and enforcement
resources, and to prevent the arrival of Agency personnel at the wrong
location or time.

6	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

	This section estimates the incremental burden and cost associated with
the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of sections 402 (a) and 404
of TSCA, and also with the notification requirements promulgated in
April 2004.  The burden estimates provided in this analysis are
primarily based on the cost estimates developed in the 1999 Economic
Analysis of the Final TSCA Section 402 (a)(3) Lead-Based Paint
Accreditation and Certification Fee Rule (Fees Rule EA), a data summary
from a survey of nine State lead accreditation and certification
programs (which was conducted to provide information for the 1999 Fees
Rule EA), and data on the level of certification and accreditation and
renewal activity observed over the most recent years of the program. 
These burden and cost estimates cover both initial accreditations and
certifications and also re-accreditation and re-certification, as well
as the associated notifications.

	Sections 6(a) and 6(b) discuss the respondents’ burdens and costs,
respectively.  Section 6(c) reports EPA burdens and costs, and sections
6(d) through 6(f) provide summaries of the respondents’ burdens, and
provide the Federal Register burden statement.  Each of sections 6(a),
6(b), and 6(c) include two parts.  The first parts of each section
consist of the analysis of the reporting and recordkeeping and training
program elements of burden and cost that were previously covered in EPA
ICR No. 1715.02.  The second parts cover the notification provisions
that were previously covered in EPA ICR 1715.05.  The first parts will
be referred to as Accreditation and Certification.  The second parts
will be referred to as Notification.  The burden and cost calculations
in the Notification sections are based on the numbers of entities and
events that are developed in the Accreditation and Certification
sections, as well as on estimates included in the previous ICR and in
the Fees Rule EA.  The estimates from both parts of sections 6(a), 6(b),
and 6(c) are brought together in the summaries in sections 6(d) through
6(f).

	6(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden  

	Accreditation and Certification

	Introduction

	Four types of respondents will be affected by this information
collection activity: 1) training providers, 2) firms performing
lead-based paint activities, 3) individual lead-based paint
professionals, and 4) States.  The burdens and costs fall into one of
the following categories: 1) applying for
authorization/certification/accreditation, 2) applying for renewal of
certification/accreditation, 3) annual reporting (or reporting during
the course of the year), and 4) annual recordkeeping (or recordkeeping
during the course of the year).  The reporting and recordkeeping burden
estimates include the time associated with completing and sending the
reports to the appropriate authority, as well as the time required to
collect the information needed to complete the report.  The
recordkeeping burden estimates include the time associated with copying,
filing and maintaining the records.  In addition, some States and the
Federal government will be affected in their role as administrators of
the programs.

	Sections 402/404 allow training providers, firms, and individuals to
apply for accreditation/certification simultaneously in multiple States.
 Some entities file multi-State applications, but this is unlikely to
have a significant effect on the estimate of the burden.  To the extent
that applicants take advantage of the relatively low cost of applying in
additional States, this analysis may have overestimated the burden to
these entities.

	Projected Activities

	Previous Method of Projections

	The previous ICR was based on projections, since data on the rate of
activities were not available.  Those projections involved the following
steps1:

	(a) Use a variety of data sources to project the number of housing
units with damaged lead-based paint in each of the fifty States and in
Tribal areas.

	(b) Collect data on the numbers of accredited training providers and
certified firms and individuals in those States that had accreditation
and certification programs.

	(c) Use the relationship between (a) and (b) to estimate a general
relationship between the number of housing units and the numbers of
accredited and certified entities, and use that relationship to project
the expected numbers of accredited and certified entities in each State
and in Tribal areas.

	(d) Partition the numbers derived in (c) among States that were
expected to administer their own programs and those that were expected
to be administered by EPA.  This generated estimates of the expected
steady-state numbers for each type of entity, and produced the number of
entities expected to be accredited or certified in the first year of the
program.  These projections were in two parts: the EPA-administered
universe, and the universe of authorized States and Tribal areas.

	(e) Use estimates of expected turnover rates to project both the
numbers of new accreditations and certifications in future years and the
number of re-accreditations and re-certifications, for both the
EPA-administered universe and for the universe of authorized States and
Tribal areas.

	

Revised Method of Projections

	Those earlier procedures were used because the program was young, the
pattern of activities had not yet stabilized, and there was insufficient
data on actual activities to form a basis for projections.  It was
expected that there would be a large initial cohort of certified firms
and individuals, and a recurring wave in activity as that initial cohort
applied for re-certification at three year intervals.  Since then, the
pattern of activities has had time to settle down, and the number of
states and tribes administering their own programs has been nearly
static over the past four years.  This analysis will base the estimated
number of future activities in areas under EPA administration on the
average level of activities over the most recent four years.  While the
data do show substantial year-to-year variation, there does not appear
to be a trend.  In the absence of a trend, the average of past activity
should be a reasonable predictor of the average of future activity.

	The Fees Rule EA estimated that the number of State-approved programs
would reach 39 in year five of the program.  Based on that number, it
was further estimated that the EPA-administered area would constitute
about 17 percent of the national universe.  As of January 2007, there
are 39 authorized State programs and three authorized Tribal programs,
as well as authorized programs in Puerto Rico and the District of
Columbia.  The number of currently authorized state programs is
sufficiently close to the earlier estimate that, in the absence of any
additional information, this analysis will again assume that the
EPA-administered areas constitute about 17 percent of the national
universe.

	This 17 percent assumption is central to the computations of burden and
cost in this analysis.  The Agency has no comparable information on the
level of activities in areas covered by the authorized State and Tribal
programs.  There are two prominent simple and easy options for
projecting those numbers.  One would be to just use the numbers from an
earlier analysis.  That is the method that was chosen in the most recent
previous ICR renewal analysis, which took the number that had been
published in 1999 in the Fees Rule EA. But the Agency now has a
substantial record of the number of activities in the EPA administered
areas, and those data seem to suggest that the number of certified and
accredited entities is substantially higher than had been anticipated in
that 1999 analysis, by almost a factor of two. The second prominent
option would be to assume that the number of such entities in the State
and Tribal administered areas is also now substantially higher than was
projected in 1999. Projections in those areas could then be based on the
available data in the EPA administered areas, using the 17 percent
proportionality factor.  That is the method that has been adopted in
this analysis. 

	This change of method, in combination with the available data, has
resulted in a substantially higher burden estimate, larger by almost a
factor of two.  This change is directly attributable to this change in
estimation methods and to the corrections to earlier projections based
on the observed levels of activity, which happen to be greater that was
earlier anticipated. This is not due to any change in the regulation or
any change in the burden associated with any of the particular elements
of the program and its administration. 

	The following chart reports the most recent four years of data on
certification and accreditation activities in the EPA administered
areas.  Those data are the central input in the projections of future
activities both in those EPA administered areas and, using the 17
percent proportionality factor, in the State and Tribal administered
areas. 

Data on EPA-Administered Activity	EPA-Administered Universe

	FY2003	FY2004	FY2005	FY2006	Average

Firm initial certification	  161	  293	  408	  219	    270.25

Firm re-certification	  322	  136	  107	  273	    209.50

Individual initial certification	1,217	1,098	1,887	1,211	1,353.25

Individual re-certification	  347	  893	  513	  543	    574.00

Training program initial accreditation	    16	    12	      8	      3	   
    9.75

Training program re-accreditation	    11	    27	    11	      8	     
14.25

	In this analysis, the average over these four years is used as a
projection of the rate of future activity in the EPA-administered areas.
 These projections in turn were used to produce estimates of activity in
the non-EPA-administered universe, based on the assumption (used in
earlier analyses) that the EPA-administered part amounts to 17 percent
of the national universe, and with the numbers all rounded to integers.

