Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2007-0142-0010
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2007-06-27T04:00Z

SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1  ADVANCE \y 129 INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR
THE

NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)/

COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT/CERTIFICATION INFORMATION

EPA ICR No. 1427.08

OMB Control No. 2040-0110

June 2007

Prepared for

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Wastewater Management

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20460

EPA Contract Number EP-C-05-046

EPA Work Assignment Number 1-24

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  TOC \h \z \t "1Header,1,2Header,2,3Header,3"    HYPERLINK \l
"_Toc169580696"  1	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580696 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580697"  1.a	Title of the Information Collection	
 PAGEREF _Toc169580697 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580698"  1.b	Short Characterization/Abstract	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580698 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580699"  2	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580699 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580700"  2.a	Need and Authority for the
Collection	  PAGEREF _Toc169580700 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580701"  2.a.1	NPDES Program	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580701 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580702"  2.a.2	Stormwater Program	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580702 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580703"  2.a.3	Sewage Sludge Program	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580703 \h  9  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580704"  2.a.4	Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Standards Certifications	  PAGEREF _Toc169580704 \h  9  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580705"  2.b	Practical Utility of the Data and
Users of the Data	  PAGEREF _Toc169580705 \h  10  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580706"  3	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND
OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA	  PAGEREF _Toc169580706 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580707"  3.a	Nonduplication	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580707 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580708"  3.b	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR
Submission to OMB	  PAGEREF _Toc169580708 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580709"  3.c	Consultations	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580709 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580710"  3.d	Effects of Less Frequent Data
Collection	  PAGEREF _Toc169580710 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580711"  3.e	General Guidelines	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580711 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580712"  3.f	Confidentiality	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580712 \h  14  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580713"  3.g	Sensitive Questions	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580713 \h  14  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580714"  4	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION
REQUESTED	  PAGEREF _Toc169580714 \h  15  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580715"  4.a	Respondents and NAICS/SIC Codes	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580715 \h  15  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580716"  4.b	Information Requested	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580716 \h  15  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580717"  4.c	Respondent Activities	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580717 \h  18  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580718"  5	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED:  AGENCY
ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580718 \h  19  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580719"  5.a	Agency Activities	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580719 \h  19  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580720"  5.b	Collection Methodology and
Management	  PAGEREF _Toc169580720 \h  19  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580721"  5.c	Small Entity Flexibility	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580721 \h  20  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580722"  5.d	Collection Schedule	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580722 \h  20  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580723"  5.d.1	Information Collection Activities	
 PAGEREF _Toc169580723 \h  20  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580724"  5.d.2	Information Collection Schedule	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580724 \h  20  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580725"  6	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE
COLLECTION	  PAGEREF _Toc169580725 \h  22  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580726"  6.a	Estimating Respondent Burden	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580726 \h  22  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580727"  6.a.1	Recordkeeping of Monitoring and
Inspection Data	  PAGEREF _Toc169580727 \h  28  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580728"  6.a.2	Compliance Schedule Reports	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580728 \h  29  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580729"  6.a.3	Noncompliance Reports	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580729 \h  29  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580730"  6.a.4	Notice of Alternate Level of
Actual Production	  PAGEREF _Toc169580730 \h  33  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580731"  6.a.5	Section 308(a) Letters	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580731 \h  34  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580732"  6.a.6	Certification for Exemption From
Monitoring and Notification of Process Changes	  PAGEREF _Toc169580732
\h  34  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580733"  6.a.7	SSO and Unpermitted CSO Reporting	
 PAGEREF _Toc169580733 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580734"  6.a.8	Certification and BMP Plan
Development Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 435	  PAGEREF _Toc169580734 \h  36  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580735"  6.b	Estimating Respondent Costs	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580735 \h  36  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580736"  6.c	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580736 \h  38  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580737"  6.c.1	Recordkeeping	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580737 \h  43  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580738"  6.c.2	Compliance Schedule Reports	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580738 \h  43  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580739"  6.c.3	Noncompliance Reports	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580739 \h  43  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580740"  6.c.4	Notice of Alternative Level of
Actual Production	  PAGEREF _Toc169580740 \h  45  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580741"  6.c.5	Section 308(a) Letters	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580741 \h  45  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580742"  6.c.6	Certification for Exemption From
Monitoring and Notification of Process Changes	  PAGEREF _Toc169580742
\h  45  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580743"  6.c.7	SSO and Unpermitted CSO Reporting	
 PAGEREF _Toc169580743 \h  46  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580744"  6.c.8	Certification of BMPs Under part
435	  PAGEREF _Toc169580744 \h  46  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580745"  6.d	Estimating the Respondent Universe
Burden Hours and Costs	  PAGEREF _Toc169580745 \h  46  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580746"  6.e	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580746 \h  47  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580747"  6.f	Reasons for Change in Burden	 
PAGEREF _Toc169580747 \h  47  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169580748"  6.g	Burden Statement	  PAGEREF
_Toc169580748 \h  48  

 APPENDIX

LIST OF EXHIBITS

  TOC \h \z \t "4Exhibit" \c    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310733"  Exhibit 1.
Summary of Burden and Costs to Respondents and State Government	 
PAGEREF _Toc169310733 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310734"  Exhibit 2.	Number of Individual NPDES
Permits Issued by EPA and the States and Permitees covered by General
Permits	  PAGEREF _Toc169310734 \h  22  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310735"  Exhibit 3.	Annual Respondent Reporting
and Recordkeeping Burden	  PAGEREF _Toc169310735 \h  25  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310736"  Exhibit 4.	Annual Average Responses per
Respondent	  PAGEREF _Toc169310736 \h  31  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310737"  Exhibit 5.	Respondent Reporting Burden
for Noncompliance Reports	  PAGEREF _Toc169310737 \h  33  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310738"  Exhibit 6.	Facilities with Certification
Potential	  PAGEREF _Toc169310738 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310739"  Exhibit 7.	Labor Rates	  PAGEREF
_Toc169310739 \h  36  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310740"  Exhibit 8.	Annual Respondent
Recordkeeping and Reporting Cost	  PAGEREF _Toc169310740 \h  37  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310741"  Exhibit 9.	Annual Burden to State and
Federal Governments as Users of Data	  PAGEREF _Toc169310741 \h  39  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310742"  Exhibit 10.	Annual Costs to State and
Federal Governments as Users of Data	  PAGEREF _Toc169310742 \h  41  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310743"  Exhibit 11.	State and Federal Burden for
Noncompliance Reports	  PAGEREF _Toc169310743 \h  45  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310744"  Exhibit 12.	Respondent Universe and
Burden and Costs	  PAGEREF _Toc169310744 \h  46  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310745"  Exhibit 13.	Bottom Line  Annual Burden
and Costs to Respondents and Government	  PAGEREF _Toc169310745 \h  47  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc169310746"  Exhibit 14.	Change in Annual Respondent
and State Burden	  PAGEREF _Toc169310746 \h  47  

 

1	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1.a	Title of the Information Collection

ICR:  National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) / 

Compliance Assessment / Certification Information.

OMB Control No.:  2040-0110.

EPA ICR No. 1427.08

1.b	Short Characterization/Abstract

This document is entitled Information Collection Request (ICR) for
NPDES/Compliance Assessment/Certification Information, and its purpose
is to calculate the burden and costs associated with the data
requirements necessary for a permitting authority (either an authorized
State or the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)) to determine whether
an existing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) or
sewage sludge permittee is in compliance with the conditions of its
permit.  This ICR updates the 2004 ICR (OMB Control No. 2040-0110, ICR
No. 1427.07).

Note that five additional effluent limitations guidelines development
ICRs are set to expire in the next three years prior to the next renewal
of this Compliance Assessment/Certification ICR.  The burden associated
with direct dischargers from those five ICRs has been incorporated into
the Compliance Assessment/Certification ICR as part of this renewal
process.  The five ICRs include: 

Milestone Plans for the Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Subcategory
of the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category (40 CFR part
430), EPA ICR No. 1877.02, OMB Control No. 2040–0202;

Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda
Subcategory and the Papergrade Kraft Sulfite Subcategory of the Pulp,
Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category (40 CFR part 430), EPA ICR
No. 1829.02, OMB Control No. 2040–0207;

Baseline Standards and Best Management Practices for the Coal Mining
Point Source Category (40 CFR part 434)—Coal Remining Subcategory and
Western Alkaline Coal Mining Subcategory, EPA ICR No. 1944.02, OMB
Control No. 2040–0239; 

Certification in Lieu of Chloroform Minimum Monitoring Requirements for
Direct and Indirect Discharging Mills in the Bleached Papergrade Kraft
and Soda Subcategory of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Manufacturing
Category (40 CFR part 430), EPA ICR No. 2015.01, OMB Control No.
2040–0242; and

Minimum Monitoring Requirements for Direct and Indirect Discharging
Mills in the Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Subcategory and the
Papergrade Sulfite Subcategory of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
Manufacturing Category (40 CFR part 430), EPA ICR No. 1878.01, OMB
Control No. 2040–0243.

This ICR was prepared according to guidance contained in EPA’s
February 1999 ICR Handbook.  This handbook is the most current guidance
available to the Agency for preparing an ICR, and it follows the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and related Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) guidelines.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387) authorizes EPA to issue
permits for the discharge of pollutants to “waters of the United
States.”  The CWA also authorizes EPA to issue permits for the use or
disposal of sewage sludge.  EPA regulates discharges to waters of the
United States under its NPDES program.  Such discharges include domestic
wastewater, industrial wastewater, and stormwater, among others.  The
Agency regulates sewage sludge use and disposal activities under its
Sewage Sludge Management program.  EPA issues permits for both types of
activities.

CWA Section 402(b) allows States, including Territories, to acquire
authority for the NPDES and Sewage Sludge Management programs.  In
addition, Section 518(e) authorizes Indian Tribes to obtain NPDES
authority.  This authority enables States and Tribes to issue permits. 
At this time, 46 entities (45 States and 1 U.S. territory) have obtained
NPDES authority, while 11 have not.  None of the 556
Federally-recognized American Indian Tribes have obtained NPDES
authority.  As of June 2007, seven States have obtained authority to
operate a sewage sludge management program (AZ, OH, OK, SD, TX, UT and
WI).  In States or Tribes that have not obtained authority for these
programs, EPA issues the permits.  Because some permit applications are
processed by States and some by EPA, this ICR calculates government
burden and costs for both States and EPA.

A permitting authority, EPA, State, U.S. territory, or a Federally
recognized Tribe, collects information necessary to determine a
permittee’s compliance with specific permit requirements during the
effective term of a given permit.  Compliance assessment reporting
requirements include routine submittals (e.g., annual certifications and
reports submitted when a compliance schedule milestone is reached) and
non-routine submittals (e.g., required when certain conditions occur,
such as an unanticipated bypass).  NPDES staff may use this information
to determine if follow-up activities are necessary.

Exhibit 1 provides a summary of the burden and costs to respondents and
States associated with the compliance assessment recordkeeping and
reporting requirements of this ICR.

This ICR includes burden hours and costs associated with sanitary sewer
overflows (SSOs) and unpermitted combined sewer overflows (CSOs)
originally estimated and provided to OMB in the 1998 Summary of Revised
Burden Estimates for SSO/Unpermitted CSO Reporting.  This ICR does not,
however, include an estimate of the number of respondents associated
with these SSO/unpermitted CSO estimates. 

This ICR includes burden hours and costs associated with noncompliance
reports for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) not accounted
for in the NPDES Regulation and Effluent Limitation Guidelines and
Standards for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations ICR (EPA ICR No.
1989.04; OMB Control No. 2040-0250)



Exhibit 1.	Summary of Burden and Costs to Respondents and State
Government

Recordkeeping

Number of Recordkeepers	446,429	All permittees except sludge facilities.

Annual Respondent Burden (hrs.)	1,773,388

	Annual Costs ($)	$80,762,184 

	Reporting (w/o Parts 435 and 434)

Number of Respondents	25,286

	Annual Respondent Burden (hrs.)	186,689

	Annual Costs ($)	$7,680,404 

	Part 435 Certification (new requirement)

Facilities that pursue certification and BMP plan development pursuant
to 40 CFR Part 435 to control nonaqueous joint fluids.

Number of Respondents	68

	Annual Respondent Burden (hrs.)	53,516

	Annual Costs for Respondents ($)	$1,956,010 

	Part 434 Baseline Standards and BMP

Facilities that pursue Baseline Standards and Best Management Practices
for the Coal Mining Point Source Category - Coal Remining Subcategory
and Western Alkaline Coal Mining Subcategory in 40 CFR Part 434

Number of Respondents	78

	Annual Respondent Burden (hrs.)	1,638

	Annual Costs for Respondents ($)	$74,922 

	State Governments (45 States and 1 Territory)

Annual Burden (hrs.)	51,384

	Annual Costs ($)	$1,878,074 

	Note: Totals may not match exactly due to individual rounding.

2	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2.a	Need and Authority for the Collection

2.a.1	NPDES Program

Section 402(a) of the CWA establishes the NPDES program, which requires
issuance of a permit to control the discharge of pollutants, ensuring
compliance with provisions of the CWA.  Section 402(p) of the CWA
requires that these NPDES permits be issued for fixed terms not to
exceed 5 years and that they:

Contain and ensure compliance with discharge limitations based on
effluent guidelines or water quality standards;

Provide for permit termination or modification for cause;

Require discharge monitoring and reporting to assess compliance with
permit conditions or to assist in development of effluent limitations;
and

Require other reports as necessary in order for the permitting authority
to ensure compliance with the objectives of the Act.

The NPDES program procedures and requirements are established in Title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 122, 123, 124, and
125.

Once the NPDES or sewage sludge permit is issued, a permittee is subject
to certain conditions for the permit term.  Permit conditions are
established in 40 CFR Part 122 for NPDES permits and Part 501 for sewage
sludge permits.  These include:

Specific effluent limitations, standards, and/or prohibitions
[§122.44];

Compliance schedules, which may specify milestones for installing
wastewater treatment equipment and processes [§122.41(e)(5)];

Monitoring and reporting requirements [§122.41(j) and (l)];

Inspection and record keeping requirements [§122.44(i)(4)(i) and (ii)];
and

Provisions concerning events, including bypass and upset of treatment
facilities.  Bypass is prohibited in most instances, and upset can only
be used as an affirmative defense for the permittee under specified
conditions [§122.41(m) and (n)].