Estimated Annual Rate of Future Activity

(all rounded to whole numbers)	EPA-Administered	Non-EPA Administered
National Universe Total

Firm initial certification	  270	1,320	1,590

Firm re-certification	  210	1,022	1,232

Individual initial certification	1,353	6,607	7,960

Individual re-certification	  574	2,802	3,376

Training program initial accreditation	    10	      47	    57

Training program re-accreditation	    14	      70	    84

	Those numbers are projections of the number of certifications and
accreditations. The number of certified or accredited entities at any
particular point in time cannot be estimated with certainty from those
projections.  A rough estimate can be obtained by assuming that each
entity remains active for three years (or four years in the case of
training programs) and then decides either to renew or to withdraw from
the industry.  Under that assumption, the total number will consist of
three age-class cohorts, and each cohort will consist of the entities
that either initiate or renew their enrollment in a given year.  This
means, for example, that the number of existing certified firms in
EPA-administered areas will be (270 + 210) * 3 = (480 * 3) = 1,440. 
Since it is likely that some entities that choose to withdraw from the
industry will do so prior to the end of their third year of their
certification or accreditation, these numbers will tend to overestimate
the population, all else being equal.  This assumption also implies that
the number of certified firms and individuals is stable, so that the
number of new certifications each year is matched by a similar number
that choose to allow their existing certifications to lapse.  This
means, for example, that there are (270 + 210) = 480 firms in
EPA-administered areas in their initial year after certification or
recertification, 480 in their second year, and 480 in their third year. 
That is, the age structure is uniform and the number of firms in any
given year-cohort can be determined by simply dividing the total number
by three.  These assumptions are used as simplifications to permit
making projections into the future. 

Estimated Population of certified or accredited entities

(all rounded to whole numbers)	EPA-Administered	

Non-EPA Administered	National Universe Total

Certified Firms	1,440	  7,026	  8,466

Certified Individuals	5,781	28,227	34,008

Accredited Training Providers	    96	    468	    564

	It may be useful to compare those projections to the projections that
were made earlier for the 1999 Fees Rule EA.  That earlier analysis
projected the number of entities on a year-by year basis, for the first
five years of the program.  The numbers projected for the fifth year are
shown in the following table.  It is clear that the projections used in
this current analysis, based on the available data on observed pattern
and level of activities in the EPA administered areas, are roughly twice
the size of the estimates that were reported in the 1999 Fees Rule EA.

1999 Fees Rule EA Estimates of certified or accredited entities in the
fifth year of the program

	EPA-Administered	Non-EPA Administered	National Universe Total

Certified Firms	   700	  3,369	  4,069

Certified Individuals	2,969	14,280	17,249

Accredited Training Providers	      30	    147	    177

	Proportions of Certified Individuals

	The projections above do not distinguish among the five professional
classifications for which EPA provides certification.  A time-series
break down of all the data on activities by discipline comparable to and
consistent with the previous projections is not available.  However, we
do have data on 16,880 certifications and renewals by discipline.  We
assume for the sake of this analysis that all individual certification
and renewal activity within a given discipline is in the same
proportions as the overall set.  We actually expect that the renewal
rate will vary across disciplines, so that the proportion of new
certifications to renewals for a particular discipline may not be
accurately represented in these numbers.  Some disciplines undoubtedly
will have above-average renewal rates, and others will be below average.
 But since the burden associated with renewal is similar to the burden
of a new certification, and since these numbers do reflect the overall
averages, the assumption of identical renewal rates across disciplines
should not affect the burden estimates. 

Numbers and Proportions of Certification Activities by Discipline

	National Universe of Certified Individuals as Estimated in the Fees
Rule EA	Observed Numbers of Certifications and Renewals in the 2003-2006
Data (Under EPA Administration)

Discipline	Numbers	Proportions	Numbers 	Proportions

Inspectors	5,175	30.0 %	1,446	8.6 %

Risk Assessors	4,140	24.0 %	6,627	39.3 %

Supervisors	3,795	22.0 %	3,098	18.3 %

Workers	3,967	23.0 %	5,309	31.4 %

Project Designers	  172	1.0 %	  400	2.4 %

	As seen in that table, the proportions of activities by discipline
observed in the data are roughly similar to those predicted in the Fees
Rule EA.  However, we see a substantially smaller proportion of
inspectors and a larger proportion of risk assessors and workers in the
data.

	The proportions that we obtained from the available data, broken down
by discipline, can be combined with previous estimates of individual
accreditation activities to give estimates of activities by year and by
discipline.

Projected Numbers of Annual Certification Activities by Discipline *

	EPA-Administered Areas	State and Tribal Areas	National Totals

          New inspectors	  116	  568	  684

          New risk assessors	  532	2,596	3,128

          New supervisors	  248	1,209	1,457

          New abatement workers	  425	2,075	2,500

          New project designers	    32	  159	  191

 Total Initial Certifications	1,353	6,607	7,960

          Inspector renewals	    49	    241	  290

          Risk Assessor renewals	  226	 1,101	1,327

          Supervisor renewals	  105	    513	  618

          Abatement workers renewals	  180	    880	1,060

          Project designer renewals	    14	     67	    81

Total Re-Certifications	  574	2,802	3,376

* All projections rounded to whole numbers and adjusted to reach
consistent totals. 

	Training Providers

	Initial Accreditation 

	A training program may seek accreditation to offer courses in any of
the following disciplines: inspector, risk assessor, project designer,
supervisor, or worker.  However, before training providers can apply for
accreditation, they must familiarize themselves with the specific
requirements of the rule, as well as compare the contents of their
current training courses (if any) to the requirements specified in the
rule.  Included in this burden estimate is the managerial time spent in
deciding if the training provider should offer lead-based paint
training.  Based on estimates provided in the Regulatory Impact Analysis
of the Interim Rule to Revise the Asbestos Model Accreditation Plan
(MAP) (EPA, 1993), this analysis assumes a total burden of 8 hours
associated with rule familiarization and determination of applicability.

	If the training provider decides to apply for accreditation, an
application must be submitted to EPA containing the following
information:

	the training provider’s name, address, and telephone number,

		a list of courses for which it is applying for accreditation,

	a statement signed by the training program manager that clearly
indicates how the training program meets the minimum requirement for
accreditation, or a statement that indicates that the training program
will use the EPA-developed curriculum if available,

		a copy of the course test blueprint, a description of the
activities and procedures for conducting the assessment of hands-on
skills, and a description of the facilities and equipment for lecture
and hands on training, and

	a quality control plan, which outlines procedures for periodic
revision of training materials and exams and annual reviews of
instructors.

	The burden of completing the accreditation statement varies depending
on whether the training provider adopts the EPA-developed curriculum or
chooses to use their own training curriculum.  The burden associated
with implementing a non-EPA curriculum, and providing documentation
demonstrating that the curriculum meets certain minimum requirements, is
significantly greater than adopting the EPA curriculum.  Given the
similarity between requirements, data collected to assess the burden of
preparing an accreditation statement for training approval under the
Asbestos MAP were used to estimate the burden of the training provider
approval process required by this rule.  Based on the Asbestos MAP, the
burden associated with adoption of the EPA curriculum is estimated to be
4 hours, or 40 hours if training providers use their own curriculum.  At
this time, EPA possesses no information for estimating the proportion of
training providers that will adopt the EPA curriculum versus those that
will use their own.  This analysis assumes that most training providers
(90 percent) will adopt the EPA curriculum, resulting in an average
burden of 7.6 hours ((0.90*4 hours) + (0.10*40 hours)) of professional
time for completion of the accreditation statement.  The analysis
further assumes two hours of clerical time required for completion of
the accreditation statement.

	The burden associated with developing the quality control plan is the
same for all training providers whether they adopt the EPA curriculum or
develop their own.  Similar data for estimating the quality control plan
burden were not available in the Asbestos MAP.  Due to data limitations,
this analysis assumes that the preparation of the quality control plan
will take 8 hours of professional time and 2 hours of clerical time.

	Quadrennial Reporting

	Training provider accreditations are valid for a period of 4 years. 
Training providers seeking re-accreditation are required to submit an
application to the approving authority containing:

	the training provider’s name, address, and telephone number,

		a list of courses for which it is applying for re-accreditation,

		a description of any changes or updates to the training facility,
equipment, or course materials that would adversely affect the
students’ ability to learn,

		a statement signed by the program manager certifying that the
program complies with all of the requirements of this rule including
recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

	Limited data are available regarding the burden of re-accreditation. 
Therefore, this analysis makes the simplifying assumption that it will
take one-half of the time it took to apply for initial accreditation
(i.e., 4.8 hours).  An audit may also be performed by the approving
authority to verify the accreditation statement and the contents of the
application.  At this time, the proportion of applicants audited is
unknown.  This analysis assumes that 10 percent of all programs applying
for re-accreditation will be audited in a given year.  Total burden for
a training provider to prepare for and participate in an audit is
assumed to be 2 hours professional and 4 hours of clerical time because
much of the work will be assembling files for the auditor.

	Annual Recordkeeping

	There are significant first year and subsequent year recordkeeping
requirement burdens for training providers.  Sections 402(a) and 404 of
TSCA require that training providers keep records on:

 	qualifications of the training manager and principal instructors,

 	 	curriculum/course materials, and documents reflecting any changes
made to these materials,

	 	course test blueprint,

	 	hands-on skills assessment methodology,

		quality control plan,	

	 	student files (including hands-on skills assessments, course test
results), and

		any other materials that were submitted to the EPA as part of the
program’s application for accreditation.

	These reports must be held for a minimum period of three and one-half
years.  Chapter 9 of the TSCA Title IV Sections 402(a) and 404:  Target
Housing and Child-Occupied Facilities Final Rule Regulatory Impact
Analysis estimates that, in total, training provider records will be 11
pages plus two pages for each of their students.  The filing burden is
calculated as a per report/file burden, and is not affected by the
number of pages in the report; the number of pages only affects the cost
of materials.  Therefore, the recordkeeping burden estimates for
training providers include labor associated with the filing and
maintenance of the records only (one hour of clerical time).

	This analysis estimates the annual burden for all training providers to
be 2,055 hours for training providers in State-administered programs and
428 hours for training providers in EPA-administered programs.  The
total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden for all training
providers is estimated to be 2,483 hours.  These estimates all assume
that the burden per entity and per activity is the same in both EPA and
State-administered programs, so that the burden in any area for a given
year depends only on the estimated numbers of entities and activities in
that area for that year.  Exhibit 6.1 below summarizes the burden of the
reporting and annual recordkeeping requirements for training providers.

Exhibit 6.1 Training Providers: Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
Estimates

 Burden Element	 Professional Hours	 Clerical Hours	Burden Hours Per
Training Provider 

Accreditation

	Rule Familiarization	8.00	0.00	  8.00

Accreditation Statement	7.60	2.00	  9.60

Quality Control Plan	8.00	2.00	10.00

Annual Burden

	Recordkeeping	0.00	0.81	0.81

Reaccreditation Burden (In Addition to the Annual Burden)

Re-accreditation	3.80	1.00	4.80

Audit*	0.20	0.40	0.60

Burden Per Training Provider

	Year of Initial Accreditation	28.41

Second, Third, and Fourth Year of Operation	  0.81

Year of Accreditation Renewal	  6.21

Training Providers Per Year

State-Administered Entities	EPA-Administered Entities

	number of entities	burden hours	number of entities	burden hours

New Accreditations	  47	1,335	10	284

Second Year Cohort	117	     95	24	  19

Third Year Cohort	117	     95	24	  19

Fourth Year Cohort	117	     95	24	  19

Accreditation renewals	  70	   435	14	  87

Total burden hours

2,055

428

Burden Per Year

	State-Administered Entities	EPA-Administered Entities	Total burden
hours

Burden in Hours	2,055	428	2,483

* This analysis assumes that 10 percent of all programs applying for
re-accreditation will be audited.

Estimates of burden hours per event taken from the Fees Rule EA and
previous ICR renewals.

	Firms Performing Lead-based Paint Activities

	Initial Certification

	In order to perform the lead-based paint activities that are regulated
under sections 402(a) and 404, firms performing lead-based paint
activities, such as inspections and abatements, are required to seek
certification from the approving authority.  Similar to training
providers, these firms must first familiarize themselves with the
specific requirements of the rule.  They must also determine if it is
profitable to enter the market for lead-based paint activities.  This
analysis assumes that it will take only 6 hours for firms, as opposed to
8 hours for training providers, for rule familiarization because firms
do not need to compare and contrast as much information.  If a firm
decides to enter the market, a certification letter must be sent to the
approving authority indicating that the firm will follow the standards
set forth in the rule and will employ only certified employees.  The
cost of certifying individuals is discussed in a later section.  The
professional burden estimate of one hour and the clerical burden
estimate of 0.5 hours for initial certification are taken from Chapter 9
of TSCA Title IV Sections 402(a) and 404:  Target Housing and
Child-Occupied Facilities Final Rule Regulatory Impact Analysis.

	Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping

	While performing lead-based paint activities, firms are required to
complete and maintain a number of reports including:

	inspection report describing the areas inspected and the results of
the inspection,

	risk assessment/lead hazard screen report, which includes the
sampling results and the associated hazards,

	occupant protection plan identifying the areas requiring abatement
and the methods that will be employed to remediate the hazard and
protect workers, and

	abatement report detailing the activities undertaken to eliminate
the hazard.

	This analysis adopts the estimates of events per firm developed in the
previous ICRs. The total numbers of events are calculated by multiplying
those numbers of events per firm by the number of firms estimated in
this ICR. The estimates for the burden per event and burden per firm are
those developed in the previous ICRs.

	The analysis in the TSCA Title IV Sections 402(a) and 404:  Target
Housing and Child-Occupied Facilities Final Rule Regulatory Impact
Analysis makes two assumptions about the certification and reporting
requirements of firms performing lead-based paint activities.  First,
because it is current industry practice to report and maintain the
records from a lead inspection, there is no incremental
reporting/recordkeeping burden associated with this activity.  In
addition, there are no incremental costs associated with the reporting
and recordkeeping of lead hazard screens as defined by this rule. 
Second, since the various reports will be completed by the inspector,
risk assessor, project designer, or supervisor, no clerical support will
be required for the reporting requirements; clerical support will be
needed for the recordkeeping requirements.

	The burden of completing the reports mentioned above varies by report
and is indicated in Exhibit 6.2.  The reporting burden estimates include
the time associated with collecting the information needed to complete
the reports.  In the upper portions of that exhibit, the professional
burden per firm is the reporting burden per event multiplied by the
estimated average number of each particular event per firm.  Similarly,
the clerical burden per firm is the recordkeeping burden per report
multiplied by the number of events per firm.  The burden hours per firm
are then the sum of the profession and clerical burdens.

	The number of events per firm was estimated in previous ICR analyses by
dividing earlier estimates of the total number of events by an estimate
of the number of firms. Those per-firm estimates were used in the two
previous ICR renewal analyses, and for the sake of consistency are used
again in this analysis.

	This analysis estimates the total reporting and recordkeeping burden to
all firms to be 648,581 hours per year. Exhibit 6.2 below summarizes the
burden of the reporting and annual recordkeeping requirements to firms.

Exhibit 6.2 Firms: Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden Estimates

Category	Number of Events per Firm	Reporting Burden per Event
Professional Burden per Firm	Recordkeeping Burden Per Report	Clerical
Burden per Firm	Burden Hours Per Firm

Certification

Rule familiarization	1.00	6.00	6.00	0.000	0.000	6.00

Certification letter	1.00	1.5*	1.50	0.008	0.008	1.51

* Includes 0.5 hours clerical time.

Target Housing (including soil abatements)

Risk assessment and lead hazard screen reports	16.11	1.86	29.96	0.008
0.134	30.09

Pre-abatement notifications	4.51	0.50	2.25	0.008	0.037	2.29

Occupant protection plan	13.97	1.00	13.97	0.008	0.116	14.08

Post-abatement reports	13.97	2.00	27.94	0.008	0.000	27.94

Child-Occupied Facilities (including soil abatements)

Risk assessment reports	0.12	1.09	0.14	0.008	0.001	0.14

Pre-abatement notifications	0.12	0.50	0.06	0.008	0.001	0.06

Occupant protection plan	0.12	1.00	0.12	0.008	0.001	0.13

Post-abatement reports	0.12	2.00	0.25	0.008	0.001	0.25

Burden per Firm

Firms in year of initial certification	82.49

Firms in year of recertification	76.49

Firms in second-year cohort	74.98

Firms in third-year cohort	74.98

Firms per Year

Number of State-Administered Firms	Number of EPA-Administered Firms
Total US Firms

Firms in year of initial certification	1,320	270	1,590

Firms in year of recertification	1,022	210	1,232

Firms in second-year cohort	2,342	480	2,822

Firms in third-year cohort	2,342	480	2,822

Burden per Year

	Burden in hours	State-Administered Firms	EPA-Administered Firms	Total
US Firms

Firms in year of initial certification	108,887	  22,272	131,159

Firms in year of recertification	  78,173	  16,063	  94,236

Firms in second-year cohort	175,603	  35,990	211,593

Firms in third-year cohort	175,603	  35,990	211,593

Total burden per year	538,266	110,315	648,581

	Individual Abatement Professionals Burden

	Initial Certification    					

	In order to become certified to perform lead abatement activities,
individuals must apply to the certifying authority.  The reporting
requirements for certification are the same for inspectors, risk
assessors, and supervisors; and for workers and project designers. 
Certifications are generally valid for a period of three years.  In the
fourth year, individuals trained in the first year who are still active
will need to take refresher training and get recertified.  The time
associated with re-certification is less than that associated with
initial certification; however, they have been assumed to be equal for
purposes of this analysis (leading to possible overestimate of burden).