The permitting authority must assess whether the permittee is in
compliance with the above conditions on a consistent basis.  Permittee
compliance is assessed through compliance inspections, review of
permittee self-monitoring data, keeping of records, and review of other
compliance assessment information required by 40 CFR Parts 122 and 501. 
The burden for compliance inspections is estimated in the NPDES and
Sewage Sludge Management State Program Requirements ICR (OMB No.
2040-0057), and the burden for the collection and retention of permittee
self-monitoring data is calculated in the NPDES/Sewage Sludge Monitoring
Reports ICR (OMB No. 2040-0004).  The burden associated with sewage
sludge self-monitoring is estimated in the same ICR (OMB No. 2040-0004),
as amended.  This ICR calculates the burden associated with compliance
assessment information (other than discharge monitoring reports [DMRs])
required by Parts 122 and 501, and certification or alternative
requirements contained in the effluent limitations guidelines and
standards (ELGs) regulations for 12 point source categories and 2
subcategories.

The information that is collected can lead the permitting authority to
follow through with one or more of the following actions:  informal
discussions with the permittee by telephone or letter, permit
modification, or enforcement actions.

A permittee generally informs the permitting authority about its
discharge through the DMR.  The DMR lists all of the results from the
permittee’s self-monitoring of required pollutants.  The permitting
authority reviews this information and compares it with permit limits to
determine compliance and/or if there is a need to develop additional
limits.  In addition to the DMR, permittees may be required to submit
reports on violations of maximum daily discharge limitations, as
specifically required in their respective permits.  This latter
reporting requirement is intended to alert the permitting authority of
potential health or environmental risks that may require a timely
response.  The data collected by this requirement are more
incident-specific than the summary information provided on the DMR.

2.a.2	Stormwater Program

In the 1987 amendments to the CWA Congress established a program to
control stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity. 
Phase I of the stormwater program, promulgated on November 16, 1990 (55
FR 47990), applied to stormwater discharges associated with industrial
activity (including construction activities disturbing five acres or
more) and to discharges from large and medium municipal separate storm
sewer systems (MS4s).  Phase II of the regulatory development effort,
promulgated on December 8, 1999 (64 FR 68722), regulates stormwater
discharges from small municipal separate storm sewer systems and
construction sites with activities disturbing one to five acres of land.
 Together, Phase I and Phase II of the NPDES Stormwater Program now
regulate all construction activities of one acre or more. 

The burden for conducting and retaining records of the routine site
inspections for construction activities subject to stormwater
regulations is estimated in the NPDES Stormwater Program Phase II ICR
(EPA ICR No. 1820.04, OMB Control No. 2040-0211) and the ICR for Notice
of Intent for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction
Activity Under a NPDES General Permit (EPA ICR Number: 1842.05, OMB
Control Number: 2040-0188). The burden for comprehensive site
inspections of construction sites in not included in those ICRs and it
is included in this ICR. All burden for small MS4s is covered under the
NPDES Stormwater Program Phase II ICR. Large and medium MS4 activities
are covered under Applications for the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Discharge Permits and the Sewage Sludge
Management Permits ICR (EPA ICR No. 0226.18, OMB Control No. 2040-0086,
June 2006)

Permit compliance for stormwater permittees with industrial discharges
is assessed on a case-by-case basis.  Under §122.44(i)(4)(i) and (ii),
the minimum compliance requirement for a stormwater permittee with
discharges associated with industrial activity (including construction)
is an annual site inspection performed by the permittee that identifies
any incidents of non-compliance and evaluates whether measures to reduce
pollutant loadings identified in the stormwater pollution prevention
plan (SWPPP) are adequate and are being properly implemented.  Although
permittees are not required to report the inspection information, they
are required to retain records of the inspection for at least 3 years. 
All stormwater general permittees (industrial and construction) are
required to fulfill this minimum requirement.  It should be noted that
the numbers reflected in this ICR for general permits refer to
individual notices of intent (NOIs).  That is, they reflect permittees
regulated via general permit, rather than the numbers of different
general permits themselves.  

In addition, stormwater permittees with discharges associated with
industrial activity are required to perform and maintain records of a
periodic visual examination of their facilities.  Twenty-nine of the 30
industrial facility categories are required to perform this visual
examination on a quarterly basis.  A portion of all stormwater general
permittees may also be required to maintain records of monitoring data. 
EPA estimates that approximately 49.5 percent of the stormwater general
permittees are required to maintain monitoring records in addition to
their annual site inspection recordkeeping requirements and their visual
examination requirements.

2.a.3	Sewage Sludge Program

Section 405 of the CWA requires EPA to regulate the use and disposal of
sludge produced by publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) and other
treatment works treating domestic sewage.  The CWA also requires the
development of technical criteria for the control of sewage sludge
disposal and use.  EPA has promulgated sewage sludge use or disposal
standards at 40 CFR Part 503.  The CWA also requires that any NPDES
permit issued to a POTW or other treatment works treating domestic
sewage, incorporate appropriate sludge controls in order to protect
public health and the environment.  As a result of this requirement,
permit conditions regarding sewage sludge are included in POTW permits
in cases where sewage sludge disposal is of concern.  In addition, EPA
issued a final rule in 1989 (subsequently amended in 1993 and 1998)
under 40 CFR Part 501 concerning State sewage sludge management program
requirements (See ICR: NPDES and Sewage Sludge Management State Program
Requirements.  EPA ICR No. 0168.09; OMB Control No. 2040-0057).  Sewage
sludge permits include standards for the use or disposal of sewage
sludge.  These may include pollutant limitations, monitoring
requirements, and compliance schedules.  The compliance assessment
requirements for sewage sludge permits, like those for NPDES permits,
allow the permitting authority to assess permit compliance.  The burden
for the compliance assessment components for sewage sludge requirements
have since been incorporated into this NPDES/Compliance
Assessment/Certification Information ICR.

2.a.4	Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards Certifications

Effluent limitations guidelines and standards are national wastewater
limitations that apply to specific categories of industrial dischargers.
 The regulations are promulgated by EPA under the authority of sections
301, 304, 306, and 307 of the CWA.  The limitations are implemented in
direct discharge permits under the NPDES program by States and EPA. 
This NPDES/Compliance Assessment/Certification Information ICR also
fully integrates certifications for exemptions of monitoring
requirements for 12 industrial categories and 2 subcategories: 
electroplating (40 CFR 413); metal finishing (40 CFR 433); electrical
and electronic components (40 CFR 469); pesticides formulating,
packaging, and repackaging (40 CFR 455); aluminum forming (40 CFR Part
467); coil coating (40 CFR 465); can making (a subpart of the coil
coating category) (40 CFR 465); pharmaceutical manufacturing (40 CFR
439); pulp and paper (40 CFR 430); builders’ paper and board mills (40
CFR 431); porcelain enameling (40 CFR 456); steam electric (40 CFR 423);
and oil and gas extraction (40 CFR Part 435).

The effluent limitations guidelines and standards for these industrial
categories allow permittees to provide certifications that reduce or
eliminate monitoring requirements for one or more pollutants.  When the
permittee chooses to certify, the effluent limitations guidelines and
standards may require semi-annual, annual, or once-per-permit cycle
reports.  For one industrial category, the pesticides formulating,
packaging, and repackaging category, no pollutant-specific monitoring
requirements exist, but the facility may certify that it is using
pollution prevention measures stipulated by EPA and must maintain a
pollution prevention plan on-site.  

For the Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source Category (40 CFR 435), a
facility can elect to use the Best Management Practices (BMPs),
including BMP plan development and certification for controlling the
discharge of non-aqueous drilling fluid (NAF) cuttings (pursuant to
Addendum B, Appendix 7 to Subpart A of Part 435), in lieu of the retort
test specified (see Section 4.c.9 of Appendix 7 to Subpart A of Part
435).

2.b	Practical Utility of the Data and Users of the Data

Most compliance assessment data is generated by permittees and submitted
to the appropriate permitting authority.  The permitting authority then
uses this information to determine compliance with permit conditions.

If noncompliance is detected, the permitting authority will determine
the appropriate enforcement action response based on the nature and
severity of the violation and the overall degree of noncompliance
frequency and degree of seriousness of the violation.

For some violations, the appropriate response may be no response at all.
 For other violations the appropriate response may range from a phone
call to technical assistance to a judicial referral to the State
Attorney General or to the Department of Justice.  For example, the
permitting authority may take one or more of the following actions:

Permit modification.  If a permit violation occurs consistently, the
permitting authority may modify the permit, although the permittee still
must comply with all appropriate provisions of the CWA.  For example, a
permit may be modified to include a compliance schedule for installation
of a new technology.  Such a modification might enable the permittee to
meet effluent limits or sewage sludge quality standards it was
previously unable to attain.

Technical assistance to permittees.  Under certain circumstances, the
permitting authority may provide technical assistance to assist the
facility in attaining compliance.

CWA Section 308(a) Information Collection Request Letter.  Section
308(a) of the Clean Water Act authorizes the Administrator of EPA to
require persons subject to the Act to provide information, conduct
monitoring, provide entry and make reports to EPA as may be necessary to
carry out the objectives of the Act.  EPA may issue a Section 308 letter
to request relevant information that is essential to determining
compliance.

Informal enforcement action.  For certain violations, the permitting
authority may initially respond with an informal enforcement response
which includes telephone calls, inspections, warning letters, notices of
violation (NOVs) or administrative penalty orders (APOs) and other such
methods to bring the permittee into compliance.

Administrative enforcement action.  For more serious violations, the
permitting authority may pursue a formal enforcement action.  Formal
enforcement requires actions to achieve compliance, specifies a
timetable, contains consequences for noncompliance that are
independently enforceable without having to prove the underlying
violation, and subjects the person to adverse legal consequences for
noncompliance.  Formal enforcement actions include administrative orders
(AOs) or a judicial referral to the State Attorney General or to the
Department of Justice; or more severe actions including NOVs, AOs, or
APOs.

Case referral.  Ultimately, the permitting authority may refer a permit
violation to the Department of Justice for further legal enforcement
action.

There are several exceptions to the general flow of compliance
assessment data from the permittee to the permitting authority.  EPA may
require additional information in the form of a Section 308(a) letter
(see Section 4.b.6 of this ICR for further explanation).

Another exception to the compliance data information flow from permittee
to permitting authority occurs in the case of the NPDES stormwater
permitting program where the regulatory requirement is for records
retention rather than reporting.  As discussed earlier, permit
compliance for stormwater permittees is assessed on a permit-by-permit
basis.  The minimum compliance requirement for a stormwater permittee is
an annual site inspection that identifies any incidents of
non-compliance and evaluates whether measures to reduce pollutant
loadings identified in the SWPPP are adequate and are being properly
implemented.  Although the permittees are not required to report the
inspection information, they are required to retain records of these
inspections for at least 3 years.  This activity is reflected in this
ICR as a recordkeeping activity.  As stated previously, EPA estimates
that all stormwater permittees will be subject to this minimum
requirement.

3	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

3.a	Nonduplication

EPA has examined all other reporting requirements contained in the CWA
and 40 CFR Parts 122, 123, 124, 125, 501, and 503.  The Agency also has
consulted the following sources of information to determine if similar
or duplicative information is available elsewhere:

EPA Information Systems Inventory,

Government Information Locator System (GILS), and

Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (TRI).

Examination of these databases revealed no duplicative reporting
requirements.  In addition, EPA prepared an ICR for the Part 503 sewage
sludge technical standards.  EPA has reviewed this ICR to ensure there
is no duplication.

EPA has examined a similar reporting requirement for notice of spills
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) for duplication
of the CWA requirement.  EPA believes that any duplication between NPDES
and RCRA reporting of pollutant releases is negligible because they
focus on different areas of a facility (RCRA focuses on on-site
activities and NPDES focuses on discharge outfalls).  EPA has concluded
that there is no other way to obtain the compliance assessment
information addressed in this ICR.

With regard to use of BMPs under Part 435 to control NAFs, EPA has
examined all other reporting requirements contained in the CWA and 40
CFR Parts 122, 123, 124, 125, 501, and 503.  The Agency has also
consulted other sources of information to determine if similar or
duplicative information is available elsewhere.  There are no additional
duplicative reporting requirements as the BMPs are an alternative to
numeric limitations and standards and the BMP Plan format allows for
cross-referencing (not duplication) of similar efforts.

3.b	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

In compliance with the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), any agency
developing a non-rule-related ICR must solicit public comments for a
60-day period prior to submitting the ICR to OMB.  The comments, which
are used partly to determine realistic burden estimates for respondents,
must be considered when completing the Supporting Statement submitted to
OMB.  EPA issued the first public notice for the revised ICR in the
Federal Register on XXXXXX X, 2007 (XX FR XXXXX-XXXXX).  EPA received
XXX comments on this notice.

3.c	Consultations

EPA has solicited public comments on the NPDES Compliance
Assessment/Certification Information ICR numerous times.  In addition,
consistent with PRA requirements, EPA has public noticed this ICR prior
to each renewal.  Most recently, EPA has public noticed this ICR on
April 9, 1996, March 23, 2000, December 9, 2003, and XXXXX X, 2007

3.d	Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection

The information collected for the NPDES/Compliance
Assessment/Certification ICR is generally required episodically.  Some
of the information included in this ICR is collected only when certain
conditions occur.  For example, compliance schedule reports are
submitted only when a permit contains a compliance schedule and when a
milestone identified in the permit is reached, to determine the
permittee’s compliance with that milestone.  Also, alternate level
reports are submitted only when there is an expected change in the
production level at the facility.

Some of the information in this ICR that is required to be submitted is
collected only after the permittee violates a permit condition.  For
example, noncompliance reports are submitted when the facility
experiences a bypass, an upset, or a violation of a daily maximum limit.
 Responses to Section 308(a) letters are submitted only when requested
by the Administrator, in response to events such as a spill of oil or a
hazardous substance, or whenever the agency has reason to believe it
needs additional information to determine compliance.  Therefore,
frequency of information collection is not an issue for the reporting
requirements in this category.