	The requirements for certification for inspectors, risk assessors, and
supervisors include submitting proof of:

	completion of a training course,

		passing the course test,

		meeting the educational and/or experience requirements (if
applicable), and

		passing the third party exam.

It is estimated that it will take one hour to gather and send these
documents per individual.

	The requirements for project designers and workers include proof of:

		completion of a training course, and

		meeting the educational and/or experience requirement (if
applicable).

It is estimated that it will take one-half hour to gather and send this
document per individual.

	This analysis estimates the total reporting and recordkeeping burden to
all certified individuals in each year covered by this ICR to be about
9,420 hours.  Exhibit 6.3 details the total reporting and recordkeeping
burden to the individual subgroups (e.g. inspectors, risk assessors, and
workers) and summarizes the individual burden.

Exhibit 6.3 Individual: Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden Estimates

Burden per Individual

	Inspectors, Risk Assessors, and Supervisors	Workers and Project
Designers

Year of Initial Certification	1.0	0.5

Year of Certification Renewal	1.0	0.5

Individuals per Year

	State-Administered Areas	EPA-Administered Areas	Total US

	entities	burden hrs	entities	burden hrs	entities	burden hrs

Inspectors

Initial certification	568	568	116	116	684	684

Certification renewal	241	241	49	49	290	290

Risk Assessors

Initial certification	2,596	2,596	532	532	3,128	3,128

Certification renewal	1,101	1,101	226	226	1,327	1,327

Supervisors

Initial certification	1,209	1,209	248	248	1,457	1,457

Certification renewal	513	513	105	105	618	618

Workers

Initial certification	2,075	1,037.5	425	212.5	2,500	1,250

Certification renewal	880	440	180	90	1,060	530

Project Designers

Initial certification	159	79.5	32	16	191	95.5

Certification renewal	67	33.5	14	7	81	40.5

Total burden hours

7,818.5

1,601.5

9,420

	State Burden

	Initial Authorization

	As of January 2007 there are 39 authorized State programs and three
authorized Tribal programs, as well as authorized programs in Puerto
Rico and the District of Columbia. .  This analysis assumes that no
additional States or Tribes will request authorization during the period
covered by this ICR.  Based on this assumption, any burden associated
with obtaining authorization has already been incurred.  While
additional States may seek authorization in the future, information is
not available at this time upon which to estimate how many and which
States may seek authorization.  Thus, the number of entities to be
administered in these States is also not known.

	Reporting and Recordkeeping

	The initial ICR for this data collection estimated the burden to States
of program authorization, but did not assume administration of entities
to be a burden of this rule.  However, the previous ICR renewal as well
as this one does include a burden estimate for the State and Federal
administration of training providers, firms and individuals. These
estimates have been developed using State-level survey data collected
for the Economic Analysis of the Final TSCA Section 402(a)(3) Lead-Based
Paint Accreditation and Certification Fee Rule, as well as using the
estimates of the number of activities in State-administered areas
reported earlier in this analysis. 

	The State-level survey data provide burden hours for the following
activities for both the certification and re-certification of
State-administered training providers, firms, and individuals:



Application processing and recordkeeping

Certification exam processing and recordkeeping

Training course audits

Fee transactions and waivers

Issuance of certification documents

Public assistance/outreach

Reporting (to overseeing agencies)

Other management



	This analysis multiplied these State-level survey data burden hours by
the number of State-administered training providers, firms, and
individuals found in the Economic Analysis of the Final TSCA Section
402(a)(3) Lead-Based Paint Accreditation and Certification Fee Rule in
order to estimate the total burden to all States of administering
training providers, firms, and individuals.

	The total reporting and recordkeeping burden to all States and Tribes
with authorized programs is estimated to be 72,712 hours in each year
covered by this analysis.  It is likely that the burden will vary from
year to year due to the fluctuating pattern of new entries, exits, and
renewals.  This analysis does not capture that fluctuation, but it does
represent our best estimate of the average burden over this period. 
Exhibit 6.4 details the total reporting and recordkeeping burden
associated with each type of State and Tribal-administered entity (e.g.,
training provider, firm, and individual) and summarizes the burden to
States and Tribes for program administration.

Exhibit 6.4 State: Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden Estimates

State Program Administration Burden per Entity Type

	Clerical Hours	Technical Hours	Managerial Hours

	Certify	Re-certify	Certify	Re-certify	Certify	Re-certify

Training Providers	3.36	1.40	28.37	10.13	8.93	7.63

Firms	0.61	0.44	4.73	4.25	2.90	2.90

Individuals	1.56	1.36	3.15	1.80	1.32	0.76

Activities per Year

Number of Activities in State and Tribal-Administered Areas

Training Providers

	Accreditations	47

Re-accreditations	70

Firms

	Initial certifications	1,320

Renewals	1,022

Individuals

	Initial certifications	6,607

Renewals	2,802

State Program Administration Burden per Year			

State Burden by Entity Type

Training Providers	3,252

Firms	18,635

Individuals	50,825

Total State Burden in Hours	72,712

	Notification

	Introduction

	Three types of respondents will be affected by the notification
provisions covered by this ICR: 1) training providers, 2) firms
performing lead-based paint activities, and 3) States.  The burden and
cost associated with notification are: 1) reporting during the course of
the year and 2) recordkeeping during the course of the year.  The
reporting and recordkeeping burden estimates include the time associated
with completing and sending the notification forms to the appropriate
authority, as well as the time required to collect the information
needed to complete the form.  The recordkeeping burden estimates include
the time required for the respondent to copy and file a record of the
notification form.  In addition some States and the Federal government
will be affected in their role as administrators of the notification
requirement.

	Training Providers

	Under the rule, pre-course notification is required at least seven
business days prior to the start of a lead-based paint activities
course.  Re-notification is required if the course date changes.  Within
10 days of course completion, training providers are required to submit
a post-course notification.  The information training providers are
required to submit during pre-course and post-course notification is
detailed in section 4 of this document.  The following sections discuss
how the reporting and recordkeeping burden estimates in this analysis
were developed. The estimated number of notifications per training
provider is taken from the January 2001 notification rule ICR analysis.
Exhibit 6.5 presents the estimation of training provider burden for the
proposed notification rule.

	Reporting

	This analysis assumes that training providers will complete a separate
notification form for each lead-based paint activity course conducted. 
The number of pre-course and post-course notification events was
estimated by dividing the total number of students in a given year2 by
an estimated average class size3 to obtain the estimated number of
courses.  According to training providers and abatement firms contacted
during the data collection phase of this analysis, currently some
notification programs require pre-course notification for each
individual course, while other programs allow training providers to
submit a list of the courses they plan to offer during the coming year. 
This analysis conservatively assumes one pre-course and one post-course
notification for each training course.  In addition, some courses may
require re-notification.  Training providers and State program
representatives contacted said that re-notification does occur. 
However, they were not able to estimate a re-notification rate. 
Therefore, this analysis has adopted a re-notification rate of 10
percent.  An estimate of the amount of time required to complete the
pre-course and post-course notification forms, described in section 4 of
this document, was determined by calling a sample of training providers
distributed across the U.S.  The number of training providers and their
levels of activity were estimated in the Accreditation and Certification
sections of this analysis.

	Recordkeeping

	The training provider burden estimates described above include the
burden associated with filing a one-page record of the notification form
sent to the administering agency.  An estimate of the amount of time
needed to file a record was adopted from Economic Analysis of the Final
TSCA Section 402 (a) (3) Lead-Based Paint Accreditation and
Certification Fee Rule.

	Annual Burden Hours

	As presented below in Exhibit 6.5, this analysis estimates the
notification burden for all training providers to be a total of 1,839
hours per year.

Exhibit 6.5 Training Providers: Notification Burden Estimates

Notification Category	Events per Training Provider	Reporting

Hours/Event	Recordkeeping

Hours/Event	Total 

Hours/Event	Burden hours per training provider

Pre-notification	1.90	0.15	0.01	0.16	.30

Re-notification	0.19	0.15	0.01	0.16	.03

Post-notification	1.90	1.54	0.01	1.54	2.93

Total burden hours per training provider:	3.26

	State-Administered Areas	EPA-Administered Areas	Total US

Training Providers	468	96	564

Burden Hours	1,526	313	1,839

	Firms

	Under the rule, pre-abatement notification is required at least 5
business days prior to the start of lead-based paint abatement
activities.  Re-notification is required if the start date or end date
of the abatement activity changes.  Firms are not required to provide
notification after the completion of an abatement project.  The
information firms are required to submit during pre-abatement
notification is detailed in section 4 of this document.  The following
sections discuss how the reporting and recordkeeping burden estimates in
this analysis were developed.  Exhibit 6.6.  presents the estimation of
firm burden for the proposed notification rule.

	Reporting

	This analysis assumes that firms will complete a separate notification
form for each lead-based paint abatement activity conducted.  The number
of pre-abatement notification events per firm was adopted from the TSCA
Title V Sections 402(a) and 404: Target Housing and Child-Occupied
Facilities Final Rule Regulatory Impact Analysis.  The number of firms
was estimated in the Accreditation and Certification section of this
analysis.  The number of re-notifications was calculated using a
re-notification rate of 9 percent4.  An estimate of the amount of time
required to complete the pre-abatement notification form, described in
section 4 of this document, was determined by calling a sample of firms
in the State of Massachusetts.

	Recordkeeping

	The firm burden estimates described above include the burden associated
with filing a one page record of the notification form sent to the
administering agency.  An estimate of the amount of time needed to file
a record was adopted from Economic Analysis of the Final TSCA Section
402(a)(3) Lead-Based Paint Accreditation and Certification Fee Rule.

	Annual Burden Hours

	As presented below in Exhibit 6.6, this amendment estimates the
notification burden for all firms to be 29,801 hours per year.

Exhibit 6.6  Firms: Notification Burden Estimates

Category	Events per 

Firm	Reporting 

Hours/Event	Record keeping 

Hours/Event	Hours per 

Firm

Pre-notification 	14.09	0.22	0.01	3.23

Re-notification	1.27	0.22	0.01	0.29

Annual Total	15.36	0.22	0.01	3.52

State-Administered Areas	EPA-Administered Areas	Total US

Certified firms	7,026	1,440	8,466

Burden hours	24,732	5,069	29,801

	State Burden

	Under the proposed rule, notifications submitted by training providers
and abatement firms would be used by States with authorized programs in
support of compliance monitoring and enforcement activities, and to
prioritize inspections.  The administrative management of information
collected under this proposed rule is detailed in section 4 of this
document.  The following sections discuss how the recordkeeping burden
estimates were developed.  Exhibit 6.7 presents the estimation of State
burden for the proposed notification rule.

	Recordkeeping

	The number of notification events per entity is the sum of pre-course,
post-course, and re-notifications submitted by training providers, and
the sum of pre-abatement and re-notifications submitted by firms.  The
sources of this information are discussed in detail in the respective
training provider and firm sections of this analysis.  The State
recordkeeping burden per notification event is estimated at 0.11 hours
for training providers and 0.09 hours for abatement firms.  Both
estimates were obtained by contacting two State agencies, which
currently operate similar lead-based paint training programs, and
maintain lead-based paint activity notification records in both
electronic and hard copy forms.

	Annual Burden

	As presented below in Exhibit 6.7., this analysis estimates the
notification recordkeeping burden for all States to be 9,902 hours per
year.

Exhibit 6.7  States: Notification Burden Estimates

Category	Notifications per Entity	Hours per Notification	Hours per
Entity

Firms	15.36	0.09	1.38

Training Providers	  4.00	0.11	0.44

Entities per Year	Burden Hours per Entity	Total State Burden Hours per
Year

Firms	7,026	1.38	9,696

Training Providers	   468	0.44	   206

Total Annual Burden	9,902

	6(b)	Estimating Respondent Costs

	Introduction

	The cost estimates addressed in this section are based on the burden
estimates discussed in section 6(a).  Wage rates for each category of
personnel are derived with methods and from sources either identical to
or very similar to those used in the Fees Rule EA and previous TSCA
section 402/404 ICR analyses.  

	The fringe and overhead factors from the Fees Rule EA and the
Comprehensive Assessment Information Rule (CAIR) were simplified
somewhat for this analysis, and a uniform loading factor of 60 percent
was applied to all categories of workers. 

	Non-governmental wages are drawn from the full time mean hourly
earnings data in the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) National
Compensation Survey: Occupational Wages in the United States, June 2005,
Table 2-2 (Private industry, selected occupations, mean hourly
earnings).  Those hourly wages are adjusted upward by 4.1 percent to
account for inflation from June 2005 to January 2007.  The BLS Consumer
Price Index for June 2005 (1982 to 1984 = 100) was 194.4.  The same
index was 202.2 in January 2007, for an increase over that period of 4.1
percent.  It is assumed that this is a reasonable representation of the
inflation adjustment for wages. The BLS occupational categories used
here are identical to those used in the most recent ICR renewal
analysis, but may in some cases be somewhat different from the
categories used in earlier analyses.  An attempt was made to match those
categories as closely as possible to the ICR labor categories.

Wage Rate Calculations for Non-Government Workers

ICR Labor Category	BLS Occupation Category	2002 Wage Rate	Wage Inflated
by 4.1%	Wage with Fringe and Overhead

Non-government professional	Professional specialty and technical	$29.80
$31.02	$49.63

Non-government clerical	Administrative support, including clerical
$14.44	$15.03	$24.05

Inspector	Construction inspectors	$24.11	$25.10	$40.16

Risk Assessor	Chemical technicians	$21.96	$22.86	$36.58

Project designer	Designers	$20.84	$21.69	$34.71

Supervisor	Supervisors, painters, paperhangers, and plasterers	$23.54
$24.51	$39.21

Abatement worker	Painters, construction and maintenance	$15.93	$16.58
$26.53

	The wage rates for State and Federal government employees are taken
from the Federal Government’s GS Salary Table for hourly wages,
effective January 2007.  The wages for EPA headquarters workers are
taken from the table including locality pay for the Washington-Baltimore
area.  The wages for all others are taken from table including locality
pay for “Rest of US.”

Wage Rate Calculations for Government Workers

Labor Category	Wage Rate Source	Hourly Wage Rate	Wage with Fringe and
Overhead

States Managerial	GS 13, step 1	$36.14	$57.82

States Technical	GS 11, step 1	$25.35	$40.56

States Clerical	GS 6, step 1	$15.42	$24.67

EPA Headquarters Managerial	GS 13, step 1; Washington DC area	$38.04
$60.86

EPA Headquarters Technical	GS 11, step 1; Washington DC area	$26.69
$42.70

EPA Headquarters Clerical	GS 6, step 1; Washington DC area	$16.23	$25.97

EPA Regional Managerial	GS 13, step 1; “Rest of US” area	$36.14
$57.82

EPA Regional Technical	GS 11, step 1; “Rest of US” area	$25.35
$40.56

EPA Regional Clerical	GS 6, step 1; “Rest of US” area	$15.42	$24.67

	Accreditation and Certification

	Training Providers

	Based on the burden estimates provided in section 6(a) and the wage
rates discussed above, this analysis estimates the cost to training
providers at $83,577 for training providers in State-administered
programs and $17,522 for those in EPA-administered programs.  The annual
reporting and recordkeeping cost for all training providers is estimated
to be $101,100.  Exhibit 6.8 below summarizes the cost of the reporting
and annual recordkeeping requirements for training providers.

Exhibit 6.8 Training Providers: Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost
Estimates

Cost Element	Professional ($49.63/hr)	Clerical  ($24.05/hr)	Burden Hours
 Cost ($) Per Training Provider

Accreditation

Rule Familiarization	8.00	0.00	8.00	$397.04

Accreditation Statement  	7.60	2.00	9.60	$425.14

Quality Control Plan 	8.00	2.00	10.00	$445.14

Annual Cost

Recordkeeping*	0.00	0.81	0.81	$19.48

Quadrennial Cost (In Addition to Annual Cost)	

Re-accreditation 	3.80	1.00	4.80	$212.64

Audit**	0.20	0.40	0.60	$19.55

Cost Per Training Provider

Year of Initial Accreditation		$1,286.95

Second, Third and FourthYear of Operation 		$19.48

Year of Re-accreditation		$232.19

Cost Per Year

	State-Administered	EPA-Administered	All US

	entities	cost	entities	cost	entities	cost

New accreditations	  47	$604,863.65	10	$12,869.50	 57	$73,356.15

Second year cohort	117	$2,279.16	24	$467.52	141	$2,746.68

Third year cohort	117	$2,279.16	24	$467.52	141	$2,746.68

Fourth year cohort	117	$2,279.16	24	$467.52	141	$2,746.68

Re-accreditations	  70	$16,253.30	14	$3,250.66	 84	$19,503.96

Totals

$83,577.43

$17,522.72

$101,100.15

* Recordkeeping burden estimate adopted from the previous ICR.