With regard to use of BMPs under 40 CFR 435 to control NAFs, the
Permittee must maintain a copy of the BMP Plan and related documentation
(e.g., training certifications, summary of the monitoring results,
records of synthetic-based fluids (SBF)-equipment spills, repairs, and
maintenance) at the facility and must make the BMP Plan and related
documentation available to the State NPDES Permitting Authority and/or
EPA, upon request.  Submission of the BMP Plan and related documentation
shall be at the frequency established by the NPDES permitting authority
(i.e., Permit monitoring reports), but in no case less than once per 5
years.  As NPDES permits are required to be revised every five years,
any less frequent submission of the BMP Plan and related documentation
would lead to outdated and ineffective BMP Plans.

The BMP alternative requires refresher training to ensure the proper
implementation of the BMP Plan.  EPA estimates that refresher training
will take place twice a year with each training course lasting 4 hours. 
Less frequent training will lead to inadequate implementation of the
associated beneficial BMPs.

3.e	General Guidelines

This information collection is consistent with OMB guidelines contained
in 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).  The 24-hour reporting requirements for notice of
unanticipated upset or bypass and notice of violation are required by
the NPDES regulations at 40 CFR 122.41(l)(6) because of the potential
for severe environmental damage or grave threats to public health
resulting from these circumstances.  The pollutant discharge limits in a
NPDES permit are designed to be protective of the environment and the
public.  Violation of those limits whether by upset, bypass, or other
violation is, therefore, a threat to the receiving stream.  The
permitting authority must be informed of such violations quickly so that
necessary remedial action can be taken as soon as possible.

3.f	Confidentiality

Where information submitted in conjunction with this ICR contains trade
secrets or similar confidential business information, the respondent has
the authority to request that this information be treated as
confidential business information.  All confidential data will be
handled in accordance with 40 CFR 122.7, 40 CFR Part 2.  Any claim of
confidentiality must be asserted at the time of submission. However, CWA
308(b) specifically states that effluent data may not be treated as
confidential.

3.g	Sensitive Questions

Reporting requirements addressed in this ICR do not include sensitive
questions. 

4	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

4.a	Respondents and NAICS/SIC Codes

An NPDES permit is required any time there is a discharge of pollutants
from a point source to the waters of the United States, regardless of a
discharger’s industrial category.  Consequently, any industrial
category may be subject to compliance assessment requirements for their
NPDES permits.  A relatively large portion of permitted facilities,
including municipal dischargers, are classified in the sanitary service
industrial category (North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) code 221320, Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 495).
 Other industrial categories covered by NPDES permits include facilities
in more than 800 industrial classifications.  Other common permittee
classifications include, but are not limited to, electric services
(NAICS 2211, SIC 491), bituminous coal (NAICS 212111 and 212112, SIC
122), chemical manufacturing (NAICS 325, SIC 28), petroleum refining
(NAICS 324110, SIC 2911), mineral ores (NAICS 2122, SIC 10), and
ready-mixed concrete (NAICS 32732 SCI 3273).  EPA may request
supplemental information from any permittee.

Applicants requesting coverage under the Sewage Sludge Management
program include POTWs and privately owned treatment works (PrOTWs)
(NAICS 221320, SIC 495).  In most cases, these facilities will have
NPDES permits and will submit information about sewage sludge use and
disposal practices as part of their NPDES applications.  In some cases,
respondents are facilities treating domestic sewage that do not have a
NPDES permit but must have a permit for sewage sludge use and disposal
activities.  These respondents are called “sludge-only” applicants.

CAFO facilities are classified based on the primary type of animal
confined at the operation.  NAICS code: 112111,112112, 112120, 112210,
112310, 112320, 112330, 112390, 112410, and 112920; SIC codes: 0211,
0212, 0213, 0214, 0241, 0251, 0252, 0253, 259, and 272.

The respondents using BMPs under 40 CFR 435 to control NAFs will be
approximately 67 offshore synthetic-based fluid (SBF) well drilling
facilities.  These operations fall under NAICS codes 211111 and 213111,
SIC code 13.  Government respondents are expected to include
representatives from EPA Regions 4, 6, 9, and 10, who will revise NPDES
permits for implementation of the BMP alternative.  The EPA Region 10
respondent will revise the general NPDES permit for the coastal State
waters of Cook Inlet, Alaska, as EPA has not yet approved authorization
of the NPDES program in the State of Alaska. 

4.b	Information Requested

EPA requires permittees to maintain and/or submit certain information. 
The following recordkeeping and reporting requirements are covered by
this ICR and are used by the permitting authority to determine a
permittee’s compliance with its permit requirements:

1.	Recordkeeping of Monitoring Data [§122.41(j)(2)]:  In association
with monitoring requirements, NPDES permittees including non-stormwater
general permittees and a portion of the stormwater general permittees
must keep records of all monitoring data and reports, including copies
of all original monitoring information, for 3 years after the date of
sample, measurement, report, or application.  Data that must be retained
include:  date and time of sampling and monitoring, names of individuals
who performed sampling and monitoring, analytical techniques or methods
used, and results of such analyses.  These data must be readily
available to the permitting authority during site inspections or at any
other time they are needed.  This recordkeeping requirement is intended
to ensure that permittees keep files on the raw data used to generate
DMR summary information.  This information would otherwise not be
available to the permitting authority.  The recordkeeping burden
associated with sewage sludge monitoring is included in the Part 503
burden estimated under the NPDES and Sewage Sludge Monitoring Reports
ICR (EPA ICR No. 0229.16, OMB Control No. 2040-0004, April 2005) and is
not covered in this ICR.

2.	Recordkeeping of Inspection Data [§122.44(i)(4)(ii)]:  A stormwater
general permittee must keep records of annual on-site inspection data
for 3 years after the date of inspection.  The inspection data must
summarize the results of the inspection, and identify any incidents of
noncompliance and evaluate measures that reduce pollutant loadings
identified in the SWPPP.  This data must be readily available to the
permitting authority on request.  This information is the minimum
compliance requirement and applies to all stormwater general permittees.
 In addition, stormwater permittees with discharges associated with
industrial activity are required to perform periodic visual examinations
of their facilities and maintain records of these visual examinations.

3.	Compliance Schedule Reports [§§122.41(l)(5) and 501.15(a)(6)]: 
Adherence to an NPDES or sewage sludge permittee’s compliance schedule
is determined by evaluation of the compliance schedule reports submitted
by the permittee.  This information is used to assess the permittee’s
progress in installing the treatment facilities (or “milestones”)
necessary to meet discharge limitations or sewage sludge quality
standards.  Compliance schedule reports must be submitted within 14 days
following the schedule date of each of the scheduled milestones.  A
schedule violation could result in an enforcement action.

4.	Noncompliance Reports [§§122.41(l)(6), 122.41(l)(7), and
501.15(b)(12)]:  A permittee must provide 24-hour oral reporting of any
noncompliance which may endanger human health or the environment (with a
written follow-up submission within 5 days).  The following must be
reported within 24 hours to the permitting authority:  1) any
unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the
permit; 2) any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the
permit; and 3) violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any
of the pollutants listed by the Director in the permit.  These reports
may include SSO events and unpermitted CSO reporting; however, in this
ICR, SSO reporting and unpermitted CSO reporting burdens appear as
separate line items in exhibits that follow.  In addition, §§122.41
and 501.15 require permittees to report instances of non-compliance with
sewage sludge regulations such as noncompliance with sewage sludge
pollution standards.  Timely reporting is essential in these cases, and
thus, separate reporting requirements have been established for
reporting bypass, upset, or violation of a maximum daily discharge.  If
required, the written report of the occurrence shall describe the event,
its cause, its duration, and remedial actions taken.  In addition,
respondents must report other noncompliance situations even if they are
not covered under these reporting requirements as soon as they occur.

5.	Alternate Level Reports [§122.45(b)(2)(B)(1)]:  The permitting
authority may, at its discretion, apply tiered production-based effluent
limits in an NPDES permit.  Tiered permit limits allow facilities to
operate under different sets of limits for pollutants based on varying
production levels.  In the case of automotive factories, however, a
reasonable demonstration by the permittee of the requirement for tiered
limits obligates the EPA (not States) to grant tiered limits to the
industry.  Nevertheless, every facility operating under tiered limits is
required to submit a notification to the permitting authority if it
intends to operate at a production level higher than the lowest
production level identified in the permit.

6.	Section 308(a) Letters:  Section 308(a) of the CWA gives broad
discretion to permitting authorities to request information from a
permittee.  The burden on respondents from 308(a) letters requesting
information is included under several ICRs.  For example, a 308(a)
letter may be sent out in response to inadequate information contained
in an NPDES permit application.  Accordingly, this burden is reflected
in the Applications ICR.  Section 308(a) letters may also request
additional information on other monitoring activities under the CWA,
including spills of oil and hazardous substances from owners or
operators of facilities or vessels.  They are, therefore, a
compliance-related activity and the burden associated with responding to
this is reflected in this NPDES/Compliance Assessment/Certification
Information ICR.

7.	Certification for Exemption From Monitoring and Notification of
Process Changes:  The effluent limitations guidelines and standards
regulations for 14 industrial categories (12 categories and 2
subcategories) allow dischargers to submit a certification to exempt
them from monitoring one or more pollutants.  Of these industrial
categories, two categories (aluminum forming and coil coating) may
choose to submit an annual certification requesting exemption from
cyanide monitoring; one category (pharmaceutical manufacturing) may
choose to submit a certification requesting exemption from monitoring
once every permit cycle (5 years); one category (porcelain enameling)
may choose to submit an annual certification requesting exemption from
chromium monitoring; certain facilities in the pulp and paper
categories, which use a totally chlorine free process, may choose an
alternative monitoring program by certification once every permit cycle;
one category (steam electric) may choose to provide a demonstration and
certification requesting exemption for monitoring requirements.  For one
of the subparts to the coil coating category (can making), the
discharger is required to submit a notification if the alloy used in
making cans contains less than 1 percent manganese.  For certain
facilities in the electroplating, metal finishing, and electrical and
electronic components categories, permittees may choose to submit a
Total Toxic Organics (TTO) certification semi-annually in lieu of TTO
monitoring, but must also develop and submit a toxic organic management
plan.  In addition, for the pesticide formulating and packaging
category, the discharger may choose to submit an annual certification to
use pollution prevention alternatives.  Dischargers submitting a
certification for pollution prevention alternative must also develop a
pollution prevention plan.

	8.	Synthetic-Based Fluids (SBF) well drilling operations that elect to
control their SBF-cuttings discharges through the use of BMPs are
required to prepare the following information: (1) certification of BMP
completion and a copy of the most current BMP Plan; (2) records
demonstrating periodic review of the BMP Plan (at a minimum once every
five years); (3) monitoring reports (including the operation of
monitoring systems) to establish equivalence with a numeric cuttings
retention limitation and to detect leaks, spills, and intentional
diversion; and (4) training reports to document re-fresher training
necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the BMP Plan.

4.c	Respondent Activities

Respondent activities can vary substantially, depending on the type of
permittee and its ability to comply with its NPDES or sewage sludge
permit.  This ICR explains these activities, in terms of the type of
information submission they require, in detail in Section 4.b above. 
However, to submit the required information, any particular respondent
may engage in the following types of activities:

Preparing basic information.  This includes reviewing regulatory and
permit requirements, responding to information requests, reporting
production levels to the permitting authority, gathering general
information for reports, preparing documents for submission, making
telephone calls to the permitting authority, drafting letters, reviewing
materials for submission, preparing certifications, and mailing
completed submissions.

Maintaining records.  All NPDES permittees must keep records of all
monitoring information and all reports required by the permit. 
Stormwater general permittees must retain records of facility
inspections and visual examinations.  New permittees need to develop a
recordkeeping system, enter data, train personnel, and file information.

SBF well drilling operations that elect to use BMPs to control their SBF
discharges will be involved in the following tasks:

BMP Plan Development, Review, and Certification: The BMP Plan must be
documented in narrative form, and must include any necessary plot plans,
drawings, or maps, and must be developed in accordance with good
engineering practices.  At a minimum, the BMP Plan must contain the
planning, development and implementation, and evaluation/reevaluation
components.

Periodic Review and Revision of BMP Plan: For those SBF-cuttings
discharges controlled through the BMP alternative, the permittee must
amend the BMP Plan whenever there is a change in the facility or in the
operation of the facility which materially increases the generation of
SBF-cuttings or their release or potential release to the receiving
waters.  At a minimum the BMP Plan must be reviewed once every five
years and amended within three months if warranted.

Additional Monitoring Reports: Respondents that elect to use the BMP
alternative to control SBF-cuttings discharges will be required to
document additional monitoring activities.  These additional monitoring
activities and the related documentation activities are required to
demonstrate a well-ordered and working BMP program.  Additional
monitoring activities include establishing equivalence with a numeric
cuttings retention limitation and detecting SBF-cuttings leaks, spills,
and intentional diversions.

Re-fresher Training: This activity may be performed by the establishment
of a program of documented initial and annual refresher training of
drilling equipment operators, maintenance personnel, and other technical
and supervisory personnel who have responsibility for operating,
maintaining, or supervising the operation and maintenance of drilling
equipment.

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

5.a	Agency Activities

The permitting authority retains all information generated by the
permittee as part of the permittee’s official file.  The information
is reviewed to determine if the permittee is in compliance with its
permit, and to determine if any noncompliance poses a threat to human
health or the environment.  In some cases, follow-up actions, including
enforcement actions, may be necessary.  In collecting and analyzing the
information associated with this ICR, EPA and authorized States enter
all applicable data into a national database: the Permit Compliance
System (PCS) or the new modernized system called the Integrated
Compliance Information System (ICIS).  The Agency uses PCS/ICIS data to
manage the NPDES program, for example, to develop statistical summaries
on such things as permit compliance rates.  The permitting authority
analyzes and processes this information as well.  The permitting
authority’s burden for compiling these reports on compliance rates is
estimated in the ICR for NPDES and Sewage Sludge Management State
Program Requirements (OMB No. 2040-0057, ICR No. 0168.09).