** This analysis assumes that 10 percent of all programs applying for
re-accreditation will be audited.

	Costs for Firms Performing Lead-based Paint Activities

	The recordkeeping costs fall under two categories: labor and materials.
 The cost estimates used in this analysis rely heavily on the burden
estimates developed for the analysis of section 406 (USEPA, 1993c). 
Recordkeeping labor costs consist of the time associated with the actual
filing of the records.  The analysis of section 406 estimates that the
time associated with filing each report, regardless of size, is 0.5
minutes or 0.0083 hours.  Copying costs are calculated based on $0.06
per copy multiplied by the total number of pages to be copied; only one
copy is required.

	As detailed in section 6(a), the total number of events is based on the
prior ICR.  The wage rates used to represent professional and clerical
labor costs are the same as those detailed above for training providers.

	Based on the burden estimates provided in section 6(a) and the
professional and clerical wage rates described earlier, this analysis
estimates the annual cost at $20,140,949 for firms in State-administered
programs and $4,127,788 for firms in EPA-administered programs, or a
total of $24,268,737 for all firms.  Exhibit 6.9 below summarizes the
cost of the reporting and annual recordkeeping requirements for firms.

Exhibit 6.9 Firms: Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Estimates

  Category	Discipline (for wage rate determination)	Average Reporting 
Cost  Per Firm	Average Record-keeping Cost Per Firm*	Total Number of
Pages Per Firm	Material cost    (@ $0.06per page)	Average Cost Per Firm

Certification

Rule Familiarization

 ($49.63/hr)	professional	$297.78	0

0	$297.78

Certification letter

 ($49.63/hr)	professional	$74.94	$0.20	1.39	$0.08	$75.22

Target Housing (including Soil Abatements)		

	Risk Assessment and

lead hazard screen

reports ($35.58/hr)	risk assessor	$1070.60	$3.22	64.43	$3.87	$1077.70

Pre-Abatement

Notifications ($39.21/hr)	supervisor	$89.79	$0.90	9.03	$0.54	$91.23

Occupant Protection

Plan ($34.71/hr)	designer	$488.72	$2.79	41.86	$2.51	$494.02

Post-Abatement

 Reports ($39.21/hr)	supervisor	$1095.53	$2.79	41.86	$2.51	$1100.83

	Target Housing Per-Firm Cost Subtotal	$2763.78

Child-Occupied Facilities (including Soil Abatements)	

	Risk Assessment and

lead hazard screen

reports ($35.58/hr)	risk assessor	$4.98	$0.02	0.49	$0.03	$5.03

Pre-Abatement

Notifications

($39.21/hr)	supervisor	$2.35	$0.02	0.25	$0.01	$2.39

Occupant Protection

Plan ($34.71/hr)	designer	$4.51	$0.02	0.25	$0.01	$4.55

Post-Abatement

Reports ($39.21/hr)	supervisor	$9.80	$0.02	0.25	$0.01	$9.84

	Child-Occupied Facilities Per-Firm Cost Subtotal	$21.81

 Cost Per Firm

Year of Initial Certification	$3158.59

Second and Third Year of Operation	$2785.59

Year of  Certification Renewal	$2860.81

 Cost Per Year

		State and Tribal Administered Firms	EPA-Administered Firms	Total US

Number of Firms	7,026	1,440	8,466

Cost	$20,140,949	$4,127,788	$24,268,737

* .0083 hours of non-governmental clerical burden per report @ $24.05/hr
= $0.20

	Individuals Performing Lead Abatement

	Based on the cost estimates provided in section 6(a) and the wage rates
developed earlier, this analysis estimates the total annual reporting
and recordkeeping cost to all individuals to be $335,383, with $278,365
of cost to individuals in State and Tribal administered areas, and
$57,018 to individuals in EPA administered areas. Exhibit 6.10 details
the total reporting and recordkeeping cost to the individual subgroups
(e.g., inspectors, risk assessors, and workers) and summarizes the
individual cost.

Exhibit 6.10 Individuals: Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost
Estimates/Cost per Year

	State and Tribal Administered	EPA Administered	Total US

Inspectors ($40.16/hr.)	$32,489	$6,626	$39,115

Risk Assessors ($36.58/hr.)	$135,236	$27,728	$162,964

Supervisors ($39.21/hr.)	$67,520	$13,841	$81,361

Abatement Workers ($26.53/hr.)	$39,198	$8,025	$47,223

Project Designers ($34.71/hr.)	$3,922	$798	$4,720

Total Individual Cost	$278,365	$57,018	$335,383

	State Costs

	The reporting/recordkeeping requirement costs include the wages
associated with the burden estimated in Section 6(a).  The methods used
to establish wage rates are covered earlier in this analysis.  Those
wage rates are $57.82 for managerial staff, $40.56 for technical staff
and $24.67 for clerical staff.

	The total reporting and recordkeeping cost to all States with
authorized programs in each year of the analysis is estimated to be
$3,021,834.  As discussed earlier, each year in State and Tribal-
administered areas is assumed to be identical, for ease of modeling.  It
is likely that the actual costs will vary from year to year.  These
estimates are intended to represent the average annual costs.  Exhibit
6.11 details the total reporting and recordkeeping cost to the State and
Tribal administered programs associated with each type of entity (e.g.,
training provider, firm, and individual).

Exhibit 6.11 States: Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Estimates

Training Providers	$144,299

Firms	$853,124

Individuals	$2,024,416

Total State Cost	$3,021,834

	Notification

	The cost estimates addressed in this section are based on the burden
estimates discussed in section 6(a).

	Training Providers

	The fully loaded wage rate used to estimate training providers’
notification costs is the non-government clerical rate, $24.05 per hour.
 Additionally, training provider costs include a (projected) $0.41
postage stamp for mailing the notification and $0.06 for a one page copy
of the notification for the firm’s records.

	Annual Costs

	As presented below in Exhibit 6.12, based on the burden estimates
provided in section 6(a) and the wage rates and materials costs
discussed above, this analysis estimates the notification costs for all
training providers to be a total of $45,741 per year.

Exhibit 6.12 Training Providers: Notification Cost Estimates

Event category	

	Reporting

Cost/Event	Recordkeeping

Cost/Event*	Materials 

Cost/Event	Total 

Cost/Event

Pre-notification	$3.85	$0.20	$0.47	$4.52

Re-notification	$3.85	$0.20	$0.47	$4.52

Post-notification	$37.04	$0.20	$0.47	$37.71

	Cost per training provider

Event category	Cost per Event	Events per Firm	Cost per Firm

	Pre-notification	$4.52	1.9	$8.59

	Re-notification	$4.52	0.19	$0.86

	Post-notification	$37.71	1.9	$71.65

Total Annual Cost per Firm	$81.10

State and Tribal Administered	EPA Administered	

Total US

Number of training providers	468	96	564

Estimated total cost per year	$37,955	$7,786	$45,741

* .0083 hours of non-governmental clerical burden per record  @
$24.05/hr = $0.20

	Firms Performing Lead-based Paint Activities Costs

	The fully loaded wage rate used to estimate certified firms’
notification costs is the non-government clerical rate, $24.05 per hour.
As noted in exhibit 6.6, this analysis estimates 0.22 hours of reporting
burden for each notification event, for a reporting cost of $5.29 per
notification. Additionally, training provider costs include a $0.41
postage stamp for mailing the notification and $0.06 for a one page copy
of the notification for the firm’s records.

	Annual Costs

	As presented below in Exhibit 6.13, based on the burden estimates
provided in section 6(a) and the wage rates and materials costs
discussed above, this analysis estimates the costs associated with
notification for all firms to be $775,025 per year.

Exhibit 6.13 Firms: Notification Cost Estimates

Cost Element	Events per

Firm	Reporting 

Cost/Event	Recordkeeping

Cost/Event	Materials

Cost/Event	Cost per Event	Cost per Firm

Notification

Pre-notification 	14.09	$5.29	$0.20	$0.47	$5.96	$83.98

Re-notification 	1.27	$5.29	$0.20	$0.47	$5.96	$7.57

Annual Total	15.36

	$91.55

	State and Tribal Administered	EPA Administered	All US

Firms	7,026	1,440	8,466

Cost	$643,199	$131,826	$775,025

	State Costs

	The State costs associated with notification are based on the burden
hours estimated and reported in exhibit 6.7. As indicated earlier, the
fully loaded hourly cost for State government clerical staff is
estimated to be $24.67. As presented below in Exhibit 6.14, this
analysis estimates the notification cost for all States combined to be
$244,282 per year over the period of this analysis. 

Exhibit 6.14 States: Notification Cost Estimates for All States Combined

Category of Notifying Entity	Number of entities	State Burden per Entity
Total Burden	Clerical Cost at $24.67/hr.

Firms	7,026	1.38	9,696	$239,200

Training Providers	468	0.44	206	$5,082

Total Estimated Annual Cost to States	$244,282

	

6(c)	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

	Accreditation and Certification

	EPA Burden

	Although sections 402(a) and 404 do not require that States develop a
lead program, it is encouraged.  As discussed in section 6(a) of this
ICR, 39 States and three Tribal areas,  as well as Puerto Rico and the
District of Columbia,  have sought and been granted authorization to
administer their own programs under TSCA Section 402.  This ICR assumes
that programs for the remaining States will be administered by EPA. 
Thus the burden on EPA due to reviewing and approving State applications
to administer their own programs has already been incurred.  If
additional States seek authorization, the cost to EPA of reviewing and
approving these applications will be offset by the reduction in EPA
hours used to administer the programs.

	This analysis estimates the agency burden of administering training
providers, firms, and individuals in unauthorized States by using
State-level survey data collected for the Economic Analysis of the Final
TSCA Section 402(a)(3) Lead-Based Paint Accreditation and Certification
Fee Rule and assumes that the EPA Regional Offices will play the major
role in administering the Section 402 requirements in States without
their own programs, while EPA Headquarters will coordinate the regional
activities, provide public assistance and perform other activities.

	Based on these assumptions and data, the total burden to EPA regions is
estimated to be 14,904 hours per year.   Exhibit 6.15 details the total
reporting and recordkeeping burden to each type of EPA-administered
entity (e.g., training provider, firm, and individual). In addition the
annual burden to EPA Headquarters is estimated to be 728 hours for each
year of the analysis (See Exhibit 6.16).  Thus the total EPA burden is
estimated to be 15,632 hours per year.

Exhibit 6.15 EPA Regions: Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden Estimates
for Accreditation and Certification Activities

EPA Region Burden per Entity Type

	Clerical Hours	Technical Hours	Managerial Hours

	Certify	Re-certify	Certify	Re-certify	Certify	Re-certify

Training Providers	3.36	1.40	28.37	10.13	8.93	7.63

Firms	0.61	0.44	4.73	4.25	2.90	2.90

Individuals	1.56	1.36	3.15	1.80	1.32	0.76

EPA Region Burden Hours (calculations rounded to even hours)

Activity	Events per Year	Clerical Hours	Technical Hours	Managerial Hours
Total Hours 

Training Provider Accreditation	10	34	284	89	407

Training Provider Re-accreditation	14	20	142	107	269

Firm Certification	270	165	1,277	783	2,225

Firm Re-certification	210	92	893	609	1,594

Individual Certification	1,353	2,111	4,262	1,786	8,159

Individual Re-certification	574	781	1,033	436	2,250

Totals

3,203	7,891	3,810	14,904

Exhibit 6.16 EPA Headquarters: Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
Estimates for Accreditation and Certification Activities

Annual EPA Headquarters Burden Hours

	Clerical Burden	Technical Burden 	Managerial Burden 

Coordinate with Regions*	0.00	104.00	0.00

Public Assistance*	104.00	104.00	0.00

Other*	104.00	104.00	208.00

Annual Burden to Headquarters			728.00

* HQ administrative burden from the Fees Rule EA; for all
EPA-administered States

	EPA Cost

	The burden on EPA associated with the administration of the States and
Tribal areas that have not been approved to administer their own
programs were estimated above.  The labor rates and overhead and fringe
loadings were discussed earlier.  Based on these estimates, the
reporting and recordkeeping costs to EPA regions are projected to be
$619,371 per year.  Exhibit 6.17 details the total reporting and
recordkeeping cost to each type of EPA-administered entity (e.g.,
training provider, firm, and individual).  The annual cost to EPA
Headquarters is estimated to be $31,384 for each year of the analysis
(See Exhibit 6.18).  Thus the total EPA annual cost is projected to be
$650,755.

	There will be additional costs involved in transitioning from an
existing Federal program to an authorized State program in States that
receive authorization after the Federal program has been fully
established.  Currently, we do not have a way of estimating the
additional burden, nor the number of State programs potentially
affected.  Such changes would also reduce the annual burden on EPA.  No
such transitions are anticipated during the period of this ICR.

Exhibit 6.17 EPA Regions: Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Estimates for
Accreditation and Certification Activities

Estimated Annual EPA Regions Costs 

Training Providers	$29,943

Firms	$174,841

Individuals	$414,587

Total EPA Regional Cost	$619,371

Exhibit 6.18 EPA Headquarters: Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost
Estimates for Accreditation and Certification Activities

Annual EPA Headquarters Cost

	Clerical 

($25.97/hr.)	Technical 

($42.70/hr.)	Managerial 

($60.86/hr.)	Totals

Coordinate with Regions	$0.00	$4,441	$0.00	$4,441

Public Assistance	$2,701	$4,441	$0.00	$7,142

Other	$2,701	$4,441	$12,659	$19,801

Annual Cost  to Headquarters	$31,384

	Notification

	Agency Burden

	Under the rule, notifications submitted by training providers and
abatement firms will be used by EPA regions in support of compliance
monitoring and enforcement activities, and to prioritize inspections. 
The administrative management of information collected under this
proposed rule is detailed in section 4 of this document.  The following
sections discuss how the recordkeeping burden estimates were developed. 
Exhibit 6.19 presents the estimation of EPA burden for the notification
rule.

	Recordkeeping

	The number of notification events per entity is the sum of pre-course,
post-course, and re-notifications submitted by training providers, and
the sum of pre-abatement and re-notifications submitted by firms.  The
sources of this information are discussed in detail in the respective
training provider and firm sections of this analysis.  The EPA
recordkeeping burden per notification event is estimated at 0.11 hours
for training providers and 0.09 hours for abatement firms.  Both
estimates were obtained by contacting two State agencies, which
currently operate similar lead-based paint training programs, and
maintain lead-based paint activity notification records in both
electronic and hard copy forms.  The number of entities-administered by
the EPA program was estimated in section 6(a) of this analysis.

Annual Burden

	As presented below in Exhibit 6.19, this analysis estimates the
notification recordkeeping burden for EPA to be 2,029 hours. 

Exhibit 6.19 EPA: Notification Burden Estimates

Category	Notifications per Entity	Hours per Notification	Hours per
Entity

Firms	15.36	0.09	1.38

Training Providers	4.00	0.11	0.44

Entities per Year	Burden Hours per Entity	Total EPA Notification Burden
Hours per Year

Firms	1,440	1.38	1,987

Training Providers	96	0.44	42

Total Annual Burden	2,029

	Agency Cost

	The notification costs are based on the burden estimated in Section
6(a) and the EPA Regional clerical wage rate estimated earlier.  The
final loaded wage rate is $24.67 for EPA Regional clerical staff.

	Annual Cost

	As presented below in Exhibit 6.20, this analysis estimates the EPA
cost associated with notifications to be $50,055 per year. 

Exhibit 6.20 EPA: Notification Cost Estimates

Category of Notifying Entity	Number of entities	EPA Burden per Entity
Total Burden	Clerical Cost at $24.67/hr.