With regard to use of BMPs under 40 CFR 435 to control NAFs, permittees
must maintain records (e.g., a copy of the BMP Plan and related
documentation, such as training certifications, summary of the
monitoring results, records of SBF-cuttings spills, repairs, and
maintenance) as described in 40 CFR 435 at the facility and must make
the BMP Plan and related documentation available to EPA and/or the State
NPDES permitting authority, upon request.  Submission of the BMP Plan
and related documentation shall be at the frequency established by the
NPDES permitting authority (i.e., permit monitoring reports), but in no
case less than once per five years.  Review of monitoring records by EPA
or the State permitting authority may also be helpful to permit writers
in the development of future NPDES permit conditions.

5.b	Collection Methodology and Management

The permitting authority will ensure the accuracy and completeness of
information collected by reviewing each submittal upon receipt and is
responsible for ensuring that applicable data are entered into PCS or
ICIS. 

Upon request to EPA, the public may access certain information via PCS,
ICIS, Online Tracking Information System (OTIS), or Enforcement and
Compliance History Online (ECHO).  Some of the information is available
to the public through web-based interfaces of these databases or other
EPA web-based tools such as Envirofacts.

With regard to use of BMPs under 40 CFR 435 to control NAFs, the data
collection and management methodology for SBF well drilling operations
that elect to use BMPs will include the submission of the BMP Plan to
the NPDES permitting authority at the frequency established by the NPDES
permitting authority (i.e., permit monitoring reports), but in no case
less than once per 5 years.  The NPDES permitting authority may also
request BMP implementation documentation (e.g., training certifications,
maintenance records).  The NPDES permitting  authority will also review
cases where operators are unable to demonstrate compliance with numeric
cuttings retention limitations.

5.c	Small Entity Flexibility

All permittees, regardless of the size of their facilities, are required
to report instances of noncompliance and keep records of monitoring
data.  In most cases, these requirements do not impose a large burden on
small business because the information required is simple and
straightforward.

Many small businesses do not discharge any pollutants, or they discharge
pollutants to a POTW.  These businesses are not required to have NPDES
permits and thus are not subject to the reporting requirements of this
ICR.

With regard to use of BMPs under 40 CFR 435 to control NAFs, pursuant to
section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the EPA Administrator
certified that this final regulation will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

5.d	Collection Schedule

5.d.1	Information Collection Activities

With the exception of the certifications allowed by the effluent
limitations guidelines and standards and the stormwater related
inspections and visual examinations, the information collection
activities included in this ICR do not follow routine schedules; they
are submitted on an as-needed basis.  The time frames for collecting and
submitting compliance assessment information are outlined below:

Recordkeeping is performed on a continual basis;

General permittee facility self-inspections must occur annually

Stormwater permittees with discharges associated with industrial
activity must perform quarterly visual examinations;

Compliance assessment reports are submitted within 14 days of a
scheduled milestone;

Noncompliance reports are submitted only in cases where the permittee
has violated a permit condition;

Notices of alternate levels of production are submitted at least 2 days
prior to a month in which a change in production is anticipated; and

Response time to Section 308(a) information requests varies.  These
letters are sent by EPA (and States under applicable State Law) when
there is reason to believe that there may be noncompliance and where
enforcement may be an appropriate response.

5.d.2	Information Collection Schedule

The information collection schedules for the 14 industrial categories
(12 categories and 2 subcategories) seeking exemptions or alternative
compliance reporting are as follows:

Facilities in the porcelain enameling, aluminum forming, coil coating,
and pesticides formulating and packaging industrial categories may
submit certifications annually in lieu of routine monitoring.

Facilities in the electroplating, metal finishing, and electrical and
electronic components industrial categories may submit semiannual
certifications in lieu of certain monitoring.

Facilities in the can making category, a subcategory of the coil coating
industrial category, must submit a notification only when a process
change is anticipated.

Facilities in the pharmaceutical manufacturing, steam electric, and pulp
and paper industrial categories must submit certifications once every
permit cycle.

Facilities subject to 40 CFR Part 435 and that will use BMPs to control
NAFs are anticipated to occur under the following schedule:

The operator shall certify that its BMP Plan is complete, on-site, and
available upon request to EPA or the State NPDES permitting authority. 
This certification shall identify the NPDES permit number and be signed
by an authorized representative of the operator.  This certification
shall be kept with the BMP Plan.  For new or modified NPDES permits, the
certification shall be made no later than the effective date of the new
or modified permit.  For existing NPDES permits, the certification shall
be made within one year of permit issuance.

Submission of records to the permitting authority demonstrating periodic
review of the BMP Plan are due at a minimum once every 5 years.

Monitoring reports demonstrating compliance with the BMP Plan are due to
the permitting authority at the frequency set by the permitting
authority (e.g., monthly or annually) and may be requested by the
permitting authority on demand.

Re-fresher training certifications demonstrating compliance with the BMP
Plan are due to the permitting authority at the frequency set by the
permitting  authority (e.g., semi-annually) and may be requested by the
permitting authority on demand.

6	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

6.a	Estimating Respondent Burden

Exhibit 2 presents a summary of the number of State-issued and
EPA-issued permits.  The major and minor and sludge-only permit data
were compiled from PCS data (July 2006).  Estimates of general
permittees with discharges of industrial stormwater were pulled from the
Applications for NPDES Discharge Permits and the Sewage Sludge
Management Permits ICR (ICR #2040-0086, OMB #0226.18, June 2006).  The
breakdown of State versus EPA permittees with discharges of industrial
stormwater is based on 2000 Census Bureau data, indicating that 94.4
percent of the U.S. population resides in NPDES authorized States while
5.6 percent resides in non-NPDES States. Storm water general permittee
estimates (discharges associated with construction activities) were
based on estimates from NPDES Stormwater Program Phase II ICR (EPA ICR
No. 1820.04, OMB Control No. 2040-0211, June 2006) and the Notice of
Intent for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity
Under a NPDES General Permit ICR (EPA ICR No. 1842.05, OMB Control No.
2040-0188, June 2006) .  Finally, the number of “other non stormwater
general permittees” were obtained from PCS (July 2006).  

Exhibit 2.	Number of Individual NPDES Permits Issued by EPA and the
States and Permittees covered by General Permits

Type of Permit	States	EPA	Total

Major Permits

	    Municipal	3,991	249	4,240

    Non-Municipal	2,198	148	2,346

Subtotal	6,189	397	6,586

Minor Permits

	    Municipal	10,543	229	10,772

    Non-Municipal	32,685	685	33,370

Subtotal	43,228	914	44,142

General Permittees 

	    Stormwater Industrial	91,146	5,404	96,550

    Stormwater Construction	231,636	10,211	241,847

    Other – non stormwater	54,017	3,203	57,220

Subtotal	376,799	18,818	395,617

Sludge-only Permits

	    POTWs	1,467	2,936	4,403

    PrOTWs	139	257	396

Subtotal	1,606	3,193	4,799

The permits shown in Exhibit 2 constitute major and minor municipal
individual permittees, stormwater and non-stormwater general permittees,
and sludge-only permittees.  The facilities holding these permits are
potential respondents in this NPDES/Compliance Assessment/ Certification
Information ICR.  Although this ICR includes Federal facility counts,
their burden is believed to be insignificant because of the manner in
which the data were retrieved from PCS.  EPA is not required to include
burden estimates imposed on other Federal agencies.  State and
EPA-issued permits have been disaggregated to allow separate reporting
of burden and costs to State and Federal governments.

With regard to use of BMPs under 40 CFR 435 to control NAFs, EPA
estimates that 68 facilities annually will be affected by this ICR.

Based on the 2006 CAFO ICR (EPA ICR No. 1989.04; OMB No. 2040-0250), EPA
estimates that there are 24,036 CAFO permittees.  Of those 23,216 are in
States with NPDES authority and 820 are directly regulated by EPA. 

EPA estimates that there are 84 Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and
Soda facilities, 82 regulated by states and 2 by EPA. These numbers come
from EPA ICR No. 1878.02 OMB ICR No. 2040-0243 and EPA ICR No. 1829.03,
OMB ICR No. 2040-0207.

As shown in Exhibit 3, EPA estimates the total annual burden to
respondents to be approximately 2,015,231 hours.  Of this total,
1,773,388 hours are for recordkeeping, while 241,843 hours are for
reporting.  Exhibit 3 provides a detailed breakdown of hours by specific
record or report.  The information requirements in this ICR potentially
affect 450,509 respondents.  Of this population, 446,429 respondents
will incur a recordkeeping burden.  This number includes all State and
EPA major, minor, and general permittees but excludes sludge permittees
because the recordkeeping burden for sludge permittees has been
estimated in another ICR (NPDES and Sewage Sludge Monitoring Reports,
EPA ICR No. 0229.16, OMB Control No 2040-0004, April 2005) (see Section
4.b).

In accordance with OMB’s instructions, this ICR calculates burden and
costs to respondents on an annual basis.  To calculate the total annual
respondent burden, the ICR first calculates the annual burden for each
compliance assessment requirement.  The ICR then adds these together. 
Thus, the total annual burden is the sum of the annual burdens for each
individual compliance assessment requirement.  This section explains the
respondent burden estimates for each compliance assessment requirement. 

Note: Numbers presented in the text may not add exactly due to rounding
(the data were developed using spreadsheets).  For example, section
6.a.3 shows: “EPA estimates that…5 percent (2,206) of the 44,142
minor facilities…”.  Five percent of 44,142 is 2,207, not 2,206, but
in the spreadsheets the calculation is done by individually calculating
5 percent of each category of minor facilities and the adding them up:

Five percent of Minor Municipal Permittees regulated by States (10,543) 
527

Five percent of Minor Municipal Permittees regulated by EPA (229)	11

Five percent of Minor Non-Municipal Permittees regulated by State
(32,685)	1,634

Five percent of Minor Non-Municipal Permittees regulated by EPA (685)	34

In general, the larger the facility, the greater the number of outfalls,
and the greater the discharge of pollutants (particularly toxics). 
Larger facilities are also likely to produce larger volumes of sewage
sludge.  Because of these factors, larger facilities tend to incur
greater burdens for completing mandatory reports and the burden will be
calculated separately for major and minor facilities as described in the
sections below.  The more often a facility violates its permit
conditions, the larger the burden associated with reporting
noncompliance (i.e., explaining reasons and proposing solutions). 

Exhibit 3.	Annual Respondent Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden

Item/Type of Respondent	Respondents per Year (State permits)	Respondents
per Year (EPA permits)	Respondents per Year (A)	Burden (Hrs.) per
Respondent (B)	Total Annual Burden (Hrs.) (A) x (B)

Recordkeeping

	Major Municipal Permittees	3,991	249	4,240	6	25,440

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	2,198	148	2,346	6	14,076

Minor Municipal Permittees	10,543	229	10,772	1.2	12,926

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	32,685	685	33,370	1.2	40,044

Stormwater General Permittees – Industrial1	91,146	5,404	96,550	6.6
637,230

Stormwater General Permittees – Construction	231,636	10,211	241,847	4
967,388

Other General Permittees	54,017	3,203	57,220	1.2	68,664

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda	82	2	84	90.71	7,620

SUBTOTAL	426,298	20,131	446,429

1,773,388

Compliance Schedule Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	1,996	125	2,121	1.125	2,386

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	1,099	74	1,173	1.125	1,320

Minor Municipal Permittees	527	11	538	1.125	605

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1,634	34	1,669	1.125	1,878

Sludge Permit Conditions Compliance Schedule Reports

	POTWs	100	0	100	1.5	150

PrOTWs	32	0	32	1.5	48

SUBTOTAL	5,388	244	5,633

6,387

Noncompliance Reports

	Unanticipated Bypass/Upset Report

	Verbal Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	599	37	636	5	3,180

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	330	22	352	5	1,760

Minor Municipal Permittees	527	11	538	5	2,690

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	                            1,634 	      
                    34 	1,668	5	8,340

Written Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	449	28	477	2	954

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	248	17	265	2	530

Minor Municipal Permittees	395	8	403	2	806

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1226	26	1,252	2	2,504

SUBTOTAL	5,408	183	5,591

20,764

Maximum Daily Violation Report

	Verbal Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	599	37	636	6	3,816

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	330	22	352	6	2,112

Minor Municipal Permittees	527	11	538	3	1,614

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1634	34	1,668	3	5,004

Stormwater Permittees	2,256	134	2,390	3	7,170

Written Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	300	19	319	4	1,276

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	165	11	176	4	704

Minor Municipal Permittees	264	6	270	2	540

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	817	17	834	2	1,668

Stormwater Permittees	1128	67	1,195	2	2,390

SUBTOTAL	8,020	358	8,378

26,294

Other Noncompliance Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	80	5	85	5	425

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	44	3	47	5	235

Minor Municipal Permittees	105	2	107	5	535

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	327	7	334	5	1,670

Sludge Permit Conditions - Noncompliance Reports

	POTWs	31	0	31	5.2	161

PrOTWs	10	0	10	5.2	52

CAFO Permittees	232	8	240	5	1,200

SUBTOTAL	829	25	854

4,278

Notice of Alternate Level of Production	0	0	0	0	0

Section 308(a) Letters	0	1,200	1,200	8	9,600

Pollution Prevention Alternative

	Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	54	1	55	20	1,100

Certifications

	Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	161	2	163	1	163

Aluminum Forming	52	5	57	1	57

Coil Coating	71	5	76	1	76

Can Making (subcategory of coil coating)	11	2	13	1	13

Porcelain Enameling	21	6	27	1	27

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing	35	4	39	1	39

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard	196	21	217	0.2	43

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda	74	0	74	6	444

Building Paper and Board Mills	108	23	131	1	131

Steam Electric	916	113	1,029	1	1,029

Electroplating	0	0	0	2	0

Metal Finishing	1454	70	1,524	2	3,048

Electrical and Electronic Components	40	4	44	2	88

SUBTOTAL	3,139	255	3,394

5,158

SSO Reporting	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	62,144

Unpermitted CSO Reporting2	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	5,184

Part 435 Certification Oil and Gas Extraction3

68	68	787	53,516

Part 434 Coal Remining and Western Alkaline	78	N/A	78	N/A	1,638

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans*	N/A	N/A
29	N/A	N/A

BMP, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans*	82	2	84	545
45,780

TOTAL	449,296	22,467	471,793

2,015,231

1. Only 49.5 percent of the 96,550 industrial stormwater permittees are
estimated to be required to maintain monitoring data

2. These burden hours were taken directly from the 1998 Summary of
Revised Burden Estimates and are based on an estimated number of events
per year, rather than the number of respondents.  For further
explanation of these estimates see the 1998 Summary of Revised Burden
Estimates for SSO/Unpermitted CSO Reporting.

3. Part 435 burden from previous ICR (EPA ICR 1427.07)

*. For detail information see Appendix A

6.a.1	Recordkeeping of Monitoring and Inspection Data

The following discussion is presented in table format in Exhibits 2 and
3.  EPA estimates that all NPDES permittees (except for certain
stormwater permittees as discussed below) will incur an annual burden
for recordkeeping of discharge monitoring and other monitoring data. 
The burden associated with this recordkeeping requirement depends on the
size of the facility.  In the previous NPDES/Compliance
Assessment/Certification Information ICR, EPA estimated that 6.0 hours
per year (0.5 hours per month) for major permittees and 1.2 hours per
year (0.1 hours per month) for minor permittees are necessary to
organize and file the appropriate existing monitoring data.  These
estimates are consistent with current recordkeeping requirements and are
retained in this ICR.  Therefore, 6,586 major permittees (4,240
municipal plus 2,346 non-municipal) will spend 6.0 hours per year on
recordkeeping activities, resulting in a total annual burden of 39,516
hours.  All 44,142 minor municipal and non-municipal permittees (10,772
and 33,370, respectively) will incur a total annual burden of 52,970
hours for recordkeeping.

All 96,550 stormwater general permittees with industrial discharges are
required to conduct and maintain records of their annual site
inspections and all 241,847 construction stormwater general permittees
are required to conduct and maintain records of their comprehensive site
inspection.  These activities are expected to result in an annual burden
of 4 hours per respondent for an annual burden of 1,553,588 hours.  All
of the 96,550 storm water general permittees with industrial discharges
are required to conduct quarterly visual examinations.  EPA estimates
these permittees will spend 0.5 hours for each visual examination, for a
total of 2.0 hours per year and a total annual burden of 193,100 hours.

A portion of the stormwater general permittees with industrial
discharges are required to keep monitoring records.  Based on
information submitted by these permittees to EPA’s NOI Data Processing
Center, this number is estimated to be 49.5 percent or 47,792
permittees.  EPA estimates that 1.2 hours will be spent by these
stormwater permittees in keeping monitoring records, resulting in a
total annual burden of 57,351 hours.  Note:  Because only a portion of
the 96,550 storm water permittees with industrial discharges are
required to maintain monitoring data, the average burden hours for storm
water permittees with industrial discharges is 6.6 hours (4 hours to
maintain records of their annual site inspections + 2 hours for visual
examinations + [1.2 hours for keeping monitoring records *49.5% of the
stormwater general permittees with industrial discharges required to
keep monitoring records]).

EPA estimates that all 57,220 non-stormwater general permittees will
incur a recordkeeping burden of 1.2 hours annually for maintaining
monitoring data.  This results in a total annual burden of 68,664 hours.

The facilities submitting certifications are a very small subset of the
major and minor permittees and the recordkeeping burden for these
certifications is believed to be adequately reflected in the
recordkeeping burden discussed above.

The total recordkeeping burden for all respondents is therefore
estimated to be 806,000 hours.  This includes burden to Subpart B,
Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda from OMB ICR 2040-0207 and OMB ICR
2040-0243.  Note that recordkeeping requirements for sewage sludge
permittees are accounted for in the sewage sludge use or disposal
standards burden estimated under the NPDES and Sewage Sludge Monitoring
Reports ICR (EPA ICR No. 0229.16, OMB Control No. 2040-0004, April 2005)
and, thus, are not included in this ICR. 

6.a.2	Compliance Schedule Reports

Permittees must submit reports that state whether compliance schedule
milestones contained in their permits have been met.  EPA assumes that
most NPDES permittees will engage a contractor to undertake the
construction necessary to meet these milestones.  The Agency further
assumes that the permittees will receive periodic detailed progress
reports from their contractors on the status of construction. 
Therefore, EPA expects this requirement to place very little additional
burden upon permittees.  According to the previous NPDES/Compliance
Assessment/Certification Information ICR, it is estimated that
permittees will submit an average of 1.5 reports per year, and the
burden to complete each report will be 0.75 hours.  This is equivalent
to 1.125 hours per year for each respondent.  This burden represents the
time required to both prepare and send the compliance schedule report.

It is expected that 50 percent of the major facilities and 5 percent of
the minor facilities will submit compliance schedule reports per year. 
General permittees will not incur a burden as they are not required to
submit compliance schedule reports.  At 1.125 hours per year, the total
annual burden to major facilities is 3,706 hours, while the total annual
burden to minor facilities is 2,483 hours.

The Agency anticipates that each year, 100 POTWs and 32 PrOTWs are
required to submit compliance schedule reports regarding sewage sludge
permit conditions and, further, that these facilities are required to
submit and average of 2 reports per year.  The Agency estimates that the
burden to complete each report is 0.75 hours, for a total annual burden
of 198 hours.

The total annual burden to respondents to prepare and file compliance
schedule reports is therefore 6,387 hours.

6.a.3	Noncompliance Reports 

When a permittee violates a permit condition, it must submit a
noncompliance report to the permitting authority.  The following
subsections discuss the burden estimates associated with these
noncompliance reports, except for those reports associated with SSOs and
unpermitted CSOs.  The burden estimates associated with these
noncompliance reports are discussed in Section 6.a.7.

24-Hour Report of Unanticipated Bypass or Upset

Where noncompliance at a permittee’s facility may endanger human
health or the environment, the permittee is required to verbally notify
the permitting authority within 24 hours of the noncompliance.  The
verbal report must be followed by a written report, unless it is waived
by the permitting authority.  EPA assumes that permittees closely
monitor the operation of their facilities so that the occurrence of a
bypass or upset of the treatment works is readily apparent to operators.
 Because of the potential for serious environmental damage, grave
threats to public health, and injury to facility employees, permittees
should act quickly in the event of such an occurrence.  Permittees must
make these reports if they wish to use unanticipated bypass or upset as
an affirmative defense for violating their permit limits
[§122.41(n)(3)].  Thus, if proper procedures for reporting bypass or
upset are followed, the permittee may use the 24-hour report as a
defense for violating its permit conditions, because it is a timely
report of the occurrence.

EPA estimates that 15 percent (988) of the 6,586 major facilities and 5
percent (2,206) of the 44,142 minor facilities upset or bypass annually,
thereby requiring a verbal notification.  EPA estimates that these
respondents will submit one report per year at 5 hours of burden.  In
addition, EPA estimates that 75 percent (2,397) of the 3,194 facilities
submitting a verbal notification will also be required to submit a
written report.  The written report is expected to require an additional
2 hours of burden.  The burden represents the time required to
investigate the bypass or cause of upset; determine the duration or
expected duration of the incident; determine the corrective actions to
be taken; prepare the written report (if the requirement is not waived);
and to send the report to the permitting authority.  As illustrated in
Exhibit 3, the total annual respondent burden for submitting the verbal
and written notification is 20,764 hours.

24-Hour Report of Violation of Maximum Daily Discharge

When a permittee exceeds its maximum daily discharge limitation for
pollutants specified in its permit, the permittee is required to
verbally notify the permitting authority within 24 hours of the
violation.  The verbal report must be followed by a written report,
unless it is waived by the permitting authority.  Permittees that have
daily maximum discharge limits are already required to monitor for
limited pollutants and report sampling results to the permitting
authority on a Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR).  Because the
permittee’s requirements are already accounted for in the DMR ICR (as
discussed above), the verbal and written notice requirements under this
ICR add only an incremental burden to the permittee’s regular
reporting requirements.

EPA assumes that the permittees required to submit verbal notices will
incur a burden of 3 hours per notice.  In addition, EPA assumes that 50
percent of those permittees giving notice will be required to submit
written notices (the remaining 50 percent will have this requirement
waived), with an estimated burden of 2 hours per written report.  The
burden represents the time required to gather information and prepare
the verbal notice, prepare the written report if the requirement is not
waived, and submit the report to the permitting authority.

EPA estimates that 15 percent (988) of the 6,586 major facilities and 5
percent (2,206) of the 44,142 minor facilities will violate their
maximum daily discharge limitations for which a 24-hour report is
required.  Of these permittees, EPA expects the written report submittal
requirement to be waived in 50 percent of the cases.  Thus, 319 major
municipals, 176 major non-municipals, 270 minor municipals, and 834
minor non-municipals are expected to submit written reports of
violations of the maximum daily discharge limit.  EPA estimates that the
major facilities will submit an average of 2 reports per year, while the
minors will submit an average of 1 report annually.  In addition to the
major and minor permittees, EPA expects 5 percent of the 47,792
stormwater general permittees with industrial discharges to violate
their maximum daily discharge limits.  This 5 percent is expected to be
inclusive of the 10 percent of stormwater general permittees with coal
pile runoff effluent limits that are expected, as estimated in the
previous ICR, to violate their maximum daily discharge limits.  As a
result, 2,390 such permittees will be required to provide verbal notice
of the violation, of which 50 percent, or 1,195, will be required to
submit written reports.  In summary, for all categories of respondents
who must submit reports for maximum daily violations, the associated
total annual burden is 26,294 hours.

Other Noncompliance

When any type of noncompliance occurs that is not covered by standard
compliance assessment reports (i.e., DMRs, compliance schedule reports,
24-hour reports, or planned changes), the permittee is still required to
report it.  Usually, a permittee makes these types of reports when
conditions other than those described above cause it to violate the
conditions of its permit.  EPA estimates the average burden to be 5
hours per response.  This burden represents the time required to gather
information, prepare and present/conduct the verbal notice, and prepare
and submit a written report.

Because most instances of NPDES noncompliance reporting are covered by
other requirements of this ICR and by the NPDES/Sewage Sludge Monitoring
Reports ICR, EPA expects very few respondents to be affected annually. 
Approximately 2 percent (132) of the 6,586 major facilities and 1
percent (441) of the 44,142 minor facilities are expected to submit 1
report per year.  Therefore, at 5 hours per response, the total annual
burden associated with these reports is 660 hours for major facilities
and 2,205 hours for minor facilities.

In addition, EPA anticipates that each year 31 POTWs and 10 PrOTWs will
be required to submit an average of one noncompliance report per year
regarding sewage sludge permit conditions (generally noncompliance with
pollutant limitations).  The Agency assumes that the burden to complete
these reports equals 5 hours for a total annual burden of 213 hours. 
The total annual burden associated with other noncompliance reports is
3,078 hours.

Due to the unique characteristics of the CAFO permits (e.g., nutrient
management plans, no potential for discharge, etc), all noncompliance
reports have been combined under ‘other noncompliance’ and EPA
expects very few CAFO respondents to be affected annually. 
Approximately 1 percent (240) of the 24,036 CAFO facilities are expected
to submit 1 report per year.  At 5 hours per response, the total annual
burden associated with these reports is 1,200 hours.

Exhibit 4 shows the annual average number of responses per respondent. 
The total annual burden for all three types of noncompliance reports, as
discussed above, is 51,336 hours.  This is summarized in Exhibit 5. 
This exhibit does not include the respondent burden associated with SSO
and CSO reporting.  This latter information can be found in Exhibit 8.

Exhibit 4.	Annual Average Responses per Respondent

Item/Type of Respondent	Respondents per Year 

(A)	Responses per Year 

(B)	Total Annual Responses  (A)x(B)

Compliance Schedule Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	2,121	1.5	3,182

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	1,173	1.5	1,760

Minor Municipal Permittees	538	1.5	807

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1,669	1.5	2,504

Sludge Permit Conditions Compliance Schedule Reports

	POTWs	100	2	200

PrOTWs	32	2	64

SUBTOTAL	5,633

8,517

Noncompliance Reports

	Unanticipated Bypass/Upset Report

	Verbal Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	636	1	636

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	352	1	352

Minor Municipal Permittees	538	1	538

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1,668	1	1,668

Written Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	477	1	477

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	265	1	265

Minor Municipal Permittees	403	1	403

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1,252	1	1,252

SUBTOTAL	5,591

5,591

Maximum Daily Violation Report

	Verbal Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	636	2	1,272

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	352	2	704

Minor Municipal Permittees	538	1	538

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1,668	1	1,668

Stormwater Permittees	2,390	1	2,390

Written Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	319	2	638

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	176	2	352

Minor Municipal Permittees	270	1	270

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	834	1	834

Stormwater Permittees	1,195	1	1,195

SUBTOTAL	8,378

9,861

Other Noncompliance Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	85	1	85

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	47	1	47

Minor Municipal Permittees	107	1	107

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	334	1	334

Sludge Permit Conditions - Noncompliance Reports

	POTWs	31	1	31

PrOTWs	10	1	10

CAFO Permittees	240	1	240

SUBTOTAL	854

854

Notice of Alternate Level of Production	0	0	0

Section 308(a) Letters	1,200	1	1,200

Pollution Prevention Alternative 

	Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	55	1	55

Certifications1

	Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	163	1	163

Aluminum Forming	57	1	57

Coil Coating	76	1	76

Can Making (subcategory of coil coating)	13	1	13

Porcelain Enameling	27	1	27

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing	39	1	39

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard	217	0.2	43

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda *	74	12	888

Building Paper and Board Mills	131	1	131

Steam Electric	1,029	1	1,029

Electroplating	0	2	0

Metal Finishing	1,524	2	3,048

Electrical and Electronic Components	44	2	88

SUBTOTAL	3,394

5,602

SSO Reporting	N/A	41,087	N/A

Unpermitted CSO Reporting	N/A	3,840	N/A

Part 435 Certification Oil and Gas Extraction 2	68	N/A	N/A

Part 434 Coal Remining and Western Alkaline *	78	N/A	N/A

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans *	N/A	N/A
N/A

BMP, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans *	84	2	168

TOTAL	25,335

31,848

1. Estimated number of respondents in each category is described in
Section 6.a.6. 

2. Part 435 burden from previous ICR (EPA ICR 1427.07)

* For detail information see Appendix A

Exhibit 5.	Respondent Reporting Burden for Noncompliance Reports

Activity/Facility Type	Total Annual Burden (Hrs.)