Firms	1,440	1.38	1,987	$49,019

Training Providers	96	0.44	42	$1,036

Total Estimated Annual EPA Notification Cost	$50,055

	

6(d)  	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

Respondent Tally

Respondent Burden and Cost

Accreditation and Certification Burden and Cost

	Burden Hours	Costs 

Training Providers	2,483	$101,100

Firms Performing Lead-based Paint Activities	648,583	$24,268,737

Individuals	9,420	$335,383

States	72,712	$3,021,834

Total	733,198	$27,727,054

Notification Burden and Cost

	Burden Hours	Costs 

Training Providers	1,839	$45,741

Firms Performing Lead-based Paint Activities	29,801	$775,025

States	9,902	$244,282

Total	41,542	$1,065,048

Over-All Total	774,740	$28,792,102

	The respondent burden and cost for the collection of this information
is estimated to be 4,322 hours and $146,841 for the estimated 564
training providers; 678,384 hours and $25,043,762 for the estimated
8,466 firms performing lead-based paint activities; 9,420 hours and
$335,383 for the 34,008 individual lead abatement personnel; and 82,614
hours and $3,266,116 for the States and Tribes.  That is an average
burden of 7.66 hours per training provider, 80.13 hours per certified
firm, and 0.28 hours per certified individual.  The overall burden and
cost per year for all respondents is 774,740 hours and $28,792,102.

Agency Tally

Agency Burden and Cost

EPA Accreditation and Certification Burden and Cost

	Burden Hours	Costs

Regions	14,904	$619,371

Headquarters	      728	 $31,384

Total	15,632	$650,755

EPA Notification Burden and Cost

	Burden Hours	Costs

	  2,029	  $50,055

Over-All Totals	17,661	$700,810

	The Agency burden and cost for the collection of this information is
estimated to be 17,661 hours and $700,810 per year.

	6(e)	Reasons for Change in Burden

	This request reflects an increase in the total estimated burden of
333,927 hours (from 440,813 hours to 774,740 hours) from that currently
in the OMB inventory.  This increase represents an adjustment in the
estimated number of respondents and/or the number of activities or
events for which respondents must provide information, based on EPA’s
experience since the approval of the most recent ICR.

	The previous ICR analyses associated with this data collection were
based in large part on assumptions and projections that were made prior
to the actual implementation of the regulations covered by this ICR. 
The most recent ICR analysis (2004) made use of some preliminary
information about the rates of activities in the areas under EPA
administration.  That preliminary information suggested that the
observed level of activities was substantially higher than had been
projected (as in, e.g., the 1999 Fees Rule EA).  The 2004 ICR therefore
projected a higher level of activities in the EPA administered areas. 
However, since that data were still considered preliminary, that
increased level of activities in those EPA areas was not used in the
projections for areas administered by authorized State and Tribal
programs.  The 2004 estimates for those areas were still based on the
preliminary 1999 projections.

	In the subsequent years, the observed data on activities in the EPA
administered areas have continued to follow the pattern noted in the
2004 ICR analysis, with events and entities occurring at a level that is
very roughly double the rate that had been anticipated in the 1999 Fees
Rule EA.  As a consequence, the assumption that the Fees Rule analysis
had correctly projected the level of activities in the State and Tribal
administered areas is no longer tenable.  This analysis, consequently,
has set aside the 1999 projections for those areas and instead used a
factor of proportionality that had been proposed earlier.  This factor
is based on the projection that the EPA administered areas represent 17
percent of the national universe of entities and events covered by these
rules, and consequently that 83 percent of the activities and entities
reside in the State and Tribal areas.  The State and Tribal parameters
can be estimated by multiplying the corresponding EPA administered
estimates by 4.88 (83/17 = 4.88).  It was this change in method, in
combination with the revised estimates of the counts of entities and
activities in the EPA administered areas, that led to the large increase
in the burden estimate.  

	The previous (2004) ICR analysis did adjust upward the estimates of
activities in the EPA administered areas, but the estimates for the
State and Tribal administered areas had been left more or less at the
level set in the 1999 Fees Rule EA.  The current analysis extends that
process by adjusting the State and Tribal area estimates proportionately
with the estimates for the EPA administered areas.  Since the authorized
State and Tribal programs account for a much greater share of these
activities, this adjustment to those estimates has a much larger impact
than the corresponding adjustment that was limited to just the EPA
administered areas. 

	These changes in burden estimation relate directly to the changed
estimates in the population of certified and accredited entities, rather
than to any changes in the estimated number of activities per entity or
any changes in the burden per activity.  These changing estimates of the
population of regulated entities can be seen in the following table,
which compares the estimates from the 1999 Fees Rule EA, the 2004 ICR
analysis, and this current analysis.

Comparison Table of Estimated Numbers of Certified or Accredited
Entities

	1999 Fees Rule	2004 ICR Analysis	2007 ICR Analysis

Certified Firms

EPA Administered Areas	700	1,257	1,440

State and Tribal Areas	3,369	3,369	7,026

Totals for Firms	4,069	4,626	8,466

Certified Individuals

EPA Administered Areas	2,969	3,989	5,781

State and Tribal Areas	14,280	14,280	28,227

Totals for Individuals	17,249	18,269	34,008

Accredited Training Providers

EPA Administered Areas	30	218	96

State and Tribal Areas	147	147	468

Totals for Training Providers	177	365	564

	As shown in this table, this analysis estimates a substantially larger
population of regulated entities in comparison to the earlier
projections.  This is due to two factors.  The first is the record of
the observed levels of activities in the EPA administered areas.  Data
are now available over seven full years, and those data suggest that
earlier projections had underestimated the numbers of entities who would
choose to become certified or accredited under this program.  The second
factor has to do with the estimates for areas not directly administered
by EPA.  Data are not currently available to the Agency on activities in
the areas administered by authorized State and Tribal programs.  But
this analysis (in contrast to the previous ICR) is based on the
assumption that the level of activity in those non-EPA areas had also be
underestimated in earlier analysis, so that those estimates should be
increased in proportion to the altered projections in the EPA
administered areas.  Since the largest share of the activity has always
been projected to occur in those State and Tribal administered areas,
the increase in the overall burden estimate is primarily due to the
increases in those areas not directly administered by EPA.  The reader
should therefore bear in mind that this burden increase comes primarily
from areas for which the Agency does not have actual data on the
population of regulated entities and the level of regulated activities.

	These issues are discussed in more detail in section 6(a) of this
report.

	6(f)	Burden Statement

Æ

&

&

Æ

&

&

&

&

&

&

옍

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

൜⌨`	\

&

&

&

&

hª

hª

hª

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

kd×

&

&

&

&

kdŸ

ytª

&

&

&

&

ytª

ytª

&

&

&

&

ytª

ytª

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

)

+

\

]

	

&

&

＀摧㼌°ࠀñ

&

&

&

&

&

ô

&

ô

ô

&

&

&

&

ô

ô

ô

ô

&

&

&

&

ô

ô

ô

ô

&

ô

&

&

ô

ô

&

&

&

ô

ô

ô

ô

ô

ô

ô

ô

&

ô

ô

&

&

&

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

ꐔ

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

☊

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

ô

&

&

&

ô

ô

&

&

ô

ô

&

&

ô

ô

&

&

ô

ô

&

&

ô

ô

&

&

ô

ô

&

&

ô

ô

&

&

ô

ô

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

kd;

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and
requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.  An
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA’s
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and included on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable.

To comment on the Agency’s need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2007-0378.  The docket is available for public viewing at
the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket in the EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC).  The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is located in the EPA West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.  The
EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the
EPA/DC Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number
for the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket is (202) 566-0280.  An
electronic version of the public docket is available through the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS) at   HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov .  Use FDMS 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 system, select “search,”
then key in the docket ID number identified above.  Also, you can send
comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503,
Attention: Desk Office for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2007-0378 and OMB Control Number 2070-0155 in any
correspondence.



	1 U.S. EPA. Economic Analysis of the Final TSCA Section 402(a)(3)
Lead-Based Paint Accreditation and Certification Fee Rule. February 26,
1999. (Hereafter referred to as the Fees Rule EA.) 

	2Economic Analysis of the Final TSCA Section 402 (a) (3) Lead-Based
Paint Accreditation and Certification Fee Rule

	3 Personal communications with Training Providers.

	4 Personal communications with Massachusetts firms.

  PAGE   

  PAGE   8 

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   9 

  PAGE   13 

  PAGE   14 

  PAGE   16 

  PAGE   23 

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   24 

  PAGE   

  PAGE   28 

  PAGE   30 

  PAGE   

  PAGE   38 

  PAGE   39 

  PAGE   49