Unanticipated Bypass/Upset Report

	   Major Facilities	6,424

   Minor Facilities	14,340

Maximum Daily Violation Report

	   Major Facilities	7,908

   Minor Facilities	8,826

   Stormwater Permittees	9,560

Other Noncompliance Reports

	   Major Facilities	660

   Minor Facilities	2,205

   Sludge-only POTWs	161

   Sludge-only PrOTWs	52

   CAFO Permittees	1,200

Total Annual Respondent Burden	51,336

6.a.4	Notice of Alternate Level of Actual Production

The permitting authority may, at its discretion, apply tiered
production-based effluent limits in an NPDES permit.  Tiered permit
limits allow facilities to operate under different sets of limits for
pollutants based on varying production levels.  In the case of
automotive factories, however, a reasonable demonstration by the
permittee for the requirement for tiered limits obligates EPA (not
States) to grant tiered limits to the industry.  Nevertheless, every
facility operating under tiered limits is required to submit a
notification to the permitting authority if it intends to operate at a
production level higher than the lowest production level identified in
the permit.

No burden is estimated for this requirement at this time since it is
believed that there are very few applicable facilities that change
production levels within a given permit cycle.

6.a.5	Section 308(a) Letters

As discussed in Section 4.b, Section 308(a) of the CWA gives broad
discretion to permitting authorities to request information from a
permittee above and beyond routine requirements.  This burden on
respondents is included under several ICRs.  For example, a Section
308(a) letter may be sent out in response to inadequate information
contained in an NPDES permit application.  Such burden is reflected in
the Applications ICR (EPA ICR No. 0226.18, OMB Control No. 2040-0086,
June 2006).  Section 308(a) letters requesting additional information
pertaining to spills of oil and hazardous substances, however, are a
compliance-related activity.  The burden associated with responding to
this type of Section 308(a) letter is reflected in this NPDES/Compliance
Assessment/Certification Information ICR.

EPA estimates the burden associated with this latter type of collection
to be 8 hours per response.  This estimate represents the time required
for the permittee to gather existing information, consult specialists,
such as engineers and lawyers, and prepare a short, direct report.

EPA estimates that 1,200 permittees will be required to respond to a
Section 308(a) letter each year.  In the past, virtually all respondents
have been non-municipal permittees, with EPA as the permitting
authority.  At 8 hours per response, this is equivalent to a total
annual respondent burden of 9,600 hours.

6.a.6	Certification for Exemption From Monitoring and Notification of
Process Changes

As discussed in Section 4.b, the effluent limitations guidelines contain
provisions that allow facilities in certain industrial categories to
request exemptions from monitoring requirements.  Also, the effluent
limitations guidelines contain provisions for one category (pesticides
formulating, packaging, and repackaging) to develop a pollution
prevention plan.  Exhibit 6 provides an estimate of the number of
facilities in each of these industrial categories.  These estimates were
generated using data from PCS and cross-referencing it with facility SIC
code data by CFR category.  Each certification is estimated to require 1
hour to prepare.

In the pesticide formulating and packaging category, EPA estimates that
50 percent of the facilities will choose to submit an annual
certification to use pollution prevention alternatives.  As part of this
certification, each facility must develop a pollution prevention plan. 
As in the previous ICR, this ICR estimates that one third of these
facilities will develop a pollution prevention plan on an annual basis
and that each plan will take 20 hours to develop.  This is equivalent to
a total annual respondent burden of 1,100 hours.

EPA estimates that approximately 75 percent of the aluminum forming
facilities and coil coating facilities will choose to submit an annual
certification requesting an exemption from cyanide monitoring.

EPA estimates that 50 percent of the porcelain enameling facilities will
choose to submit an annual certification requesting an exemption from
chromium monitoring.

Exhibit 6.	Facilities with Certification Potential

Type of Respondent	State	EPA	Total

Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	322	4	326

Aluminum Forming	69	7	76

Coil Coating	94	7	101

Can Making (subcategory of coil coating)	15	3	18

Porcelain Enameling1	42	12	54

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing	117	13	130

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard	326	35	361

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda*	74	0	74

Building Paper and Board Mills	144	30	174

Steam Electric	1,221	151	1372

Electroplating2	0	0	0

Metal Finishing	1,939	93	2032

Electrical and Electronic Components	79	7	86

TOTAL	4,442	362	4,804

1. Categorical data  taken from the previous ICR and apportioned between
State and EPA based on the ratio of authorized to nonauthorized States. 

2. All electroplaters believed to be indirect dischargers. 

* For detail information see Appendix A

Additionally, of the eligible pharmaceutical facilities, EPA estimates
from effluent guideline development documents that approximately 40
percent of the pharmaceutical facilities are in a subcategory that
potentially use cyanide.  Of these, EPA estimates that 75 percent will
choose to submit a certification once every permit cycle requesting an
exemption from monitoring.

In the pulp, paper, and paperboard category, EPA estimates from effluent
guideline development documents that approximately 80 percent of the
facilities use a chlorine free process and are eligible to choose an
alternative monitoring program.  These facilities may certify once every
permit cycle that their process does not use chlorophenolic biocides. 
EPA estimates that of these 80 percent eligible, that 75 percent will
choose to certify that their process is eligible for alternative
monitoring requirements.  Similarly, for the builders’ paper and board
mills category, EPA estimates that 75 percent of the facilities will
certify their process. 

EPA estimates that approximately 75 percent of the facilities in the
steam electric category will choose to provide a demonstration and
certification requesting an exemption from monitoring requirements.

EPA estimates that approximately 50 percent of the eligible electrical
and electronic components facilities will choose to submit a TTO
Certification (semi-annually) in lieu of TTO monitoring, and 75 percent
of the metal finishing facilities will choose to submit this
(semi-annual) TTO certification.  Note: At this time there are no known
electroplating direct discharging facilities.

For these certification and pollution prevention activities, EPA
estimates a total annual burden of 6,258 hours (see Exhibit 3).  This
burden includes Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda from ICR
OMB 2040-0242

6.a.7	SSO and Unpermitted CSO Reporting

In 1998, EPA conducted an evaluation of SSOs and gathered information on
the number and frequency of SSOs and unpermitted CSOs.  At that time,
EPA developed a Summary of Revised Burden Estimate for SSO/Unpermitted
CSO Reporting that was approved by OMB in March 1998.  This revised
burden summary estimates the SSO and CSO respondent burdens to be 62,144
hours and 5,184 hours, respectively.  The SSO burden is based on an
estimated 41,087 SSO events per year and the associated DMR, 24-hour and
5-day reports.  The CSO burden is based on an estimated 3,840 events per
year and the associated DMR, 24-hour and 5-day reports.  For further
explanation of the assumptions used to arrive at these burden estimates,
see the 1998 Summary of Revised Burden Estimate for SSO/Unpermitted CSO
Reporting.  

6.a.8	Certification and BMP Plan Development Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 435

With regard to use of BMPs under 40 CFR 435 to control NAFs, EPA
estimated a total burden of 53,516 hours for the previous ICR (EPA ICR
No. 1427.07).  This assumption is assumed to be valid for this ICR.  For
details on the calculation of this burden, see the previous ICR. 

6.b	Estimating Respondent Costs

The cost imposed on permittees for the requirements discussed in this
ICR is a function of the burden placed on them for recordkeeping and
reporting the information described above and the wages of a typical
worker performing these activities.  Exhibit 7 shows the labor rates
used in this ICR.

Exhibit 7.	Labor Rates

Respondent	Labor rate ($/hour)

State and local governments	$36.55 

Private industry	$45.74 

EPA assumes the average hourly rate in the private sector is $45.74 as
determined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Total Compensation for Management, professional, and in 2006 dollars. 
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, Table 5- Employer costs per
hour worked for employee compensation and costs as a percent of total
compensation: Private industry workers, by major occupational group and
bargaining unit status, September 2006. 

This ICR estimates the municipal POTW employee hourly rate in September
2006 dollars to be $36.55.  Updated rates are derived from Employer
Costs for Employee Compensation, Table 4- Employer costs per hour worked
for employee compensation and costs as a percent of total compensation:
State and local government workers, by occupational and industry group,
September 2006.  The same rate was used for State employees. See Section
6.c for federal government costs.

The estimated burden and costs to respondents (facilities) for the
activities covered by this ICR are presented in Exhibit 8.

Exhibit 8.	Annual Respondent Recordkeeping and Reporting Cost

Item/Type of Respondent	Total Annual Respondent Burden (Hrs.)

(A)	Respondent Labor Cost Per Hour

(B)	Total Annual Respondent Cost

(A)x(B)

Recordkeeping

	Major Municipal Permittees	25,440	$36.55	$929,832 

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	14,076	$45.74	$643,836 

Minor Municipal Permittees	12,926	$36.55	$472,445 

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	40,044	$45.74	$1,831,613 

Stormwater General Permittees - Industrial	637,230	$45.74	$29,146,900 

Stormwater General Permittees - Construction	967,388	$45.74	$44,248,327 

Other General Permittees	68,664	$45.74	$3,140,691 

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda *	7,620	$45.74	$348,539 

SUBTOTAL	1,773,388

$80,762,184 

Compliance Schedule Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	2,386	$36.55	$87,208

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	1,320	$45.74	$60,377

Minor Municipal Permittees	605	$36.55	$22,113

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1,878	$45.74	$85,900

Sludge Permit Conditions Compliance Schedule Reports

	POTWs	150	$36.55	$5,483

PrOTWs	48	$45.74	$2,196

SUBTOTAL	6,387

$263,276

Noncompliance Reports

	Unanticipated Bypass/Upset Report

	Verbal Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	3,180	$36.55	$116,229 

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	1,760	$45.74	$80,502 

Minor Municipal Permittees	2,690	$36.55	$98,320 

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	8,340	$45.74	$381,472 

Written Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	954	$36.55	$34,869 

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	530	$45.74	$24,242 

Minor Municipal Permittees	806	$36.55	$29,459 

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	2,504	$45.74	$114,533 

SUBTOTAL	20,764

$879,626 

Maximum Daily Violation Report

	Verbal Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	3,816	$36.55	$139,475 

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	2,112	$45.74	$96,603 

Minor Municipal Permittees	1,614	$36.55	$58,992 

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	5,004	$45.74	$228,883 

Stormwater Permittees	7,170	$45.74	$327,956 

Written Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	1,276	$36.55	$46,638 

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	704	$45.74	$32,201 

Minor Municipal Permittees	540	$36.55	$19,737 

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1,668	$45.74	$76,294 

Stormwater Permittees	2,390	$45.74	$109,319 

SUBTOTAL	26,294

$1,136,097 

Other Noncompliance Reports

	Major Municipal Permittees	425	$36.55	$15,534 

Major Non-Municipal Permittees	235	$45.74	$10,749 

Minor Municipal Permittees	535	$36.55	$19,554 

Minor Non-Municipal Permittees	1,670	$45.74	$76,386 

Sludge Permit Conditions - Noncompliance Reports

	POTWs	161	$36.55	$5,885 

PrOTWs	52	$45.74	$2,378 

CAFO Permittees	1,200	$45.74	$54,888 

SUBTOTAL	4,278

$185,374 

Notice of Alternate Level of Production	0	$45.74	$0 

Section 308(a) Letters	9,600	$39.06	$374,976 

Pollution Prevention Alternative 

	Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	1,100	$45.74	$50,314 

Certifications

	Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	163	$45.74	$7,456 

Aluminum Forming	57	$45.74	$2,607 

Coil Coating	76	$45.74	$3,476 

Can Making (subcategory of coil coating)	13	$45.74	$595 

Porcelain Enameling	27	$45.74	$1,235 

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing	39	$45.74	$1,784 

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard	43	$45.74	$1,967 

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda *	444	$45.74	$20,309 

Building Paper and Board Mills	131	$45.74	$5,992 

Steam Electric	1,029	$45.74	$47,066 

Electroplating	0	$45.74	$0 

Metal Finishing	3,048	$45.74	$139,416 

Electrical and Electronic Components	88	$45.74	$4,025 

SUBTOTAL	5,158

$235,927 

SSO Reporting	62,144	$36.55	$2,271,363 

Unpermitted CSO Reporting	5,184	$36.55	$189,475 

Part 435 Certification Oil and Gas Extraction1 	53,516	$36.55	$1,956,010

Part 434 Coal Remining and Western Alkaline *	1,638	$45.74	$74,922 

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans *	N/A
$45.74	N/A

BMP, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans *	45,780	$45.74
$2,093,977 

TOTAL	2,015,231

$90,473,520 

1. Part 435 burden from previous ICR (EPA ICR 1427.07)

* For detail information see Appendix A

Note: Totals may not match exactly due to individual rounding.

6.c	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

Government workers must enter the compliance assessment data into PCS or
ICIS-NPDES and file the data in the permittee’s official file.  In
some cases, the government must also perform substantive follow-up.  The
compliance assessment requirements accounted for in this ICR affect the
Federal government and the State government, depending on which entity
is the permitting authority.  Forty-five States and one Territory are
authorized currently to administer the NPDES program.  Seven States are
currently authorized to administer State sewage sludge management
programs.  In addition, EPA expects additional States to obtain full or
partial State sewage sludge programs during the life of this ICR or an
annual average of eight States with sludge program approval.  As this
happens, the burden should remain the same, but some of it will shift
from the Federal to State government.  The costs to State and Federal
governments associated with processing and analyzing compliance
assessment information are a function of three factors:  1) the number
of compliance reports received by State and Federal governments, 2) the
time it takes to process and analyze those reports and, 3) the salary
and overhead costs associated with the time the State and Federal
workers spend processing and analyzing the reports.

Estimates of Federal government costs associated with this ICR have been
prepared using Federal Salary Table 2003-GS.  The 2007 annual salary for
a Federal GS-9, Step 10 employee is $54,155.  At 2,080 labor hours per
year, the hourly rate is $26.04.  Assuming overhead costs of 50 percent,
or $13.02 per hour, the fully loaded cost of employment for a Federal
employee would be $39.06.

The estimated burden and costs to the government (State and Federal) for
handling and reviewing compliance assessment information, as discussed
in this ICR, are presented in Exhibits 9 and 10.  EPA estimates that the
government will spend approximately 70,921 hours reviewing compliance
assessment information each year.  Of the total government burden,
53,863 hours will be spent by State governments and 17,059 hours will be
spent by the Federal government.

As presented in Exhibit 10, the total annual government cost is
estimated to be $2,538,149.  Of this total government cost, $1,878,074
will be borne by State governments, while $660,075 will be borne by the
Federal government. 

Exhibit 9.	Annual Burden to State and Federal Governments as Users of
Data

Item/Type of Respondent	Respondents per Year	Hrs. per Response	Total
Annual Burden (Hrs.)

	State	Federal

State	Federal	 Total 

Recordkeeping	0	0	0	0	0	0

Compliance Schedule Reports

Total Permittees	5,256	244	0.4	2,102	98	2,200

Noncomplying Permittees	1,051	49	6	6,306	294	6,600

Sludge Permittees	7	125	0.5	4	63	66

SUBTOTAL	6,314	418

8,412	454	8,866

Noncompliance Reports

Unanticipated Bypass/Upset Report

Verbal Notification	3,090	104	1	3090	104	3,194

Written Report	2,318	79	2	4636	158	4,794

Federal Assistance to States	N/A	116	2	N/A	232	232

Immediate Action	773	26	2	1546	52	1,598

Additional Federal Review	N/A	270	2	N/A	540	540

SUBTOTAL	6,181	595

9,272	1086	10,358

Maximum Daily Violation Report

Verbal Notification	3,090	104	1	3090	104	3,194

Written Report	1,546	53	2	3092	106	3,198

Federal Assistance to States	N/A	77	2	N/A	154	154

Immediate Action	773	26	2	1546	52	1,598

Additional Federal Review	N/A	232	2	N/A	464	464

SUBTOTAL	5,409	492

7,728	880	8,608

Other Noncompliance Reports

NPDES Permittee Reports	556	17	2	1112	34	1,146

Additional Federal Review	N/A	28	1	N/A	28	28

Sludge Permittee Reports	2	39	0.3	0.6	11.7	12

CAFO Permittees	232	8	2	464	16	480

SUBTOTAL	790	92

1,577	90	1,666

Notice of Alternate Level of Production	0	0	0	0	0	0

Section 308(a) Letters	N/A	1,200	8	0	9600	9,600

Pollution Prevention Alternative 

Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Certifications

Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	161	2	1	161	2	163

Aluminum Forming	52	5	1	52	5	57

Coil Coating	71	5	1	71	5	76

Can Making (subcategory of coil coating)	11	2	1	11	2	13

Porcelain Enameling	21	6	1	21	6	27

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing	35	4	1	35	4	39

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard	196	21	0.2	39.2	4.2	43

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda *	74	0	0	0	0	0

Building Paper and Board Mills	108	23	1	108	23	131

Steam Electric	916	113	1	916	113	1,029

Electroplating	0	0	2	0	0	0

Metal Finishing	1454	70	2	2908	140	3,048

Electrical and Electronic Components	40	4	2	80	8	88

SUBTOTAL	3,139	255

4,402	312	4,714

SSO Reporting	N/A	N/A	N/A	9,316	2,752	12,068

Unpermitted CSO Reporting	N/A	N/A	N/A	4,076	1,204	5,280

Part 435 Certification Oil and Gas Extraction1	N/A	68	N/A	0	385	385

Part 434 Coal Remining and Western Alkaline *	78	N/A	N/A	5,607	0	5,607

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans *	29	29	6
States/ 

4 fed	174	116	290

BMP, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans *	82	2	10	820	20
840

TOTALS	22,022	3,151

51,384	16,899	68,283

Annual burden hours reflect updated burden estimates for SSOs and
unpermitted CSOs from the 1998 Summary of Revised Burden Estimates. 
Total number of respondents do not include SSO/unpermitted CSO
estimates.

1. Part 435 burden from previous ICR (EPA ICR 1427.07)

* For detail information see Appendix A

Note: Totals may not match exactly due to individual rounding.

Exhibit 10.	Annual Costs to State and Federal Governments as Users of
Data

Item/Type of Respondent	Annual Burden (Hrs.)	Agency Labor Cost/Hour
Annual Cost

	State	Federal	State	Federal	State	Federal	Total

Recordkeeping	0	0	$36.55	$39.06	$0	$0	$0

Compliance Schedule Reports

	Total Permittees	2102.4	97.6	$36.55	$39.06	$76,843	$3,812	$80,655

Non-complying Permittees	6306	294	$36.55	$39.06	$230,484	$11,484
$241,968

Sludge Permittees	3.5	62.5	$36.55	$39.06	$128	$2,441	$2,569

SUBTOTAL	8411.9	454.1	$36.55	$39.06	$307,455	$17,737	$325,192

Noncompliance Reports

	Unanticipated Bypass/Upset Report

	Verbal Notification	3090	104	$36.55	$39.06	$112,940	$4,062	$117,002

Written Report	4636	158	$36.55	$39.06	$169,446	$6,171	$175,617

Federal Assistance to States	N/A	232	$36.55	$39.06	N/A	$9,062	$9,062

Immediate Action	1546	52	$36.55	$39.06	$56,506	$2,031	$58,537

Additional Federal Review	N/A	540	$36.55	$39.06	N/A	$21,092	$21,092

SUBTOTAL	9272	1086	$36.55	$39.06	$338,892	$42,419	$381,311

Maximum Daily Violation Report

	Verbal Notification	3090	104	$36.55	$39.06	$112,940	$4,062	$117,002

Written Report	3092	106	$36.55	$39.06	$113,013	$4,140	$117,153

Federal Assistance to States	N/A	154	$36.55	$39.06	N/A	$6,015	$6,015

Immediate Action	1546	52	$36.55	$39.06	$56,506	$2,031	$58,537

Additional Federal Review	N/A	464	$36.55	$39.06	N/A	$18,124	$18,124

SUBTOTAL	7728	880	$36.55	$39.06	$282,458	$34,373	$316,831

Other Noncompliance Reports

	NPDES Permittee Reports	1112.12	34.16	$36.55	$39.06	$40,648	$1,334
$41,982

Additional Federal Review	N/A	28	$36.55	$39.06	N/A	$1,094	$1,094

Sludge Permittee Reports	0.6	11.7	$36.55	$39.06	$22	$457	$479

CAFO Permittees	464	16	$36.55	$39.06	$16,959	$625	$17,584

SUBTOTAL	1576.6	89.7	$36.55	$39.06	$57,625	$3,504	$61,128

Notice of Alternate Level of Production	0	0	$36.55	$39.06	$0	$0	$0

Section 308(a) Letters	0	9600	$36.55	$39.06	$0	$374,976	$374,976

Pollution Prevention Alternative 

	Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	N/A	N/A	$36.55	$39.06	N/A	N/A	$0

Certifications

	Pesticides Packaging and Repackaging	161	2	$36.55	$39.06	$5,885	$78
$5,963

Aluminum Forming	52	5	$36.55	$39.06	$1,901	$195	$2,096

Coil Coating	71	5	$36.55	$39.06	$2,595	$195	$2,790

Can Making (subcategory of coil coating)	11	2	$36.55	$39.06	$402	$78
$480

Porcelain Enameling	21	6	$36.55	$39.06	$768	$234	$1,002

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing	35	4	$36.55	$39.06	$1,279	$156	$1,435

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard	39.2	4.2	$36.55	$39.06	$1,433	$164	$1,597

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda *	0	0	$36.55	$39.06	$0	$0
$0

Building Paper and Board Mills	108	23	$36.55	$39.06	$3,947	$898	$4,846

Steam Electric	916	113	$36.55	$39.06	$33,480	$4,414	$37,894

Electroplating	0	0	$36.55	$39.06	$0	$0	$0

Metal Finishing	2908	140	$36.55	$39.06	$106,287	$5,468	$111,756

Electrical and Electronic Components	80	8	$36.55	$39.06	$2,924	$312
$3,236

SUBTOTAL	4402.2	312.2

	$160,900	$12,195	$173,095

SSO Reporting	9316	2752	$36.55	$39.06	$340,500	$107,493	$447,993

Unpermitted CSO Reporting	4076	1204	$36.55	$39.06	$148,978	$47,028
$196,006

Part 435 Certification Oil and Gas Extraction1	0	385	$36.55	$39.06	$0
$15,038	$15,038

Part 434 Coal Remining and Western Alkaline *	5607	0	$36.55	$39.06
$204,936	$0	$204,936

Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans *	174	116
$36.55	$39.06	$6,360	$4,531	$10,891

BMP, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans *	820	20	$36.55
$39.06	$29,971	$781	$30,752

TOTALS	51,384	16,899

	$1,878,074	$660,075	$2,538,149

1. Part 435 burden from previous ICR (EPA ICR 1427.07)

* For detail information see Appendix A

Note: Totals may not match exactly due to individual rounding.

6.c.1	Recordkeeping

Recordkeeping costs for the government are incorporated into the burden
for each of the components discussed below and are not reported
separately in this ICR.

6.c.2	Compliance Schedule Reports

EPA estimates that the government requires 0.25 hours to review each
compliance schedule report submitted by permittees who are in
compliance.  See Section 6.a.2 for a discussion of how many permittees
are estimated to be required to submit compliance schedules.  As shown
in Exhibit 9, a total of 5,500 respondents are expected to submit
reports each year.  As explained in Section 6.a.2., a respondent is
expected to submit an average of 1.5 reports per year.  The burden
equates to approximately 0.4 hours per year per respondent (1.5 reports
per year at 0.25 hours per report).  Of the 5,500 reporting facilities,
5,256 are expected to report to State governments, while 244 are
expected to report to the Federal government.

According to the Quarterly Noncompliance Report (QNCR), approximately 20
percent of permittees that submit these reports are not in compliance
with their scheduled milestones.  EPA estimates that the government
requires 4 hours to review and conduct follow-up activities (phone
calls, letters) for each of these reports.  At 1.5 reports per year, the
total burden per respondent is 6 hours.

For sludge permits, EPA expects 100 POTWs and 32 privately owned
treatment works, for a total of 132 facilities, to report compliance
schedule progress.  Each facility is expected to submit an average of 2
reports per year under 40 CFR Part 503.  Each report is expected to take
0.25 hours to review and process.

Exhibit 9 shows that the total annual burden to the State government for
compliance schedule reporting activities is 5,412 hours while the total
annual burden to the Federal government is 454 hours.  Exhibit 10 shows
that the costs to State and Federal governments for compliance schedule
activities are $307,455 and $17,737, respectively.

6.c.3	Noncompliance Reports

24-Hour Report of Unanticipated Upset or Bypass

EPA estimates that 1 hour is required for the government to receive and
process each verbal noncompliance notice, and 2 hours are required for
the government to receive and process each written noncompliance report.
 As discussed in Section 6.1, approximately 75 percent of those
permittees that must submit verbal reports are also required to submit
written reports.  EPA anticipates that the remaining 25 percent will
have their written report requirement waived.  In addition, it is
estimated that 2 hours are required for immediate action to mitigate the
problem for 25 percent of the responses.  Also, an additional Federal
burden is calculated (estimated to be 5 percent of the number of written
reports submitted to States) for a portion of the responses that are
submitted to States which need Federal assistance.

It is estimated that 5 percent (116) of the 2,318 written responses
submitted to States will incur an additional 2 hours of Federal burden
per response.  In addition, 5 percent (270) of the 5,408 verbal and
written State responses will need 2 hours additional Federal review time
after the State response.

As shown in Exhibit 9, 3,090 State permittees and 104 Federal permittees
are expected to submit one verbal report of noncompliance per year.  Of
these, 75 percent (2,318 State and 79 Federal) are expected to submit a
written report.  In addition, 799 respondents (773 State and 26 Federal)
are expected to require immediate action to mitigate a problem.

As shown in Exhibit 9, the resulting annual burden for noncompliance
reports to State and Federal governments are 9,272 and 1,086 hours,
respectively.  As shown in Exhibit 10, the annual costs to State and
Federal governments are $338,892 and $42,419, respectively.

24-Hour Report of Violation of Maximum Daily Discharge

EPA estimates that 1 hour is required for the government to receive and
process each verbal violation notice and 2 hours are required to receive
and process each written violation report.  As mentioned earlier, in 50
percent of the cases the requirement for the written report is waived. 
In addition, 2 hours are estimated for immediate action to mitigate the
problem for 25 percent of the verbal and written responses.

As shown in Exhibit 9, State governments and the Federal government will
handle verbal notices of violation from 3,090 and 104 respondents,
respectively.  Fifty percent of the respondents submitting verbal
notices of violation will be required to submit written reports
resulting in States and the Federal government handling 1,546 and 53
written responses, respectively.

In addition, a total of 773 and 26 respondents will require immediate
action to mitigate a problem from States or the Federal government,
respectively.  Also, an additional Federal burden is calculated for a
portion of the responses that are submitted to States which need Federal
assistance.  It is estimated that 5 percent of written responses
submitted to States, or 77 responses, will require an additional 2 hours
of Federal burden per response.  In addition, 232, or 5 percent of the
total responses submitted to States (3,090 verbal and 1,546 written),
will result in 2 hours of additional Federal review time after the State
response.

As shown in Exhibit 9, annual burden from this activity to State
governments and Federal government is 7,728 and 880 hours, respectively.
 As shown in Exhibit 10, the annual costs to States and the Federal
government are $282,458 and $34,373, respectively.

Other Noncompliance

It is estimated that an average of 2 hours is required for the
government to receive and process each report.  EPA expects 2 percent
(132) of the 6,586 major permittees and 1 percent (441) of the 44,142
minor permittees to submit 1 report per year.  As shown in Exhibit 9,
this results in States and the Federal governments handling 556 and 17
annual responses, respectively.  Also, 1 hour is required for additional
Federal assistance to 5 percent (28) of the 556 State responses.

In addition, EPA estimates that 31 POTWs and 10 PrOTW, or 41 total
facilities, will be required to submit noncompliance reports regarding
noncompliance with sewage sludge regulations.  It is estimated that
these reports will be submitted once per year.  Each report is expected
to take 0.3 hours to review and process resulting in an annual burden of
12 hours.

It is estimated that an average of 2 hours is required for the
government to receive and process each CAFO report.  Approximately 1
percent (240) of the 24,036 CAFO facilities are expected to submit 1
report per year.

Exhibit 9 shows that the estimated annual burden to States and the
Federal government for handling other noncompliance reports are 1,577
and 90 hours, respectively.  Exhibit 10 shows that the estimated annual
costs to States and the Federal governments for this activity are
$57,625 and $3,504, respectively.

Exhibit 11 presents the total annual burden from noncompliance reports
to the States and the Federal government.  These numbers do not include
the burden associated with SSO and CSO reporting, which can be found in
Exhibit 10.

6.c.4	Notice of Alternative Level of Actual Production

As discussed earlier, EPA expects no burden to respondents from this
requirement.

Exhibit 11.	State and Federal Burden for Noncompliance Reports

Activity/Facility Type	State Annual Burden (Hrs.)	Federal Annual Burden
(Hrs.)	Total Annual Burden (Hrs.)

Unanticipated Bypass/Upset Report

	   NPDES Facilities	9,272	1,086	10,358

Maximum Daily Violation Report

	   NPDES Facilities	7,728	880	8,608

Other Noncompliance Reports

	   NPDES Facilities	1,112	62	1,174

   Sludge Facilities	1	12	12

   CAFO Permittees	464	16	480

	Total Annual Government Burden	18,577	2,056	20,632

Note: Totals may not match exactly due to individual rounding.

6.c.5	Section 308(a) Letters

The Federal government is the sole recipient of each of these responses.
 It is estimated that 8 hours are required for the Federal government to
issue the letter, review the response, and evaluate the need for
additional enforcement action for each response.  As shown in Table 9,
it is expected that 1,200 letters will be processed annually.  This will
result in an annual burden of 9,600 hours and $374,976 in costs to the
Federal government (see Table 10).

6.c.6	Certification for Exemption From Monitoring and Notification of
Process Changes

Review of certifications is estimated to take 1 hour per certification
and occur annually, except those for pulp, paper, and paperboard
facilities.  These facilities are required to submit certifications once
per permit cycle.  The electroplating, metal finishing, and electric and
electronic components facilities must submit semi-annual certifications.
 The certification, pollution prevention alternative and process change
activities are estimated, as shown in Table 9, to involve 3,139 annual
responses to States and 255 annual responses to the Federal government,
resulting in a total annual burden of 4,402 hours for the States and 312
hours for the Federal government (see Exhibit 9).  The annual costs to
the States and the Federal government for these activities are $160,900
and $12,195, respectively (see Exhibit 10).

6.c.7	SSO and Unpermitted CSO Reporting

The Summary of Revised Burden Estimate for SSO/Unpermitted CSO Reporting
estimates the government burden associated with SSOs and CSOs to be
12,068 hours and 5,280 hours, respectively.  The SSO burden is based on
an estimated 41,087 SSO events per year where 95 percent of the reports
are included as part of DMR reporting and 5 percent require 24-hour
verbal reports.  In addition, a portion of these events require written
5-day reports, immediate action, and additional review.  The CSO burden
is based on an estimated 3,840 events per year potentially requiring DMR
reporting, verbal and written reports, immediate actions, and additional
review.  Government burden hours have been apportioned in Exhibit 10
between the State and Federal governments based on the number of
authorized (45) to non-authorized (5) States.

6.c.8	Certification of BMPs Under part 435

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 With regard to the use of BMPs under 40 CFR 435 to
control NAFs, EPA estimates the public reporting (i.e., all information
collection) burden for the selected BMP option as 787 hours per
respondent per year [i.e., (17,000 initial hours/3 years + 47,872 annual
hours/year) / 68 SBF well operators].  EPA also estimated the annual
burden for EPA Regions, the NPDES permit controlling authorities, to
review BMPs and ensure compliance.  EPA estimates that essentially all
of the SBF discharges will occur in Federal offshore waters or in Cook
Inlet, Alaska, where EPA Region 10 is the NPDES permit authority.  The
EPA Regional burden for reviewing BMP Plans is estimated at 385 hours
per year [i.e., (544 initial hours/3 years + 204 annual hours/year)] 

6.d	Estimating the Respondent Universe Burden Hours and Costs

Exhibit 12 presents the total annual burden hours and costs to
respondents and the State government.  It summarizes the burden and cost
calculations previously presented in Exhibits 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10. 
The annual burden for respondents is 2,015,231 hours and the annual
burden to State governments is 51,384 hours.

Exhibit 12.	Respondent Universe and Burden and Costs

	Annual Burden (Hrs.)	Annual Costs

Recordkeeping	1,773,388	$80,762,184

Reporting	186,689	$7,680,404

Part 435 Certification	53,516	$1,956,010

Part 434 Coal Remining and Western Alkaline	1,638	$74,922

Total for Respondents	2,015,231	$90,473,520

State Governments	51,384	$1,878,074 

TOTAL	2,066,615	$92,351,594 

Note: Totals may not match exactly due to individual rounding.

6.e	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs

The total annual bottom line burden hours and costs for respondents,
States and the Federal government are 2,083,514 burden hours and
$93,011,669.  This is summarized in Exhibit 13 below.

Exhibit 13.	Bottom Line Annual Burden and Costs to Respondents and
Government

	Annual Burden (Hrs.)	Annual Costs

Recordkeeping	1,773,388	$80,762,184

Reporting (w/o Part 435)	186,689	$7,680,404

Part 435 Certification	53,516	$1,956,010

Part 434 Coal Remining and Western Alkaline	1,638	$74,922

Total for Respondents	2,015,231	$90,473,520

State Governments	51,384	$1,878,074

Federal Governments	16,899	$660,075

TOTAL	2,083,514	$93,011,669

Note: Totals may not match exactly due to individual rounding.

6.f	Reasons for Change in Burden 

Exhibit 14 presents the change in respondent burden for each information
item covered by this ICR.  As shown in Exhibit 14 the revised ICR
estimates an increase in burden from 1,809,580 hours to 2,066,615 hours,
or 14.2 percent.  The primary reasons for the increase are:

The migration of burden from five ICRs to this ICR

The increase in the number of expected stormwater construction and other
non- stormwater general permittees.

Exhibit 14.	Change in Annual Respondent and State Burden

Item/Type of Respondent	Previous ICR (A)	Current ICR (B)	Change (C)
(B-A)	Percent Change (C / A)	Reason for Change

Recordkeeping	1,568,158	1,773,388	205,230	13.09%	Migration from OMB
ICRs: 2040-0243 and 2040-0207. Increase in the number of stormwater
construction and other non-stormwater general permittees

Compliance Schedule Reports	8,267	6,387	-1,880	-22.74%	Change in the
percentage of major facilities that will submit compliance schedule
reports from 75% to 50%. Section 6.a.2

Noncompliance Reports

	  Unanticipated Bypass/Upset Report	21,015	20,764	-251	-1.19%

	  Maximum Daily Violation Report	25,996	26,294	298	1.15%

	  Other Noncompliance Reports	3,123	4,278	1,155	36.98%	Noncompliance
for CAFO Permittees has been included

Notice of Alternate Level of Production	0	0	0	-

	Section 308(a) Letters	9,600	9600	0	0.00%

	Pollution Prevention Alternative	1,080	1,100	20	1.85%

	Certifications and Notice of Process Changes	4,713	5,158	445	9.44%
Migration from OMB ICR 2040-0242

SSO Reporting	62,144	62,144	0	0.00%

	Unpermitted CSO Reporting	5,184	5,184	0	0.00%

	Burden to State Governments as Users of Data	46,784	51,384	4,600	9.83%
Migration from OMB ICR 20204-0202 and correction to calculations (See
section 6.c.2 – Other Noncompliance)

Part 435 Certification (former OMB ICR #2040-0230)	53,516	53,516	0	-

	Part 434 Coal Remining and Western Alkaline (former OMB ICR# 2040-0239)
0	1,638	1,638	-	Migration from OMB ICR 2040-0239

BMP, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Milestone Plans	0	45,780	45,780
-	Migration from OMB ICR 2040-0202

TOTAL	1,809,580	2,066,615	257,035	14.20%

	Note: Totals may not match exactly due to individual rounding.

6.g	Burden Statement

The annual average reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection of information by facilities responding is estimated to be
4.47 hours per respondent (i.e., an annual average of 2,015,231 hours of
burden divided among an anticipated annual average of 450,509 unique
facilities).  The State reporting and recordkeeping burden is estimated
to average 1,117 hours per State respondent (i.e., an annual average of
51,384 hours of burden divided among 46 States).  Burden means the total
time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate,
maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency.  This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.  An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on EPA’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,
the Agency has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2007-0142, which is available for public viewing at the
Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC.  The EPA Docket Center
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading
Room is 202-566-1744, and the telephone number for the Water Docket is
202-566-2426.  An electronic version of the public docket is available
through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at
http://www.regulations.gov/.  Use FDMS to submit or view public
comments, to access the index listing of the contents of the public
docket, and to access documents in the public docket that are available
electronically.  Once in the system, key in the docket ID number
identified above.  You can also 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. OW-2007-0142 and OMB control number
2040-0258 in any correspondence.

 A copy of the approved supporting statements for these ICRs are
included as Appendix A. Note that this supporting statement does not go
into the details of the specific provisions of each of those programs.
Nevertheless, the tables and calculations contain the migrated burden.

 Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda from EPA ICR 2015.02, OMB
3050-0242 has been added.

 Subpart B, Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda from EPA ICR 2015.02, OMB
3050-0242 has been added.

 Many of the same environmental controls promoted as part of a BMP Plan
currently may be used by industry in stormwater pollution prevention
plans; spill prevention and response plans (30 CFR 254); Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) safety plans; fire protection
programs; insurance requirements; Federal, State, or local requirements;
or standard operating procedures. Additionally, permittees may have
already developed pollution prevention programs or controls such as
source reduction, recycling, and reuse which may be similar to those
promoted as part of a BMP Plan.  When a BMP issue is already addressed
via a separate regulatory program, the BMP Plan is expected to reference
those efforts, not duplicate them.  Where operating manuals, standard
operating plans, or other documents have been developed to address other
regulatory requirements (e.g., OSHA, RCRA, etc.) these may be
cross-referenced in the BMP Plan.

 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2) Unless the agency is able to demonstrate, in its
submission for OMB clearance, that such characteristic of the collection
of information is necessary to satisfy statutory requirements or other
substantial need, OMB will not approve a collection of information (i)
Requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often
than quarterly; (ii) Requiring respondents to prepare a written response
to a collection of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of
it;

 The facility type indicator field was used in PCS to categorize whether
a facility was municipal or non-municipal.  All facilities coded as
“M” for “Municipal” were selected as Municipal facilities.  All
facilities coded as “I” for “Industrial,” “F” for
“Federal,” or “O” for “Other” were selected as Non-Municipal
facilities.

 See EPA ICR No. 1427.07 for detailed explanation of the assumptions
regarding Part 435

 These numbers are expected to decrease when the 2003 CAFO rule is
revised to incorporate the February 28, 2005 decision of the U.S. Second
Circuit Court of Appeals that reduced the number of CAFOs required to
have NPDES permits.

 In the previous 2004 ICR (EPA ICR No. 1427.07) EPA estimated that 75
percent of the major facilities would submit compliance schedule reports
per year.  The percentage was revised based on input from EPA’s Water
Permits Division, 2007.

 This number is expected to decrease when the 2003 CAFO rule is revised
to incorporate the February 28, 2005 decision of the U.S. Second Circuit
Court of Appeals that reduced the number of CAFOs required to have NPDES
permits.

 Calculations for the number or respondents for other noncompliance were
incorrect in the 2004 ICR. Corrections are taken for this ICR. In 2004
the number of major and minor permits administered by the state was
5,678 and 42,472 respectively. The number of major and minor permits
administered by the EPA was 887 and 2,487 respectively. Following the
logic presented in the text, Exhibit 9 should have reported 538
(5,678*0.02 + 42,472*0.01) permits for states and 43 (887*0.02 +
2,487*0.01) permits for EPA submitting other noncompliance; instead, it
reported 1,926 and 134.

 See EPA ICR No. 1427.07 for detailed
explanation漠⁦桴⁥獡畳灭楴湯⁳敲慧摲湩⁧慐瑲㐠㔳മ
̍഍ഄ̍഍ഄࠍ഍ഈࠍ഍ഈࠍ剄䙁⁔潃灭楬湡散䄠獳獥
浳湥⁴䍉॒慐敧
ࠍഈऍ畊敮㈠〰ഷࠍ഍ഈࠍ剄䙁⁔潃灭楬湡散䄠獳獥浳
湥⁴䍉॒慐敧
ࠍഈऍ畊敮㈠〰ഷࠍ഍ഈࠍ剄䙁⁔潃灭楬湡散䄠獳獥浳
湥⁴䍉॒慐敧
ࠍഈऍ畊敮㈠〰ഷࠍ഍ഈࠍ剄䙁⁔潃灭楬湡散䄠獳獥浳
湥⁴䍉॒慐敧
ࠍഈऍ畊敮㈠〰ഷࠍ഍ഈࠍ剄䙁⁔潃灭楬湡散䄠獳獥浳
湥⁴䍉॒慐敧
ࠍഈऍ畊敮㈠〰ഷࠍ഍഍഍഍഍഍഍഍഍